[1.0.x] [V1.9f] Kerbal Foundries wheels, anti-grav repulsors and tracks

[Gaalidas]

Wait, they got a discount? I was charged double when I ordered last week. Now I'm going to have to drop a booster on their storefront next time I fling another poor intern into a decaying orbit. Hey, don't judge me now, they asked for it.

[lo-fi]

Yes they are extremely power hungry, I don't think anyone would complain if they were turned down a bit I started this just before the recent talk of trailer hitches and coincidentally it has a 2xIR link, but just after Achroma's stunning race video a few pages back so I'm blaming him for the hours of grief of getting 3 repulsor craft going the same direction at the same time in the same place. Classical ballet on a planet with no atmosphere is so much more relaxing.

http://youtu.be/V_5zzany_84

You can change from the default using chargeConsumptionRate in the .cfg it defaults in the code, but can be overridden this way.

DSR3C and container coming very soon

http://i.imgur.com/tzdhEGL.png

Still can't wait for this, Spanner!

Lo-Fi, I have to thank you for pointing me toward Sketchup, too. It takes a bit of getting used to, but after a few experimental bits of fiddling around, I managed to make it work. It's a good, simple way to make 3D stuff when 3D is needed for showing a thought. And yes, the hexagonal design to the canopy glass was done on purpose. High-visibility, yet designed to look more aesthetically pleasing, at least to me, than a big glass dome.

You're welcome mate!

Got a few updates and loose ends to tidy up, then I'm going to have a look at proper TweakScale support for all the parts. The issue someone (might have been you, Madrias?) had with the suspension not working right is caused by my recent changes in the way the suspension is handled. Previous, it was done by moving the suspensionTraverse object using transform.localposition. This is all well and good, but counter intuitive because it moves in the local axis of the parent, not the object itself. It's also affected by the scale of the parent object. Ah-ha, you might be thinking! Ideal for TweakScale. Yes, but also made it a nightmare to get things exported, into Unity and out as a part, all with scale 1, and without breaking the prefab model connection while rigging in Unity. Also limited suspension movement somewhat, so I've changed to using transform.translate which does work on the local axis of the named suspensionTraverse object, but it not affected by scale. TS will be broken for all wheels and tracks until further notice as I need make a little code change and configure TS to change a value in my module to make it work. This is why the wheels were stuck in the ground when scaled down. the suspension travel of the collider has been scaled, but the movement of the susTrav object in local space is not, and this is what needs to be addressed.

[Madrias]

Decided to try something different.

Infernal Robotics powers the front steering by two hinges, set with a fixed angle. Rear steering is standard Kerbal Foundries Differential Braking. KSO provided the rover body, and Jeb enjoys ripping around the Space Center at 18 m/s, often sliding the rear set of tracks.

[lo-fi]

That's cool! I'm about to break everything one last change to modularise the plugin further and enable an alternative method of steering like that. Blame Spanner, he gave me the idea

The only other thing I want to do with it will be adding more sounds for acceleration, braking and sliding, then I think its safe to say 'feature complete', document and leave it be.

[Madrias]

Smoke trails for sliding might be cool, too. Just an idea.

That, and I'm not sure if it's just the fact that I use a highly reduced volume amount, or whether something's just not right, but the sounds you're using are near impossible to hear. Either that, or they're so quiet that I don't hear them because I have the volume turned way down because otherwise jets are bloody loud.

And I'm glad to see that you're considering automotive-steering on tracks. It's kinda fun once you get used to it.

[lo-fi]

I think you can use effects modules for particle emitters, so that might be possible.

I do have it set fairly quiet, I didn't want it have the droning get too annoying. Maybe a little too quiet..

[Neutrinovore]

A few comments:

First, the volume is fine, in fact could be a little quieter IMO.

Now, I can confirm that TweakScale MAJORLY breaks something with these parts, at least in my experience. When adding the module via MM, it somehow changes the model for the Alpha Medium Wheel (the NON repulsor one, mind you) to the one for the Repulsor converting wheel, and that happens even if I've DELETED the repulsor wheel folder completely from my computer! How or why, no clue. Plus all of the steering and top speed / rpm limit problems I've mentioned before. Now, to be clear, adding the TweakScale module causes these problems EVEN IF I DON'T SCALE THE PARTS IN THE VAB/SPH! Even if I leave the part at 100%, the model (or mesh, whatever the proper term is, sorry) is already wrong.

So, rotsa ruck, lo-fi, I have a sneaky suspicion that this may not be quite so straightforward a task as we all hope. But I hope I'm wrong.

Later.

[Hellbrand]

hmm think there would be a way to make these work with modular multiwheels?

[lo-fi]

A few comments:

First, the volume is fine, in fact could be a little quieter IMO.

Now, I can confirm that TweakScale MAJORLY breaks something with these parts, at least in my experience. When adding the module via MM, it somehow changes the model for the Alpha Medium Wheel (the NON repulsor one, mind you) to the one for the Repulsor converting wheel, and that happens even if I've DELETED the repulsor wheel folder completely from my computer! How or why, no clue. Plus all of the steering and top speed / rpm limit problems I've mentioned before. Now, to be clear, adding the TweakScale module causes these problems EVEN IF I DON'T SCALE THE PARTS IN THE VAB/SPH! Even if I leave the part at 100%, the model (or mesh, whatever the proper term is, sorry) is already wrong.

So, rotsa ruck, lo-fi, I have a sneaky suspicion that this may not be quite so straightforward a task as we all hope. But I hope I'm wrong.

Later.

I don't remember any steering problems mentioned (I probably missed it)? The maxRPM fix I've explained, and there is not a nice little RPM readout in the GUI menu which is useful if you go want to go config bashing. I've not even tried TS on a wheel myself, so I'll get back to you on that one..

The medium wheel is deprecated and replaced in whole by the converting wheel model. Both are still in the repo as I'm using the converting version to hack about still before completely merging the two. I'd suggest deleting the whole folder and unpacking again, it sounds like you've got some things in a muddle after the recent reorganisation.

hmm think there would be a way to make these work with modular multiwheels?

Yes and no. As with the stock or ASET, the plugin will now drive just about any wheel if you set up the config and know a few GO names and orientations, and I've written a module to override any wheel collider settings backed into parts the same as FireSpitter does. However, IIRC, TT added some modules which hack about with ModuleWheel (stock), which won't work my the KF plugin so you'd have to lose those features. There's a little more wizardry with the mud guards and stuff like that that may still work, but I've got no idea how that works without doing a little code diving. I think the short answer is yes if you want the KF features rather than TT's. I'll be honest, I'm not a fan of the engine/driveshaft thing, so not a route I'll be taking myself. Though I do really like the toggleable arches, so that may appear as a feature at some point...

[Gaalidas]

That's cool! I'm about to break everything one last change to modularise the plugin further and enable an alternative method of steering like that. Blame Spanner, he gave me the idea

The only other thing I want to do with it will be adding more sounds for acceleration, braking and sliding, then I think its safe to say 'feature complete', document and leave it be.

For the time being anyway. I mean, come on, are you really going to be absolutely satisfied with all of the features in this thing? I doubt it. At the very least, you can call this version feature-complete and let it loose.

[AccidentalDisassembly]

Bah, you all are terrible teases with the videos & pics of neat new stuff. Random return to previous subject: I think TweakScale code right now can (maybe?) handle any of the values you use for tracks' or wheels' suspension, torque, power, whatever - I think if you provide the internally-used variable name in a TweakScale SCALEEXPONENTS config, and set the exponent for it, TS will automagically scale it appropriately even if it's not a stock value/variable/name/whatever. Sorry if that makes no sense, trying to recall what Biotronic said in a post long ago, possibly butchering it in the process.

[lo-fi]

For the time being anyway. I mean, come on, are you really going to be absolutely satisfied with all of the features in this thing? I doubt it. At the very least, you can call this version feature-complete and let it loose.

True; I'd be kidding myself.. Version complete it will be!

Bah, you all are terrible teases with the videos & pics of neat new stuff. Random return to previous subject: I think TweakScale code right now can (maybe?) handle any of the values you use for tracks' or wheels' suspension, torque, power, whatever - I think if you provide the internally-used variable name in a TweakScale SCALEEXPONENTS config, and set the exponent for it, TS will automagically scale it appropriately even if it's not a stock value/variable/name/whatever. Sorry if that makes no sense, trying to recall what Biotronic said in a post long ago, possibly butchering it in the process.

Hehe. Sorry about that, I'm hoping to get some major releases out before too long!

Yep, that's what I think I can use to fix the current issue with TS. I need to review the docs in depth, but I'm sure you're right

[lo-fi]

The latest dev commit will probably not break saves, but it will lose settings from saved craft and craft in flight. Sorry about that guys, a refactor which included the module names was long overdue. Seeing as I started the track modules now run wheels and the screws, it seemed a little odd being called ModuleTrack! Sadly as the module names no longer match those in the persistence file, the values will be discarded and defaults set. If you've got anything that matters in a save, I suggest running a find and replace for the following:

ModuleTrack > KFModuleWheel

TrackWheel > KFWheel

The config and persistence fields are the same, so all should be good if you do that. Sorry, should be the last time now! New steering module and a new type of track I've been unable to make up until now will land in dev shortly.

[Gaalidas]

Oh sure, get back at us for egging you on and giving you new time-consuming ideas by breaking all out precious stuff!

Granted, it was a little strange calling it ModuleTrack.

[lo-fi]

Revenge is sweet

Originally, I wrote it purely to drive tracks.. Then I realised it would drive wheels just as well, learned some more C# tricks (I am a programming newbie, don't forget) and it just sort of carried on from there before I renamed it. I suppose I should have done so before the 1.7 release, but there's not a lot I can do about that now!

Anyone tested the repulsors with the new water collider method, btw?

[SpannerMonkey(smce)]

Now this you can blame on the boss, it was supposed to go in a pm but somebody's a bit popular!!

So you can all see it .

Ive done something different here with the internals, even without rpm you will see whats in the screeny,

But with rpm you'll get everything, ie. fancy monitors, glowy things, visible kerbs that are 5 in number and stuff.

Surfaces are provided for attaching experiments internally, the experiments are placed via the normal part editor in sph, so you can take what you want. it also has a KAS capacity of 400

Feedback appreciated, it's also likely to come with the hitch and trailer bed that are shown

[Gaalidas]

How'd you pull that off? Actually, I can probably answer that myself. You've simply left out certain parts of the IVA and instead attached them to the standard model so that the internal IVA can be active or not and you will still get a transparent window, but if RMP IVA is active, you won't get funky results from the standard model's interior.

OR I could be way off and just typing to hear my keyboard rattle. Either way, looks awesome. Now, how's about including that monstrosity in the background? That thing's beautiful.

Now, just need to give some of those tanks the necessary equipment to hold Baha-ammo and attach a few of those boomsticks to those rovers and we've got ourselves a rolling death machine. -insert evil laughter here-

Revenge is sweet

Originally, I wrote it purely to drive tracks.. Then I realised it would drive wheels just as well, learned some more C# tricks (I am a programming newbie, don't forget) and it just sort of carried on from there before I renamed it. I suppose I should have done so before the 1.7 release, but there's not a lot I can do about that now!

Anyone tested the repulsors with the new water collider method, btw?

Knew I was forgetting something. I'll get on that tomorrow hopefully. As for all the module name changes, I believe all will transfer over smoothly. I just got done using Notepad++ to do a complete directory search/replace for those module name changes and... roughly 200 matches being replaced in about 40 seconds, I'm rather optimistic about my chances of loading those babies up and not having anything out of whack beyond a few settings being reset.

Edited November 3, 2014 by Gaalidas

[lo-fi]

All you can really say is 'wow'! Looking amazing, Spanner, will give it a whirl shortly

You clearly had a lot of KF stuff scattered around a save, Gaalidas

[Madrias]

Wow! That looks epic!

Lo-Fi, I'm not worried about lost settings in my tracks. Many run on defaults. Even still, the things changed is usually Torque and Ride height.

[J.Random]

http://i.imgur.com/YIAnVRr.png

This is one very... soviet picture.

[lo-fi]

Wow! That looks epic!

Lo-Fi, I'm not worried about lost settings in my tracks. Many run on defaults. Even still, the things changed is usually Torque and Ride height.

That's cool, just thought I'd forewarn just in case.

This is one very... soviet picture.

Haha! Yes, it kinda does. I'm off to make some Kerbalised T72 tracks...

[Madrias]

I shall await the tank tracks, and also, if I read it correctly before, some steering tracks, so that I may avoid using my Infernal Robotics parts for steering.

I'm loving this parts pack.

[Gaalidas]

All you can really say is 'wow'! Looking amazing, Spanner, will give it a whirl shortly

You clearly had a lot of KF stuff scattered around a save, Gaalidas

That was actually all my .craft files, my persistence file, and the parts all combined. I have a lot of prototypes, some never even tested.

[lo-fi]

What I'm actually going to do is make separate steering components you can mount wheels or tracks to, the same as you're doing with IR. The difference will be no IR dependency and the steering will mimic the current method exactly for control input and proportionality. If what I'm testing currently works, it'll be a complete game changer for how attached parts behave in KSP, but it's early days yet. The joints are all new to me, and I have to learn how to use config nodes properly, so this will be a slow burn - I hope you're up for lots of testing, it's going to need it

Cheers dude, I'm having a blast! I know it looks like I'm going way of scope sometimes, but the more I cover the more cool stuff I realise I can do. It's a pretty cool journey to be on. Thanks for sticking with it

[Gaalidas]

What I'm actually going to do is make separate steering components you can mount wheels or tracks to, the same as you're doing with IR. The difference will be no IR dependency and the steering will mimic the current method exactly for control input and proportionality. If what I'm testing currently works, it'll be a complete game changer for how attached parts behave in KSP, but it's early days yet. The joints are all new to me, and I have to learn how to use config nodes properly, so this will be a slow burn - I hope you're up for lots of testing, it's going to need it

Cheers dude, I'm having a blast! I know it looks like I'm going way of scope sometimes, but the more I cover the more cool stuff I realise I can do. It's a pretty cool journey to be on. Thanks for sticking with it

Now that's what I'm talking about. If you succeed, it could be a way for us to possibly add the steering functionality to any wheel we can find out there that can be mounted to the part that handles what you're describing without changing to original wheel's configs. The options are endless.