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

lo-fi · February 22, 2015

um not sure where this post was meant to go, But i have busted out both my homeworld cd's 1 and 2 and beat em both. Sadly my cataclysm cd was snapped in half in a move and tossed out. But I also got this on pre-order via Steam and eagerly await its release on the 25th!

Me either, just idle musing of a bored modder. Can't wait!

hmm, I just tried a clean install with Kerbal Foundries downloaded from KerbalStuff and GCMonitor by Sarbian to measure fps. It gave me same results. Weird :/

That's an interesting one... We did do some soak testing, but never managed to get anything to slow down appreciably. Unless it's maybe a sound channel overload! Try deleting the sounds, I believe it'll just stop bothering to try playing them, but keep an eye in the log for other funnies.

riocrokite · February 22, 2015

That's an interesting one... We did do some soak testing, but never managed to get anything to slow down appreciably. Unless it's maybe a sound channel overload! Try deleting the sounds, I believe it'll just stop bothering to try playing them, but keep an eye in the log for other funnies.

Glad to hear that it might be my machine screwed up Actually I do have a problem with sound - half of games including KSP I can't hear sound. Probably will have to reinstall win7 since I have too much dead weight on the system anyway.

lo-fi · February 22, 2015

Ah, wouldn't surprise me if the sound stuff is causing an issue. I was worried that lots of wheel colliders would be a problem (there are nine on each of those track units in your screen grab), but they appear to be very slick, and that's actually the first report of a performance problem I've had reported. Keep me posted!

Edited February 22, 2015 by lo-fi

goldenpeach · February 23, 2015

I have a simple problem:

my skids are often stuck in the "compressed" position like this http://imgur.com/eMSSlmV

Sometime, they aren't stuck and they extend normally.

Is there anything I do wrong?

Gaalidas · February 23, 2015

It's fair to say that with an extreme number of these wheels/tracks/whatever you'd get some slowdown compared to stock. There's a lot more happening with these than anyone could have expected for something as simple as a wheel. I really doubt anyone has tried to see just how many wheels it would take before KSP chocked on them. Kinda makes me want to go make something that stretches down half the runway with wheels set as thick as they go and see what happens, but with the time it takes KSP to load up that sort of test could be painful simply in time spent waiting.

- - - Updated - - -

I have a simple problem:
my skids are often stuck in the "compressed" position like this http://imgur.com/eMSSlmV
Sometime, they aren't stuck and they extend normally.
Is there anything I do wrong?

Most likely there's something you're doing wrong... Oh, you meant in relation to the skids? Right... actually, I haven't even used the skids before. If this is related to suspension though, it could have something to do with a lack of a surface in which the part can relate to, thus causing it to just lock at whatever suspension level it was at when it lost contact. Similar to if you roll your rover on its back (with no chance of recovery) and had some wheels at different heights. The wheels, at this point, won't simply retract fully (thus following gravity) but will instead often just become stuck at whatever level they were at when they lost the reference point with the ground. Perhaps we need to look into a default settings for the wheels to return to if the ground/surface reference is lost.

lo-fi · February 23, 2015

I have a simple problem:
my skids are often stuck in the "compressed" position like this http://imgur.com/eMSSlmV
Sometime, they aren't stuck and they extend normally.
Is there anything I do wrong?

Cool, you're using them as landing gear! Actually, that's my fault. Kinda technical, but to do with the infuriating way Unity wheel colliders default to the fully compressed position when they aren't in contact with anything. I fixed it once, then redid the suspension code and was too lazy/forgot to fix it in the new code. They should come back to life when you land? I'll revisit that, it does need fixing.

goldenpeach · February 23, 2015

Thank you

Also, just for the annecdote, I also use tracks as landing wheel(it's difficult to land properlly).

Ps: on the plane you saw, I took off with track, then jettisonned the tracks after take-off.

Of course refular gears would do it: that's what I used before on that plane! So, why the change?

Because KSP, that's why

B787_300 · February 23, 2015

just a question (i use the SKIDS as LG) could you up the friction on them quite a bit? or have it tweakable

Edited February 23, 2015 by B787_300
tracks to skids

lo-fi · February 23, 2015

Any chance of a few more screen grabs, goldenpeach? Sounds perfectly kerbal!

You can change it in the config if you like, B787_300. The value for rollingResistance will give you forward friction. Try a value of 40 or 50 to start, maybe

goldenpeach · February 23, 2015

here you go!

oh, and a little bonus: the plane

Edited February 23, 2015 by goldenpeach

lo-fi · February 23, 2015

Oh cool, cheers! And looks like the arrows aren't getting removed outside the editor for the small tracks - I'll put that right.

Gaalidas · February 23, 2015

That is awesome. Staged horizontal takeoff. That's got to be a rare occurrence. I always wondered about such a system to help oversized crafts get off the ground. Unfortunately that would only be usable once. What is really needed is a complete platform that could be brought up to speed and then eject the plane into the air, self-stopped and then return back to the beginning of the runway. Upon landing, you would have to align yourself to touch down right back on top of the vehicle which would then match your speed and latch on, then slowly bring you to a stop. We need those non-docking tie-downs for that I think, especially in-flight re-tying and ejecting.

Can you imagine the outtakes for trying to create such a system, not to mention the need to re-create a flight-synchronization mod and an autonomous smart autopilot? It gives me a headache just thinking about out. Maybe it would be easier to try to implement a catapult takeoff assistance system into the stock runway. It'd bring to life a dream of launching a jumbo jet from an aircraft carrier.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh cool, cheers! And looks like the arrows aren't getting removed outside the editor for the small tracks - I'll put that right.

Yeah, that's the same issue I was having with the hitch parts. In the editor the arrows are awesome, but outside of that they sorta loose their appeal.

- - - Updated - - -

Any chance of a few more screen grabs, goldenpeach? Sounds perfectly kerbal!
You can change it in the config if you like, B787_300. The value for rollingResistance will give you forward friction. Try a value of 40 or 50 to start, maybe

It probably wouldn't be too hard to make it tweakable in the editor of course... might be worth looking at someday.

Edited February 23, 2015 by Gaalidas

lo-fi · February 23, 2015

The arrows on the hitch are a hangover from some debugging stuff. Since gone, but the rest is so broken, I haven't even released it to you guys. I've got a lead on the time warp problem, but with the Krakensbane stuff it's a snake pit of positions and velocities. Not easy.

The small track is missing a module to remove the arrows in flight - I must have missed it.

You mean like landing FireFlash in Trapped in the Sky? That would be hilarious and damn near impossible

smjjames · February 23, 2015

Which of the tread wheels have tank steering? I thought all of the tread ones would have that?

Gaalidas · February 23, 2015

The arrows on the hitch are a hangover from some debugging stuff. Since gone, but the rest is so broken, I haven't even released it to you guys. I've got a lead on the time warp problem, but with the Krakensbane stuff it's a snake pit of positions and velocities. Not easy.
The small track is missing a module to remove the arrows in flight - I must have missed it.
You mean like landing FireFlash in Trapped in the Sky? That would be hilarious and damn near impossible

I have absolutely no clue what you are referring to there, but sure I'll go with that.

lo-fi · February 24, 2015

Which of the tread wheels have tank steering? I thought all of the tread ones would have that?

All except the surface track, which steers like a wheel.

I have absolutely no clue what you are referring to there, but sure I'll go with that.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x28x1gu_01-thunderbirds-trapped-in-the-sky_shortfilms

Well before our time, but boy did that guy have an imagination!! Fast forward to around 45:00

Oh, by the way, I seem to have got the hitch working in time warp. Still a lot of bugs to iron out to make it properly usable, but I think this one is feasible. As will tie downs for undocked rovers.

Edited February 24, 2015 by lo-fi

Madrias · February 25, 2015

Been a long time since I've seen staged horizontal takeoff. I've done it, but not so much as "lift the nose" as "Get this thing moving!"

Very few aircraft, thankfully, need an RT-10 shoved under each wing just to make it to takeoff speed before running out of runway. That thing back in 0.23.5... Takeoff velocity at 330 m/s. Cargo capacity? One Science Lab for the space station, plus two Kerbals, plus pilot.

CaelumEtAstra · February 25, 2015

Rep and sub. You're doing good work, my friend.

Melfice · February 25, 2015

Well before our time, but boy did that guy have an imagination!! Fast forward to around 45:00

Ah, the Fireflash.

Why they even bothered with the thing after the first two sabotage attempts, I still cannot fathom.

Thunderbirds were so awesome. Fond childhood memories.

bartekkru99 · February 25, 2015

Can you make bigger and longer screw drives?

lo-fi · February 25, 2015

Rep and sub. You're doing good work, my friend.

Cheers

Ah, the Fireflash.
Why they even bothered with the thing after the first two sabotage attempts, I still cannot fathom.
Thunderbirds were so awesome. Fond childhood memories.

Inspiring to many generations! Because it was so darn cool, that's why

Might get around to building Crablogger in ksp for a laugh one of these days...

Can you make bigger and longer screw drives?
http://img.izismile.com/img/img6/20130905/640/the_most_insanely_awesome_machines_ever_640_05.jpg

Tweakscale, my friend, tweakscale!

The Space Man · February 25, 2015

Can you make bigger and longer screw drives?

Tweakscale, my friend, tweakscale!

I've already edited the tweakscale cfg for bigger and longer everything :blush:

SCALETYPE
{
	// Medium wheels have a wide range of 40%-140% to keep them in that medium range.
	name = KFScaleM
	freeScale = false
	scaleFactors = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 4.0
	scaleNames = 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, 100%, 110%, 120%, 130%, 140%, 150%, 160%, 170%, 180%, 190%, 200%, 210%, 220%, 230%, 240%, 250%, 260%, 270%, 280%, 290%, 300%, 310%, 320%, 330%, 340%, 350%, 360%, 370%, 380%, 390%, 400%
	defaultScale = 1.0
	TWEAKSCALEEXPONENTS
	{
		name = KFModuleWheel
		!tweakScaleCorrector = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 4.0
	}
}
SCALETYPE
{
	// Small wheels may becomes unusable at extremely small scales.  80%-180% range.
	name = KFScaleS
	freeScale = false
	scaleFactors = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 4.0
	scaleNames = 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, 100%, 110%, 120%, 130%, 140%, 150%, 160%, 170%, 180%, 190%, 200%, 210%, 220%, 230%, 240%, 250%, 260%, 270%, 280%, 290%, 300%, 310%, 320%, 330%, 340%, 350%, 360%, 370%, 380%, 390%, 400%
	defaultScale = 1.0
	TWEAKSCALEEXPONENTS
	{
		name = KFModuleWheel
		!tweakScaleCorrector = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 4.0
	}
}
SCALETYPE
{
	// Large wheels are best kept at a 20%-120% range so they don't get too big to handle.
	name = KFScaleL
	freeScale = false
	scaleFactors = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 4.0
	scaleNames = 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, 100%, 110%, 120%, 130%, 140%, 150%, 160%, 170%, 180%, 190%, 200%, 210%, 220%, 230%, 240%, 250%, 260%, 270%, 280%, 290%, 300%, 310%, 320%, 330%, 340%, 350%, 360%, 370%, 380%, 390%, 400%
	defaultScale = 1.0
	TWEAKSCALEEXPONENTS
	{
		name = KFModuleWheel
		!tweakScaleCorrector = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 4.0
	}
}
SCALETYPE
{
	// Track scaler. Largest range of all the scaletypes: 20%-200%
	name = KFTrack
	freeScale = false
	scaleFactors = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 4.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 4.0
	scaleNames = 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, 100%, 110%, 120%, 130%, 140%, 150%, 160%, 170%, 180%, 190%, 200%, 210%, 220%, 230%, 240%, 250%, 260%, 270%, 280%, 290%, 300%, 310%, 320%, 330%, 340%, 350%, 360%, 370%, 380%, 390%, 400%
	defaultScale = 1.0
	TWEAKSCALEEXPONENTS
	{
		name = KFModuleWheel
		!tweakScaleCorrector = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 4.0
	}
}
SCALETYPE
{
	// Samll Track scaler. Different scale range: 60%-240%
	name = KFTrackSmall
	freeScale = false
	scaleFactors = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 4.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 4.0
	scaleNames = 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, 100%, 110%, 120%, 130%, 140%, 150%, 160%, 170%, 180%, 190%, 200%, 210%, 220%, 230%, 240%, 250%, 260%, 270%, 280%, 290%, 300%, 310%, 320%, 330%, 340%, 350%, 360%, 370%, 380%, 390%, 400%, 210%, 220%, 230%, 240%, 250%, 260%, 270%, 280%, 290%, 300%, 310%, 320%, 330%, 340%, 350%, 360%, 370%, 380%, 390%, 400%
	defaultScale = 1.0
	TWEAKSCALEEXPONENTS
	{
		name = KFModuleWheel
		!tweakScaleCorrector = 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 2.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 2.9, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 4.0, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5
	}
}
SCALETYPE
{
	// Repulsor scaler.  Free-scale from 5%-250% with no extra values altered.
	name = KFRepulsor
	freeScale = true
	minScale = 5
	maxScale = 250
	defaultScale = 100
	suffix = %
}
SCALETYPE
{
	// Main Gear Dev part support.  Free-scale from 20%-140% for now.  Needs Testing!
	name = KFMainGear
	freeScale = true
	minScale = 20
	maxScale = 140
	defaultScale = 100
	suffix = %
}

Melfice · February 25, 2015

I've already edited the tweakscale cfg for bigger and longer everything

... there are rules against this. I know there are. But who could resist? Who would report a man for it? So here goes:

"How do I apply that to real life?"

lo-fi · February 25, 2015

Very cool. Cheers for posting your alternate config, TSM

Gaalidas · February 25, 2015

All except the surface track, which steers like a wheel.
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x28x1gu_01-thunderbirds-trapped-in-the-sky_shortfilms
Well before our time, but boy did that guy have an imagination!! Fast forward to around 45:00
Oh, by the way, I seem to have got the hitch working in time warp. Still a lot of bugs to iron out to make it properly usable, but I think this one is feasible. As will tie downs for undocked rovers.

That was EPIC. wow...

- - - Updated - - -

... there are rules against this. I know there are. But who could resist? Who would report a man for it? So here goes:
"How do I apply that to real life?"

No... don't go there.... ugh!

- - - Updated - - -

I've already edited the tweakscale cfg for bigger and longer everything
--snipped the code--

The values I entered were limited purely based on what was considered "usable" when taking into consideration the originally intended use for the part. For instance, you could scale the mole tracks and make them usable as a snowmobile, but that would start to border the ridiculous considering what they were made for. Still, no one will fault you for tweaking your local copy for the results you want. Just don't go making too many changes to the default. I intend to update my TweakScale implementation in the near future to implement things such as scale-based RPM limits and such. I'm still testing... with some hilariously over/under powered results. My goal is to reduce those moments where you scale down a wheel a ton and find out the wheel is still powerful enough to flip your rover when you try to move. I'm messing around with the torque curves and a tweakscale exponent for the RPM limiter to get the right feel.

For the hypnodrive (screw drive) what we really need is not the standard omnidirectional scale factor, but rather a way to procedurally change its shape so that we can stretch it lengthwise, thus providing a longer stable surface for the craft to rest on. This is something for the far future, however, along with the near impossibility of procedurally generated tracks. However, I doubt that differently-shaped and sized screws as additional parts would be too difficult. I'm not a modeler, so I have no clue what goes into that.

Edited February 25, 2015 by Gaalidas

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

What to work on next? 1,282 members have voted

1. What to work on next?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

What to work on next?
1,282 members have voted