Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Allow multiple items in capName field of PARACHUTE nodes #80

Closed
sumghai opened this Issue Jul 25, 2018 · 2 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@sumghai
Copy link
Collaborator

sumghai commented Jul 25, 2018

Not sure how feasible this is, but would it be possible to modify the capName field of PARACHUTE nodes to support multiple mesh names in a comma-delimited list, instead of a single string value?

When a parachute is deployed, the method would look through and eject each mesh in the list, and if the mesh cannot be found, it will be assumed that it was ejected earlier by another parachute.

Rationale / Use case

As part of a revamp of my SDHI SMS mod, I designed a parachute-equipped docking port that uses two PARACHUTE nodes:

  • the drogue chute drogue_chute_baseTransform, whose corresponding cap of cap_cover is the outermost casing of the docking port
  • the main chute main_chute_baseTransform, whose corresponding cap of cap_mains is a mesh representing bundled-up bags of mains parachutes
MODULE
	{	
		name = RealChuteModule
		caseMass = 0.35
		timer = 0
		mustGoDown = true
		cutSpeed = 0.5
		spareChutes = 1
		secondaryChute = true
		
		// Main chute
		PARACHUTE
		{
			material = Nylon
			capName = cap_mains
			parachuteName = main_chute_baseTransform
			preDeploymentAnimation = SDHI_Parachute_Main_semi_deploy
			deploymentAnimation = SDHI_Parachute_Main_full_deploy
			preDeployedDiameter = 3
			deployedDiameter = 55
			minIsPressure = false
			minDeployment = 1998
			deploymentAlt = 700
			cutAlt = -1
			preDeploymentSpeed = 2
			deploymentSpeed = 6
		}
		
		// Drogue chute
		PARACHUTE
		{
			material = Kevlar
			capName = cap_cover
			parachuteName = drogue_chute_baseTransform
			preDeploymentAnimation = SDHI_Parachute_Drogue_semi_deploy
			deploymentAnimation = SDHI_Parachute_Drogue_full_deploy
			preDeployedDiameter = 5
			deployedDiameter = 10
			minIsPressure = false
			minDeployment = 12500
			deploymentAlt = 2500
			cutAlt = 2000
			preDeploymentSpeed = 1
			deploymentSpeed = 4
		}
	}

cap_mains is nested inside cap_cover, as it visually makes sense for the outer casing to come off when the drogues are deployed, followed by the inner parachute bags when the mains are deployed. This setup currently works fine for most reentry-to-landing scenarios.

However, if the parachutes are deployed when the altitude is too low to deploy drogues (such as pad aborts with an Escape Tower), which results in the visually jarring situation of main parachutes poking out of the still-intact outer casing.

As an attempted workaround, I tried tuning the deployment altitudes for the drogues to work at lower altitude, but this negates their usefulness at the usual higher altitudes during normal reentry through to landing.

Therefore, if my feature request was implemented, then I can do this:

		// Main chute
		PARACHUTE
		{
			material = Nylon
			capName = cap_cover, cap_mains
			parachuteName = main_chute_baseTransform
			[...snip...]
		}
		
		// Drogue chute
		PARACHUTE
		{
			material = Kevlar
			capName = cap_cover
			parachuteName = drogue_chute_baseTransform
			[...snip...]
		}
	}

Essentially, the main chute would optionally eject both the outer casing and the main parachute bag, even if the drogues were never deployed. And if the drogues were deployed earlier, then the mains would eject just the main parachute bag.

@StupidChris, @Starwaster - thoughts?

@StupidChris

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Owner

StupidChris commented Aug 25, 2018

Doable, but will transpose to RC2 as talked about privately. Will keep open though.

@StupidChris

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Owner

StupidChris commented Oct 16, 2018

Will be fixed In RC2, closing

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.