Update Arrow Freighter/UCGO/DGIV version 2013 update

[Interceptor]

Yeah,I think the tab key would work,when you get some time download,install UMMUFA2.0,and it will show you the feature I am trying to explain to you,and maybe some other ideas.

 

[PeterRoss]

XR cargo containers are fitting well into Hercule too. Sadly they're incompatible with UCGO cargo interface, but it's nothing UCD can't fix.

Next, I'll try 40ft container

 

[PennyBlack]

XR cargo containers are fitting well into Hercule too. Sadly they're incompatible with UCGO cargo interface, but it's nothing UCD can't fix.

Next, I'll try 40ft container

How are you doing that PeterRoss.? Are you editing the configs and as I'm soon to update the Cargo Pack, is there something I can add to make them compatable.?

The cargo looks good with the Hercule, I was driving that around for a while today and never did that cross my mind. :lol:

 

[PeterRoss]

How are you doing that PeterRoss.? Are you editing the configs and as I'm soon to update the Cargo Pack, is there something I can add to make them compatable.?

The cargo looks good with the Hercule, I was driving that around for a while today and never did that cross my mind. :lol:

I'm using [ame="http://orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=3262"]Universal Cargo Deck[/ame] which allows you to attach anything to anything. The only inconvenience is one more vessel in ships list and necessity to switch between Hercule and its UCD to drive and to operate with cargo.

In theory you can add UCGO compatibility to XR container config so it will be treated by Hercule (and any other UCGO vessel) as another UCGO cargo, you can even tweak its UCGO attachment point coordinates so it will visually fit Hercule's cargo deck when attached through UCGO interface, but the problem here is that containers are bigger than common UCGO containers and the container will only take one cargo slot of Hercule's deck, all others will be available for cargo attachment although they will be visually blocked by the container. Not the big problem if you're doing it for your own fun, but it will raise questions when people will start to playing with it. And if the attachment point will be tweaked for Hercule's cargo deck, the container will look weird when attached to, let's say, Arrow. Many people will do that, and at least half of them will post a bug report. Do you really want it?

More smart way to make these things compatible is to make Hercule capable of operating with XR cargos (with automatic switch between UCGO and XR cargo interface depending on the type of cargo is attached), but it's up to Dansteph entirely, and he's quite busy right now with UCGO 3.0 release, I don't think he will find it a good idea to add some new features to it right now. Although it would have been just great, taking into account the amazing visual compatibility of Hercule and XR cargoes.

---------- Post added at 19:45 ---------- Previous post was at 19:02 ----------

Hercule with 40ft container still looking good :thumbup:

Question to Dansteph: I'm operating a Peary base near Moon's north pole, and I've noticed that UCGO cars sometimes are like stucking for a moment when driving around, like instantly losing speed and accelerating again from the same place. The frequency of 'stucking lags' is depending heavily on the direction the vessel is moving. Some directions (I suspect it's 0, 90, 180 and 270 degrees, but I can't say for sure since vessels has no Surface HUD) are almost lag-free, some other are producing lags every second. Hercule seems less affected by this problem, the worst case is Azure rover. It's behaving this way under UCGOcars.dll of both 2.5 and 3.0 versions.
Have you ever tested UCGO cars around plnetary poles?

 

[PennyBlack]

It never ceases to amaze me how people toy with addons.
That was a novel idea, but as you have pointed out PeterRoss, it may cause more problems than it's worth with mountings and how to offset the XR cargo centre to an attachment point. It would be better to target the actual vehicle. However, TL8 has a version planned; similar to the UCGO system by DanSteph which would target the XR series.

Thankyou. :thumbup:

 

[PeterRoss]

It never ceases to amaze me how people toy with addons.

Why not toy with toys?:lol:

That was a novel idea, but as you have pointed out PeterRoss, it may cause more problems than it's worth with mountings and how to offset the XR cargo centre to an attachment point. It would be better to target the actual vehicle. However, TL8 has a version planned; similar to the UCGO system by DanSteph which would target the XR series.

I'm fully agree with you on that, and I know about TL8's project and wait for it.

Thankyou. :thumbup:

Thank YOU! :tiphat:
Thank Dansteph
Hail Probe!

---------- Post added 06-12-13 at 17:59 ---------- Previous post was 05-12-13 at 22:14 ----------

Question to Dansteph: I'm operating a Peary base near Moon's north pole, and I've noticed that UCGO cars sometimes are like stucking for a moment when driving around, like instantly losing speed and accelerating again from the same place. The frequency of 'stucking lags' is depending heavily on the direction the vessel is moving. Some directions (I suspect it's 0, 90, 180 and 270 degrees, but I can't say for sure since vessels has no Surface HUD) are almost lag-free, some other are producing lags every second. Hercule seems less affected by this problem, the worst case is Azure rover. It's behaving this way under UCGOcars.dll of both 2.5 and 3.0 versions.
Have you ever tested UCGO cars around plnetary poles?

I've made some more thorough testing of this problem. Of course I've found HUD direction indicator :facepalm:My guess about bug-free direction was wrong, but it seems that the faster the Azure rover is moving the less chances to hit the speed bug. The worst situation is when the vehicle is just starting to move. Here's a scenario where you can see the problem:

BEGIN_DESC

END_DESC

BEGIN_ENVIRONMENT
  System Sol
  Date MJD 83661.2243717135
END_ENVIRONMENT

BEGIN_FOCUS
  Ship Azure_Peary
END_FOCUS

BEGIN_CAMERA
  TARGET Azure_Peary
  MODE Cockpit
  FOV 50.00
END_CAMERA

BEGIN_HUD
  TYPE Surface
END_HUD

BEGIN_PANEL
END_PANEL

BEGIN_SHIPS
Azure_Peary:UCGO\Cars\CarAzure
  STATUS Landed Moon
  POS 34.2140934 86.5995791
  HEADING 94.65
  AFCMODE 7
  NAVFREQ 0 0
  AIInFonction 0
  CurrentWpt 0
  EngineStarted 1.0000000000
  FlashLightState 0
  SAVEVAR00 2§0,5§0,8§0,11§0,14§0,17§0,20§0,23§0,26§0,29§0,32§0,35§0,38§0,41§0,44§0,47§0,50§0,53§0,56§0,59§0,200§0,301§0,400§1,401§1,403§1,405§1,407§1,
  UCGO @@0,1,0,0,@@1,1,0,0,
END
END_SHIPS

Just try to start moving the rover. If you have no problem with it then I'll try to find the source of the problem on my side.

---------- Post added 07-12-13 at 07:47 ---------- Previous post was 06-12-13 at 17:59 ----------

Seems like the problem is connected with simulation date/time. The scenario posted above is dated with 2087 year. When I change it into 2013 almost everything seems fine, the glitch only happens when turning sometimes. I suppose it's a known bug of Orbiter, I remember it was mentioned several times on OF.

 

[dansteph]

More smart way to make these things compatible is to make Hercule capable of operating with XR cargos (with automatic switch between UCGO and XR cargo interface depending on the type of cargo is attached), but it's up to Dansteph entirely, and he's quite busy right now with UCGO 3.0 release

This is not possible because XR's cargo size are not standardised for something that can fit in several vehicles not to speak about UMmu handling.
This is why I did choose a ~1.3 meter cube for slot, it fit almost in any vehicle (just add more slots), can be handled by UMmu without looking too strange etc. etc.
So I cannot do a patch only for one precise case: XR into Hercule. In UCGO you cannot do anything with such cargo. Doesn't fit in jeep, Ummu etc etc.

I don't know well XR's serie but why not do the inverse: Use UCGO cargo in XR serie ?

---------- Post added at 06:36 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:32 AM ----------

Why not toy with toys?:lol:
[/COLOR]Seems like the problem is connected with simulation date/time. The scenario posted above is dated with 2087 year. When I change it into 2013 almost everything seems fine, the glitch only happens when turning sometimes. I suppose it's a known bug of Orbiter, I remember it was mentioned several times on OF.

Right, the more in future you are the less Orbiter is precise with ground displacement. Ideally 2001 is the date which is the most stable.
The Orcus scenario are fixed at 2030 which is a compromise with a date that look very strange (2001 on mars?) and the displacement bug.

Also the bug get worse with low or unstable framerate, I can play in 2120 on Mars with only very little jump (100 FPS stable, limited by DX9)
while other with low framerate (20-30) start to have them as soon as 2030.

 

[garyw]

I don't know well XR's serie but why not do the inverse: Use UCGO cargo in XR serie ?

That's exactly why woo482 put these together [ame="http://orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=4571"]XR2 UCGO Cargo Platform v2.2[/ame]

 

[C3PO]

Why not just make an XR container that takes UCGO crates?

WOW! :ninja: of the decade. :lol:

[ame="http://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=4657"]UCGO Cargo Container[/ame]

 

[PeterRoss]

I don't know well XR's serie but why not do the inverse: Use UCGO cargo in XR serie ?

First of all - XR cargos are looking like real cargo containers, I mean - the big ones.

 

[Evil_Onyx]

I think the discussion with UCGO containers and XR cargos has been discussed to death elsewhere.

It boils down to that XR cargos are based on [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TEU"]TEU (Twenty-foot equivalent unit)[/ame] shipping containers and UCGO is close to EUR-pallets.

Both are valid types of standard cargo sizes and both have there place.

 

[dansteph]

First of all - XR cargos are looking like real cargo containers, I mean - the big ones.

Yep, but that's wasn't my point. My point is that you cannot
handle them with UMmu, Jeep, Azure, Forklift, DGIV, Arrow, etc. etc. The only
case is eventually the Hercule and the earth truck. I cannot write in "universal
cargo SDK" something that handle cargoes that doesn't fit in the majority of
vessels that use it.

Also in reality mass transport also divid in small packs that can be handled, so you
can use woo482's [ame=http://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=4657]container[/ame] and you have the best of both and something
close to the reality.

 

[PeterRoss]

Yep, but that's wasn't my point. My point is that you cannot
handle them with UMmu, Jeep, Azure, Forklift, DGIV, Arrow, etc. etc. The only
case is eventually the Hercule and the earth truck. I cannot write in "universal
cargo SDK" something that handle cargoes that doesn't fit in the majority of
vessels that use it.

Also in reality mass transport also divid in small packs that can be handled, so you
can use woo482's container and you have the best of both and something
close to the reality.

Yes, I got it, Dan. It wasn't my intention to start another XR cargo vs UCGO war. As it was said before, both types has their uses. And you've answered my question already - in fact I've forget that Hercule is a vehicle based on universal library and don't have its own dll. I'm perfectly fine with custom Hercule-UCD modification, but I guess it means warranty is cancelled... :uhh:

 

[Koloss]

Hi community,

I don't want to necropost here but perhaps the information I need is relevant for future Arrow Freighter captains

My question is: How long and wide is the docking bay?
I know that the DGIV is approx. 18 meters long. Until know I dock by eyeballing it via an outside view.
I would like to look at the numbers in the Docking MFD and say: "Ok, now I am right underneath the docking bay. If I now translate upwards the DGIV won't hit any part of the Freighter."

Any ideas? I didn't find the information in the Doc. Or am I blind? :idk: