Justin Kerbice
-
Posts
1,476 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Justin Kerbice
-
-
Do you have stockPatch.cfg in the B9_Aerospace folder? You'd need to remove that for KSP 0.90
What version number? The one in the OP is the last one Bac9 released, my version is just compatibility and bug fixes with the odd small improvement thrown in here and there because Bac9 has been unable to spend time on this and it's way too good to just leave it as it was.
I did add a .version file for the patch after KSP 1.0, but everything before that was just a Github link
yes.
Without it, it's works.
the plug-in library version (they're all set to 1.0.0.0, despite there is many version, so "1.0.0.0 not working" means which one ?).
All of this is very drafty, a few releases on github would have been better for everyone, especially you. Because it is like "get the files from github and overwrite but warning if you have KSP version X, do this, if KSP Y, do this, and if KSP Z, do this", can't imagine what it is for people without enough computer skills.
-
Latest version is only compatible with KSP 1.0, the stock lift/drag system changed considerably between 0.90/1.0. This is the last 0.90 compatible version I believe
Why keeping the same version number ? This would make your job harder :/.
with the version given in your link, it still have issue.
EDIT: control surfaces are both ok, only wings have this issue, take a part from list, try to attach it (as soon as part is just put on another one, without actually attach it) => exception !
1st time I put a wing, it's ok, menu is there, but after remove and put a new proc. wing part, I got this on log:
InvalidCastException: Cannot cast from source type to destination type.at WingProcedural.WingProcedural.CalculateAerodynamicValues () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
at WingProcedural.WingProcedural.UpdateGeometry (Boolean updateAerodynamics) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
at WingProcedural.WingProcedural.RefreshGeometry () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
at WingProcedural.WingProcedural.Setup () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
at WingProcedural.WingProcedural.Start () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
deleting part B9.Aero.Wing.Procedural.TypeA
Menu don't show up anymore after that, 'J' key does nothing, but button in the toolbar still display the small window.
-
I have the same issue as Subadanus (KSP 0.90 32b on windows, OpenGL or not)
in log there is
TypeLoadException: Could not load type 'DragCubeList' from assembly 'Assembly-CSharp, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'.
B9.Aero.Wing.Procedural.TypeA added to ship - part count: 2
stage count is: 0
deleting part B9.Aero.Wing.Procedural.TypeA
Every time I add a B9 procedural parts (all 3 types: wing or CS) to the vessel.
In editor: the button does nothing, no small popup displayed, so J key does nothing too.
in flight: button display the debug window, didn't tried further.
It's occurred with or without MM installed, and only with your version, base Bac9 plug-in works.
Also, part loader complain about these two:
Cannot find a PartModule of typename 'ModuleFuelTanks'
Cannot find a PartModule of typename 'ModuleHeatShield'
but it is not directly linked.
I use your plug-in downloaded on 27/04/2015.
-
@Ferram4:
regarding this in config:
@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]:HAS[@PROPELLANT[intakeAir]]]:BEFORE[NEAR]:NEEDS[!AJE]
{
@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]
{
@maxThrust *= 0.5
}
}
is there any, simple is possible, mean to prevent it to be applied to a given (set of) engine(s) (by part's name, manufacturer or part directory) ?
Thanks.
-
I would like to see something like this, but I think it lies fair and square in mod territory at this point
Just maybe, you're doing something wierd here. Mass is measured in kg and is an inherent property of an object (and is the number we use in KSP and in everyday earth conversation). Weight is the force exerted on that object by gravity and is measured in Newtons (eg. you need 10kN of thrust to lift 1t off the surface of earth/kerbin). You're multiplying the mass of an object by Kerbin/Earth surface gravity and getting it's surface weight in Newtons and then trying to compare that with the mass of the earth equivalent. An unloaded F-16 weighs 85.8kN on the Earth's surface by your numbers (whether the engine weighing 9.8kN (1t mass) is appropriate I have no idea)
You forgot one point: we usually express weight as the absolute value of force vector, so my computer weight X kgs, it's not the force itself, but the force value (discarding the way, which is obviously "down"). Which is the units use for the plane I use in my post.
No one use mass in everyday conversation at all ! Unless you only speak to physicists ! What the matter using mass at all ? it's too much abstract for our everyday life.
A scale didn't give you the mass, it gives you the weight, and what's the unit used ?
Could you please explain what weird math is going on here? 1 ton is 1 ton. How are you turning 1 ton into 9 tons?Not weird at all, Kerbin gravitation constant is the same as our Earth one (9.81 m/s-2), so 1t in KSP on Kerbin weight as much as in our universe on Earth (at ground level to be thorough), which is 9.81 t in weight (again absolute value of force vector).
-
As I wrote here,
C7's engines (jet engines) masses are completely insane !
basic jet engine mass = 1 t ==> weight > 9 t (9.8 t)
turbo jet engine mass = 1.2 t ==> w ~ 11.7 t
for comparison: a complete F-16 plane have an empty weight of 8.570t (less than the KSP engine alone !) and a loaded weight of 12t, another comparison: one single big Airbus A-380 engine weight ~5t.
For a 10 times smaller world... it's weird
.--
Changing paradigm could be good, but first, some "easy" work could be done to start.
There is a lot which could be done on KSP to make it better, but it's probably a lot less cheap as "rip mods off" as Squad have chosen to do for now (AFAIK not a single 1.0 "feature" is brand new, all comes from modders in a way or another).
-
If it still open, I add this:
inconsistency: 50% thrust on launch was allegedly added for morons who don't understand why their rocket doesn't move after pushing space key but...
the same morons would know they have to add crews to pod as for some reason, after some launches, crews are no longer automatically put on their seats WHEREAS they are still crews available, and even worth, go to the astronauts complex to recruit some new ones before adding them to seats.
Weird issue: when a pod have minimumcrew > 1, have only mincrew-1 inside the pod make the craft doesn't respond to any control at all, like it has run out of EC.
(not applicable with stock as all pods have mincrew=1, even mk3 pod ! But this can occurred "suddenly", goes through QA testing unnoticed, and reach the release if min crew is increased for any reason)
balance issue: C7's engines (jet engines) masses are completely insane !
basic jet engine mass = 1 t ==> weight > 9 t (9.8 t)
turbo jet engine mass = 1.2 t ==> w ~ 11.7 t
for comparison: a complete F-16 plane have an empty weight of 8.570t (less than the KSP engine alone !) and a loaded weight of 12t, another comparison: one single big Airbus A-380 engine weight ~5t.
For a 10 times smaller world... it's weird
. -
Hi,
mirror symmetry completely fail to achieve its goal with compound parts in the VAB:
(strut connectors suffer the same issue)
it's work with both symmetry modes in SPH.
(EDIT: KSP 0.90.0.705)
-
A thing I learn in KSP is you can lift about 0.1 * thrust in ton (a vessel with 50 kN of thrust can lift about 5t not more, itself+propellant included).
-
Good but unfortunately... too much modders are more interested to put a useless license file, sometime in many/every subdirectories of their GameData folder, than a single readme... or put changelog/revision history prior to any single explanation of what their stuff is all about
.(but it's not as worth as many GTA4 mods... no install instructions for most of the things there, just a few words and a stupid useless changelog)
Ok it's on free time but what the purpose of sharing (they surely like when people like their mods, right ?) if it's doing it a bad way ?
NOBODY knows what you know by doing something, so explanations are mandatory, or just don't share at all.
-
A little issue: ckan pull request is sent even checkbox has been unchecked (is it possible it is re-check against our will and behind our back every time with choose to edit our stuff ?), and most of them fail for some reason (license it seems).
-
May I suggest to add more info on custom filter on 1st post (from source: isEngine, isCommand, adapter, multicoupler, crewCabin) as well as path/folder ?
What do you think about using subcategory of part, as it is not yet used by Squad but not discarded/rejected from config parser I guess ?
-
For people who could be interested, I have recompile the plug-in for 0.23.5 + fix a little issue, and move the track a bit to make it easier to get on.
Can add a link here later (message sent a while back to InfiniteDice, still no answer yet, so I took it for a grant for just this tiny update).
-
So the issue with the TB is gone? Great!
Strange though: in your log I only saw plenty of exceptions from AntennaRange. Are you sure you've used the debug version?
Mmm, I'm not quite sure I understand about the TWR. You mean "in some maneuvers TWR becomes <1"?
If so, have your craft some reserve of TWR? Because if the initial TWR is, say, around 1.5, it may not be enough for when some engines are dethrottled in the maneuver.
Yes.
Even stranger, you don't talk about my very own log at all ! (I don't even have any related mod to AR installed)
Forget about it, thinking deeper just shows me it's impossible and right, I would check to have at least a TWR of 1.5 in the future.
-
I've updated the debug version of TCA, including several log messages that should trace the process of button creation. Please, download it from the link above and test the whole thing again, then share the log.
Thanks for the quick answer. Tried it after deleting potentially buggy BTB settings file, BTB button is displayed now
.The window seems a bit too big (there is lot's of empty space around engines data).
A little "issue": throttle control may be adjusted in order to achieve a TWR > 1, sometimes, throttle is too low and TWR fall below 1 for enough time to make ship falling down before TWR get back to a value > 1 (I know, it would not be easy, TCA did already a good job).
Check your pm soon for the log.
-
As DavidHunter, stock TB button is not displayed for me (win7, KSP 0.90, OpenGL, TCA v2.1, ship with engines
).Also (related ?) blizzy's TB doesn't appear as well (my own curse it seems) in flight scene.
Assembly is loaded well, no error in log... weird. Shortcut key works as expected, but no window.
Is there any things to check to help solving this ?
(Perhaps adding some debug log in button creation may help, we never knows).
-
For what it's worth, I believe no feature should be added but be focused on issues and optimization/cleaning.
- it's in unbelievable/unacceptable/disappointing to see NO Claw's fixes AT ALL has already been included in stock game,
- if feature/mod integration are done like it has been done before (quite poor mimic of Enhanced navball in 0.90, not enough example of ships when SPP has been integrated), new announced ones could lead to a disaster, example: new aero, either a FAR/NEAR integration or (again) a poor copy of it + NO public doc = nothing (no prior experience, no knowledge) will be ready for release and noone would know how to build a proper plane BEFORE and to make mods compatible for it (as usual, some people will do the Squad job more or less well as guessing how it's works is no equal to actually exactly knowing how it's works), except maybe in QA team (not so much people I guess), comparing to all knowledge related to FAR/NEAR which is already available to anyone who know how to find it.
- the current state of the game is not very something to be proud of (too slow, too limited, too messy), nothing destined to last can be build on a swamp (just looking at how the part list is displayed in 0.90, it's really looks like a dirty hack made in the UI), so adding more stone to the tower could lead to it's collapse sooner or later.
-
I wanna ask, whats that engine from? And this is amazing... are you going to maybe add other mod support? Like Procedural Parts?
This one, and no, I'm only focused on stock parts + a very selected few mods, but anyone is free to copy and adapt what I've done so far.
-
Got two issues (KSP 0.90 32b, openGL, win7, DDSLoader 1.8 default cfg):
- assembly version mismatch:
Mod DLLs found:Assembly-CSharp v1.0.0.0
DDSLoader v1.7.0.0
- textures loading exception:
Load(Texture): Kerbice Group/landglider/glider-lights-diffuseUnityException: LoadRawTextureData: not enough data provided (will result in overread).
at (wrapper managed-to-native) UnityEngine.Texture2D:LoadRawTextureData (byte[])
at DDSLoader.DatabaseLoaderTexture_DDS.LoadDDS (System.String path, Boolean keepReadable, Boolean asNormal, Int32 mipmapBias, Boolean apply) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
at DDSLoader.DatabaseLoaderTexture_DDS+<Load>c__Iterator0.MoveNext () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0
UnityEngine.MonoBehaviour:StartCoroutine_Auto(IEnumerator)
UnityEngine.MonoBehaviour:StartCoroutine(IEnumerator)
:MoveNext()
This tex was created using:
nvdxt.exe -file glider-lights-diffuse.tga -dither -output glider-lights-diffuse.dds -RescaleBlackman -quality_normal -nmips 5 -Blackman -dxt1c
(no alpha channel)
targa textures load more or less (ie: when KSP/Unity is in a mood of loading these textures) as they should.
I didn't see anything in 1st post which may shows one of the nvdxt's option used is wrong/not managed.
(-Blackman is for mipmap filtering)
And using "-quality_normal -nomipmap -dxt1c" options only works.
(what's weird is the loaded texture, which is not the main object diffuse tex, "override" it ??? Guess it's another KSP/Unity issue)
-
Hi everyone,
I've started to make a Module Manager config to add Firespitter FuelSwitch module to many stock fuel tanks. Very early WIP with only three tanks managed (Stratus-V, Oscar-B and PB-X50R).
WHY ? because it allow a lot more combination of shapes and resources' amounts.
For example, I use quite a lot Xenon Gas, but using 10 to 50 small tanks is a huge pain somewhere, especially with the very poor stock resources trasnfert between vessels.
My aim is to ONLY play with stock resources and tanks plus some precise parts sets which add really new tank shapes (I think of the set by Nazari1382, with half spherical tanks, or RLA stockalike parts).
I saw in Firespitter release thread that some people tried this and failed, so it may help them.
Example here with some tanks:
If you want to try yourself, you can get it here:
github project page (where you can also download the file as it is for now)
Required: Module Manager and Firespitter (only the plug-in)
Installation: download the file then copy it to your GameData folder (read the FS doc also can be helpful)
You can also contribute by create pull requests, adding more tanks, improve balance, etc
-
Launch sites on other bodies than Kerbin seems to doesn't work very well :/.
I have one on Minmus:
- icon not displayed on map,
- using HyperEdit plug-in confuse KK (it may also do this on Kerbin): launch site is not loaded at all and crafts and/or kerbals sitting on the building fall to the ground when we're get close.
And, why providing some buildings with KK ? KK is supposed to be just a plug-in, not something else.
-
... when going back to the vessel from tracking station or use "revert to launch" makes KSP use the base, not rescaled, mesh !
Look similar to this TweakScale issue, as I guess TS just use code to play with rescaleFactor dynamically.
What I got is a mesh of base size 1.25m diameter, use RS to 0.5 or 2 to fit 0.625/2.5m diameter parts, it works on the VAB/SPH, works fine while keeping the vessel launched on play, but KSP messed up the size when going back later.
Anyone already encounter this ? Any workaround ?
(very nice, did this to spare some memory and for what ? scratching head for nothing), not sure it even worth adding another issue report (as they didn't seems to get much attention).
-
Start a brand new career save, add some science points (~ 1200) and funds.
Unlock some technologies (only half of 2nd groups of tech nodes), create a simple craft, go to the adm building, select 2 contracts (1st launch + altitude record of 5000m), launch the craft =>
Going over 5000m (the one displayed on top, which is altitude above sea level) = alt. record contract not completed (1st launch completed).
The only contract parameter is altitude >= 5000m, there is no other parameters showed to the user (manned or not, part requirement, etc).
(Data displayed may not be in sync with actual parameter value used.)
-
To Eskandare and any other people interested by the idea: I thought it would be also good for motivated builders to only create layout of various style (see below) and let them empty and also free to use elsewhere. So people can just add a building to an empty place and upload there stuff to some common repository (github could be use as helper for that), and a "build" could be even created more or less automatically every x days/every accepted pull request.
Layout style: from village (random spots of random shapes with a lot's of space between) to megalopolis (New York style: a grid of street with various sized rectangular spots to fill).
For the sake of KSP and memory, spot shapes should be only rectangles.
This could lead to the exact same behaviour on how real cities grows by themselves, without too much restrictive central soviet-style bureaucracy
.
.
.
.
).
[1.0.2] B9 Aerospace | Procedural Parts 0.40 | Updated 09.06.15
in KSP1 Mod Development
Posted
I'll not be too much blunt but what about people who just want to catch up and want this or this ?
Are they be forced to upgrade KSP to just get some upgrades to the Bac9 work, just because you haven't sort things up in your github page ?
So it's quite "too bad for you guys you should have been there, following carefully this thread to get the update when I made them".