Drew Kerman

Actually the data from my analysis packet showing the temp results from kOS under a stock game seems to show a pretty linear plot. I mean, yea it's a bit curvy but that's likely just the result of me only outputting values from kOS once per second instead of like once per 250ms to really get resolution on the pointy edges

Minor complaint - I've noticed in the LVD case file I previously linked to that when I turn off auto script propagation (in this case to quickly go through and disable some optimizer values) the figure still updates. With all the view options I have set it takes about 10s to update between each toggle of the event's optimizer settings. Mainly that's because I have the ground objects visible. I disabled those and then it was only 3s between toggling. Three related issues: Ctrl+F doesn't seem to do anything in regards to changing the toggled state of optimizer variables for an event. I tried the keys on both sides of my keyboard. Also tried Shift and Alt you can't completely unselect ground stations in the Edit View Setting. At least one must always be selected. Is this intended? if I pop out the view, after closing the figure any attempts to change the position of the timeline cursor generates a ton of error digs. Reloading the file makes it usable again tho I got the LVD optimizer to give me a circular (or near enough for my purposes) orbit, so that worked well. I'm going to be interested in seeing during this mission how I use LVD and MA as the mission progresses no idea myself, but I can try to shed some light on this by paying a visit to the KSP mod dev discord server and seeing who shows up here to discuss this further. Also I'm afraid I wasn't clear on what I was asking in regards to the new integrator step size setting. Well, I did say output but still should have added additional clarification to reduce the chance of confusion because I did think this could be misinterpreted. So what I'm really looking for is to globally modify the step size for the GA tool results. Unless I'm exporting data for analysis in excel I prefer to keep the output size at -1 so the GA plots faster

also @Arrowstar I think I said this before but just as a reminder I want it to be clear that with regards to all the effort I'm making to improve the atmospheric model I of course do not expect it to ever be "perfect" where I can wind up with a rocket precisely positioned after ascent as planned. However I do want to work towards building up an understanding of just how accurate LVD can be so a proper error margin can be planned into missions

nice to have not need to have so take your time, thanks for the patch job!

Eh, they don't seem to do any harm when I click on them - it's just that nothing happens so you may get questions about it

That makes sense tho, no big deal ultimately would rather have the color by event ability One of the prereleases you had them disabled after I pointed out that they don't do anything under certain view conditions and I suggested they jump from event to event instead Eh, just a very minor inconvenience to have to remember to switch the setting 99.9% of the time I need to zoom/pan. Would not bother looking further into it. It's basically an extension of my request to make the rotation tool selected by default Let's do this instead - post a detailed report of your attempts to make it through the tutorial up to the point where you get stuck. Arrowstar can then guide you around the outdated material to get you started towards the next steps. You get stuck again, come back and do the same thing. Repeat until through the tutorial. Now you're served and Arrowstar has a clear idea of what needs to be revamped in the tutorial. In the meantime basic guidance is available here in the forum for anyone else looking to do the tutorial (*cough*me*cough*) before Arrowstar finds time to actually make the updates needed to the document

hey @Arrowstar finally got to work on planning my upcoming second orbital mission (only 11 days away... no pressure...) and I have some bugs/feedback for you on the latest prerelease. Please download this package for the relevant files. GA plots in LVD seem to now constrain the ability to move the data point cursor to within events only. It's a bit annoying to not be able to drag the data point cursor along the entire plot Would you consider import/export of ground objects? Ground stations will be there every mission and ground bases too. Easier to import and delete what's not needed than to recreate every time I did something in Ascension Mk2 #2 Ascent Optimized.mat that creates two problems I only notice after loading this file (neither happen with the default project loaded at LVD start): Trying to add any additional objective function throws an error to the log Going into the Celestial Body Catalog and clicking on Kerbin then selecting the atmosphere plot just locks up the whole program Arrow buttons are no longer disabled in the LVD figure view when I don't have any additional SOI or anything to jump to Is it possible for the figure view not to completely reset to the default view after a change is made to an event? Been meaning to suggest for a while Camera Pan & Zoom be the default for the grabber and magnifying glass instead of Limits Could there be an addition to the Settings->Integration Settings for Global Output Step that would set the output step for all events? Not an override to individual settings, it would modify all the individual event settings When setting a TWR throttle model it won't let me do so unless I set min/max optimizer values I can set a coast to Apokee using any of these three methods, and the last one doesn't make sense (I got TA for Ap/Pe backwards from memory which is why I found a way to set to 0 initially): TA termination 180 increasing/decreasing TA termination 180 increasing TA termination 0 decreasing Finally, there's an additional Ascension Mk2 #2 Orbit.mat file for MA which I used to create a circular orbit insertion burn. I then used the Maneuver Execution Assistant to tell me when to start the burn and its duration. I then attempted to recreate the burn in LVD (over time, not with a DV event) but did not get the same resulting orbit and am wondering what I did incorrectly

check the analysis packet, in /script/includes/logger.ks Not exactly sure how it's being done to be honest I just scraped the code with permission from the author

Nope, it's a custom calculation. Response from the author regarding how his code is getting temperature:

I re-uploaded the analysis package, made the changes but not much of a difference. New data is "Stock New Logging"

here's his response: So not sure about the upper atmo data impact but he did mention two things I did not consider when using his script - time between initialization and logging (would explain the bogus early data) and not making sure it all occurs within a single physics tick (not sure of the impacts to that). I plan to fix both of these things and I can also re-run the tests if you'd like

I'm not sure, it may have something to do with how kOS is calculating the temperature values because the density also seems to oddly curve up and over rather than just start with a more linear decrease like you see the LVD data do. I think the initial readings are just a bit bogus and should be tossed out. I know who wrote the code from reddit, I will see if he can provide me more information about it in regards to this fraid not. that may be possible via the kRPC mod or maybe I can get the FAR developer to add atmospheric logging data, since the full-spectrum analysis I did shows that the real culprit of any major change to atmospherics is Kopernicus (Real Atmospheres, really) and not FAR

As usual I went quite overboard with this but I really wanted to see also what the difference is between various KSP setups to really understand what the changes are to my install from stock, and confirm what mods are making the changes. Analysis Package link - includes plots for various things in 4k resolution Full Mod - everything mod I have installed normally No FAR/Kopernicus - I removed both these mods from my full modded install No FAR - all mods installed but not FAR No Kopernicus - all mods installed but not Kopernicus Stock - nothing but Squad and kOS Note that removing Kopernicus also nullifies any effect the Realistic Atmospheres mod has LVD case files were built from scratch in the latest pre-release. Drag area image and Cd values (output from FAR) raw data included. Flights were flown 3 times under each KSP version and the values of the runs were averaged for the final analysis document All the raw data is included if you wish to replicate my final results in the analysis worksheet All the mods relevant to the KSP versions I tested are included in the GameData folder. The /Script folder has the kOS script used and the vessel file is in the /Raw Data folder. If you want to recreate the flights, I will provide additional instructions to do so

what is happening here in propellants.cfg? // Fix engine propellant ratios to be whole numbers. This has no effect on // engine performance, but it makes MFT produce nice numbers when configuring // tanks for engines. @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX]] { @MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX]:HAS[@PROPELLANT[LiquidFuel],@PROPELLANT[Oxidizer]] { @PROPELLANT[LiquidFuel]:HAS[#ratio[0.9]] { @ratio = 9 } @PROPELLANT[Oxidizer]:HAS[#ratio[1.1]] { @ratio = 11 } // just in case someone has multi-propellant engines @PROPELLANT,*:HAS[~name[LiquidFuel],~name[Oxidizer]] { @ratio *= 10 } } } @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEngines]] { @MODULE[ModuleEngines]:HAS[@PROPELLANT[LiquidFuel],@PROPELLANT[Oxidizer]] { @PROPELLANT[LiquidFuel]:HAS[#ratio[0.9]] { @ratio = 9 } @PROPELLANT[Oxidizer]:HAS[#ratio[1.1]] { @ratio = 11 } // just in case someone has multi-propellant engines @PROPELLANT,*:HAS[~name[LiquidFuel],~name[Oxidizer]] { @ratio *= 10 } } } The ratio is causing the LV-T30 to burn fuel at an unequal rate leaving me with LF/O in the tank. It may not affect engine performance but it is most certainly affecting overall rocket performance. With this patch my engine cuts out at 90km traveling at 2.620km/s. When I remove MFT the rocket (flying the same kOS controlled ascent) burns to 96km traveling at 2.857km/s Also I'm stumped why this patch is not affecting all engines, which is why I've never noticed this before. The Nova Punch "NP_lfe_125m_K2XEngine" that I usually use is unaffected. Looking in the MM config cache this is what its config contains: MODULE { name = ModuleEnginesFX PROPELLANT { name = LiquidFuel ratio = 0.9 DrawGauge = True } PROPELLANT { name = Oxidizer ratio = 1.1 } } I did a search to make sure no other patch was modifying the base config file, which also contains the above.

So then just stick it in your GameData and find out, then let everyone know. No harm no foul

I'd say only do it if there's ability in LVD's better structure to improve on it in a substantial way. Otherwise opening up MA to use it isn't really that big of a deal. On the other hand, that's not where people would think to look for it either

lol my bad I meant it was easy for me to answer you'll actually want to start with the Launch Window Analysis tool in MA. Actually that's probably something @Arrowstar will want to port over to LVD as well

I'll leave this to Arrowstar to comment on, because the development history is clearer in his mind - but it's an understandable confusion without knowing how these two aspects of KSPTOT evolved This one is easy - in LVD open the lvdExample_TwoStageToOrbit.mat file. It is exactly what you want

no problem - just to confirm straight up is good? Or would an angle be better?

Hype time! Also if you didn't know the Mk7-B's second launch is scheduled for tomorrow. Missed the first one? Yea I didn't really advertise them here but as always the Ops Tracker has you covered.

You betcha. 1.6.6 run: (16:31:17) Executed mission script in 3.234 seconds. (16:31:31) Executed mission script in 1.599 seconds. (16:31:33) Executed mission script in 1.572 seconds. (16:31:36) Executed mission script in 1.426 seconds. (16:31:39) Executed mission script in 1.525 seconds. 1.6.7 PR3 run: (16:38:00) Executed mission script in 7.593 seconds. (16:38:08) Executed mission script in 2.018 seconds. (16:38:11) Executed mission script in 1.729 seconds. (16:38:14) Executed mission script in 1.763 seconds. (16:38:17) Executed mission script in 1.916 seconds.

Fixed the issue with my atmo logging code. Here is thrust over density from a solid rocket motor that is using a thrust curve, for a more complex example: the kOS code doesn't report good data when the rocket is just getting moving, as exemplified below in just density over altitude: I'm missing VOID data because it's not working well with KSP 1.9.1 yet I am confident in the values the kOS code is reporting because it does properly calculate the Mach number. The rocket went supersonic during L+15s (MET in upper left, mach # in FAR window to the left of resources panel) and when I use the kOS atmo data to calculate its Mach number I see L+15 @ mach 0.975209378981002 and L+16 @ mach 1.02457377154838 I can do a more basic test with a LF/O engine, just launch it straight up at full thrust. Only have the data above right now as I'm working on a flight analysis to publish tomorrow so won't be able to do the simpler test until later this week, maybe weekend. Let me know what else you'd like me to do

ooohhh maannn I'm so glad I haven't actually had time to really do any serious work on the Kerbin->Eve->Jool->Plock flyby that MFMS found me back in 2018 for late 2021 launch. Good to know that when I do have time, less of it will be spent on it! Unfortunately for me that time is still at least a month or two away while I deal with still just getting into orbit reliably...

Yes, it's in the options. Off the top of my head can't remember which. Alarm type settings I think, Warp To

and of course I managed to break it, because that is my superpower. Repro steps: Open MA Insert a coast event Change nothing, close & save Attempt to insert any other event Check error log for details Can also repro this in 1.6.5. Which caught me cause I just did some MA work recently in it so dug a bit deeper and I can make things work if I change the coast from TA (which I haven't used recently) to something else. wow goes back to 1.6.4 too. Haven't been using MA as much lately! Works if you change the TA from 0