Jump to content

Youen

Members
  • Content Count

    340
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

444 Excellent

2 Followers

About Youen

  • Rank
    Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. So no one uses this kind of technique for faster iterations during mod development? Or is there a better place to ask? Does anyone use the LoadScene method from the main menu? Is it supposed to work? Thanks for any hint.
  2. During plugin development, it's useful to have the game automatically load a save file and start the flight scene with a specific vessel, each time the game is started. I had some code that did just that, I think it was borrowed from the AutoLoadGame mod (https://github.com/allista/AutoLoadGame) but maybe it was from somewhere else. Anyway, it worked on old KSP versions, but it doesn't work on 1.7. When I call, from the main menu HighLogic.LoadScene(GameScenes.SPACECENTER), it does display the space center, but something is broken and I can't click on any building or do anything. Doe
  3. I know this thread is old, but if anyone reads this interesting discussion like I did after landing it from your favorite search engine, I'd like to add an existing solution that wasn't mentioned : the Konstruction mod allows to weld* docking ports. The process is then: design your ship/base/space station in VAB as you like cut it in manageable blocks for launch, and add docking ports and RCS/probe cores as needed Launch the blocks Dock the blocks together in orbit Separate unneeded RCS/probe cores (KAS can help here) Then you can right-click each docking po
  4. Hi, Does anyone know if there is a combination of mods that would allow playing with RSS and clouds with KSP 1.2.2 ? It doesn't seem environmental visual enhancements is compatible with RSS, and I can't find a recent version of RVE that would work with KSP 1.2.2. I'd appreciate any pointer if such a thing is at all possible. Thanks.
  5. This is normal if your ship has steering fins: when you change attitude, they move, which changes the drag of the ship. Not sure that's the explanation, but maybe it is. If you have different results depending on your ship attitude, even when it is static (not steering, not rotating), then it's something else.
  6. I'm not sure it's an issue, when you use RK4 integration you do not feed it with different accelerations for each 0.04s time step. The force varies very slowly, that's also the assumption used for the cache system. To be more precise, you could adjust the force depending on velocity, by assuming it varies with squared velocity (that would still be faster than going through the whole force computation stuff). I think it would make sense to only give accurate predictions for 1x time warp. Or maybe a prediction somewhere in between. Or ultimately give players the option to choose which on
  7. Not necessarily. If I remember correctly the default KSP timestep is 0.04 (you can see it in the game settings). If you just use the same acceleration multiple times (we are trying to solve integrator accuracy, but not to increase force computation frequency), it should be fine, as it's just a bunch of multiplications and additions (you would have about 10 "sub-steps" for each simulation step? That means 20 additions and 10 multiplications). You can even pre-compute acceleration*time_step. I can't guarantee without testing, but I don't think it will have a big impact on performances.
  8. I think it's just the most naive thing you can do: velocity = velocity + acceleration * time_step position = position + velocity * time_step
  9. Do you get the same result as with the previous integrator? That could mean either you did not implement it right (but I don't think so, chances are you would get completely wrong results in that case), or more likely it just proves that precision issues do not come from the integrator, or, even worse, that getting more "precise" results will diverge more from what KSP does. Because KSP does naive integration (with a small time step, but that might only increase numerical errors). That's just a quick thought, maybe I'm wrong Maybe integrating with the same time step as KSP would make it b
  10. Thanks for taking over @Kobymaru, and thanks and good luck to all contributors currently working on the mod.
  11. This thread has moved here: Please only respond in the new thread. Thanks.
  12. You have accuracy issues with KSP 1.0.5 and Trajectories v1.4.5 ? That's weird, because the changelog says accuracy issues with stock aerodynamics were fixed in that release, so it should mean I had actually validated it was accurate after the fix.
  13. That's a bit of an overstatement... Unless you mean my code is so awful that no one can understand it ;-) Unfortunately, I've lost interest in KSP in general for quite some time now, and I don't really want to reinstall the latest version just to fix bugs and upgrade code for the latest version, which is precisely the part I dislike about modding. Maybe I'll get back to it later, but no ETA nor promises. In the meantime, I can at least update the opening post inform people of what works or not, and on which version of the game. I think the most problematic issue is that predicti
  14. Module manager is used to inject a module in all command parts that will store your descent settings (angle of attack, etc.) so that you don't loose them when switching vessel or saving/loading a game. I have never tested the behavior without it, so you could expect issues. As a side note, I don't see why you would want to remove it ; it's just a tool to standardize how mods add or remove modules to parts, so that they remain compatible with each other (most of the time).
  15. You can't void Trajectories warranty (there is none).
×
×
  • Create New...