taio

I encountered the same sort of broken custom launch pad problem on another mission in the current version which I don't remember clearly enough to find again. I know very little about the mission builder but in my tinkering, I can't get custom launch sites to work at all, in a simple test mission. They spam duplicate entries into the list of launch sites in the dropdown, they usually can't actually be selected, and if you edit the mission file to set it anyway, the game behaves oddly, either failing with an error when the mission starts, or spawning the craft at a bizarre angle above the default launch pad. Though the launch platform does visually appear in the right spot on Kerbin. It may be that the devs broke this custom launch sites feature entirely and abandoned this DLC too hard to even notice. May instead be that it's been buggy ever since release and there's some trick to getting it right that I don't know.

I reproduced the Jiukuan issue on a vanilla install. You can see, even from the start of the mission, that it doesn't appear in the list of launch sites. Also, I'm no longer able to get the dumb rovers to dock with the DTV, either on the front or the back. In the past, they still weren't aligned, but I could eventually get them to dock by increasing the docking port acquire force and either ramming the two ports together at a few m/s, or placing them close together and unloading and reloading the crafts (so the DRV bounces via physics easing). Not having success with those methods anymore for some reason, nor with fiddling with the wheels' settings to get the rovers to bounce. The root issue may be that landing struts worked differently (or just had a different default spring setting?) when the DRV was designed, such that the resting position of the struts held the craft slightly higher above the surface. Or maybe it's the rovers' wheels that held the rovers lower down.

I think the mission is broken as of 1.12.5 - the Jiukuan launch site can't be launched from, so when it comes time to launch the Kaijang Khen, the mission node "succeeds" but without actually spawning the craft (instead focus switches to the Kermes). This soft-locks the mission since the specific vessel the mission requires you to rendezvous with the Kermes, spawned only from that mission node, doesn't exist. I am running some mods, so I'll test again on vanilla, but it will take a bit of time to untangle. EDIT: I would guess this is the same issue faced by @FM2828 and @creymartin. I'll post again if I find a solution.

it seems to be just a display issue but latitude in the hover tooltip is being reported as m/s instead of degrees

Perfect! damn with service this fast i owe you a donation, do you have any link for that? also can you make the longitude axis labels go by multiples of 45 or 30

What I'd love from the trajectory illustrator, and would use constantly, is integrating biome maps, and plotting orbital trajectories projected against the central body's surface for n orbits forward. Either 3d or 2d view would work, but I think 2d would be best. For aid in collecting science or otherwise planning being over a certain piece of land. It would even be good without the biome maps, just plotting on an undifferentiated lat-lon grid. Ideally, on hover of the plotted line, it'd give some indication of time when/until that point is reached by the craft.

Installed via Steam. Yes the mission progressed until the landing task.

Great mission in a lot of different ways, this would be a long post if I listed them all. I modified the supply mission to stick an extra RA-100 around Kerbin, put 3 RA-15s around Duna, and send another rover docking-port-module with 4x6 solar panels cause why not - made the rover journey and the commnet stuff hell of a lot more straightforward oh and gave the damn lander more fuel and an engine so i could land it lol TAC Life Support mod integrated into this would be dope. Issues I ran into - the red rover's wheels would not draw power from anything on the red rover. Couldn't figure that one out. some of the triggers in the mission were overeager. just because something like the RTG or the KRES ascent vehicle is the active vessel, doesn't mean Bob got there, just means I looked at it when the mission started to see what vessels I had to work with. And sadly I couldn't get the mission to finish despite landing right on the runway. Looking in the mission builder it looks fine so I don't know why this would happen.

Hm. Even after converting TA to mean anomaly (which actually shouldn't affect this, but still), I'm just not able to reproduce the MFMS's results in MA. MA converges on significantly different burn TA (~20 deg!!) and delta V components (~1% off), and for my target inbound orbit, I can't reproduce the eccentricity to within 1%. Even after jumping 1 or 2 orbits back or forward for the departure. For MA I'm following the PDF tutorials quite closely. Also, it's an Eve flyby, and I'm confused why the periapsis MFMS came up with is so high, 27 km above atmo. I guess there might be exceptions, but most of the time I figure a powered flyby will be more efficient with a lower periapsis. My initial state is very close to circular (0.000031), but that shouldn't be close enough to cause trouble with things like TA.

There's an issue in the multi-flyby maneuver sequencer's initial elliptical orbit info widget. The context menu "get orbit from KSP (active vessel)" option, and presumably the other options also, pull in the true anomaly value into the mean anomaly field. And feature request. Add burn UT (at least for the first departure) to the maneuver information, at least if the MA/epoch are nonzero.

I encountered many problems of that nature with CKAN. Their dependency-network logic isn't consistent with their interface. Frequent reproducible unhandled exceptions. And crashing the game even without additional AVP modules. In the end I gave up on running AVP via CKAN, and installed it manually, which has worked okay.

It’s a problem with the mod, not with your configâ€â€I and others have also run into it. One thing that will resolve it is either the basic or the aggressive version of ATM. That’s not a proper solution but if you intend to install more memory-intensive mods, you’ll probably want ATM anyway.

I haven’t given FF a look yet  I should be able to get the same parameters for these missions with that right?

I wasn’t able to find any of those values in LambertE, even in the Lambert sheet, except for “departure dV over circâ€Â. There is a “Boost Vzâ€Â, but since it’s not paired with a prograde eq. ÃŽâ€v it doesn’t seem like the right value.

I'm going to give some of these a shot - one thing - how do I work out ejection angle from the LambertE spreadsheet? I assume some of the cells buried in the Lambert sheet have the needed variables to compute it, but I'm not sure just which ones. I could estimate it, but I want to work from the same data that the spreadsheet is using, just for consistency.

Is there something wrong with time-reversing bodies.ini?

PLAD, I’m interested in exploring similar routes to your KEKKEKKJâ€â€in particular, later ones (or later KEKKJs) that leave at least 5 years for Vector’s Mun magic beforehand. How’d you come up with that one? And I don’t know if LambertE used to be different, but as it is, it doesn’t appear to accommodate more than 5 bodies in a route, for folks to examine the route in it as you suggest. (Also, I’m pretty confused by your statement about orbiting 5 times. How the hell can you orbit 5 times in 932.4−817.4=115 days, when even Eve takes 66.9 days to do it once?)

Is there any ability to plan a mission in reverse? Either having time run in reverse, or by starting from a final state instead of an initial state? I want to explore a complicated series of gravity assists, and I don’t particularly have any idea when I should leave Kerbin  my boundary condition is a transfer window that comes late in the picture. If nothing else, it should work to reverse the correct orbital elements of everything in bodies.ini, right? I expect there would be multiple ways to do this, but I’m not sure what the most straightforward time-reversal mapping of the elements is (or any time-reversal mapping of them). Then I’d set all the epochs to X, and then my new timeline would effectively run in reverse from X to 0. Or maybe I can add a "* -1" somewhere in the source, and recompile?

I don’t remember 100%, but trying to remember reasons why I switched to Python: familiarity & my love for the comprehension syntax, more flexible exceptions, and the wider availability of libraries. Especially there was a parser combinator library in Python that I liked and wanted to use, and I figured if it runs slow when I’m done I’ll just learn how to Cython and whatever else people do to make their Python fast.

Initially I was just modifying your code by adding a CFG parser behind it, but that turns out to be non‑trivial (wacky syntax like @PART[engineLargeSkipper_125m]:FOR[RealismOverhaul]:NEEDS[!RftS,!RealFuels_StockEngines], and also because the CFG format is tolerant of lots of strange inconsistent formatting that people use and I therefore need to tolerate). I decided Julia lacked enough language features that I would have an easier time rewriting from scratch in Python. The CFG parsing is ~70% done and the actual engine optimization is ~15% done. I’ll probably put it on github at some point. (I did the majority of the work for this a month or two ago, but it’ll eventually get done.)

I have in progress a rewrite of this which should be generic to all installed mod parts by reading installed CFGs.

MechJeb provides the orbital elements. KER or VOID might too, but I forget. Certainly they provide some of them.

FYI these mods appear to be updated for 0.90: Connected Living Space, Procedural Wings, Toolbar, Near Future Tech, SXT. And AIES Aerospace is now available on CKAN.

Here’s John FX’s updated charts; they begin from this post in the thread. (I’m working on a similar script that pulls its info from GamaData/ directly, so it would automatically allow comparison with any mod parts. WIP.) BTW, a suggestion for a mention in the tutorial  I am a fan of the Improved Chase Camera mod for plane flying. One of those simple ones that could easily just be stock behavior.

Let me know if you’d like to take a look at my code; I’ve got it working now. Julia is similar to Python. Though it only parses the nodes into an internal representation, and not a ConfigNode object, you might still find it helpful.