AloE

Members
  • Content Count

    53
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by AloE

  1. usually by a public sharing link...needs to be uploaded to a cloud service you have and then you share a public link to it....if you do not already use something like google drive, onedrive, or dropbox...then I suggest creating a KerbalX account so you can easily share as well as find & store interesting craft in 'hangars'...such an account can also be useful integrated ingame with Craft Manager ... this suggests to me that I should also add some 'forum tips' to one of my KerbalEdu help topics as I also had a steep learning curve on using this forum...Also if you highlight a part of someone's post, the KSP forum should popup a small window near the highlight that says something like "quote selection"...if you click that it adds the text to the message being composed (e.g. see the quotes I added above) and (usually) notifies the person being quoted so they can respond more easily if needed.
  2. are you willing to share your .craft file for this vessel (either via a google drive or drop box or KerbalX link) ? you may already know where to find the .craft file, but just in case not, it is likely located in the SPH folder in your game save in the main Saves folder = KSP-->Saves-->[your named save]-->Ships-->SPH (rather than in the main Ships-->SPH folder). I would like to see this behavior in action & study the parts in use so easiest for me to do that if I have the .craft file...thanks!
  3. Excellent...Thank you...I will try these out & also these configs as an example make it so much more clear the part config instructions...& I will attempt to do the process on some other parts. Thanks again! I am curious to see your images of what you are observing...so the easiest way I have found to post & image is to upload the image to imgur.com & then copy the "direct link"...then paste that link into your post...this forum automatically converts it to an image...you can use a 'spoiler' to hide it like i do below or make a 'table' to limit the picture's size in the post (it goes full size when people click on the image)... click to see example in image below:
  4. @dkavolis might be able to offer insight as to your 'only control deflect 'question. Also, in case your search did not find it, there is a bit more clarification of these values and how to figure them out in the Final Results at the end of the tutorial at github FAR wiki on Deriving FAR Values:
  5. If you worked on additional parts & are willing to share the FAR configs you created that would be both fun & helpful for me to see if I and some others I see posting recently can learn how to do this as well...thanks! unfortunately indeed the dropbox links are still broken...anyone happen to have a screenshot or a save of the page from when these links worked (or better than me at finding old dropbox content)? [Fitting](https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/42665548/KSP/Mods/Info/FAR%20Values/Fitting.jpg) [Swept Wing approximation](https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/42665548/KSP/Mods/Info/FAR%20Values/Approximation.jpg)
  6. you can try the workaround & follow the active discussion about it at the MM forum topic
  7. yes, thank you...that appears good for the bulk parts approach especially by mod pack...note that MM does not produce a cache if it logs an ERR (also, I use KSP 1.4.5 but for anyone using 1.6 there seems to be some trouble with MM & parts & mods due to a Squad change/issue: proposed workaround ) The FAR wiki has some very interesting descriptions, but I have not found a discussion of 'parts' or what happens when they fall off a craft, etc which in part reinforced my recently popped 'voxels are everything bubble'...lol...thus I would greatly appreciate your current assessment regarding how FAR handles: a part that uses ModuleLiftingSurface, but is mostly or completely 1) inside fuselage or 2) mostly surrounded by parts that use FARWingAero? e.g. FAR ignores the lift/drag of the part, or SQUAD lift/drag values mess with FAR calculations, or otherwise makes the FAR approximation less good, or completely breaks FARs calculation process? or? heavily overlapped parts that both use FARWingAero...I frequently see this when people create a specific shape from squad or other fixed shape parts...such that literally 3/4 of one wing shape may be inside of a 2nd or 3rd wing shape (i.e. not a B9 'procedural wing') related is how does tweakscaling a part affect FAR calculations? when heat or aero stress break off or explode off a part of a FAR craft, conceptually, how does the FAR model for that craft change in flight...new voxel craft shape? plus removal of the lost part(s) FARWingAero influence on the overall craft FAR calculations? or? at the moment my focus is on the few parts most commonly used in our environment that have the ModuleLiftingSurface module. I needed a way to easily identify these few parts while building (or deconstructing) craft in SPH. DebugStuff works very well for that so that is why I described & offered that as another option. i am hoping that more & more FAR users become interested in making & sharing corrections for at least their most frequently used/favorite parts so that at least the best/most useful parts in various mod packs work well with FAR's 'calculation process'. (I use many mod parts packs so the MM cache is full of parts that still use ModuleLiftingSurface but at the moment most of those parts are not used for FAR projects since I have found changing mods packs for different projects to be too time consuming. I already manage 4 different 'project environment' GameData folders: Trappist -1, RSS/Principia, Stock KerbalEDU lessons, & FAR projects...my hope is to work out a process by which when I identify a part we really need with FAR, I can do whatever is needed to get that part working better with FAR...so more of a 1x1 approach which is likely all I will be able to handle for now....) Thanks for your insights & efforts!
  8. thanks for the clarification...indeed also a concern of mine that I am looking forward t understanding & figuring out how to assess...how do we check up on a given part's effect on the over all lift & drag, etc data...for example, ZLM-Master has some interesting craft at KerbalX useful for testing purposes with FAR & APP...in particular the Rafale B - Demo Edition uses 4 of a single connector part from AirplanePlus that shows up using ModuleLiftingSurface rather than FARWingAero...the part is mostly embedded into the wing ...so is it just ignored by FAR as if it does not exist from a lift & drag perspective or does having the ModuleLiftingSurface module called by any part in the craft break something much more serious & thus the associated symptom question what does having even a single part that uses a ModuleLiftingSurface change the blue aero overlay ball to one with arrows really mean...i.e. is the approximation made just a bit less good or does it make a big change to the FAR calculations...my questions emerging from the interesting insights from the related conversation at GitHub: https://github.com/dkavolis/Ferram-Aerospace-Research/issues/19#issuecomment-451737783 https://kerbalx.com/ZLM-Master/Rafale-B-Demo-Edition FAR & AirplanePlus Connector that uses MLS rather than FARWingAero
  9. OK...Thank you...so I will use DebugStuff to look for parts missing FAR modules...especially will keep an eye out with regards to APP parts: DebugStuff used to check a part's FAR modules FAR DebugStuff
  10. indeed I very much appreciate your current improvements thus value your focus there instead...very much looking forward to your & @Booots work leading to FAR support in Kerbal Wind tunnel! Still I find amusing just imagining what some of those 'few' might actually do with a ground effect model even if was 'contained' to be only active in a very flat 'test' location like a pole ice field...one day far in the future:
  11. at GITHub: @dkavolis sounds like I may need to dig through parts...if am i understanding correctly now that FAR will still place voxels around a part even if it has no FARWingAerodynamicModel ? ( In other words, even if the debug voxel view while building the craft in SPH for example looks great around a craft, I still may have used parts using ModuleLiftingSurface rather than only ones patched to have the proper FARWingAerodynamicModel so i can not use the voxels as an easy check for making sure all the parts I am using have the FARWingAerodynamicModel config ? ) @theonegalen Such APP wing configs sounds very helpful...i would be grateful to try those out!
  12. Once Kopernicus Expansion Continued ( KEX-RegionalPQSMods ) makes a release for 1.5.1 then I speculate SLIPPIST-1 might also work with 1.5.1: https://github.com/StollD/KopernicusExpansion-Continued/releases The other dependencies already have 1.5.1 versions...this post above might help you sort out the needed dependencies at that point...
  13. also, interesting conversation regarding turbofan performance in general in AJE starting with this post at AJEEX forum page
  14. fyi...AJE Extended Configs is working on an issue that appears to have some similar symptoms that I encountered with turbofans in 1.4.5 with AJE & AJEEX configs for AirplanePlus turbofans...details in this issue report at git. @dreadway2 especially if you are using the AJEEX configs with AJE, the J85 & related are not currently working see the git issue report above for details.
  15. AloE

    KerbalEdu updated to 1.4.5e882

    @MarkZero fyi..to be stirring in the back of your mind for when TG projects come back around to Kerbal again:: @ShadowZone reports a rather serious memory issue with 1.5.1, with much better performance in 1.6: Memory issue in 1.5.1, 1.6 much better Also, @raidernick indicates that RO is targeting 1.4.5 (yes!) & then 1.6 (skipping 1.5.1):
  16. Indeed the transform to exclude from FAR is 'foreceIndicator'...DebugStuff really is a useful tool!...thanks again for bringing it to my attention!
  17. Scatterer usually gives me the biggest performance hit...I suggest that you try testing without scatterer and see if it is better...also see if the debug console (windows: alt-F12) shows a lot of red lines when Kerbin is in view... @themaster401 Thanks for bringing this back! Liked it in 1.0.4...love it in 1.4.5! Even footprints for the kids!
  18. Kerbal TRAPPIST-1 Where Planet Years are only a few Earth Days...more like Jupiter & its large moons. 1.5 b, 2.4 c, 4.1 d, 6.1 e, 9.2 f, 12.4 g, 18.8 h Earth days per "year" This "Topic" is an invitation to join an exploration of the TRAPPIST-1 system ...students, teachers, KSP players all welcome to share fun & significant TRAPPIST-1 related insights... missions you build either for SLIPPIST-1 or TRAPPIST-1, a place to share your explorations of this exoplanet system, contrasts with Jupiter or Pluto moon systems in KSP RSS Principia, e.g. orbit transfers, etc., cool research you discover about this system, remarkable moments encountered while exploring this model system in Kerbal, etc, focus on creating together a fun & educational concentration of information about TRAPPIST-1 & our exploration of it. NASA JPL: TRAPPIST-1 Compared to Jovian Moons and Inner Solar System - Updated Feb. 2018 Observe 'actual' planet transits in Kerbal! For the Principia adjusted version, the epoch start date is "JD2457000.000000000" = UTC Noon Monday 2014 December 08. Here is an excerpt from the Principia GitHub FAQ: Credits: @GregroxMun ( SLIPPIST-1 ) & the Principia team @eggrobin & @pleroy ( TRAPPIST-1 for Principia ) a remarkable model of the TRAPPIST-1 system that works well in both x64 KerbalEDU & KSP 1.3.1 & 1.4.5 source: https://www.eso.org/public/unitedkingdom/images/eso1615e/ source: https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/spaceimages/details.php?id=PIA22096 Save files & Mission links (To_Be_Added): TRAPPIST1_system stationary 1d orbit Jovian system stationary Europa orbit Seven Worlds of SLIPPIST-1, and an Astronomy Lesson on Stars and the Exoplanets around TraPPiST-1 https://imgur.com/gallery/FQHpnE6 At the above link, Gregrox has written a fun & insightful astronomy lesson with some cool details about the beautiful model images of this system...'almost eyeball' planets & all!...a few excerpts: "You get a hot zone, and then progressively cooler zones down to the night side of frigid temperatures and nothing but ice! You'd have a band of scorching desert, a band of rainforests, a band of tundra, and a massive cap of ice. Or if it's colder and wetter, it can look even more eyeball-like, maybe a cracked frozen ice ball like a huge Europa with a circular sea of melted ice. But these don't account for the fact that real tidally locked exoplanets spin. The Coriolis force drives winds that completely change the climate." "Try to figure out the resonant chain in TRAPPIST-1! Just kidding, I'll tell you. It's in a 24:15:9:6:4:3:2 resonance. Neighboring planets are in 8:5, 5:3, 3:2, 3:2, 4:3, and 3:2 resonances" CKAN import file (must set CKAN Settings --> 'Compatible KSP versions' to 1.4) plus must copy TRAPPIST1 for Principia folder to GameData "Download the trappist-1 for principia εὔδοξος.zip file, unzip it, and drop the Trappist-1 for Principia folder in the GameData folder of your installation of KSP." plus must copy Principia for 1.4.5 manually to GameData: Download the binary (Macintosh, Ubuntu, and Windows) here for 1.3.1 and here for 1.4.x and 1.5.1. if you encounter issues then also see this post
  19. KSP TRAPPIST1 for Principia video comparison with published planet transit data. Considering the opportunity to create KSP 'observatories' as well as 'tourist' colonies to explore 'real' events in KerbalEDU... and experience the differences between the Jovian & TRAPPIST1 systems. TRAPPIST1 planet 1b is about 45 minutes early compared to published data...whereas planets 1c,1d,1e,1f,1g,1h transit within a few minutes of published observations for late 2016. I have asked the Principia team about 1b. This is very initial ground work for Principia RSS & TRAPPIST1 & KerbalEDU in 1.4.5 so that a few highlight missions can be created to make it easier to compare the two systems in KerbalEDU e.g. Calisto & 1b. KSP 1.4.5 TRAPPIST1 Planet Transits & KerbalEDU 1.3.1 2032 Jupiter Triple Shadow Transit 1080p captures Considerations about Tides: exo-planet tides. "Implications of tides for life on exoplanets" heating: "Magma oceans and enhanced volcanism on TRAPPIST-1 planets due to induction heating" & "Interior structures and tidal heating in the TRAPPIST-1 planets"
  20. @pleroy Thank you. I have been exploring upcoming eclipses in KerbalEDU 1.3.1 Principia/RSS/RSSVE/RO...indeed they match nicely other data. I also am delighted that the 2032 March 20 Jupiter triple shadow transit event is reasonably well replicated. I also see in KSP 1.4.5 TRAPPIST1 for Principia the planet transits occurring within a few minutes of the observed transits published in the appendix of this May 2018 article, at least for the observations I checked for the late 2016 time period... except that 1b is transiting about 44 minutes "early" in KSP relative to the published observations (1c, 1d, 1e, 1f, 1g, 1h are all very close matches)...so I am curious, what is the story with 1b? The third video below shows an abbreviated excerpt from my TRAPPIST1 transit comparison showing 'on time' transits for 1c,1d,1e,1f,1g.... KSP view angle is held constant for the measurements...except at the very end to verify that view angle is not causing the time difference as the amount of angle change needed to line up 1b at the expected time is large. time clock text is most clear when viewed at 1080p 1b transits at 2m14s into the video...the ~44 minutes 'early' pattern with 1b continued beyond the excerpt...that data is pasted below.... Eclipses Principia RSS RSSVE KerbalEDU 1.3.1 & KSP 1.4.5 TRAPPIST1 for Principia Uncert. Planet Observ. DateTime Observ. Calendar DateTime KSP Transit time 0.00035 1b 2457 721.3875 2016-11-29 21:18:00 20:34:42 0.00059 1b 2457 739.5177 2016-12-17 0:25:29 23:40? 0.00055 1b 2457 741.0279 2016-12-18 12:40:11 11:56:?? 0.00089 1b 2457 757.6484 2017-01-04 3:33:42 02:48:??
  21. @SuicidalInsanity Thank you. Is the Unity hierarchy tree revealed in a file like part.cfg or other 'end user' file normally included with a part buried inside of the GameData folder or would one need access to the original 3D app files for the model that created the .mu Unity files in order to identify the actual names given to the relevant part of the model? (I just guessed at the name from the info in the part.cfg which fortunately appears to have worked this time, but would be good to know for the future what file(s) actually carries the hierarchy & names especially if visible to the end user & if not I speculate I would need to find out either from the creator of the model or try a tool like suggested in this post to get into a .mu via blender...please let me know if it sounds like I am understanding sufficiently to write future exclusions)
  22. @NecroBones Thank you for these beautiful more realistic models! fyi..the ~1g planets & ~Jovian moon orbital periods of the SLIPPIST-1 & TRAPPIST-1 for Principia mod also present some additional interesting 'realism' applications for your Real Scale Boosters. more SLIPPIST1/TRAPPIST1 info & images
  23. AloE

    KerbalEdu updated to 1.4.5e882

    @MarkZero will hopefully reply with the official statement, but until then...Basically all KSP community mods will run in the same version of KSP & KerbalEDU...since KerbalEDU updates about 1 year behind KSP most mods have been updated by the time KerbalEDU is released. Note however, some mods change things such that standard KerbalEDU lessons & missions will not trigger properly...for example, if you load RSS (Real Solar System) then all Kerbin based missions will obviously not work. Also, for example, if using FAR with KerbalEDU it is best to exclude the EDU ForceIndicator from FAR: see post. & unfortunately RO is jumping from 1.3 to 1.5 so there appears there will be no official RO release for 1.4, thus no easy click install via CKAN. Given KerbalEDU is login based since version 1.3.1 it is easy to have 1.3.1 & 1.4.5 KerbalEDU versions on the same machines if some mod is no longer supported past 1.3.1. In summary, KerbalEDU still does not 'lockout' content...I run a bunch of edu relevant KSP mods in KerbalEDU 1.3.1 & 1.4.5...details are at the following post & you are welcome to follow & add to the topic:
  24. fyi...For those wanting to install SLIPPIST1 via CKAN in KSP 1.4.5, set CKAN 'compatible versions' to 1.4 And to make the install easier, here is a CKAN file for import that includes Kopernicus & also EVE & Scatterer... note that EVE creates 'exception' spam in the log so if you see performance lag try removing that first or uncheck it so CKAN does not install it at all... These images show detail for the above: [original post info:] fyi...While setting up in the recently released KerbalEDU 1.4.5, I noticed that SLIPPIST-1 in CKAN currently only has ModuleManager as a dependency, not also Kopernicus, consequently just clicking SLIPPIST-1 in CKAN will not show your great work in game until the user also makes sure to install Kopernicus. having CKAN suggest EVE & scatterer is also worth considering, since indeed your work looks very nice with those (in both 1.3.1 & 1.4.5 )...Though for some reason at least in both 1.3.1 & 1.4.5 EVE spams the log with exceptions SLIPPIST1 = "NullRefference...Object reference not set to an instance of an object" & TRAPPIST1 = " "invalid matrix index!" shown in the following images: Thank you again for creating this inspiring 'realism' mod (& associated astro 'lesson' )! Also, a great place to use RealScaleBoosters with all these ~1g & ~1R planets :-) We are very much enjoying & learning by contrasting this with Jupiter & its moons e.g. Jupiter's moons are smaller & receive sunlight to all longitudes not just tidal heating...even I did not really think through the significance of that until this mod. And that TRAPPIST-1 planets may well experience significant Tidal effects both from the star & eachother: "The team found that tidal heating likely occurs on the five innermost TRAPPIST-1 planets, b through f, becoming generally weaker moving away from the sun. Other calculations included in the paper argue that except for TRAPPIST-1 c, the planets could all have a fair amount of water, suggested by their relatively low densities" source & journal article "Results. The compositions for planets b, c, d, and e remain uncertain given the error bars on mass and radius. With the exception of TRAPPIST-1c, all have densities low enough to indicate the presence of significant H2O. Planets b and c experience enough heating from planetary tides to maintain magma oceans in their rock mantles; planet c may have surface eruptions of silicate magma, potentially detectable with next-generation instrumentation. Tidal heat fluxes on planets d, e, and f are twenty times higher than Earth’s mean heat flow."" "Are the Trappist-1 planets close enough to be tidally heated?" & an interesting full access article on celestial body formation: The nature of the TRAPPIST-1 exoplanets
  25. I would be grateful for anyone's clarification on what "TransformException" actually is/reffers. I added the following exclusion and it appears to work, however I guessed at the TransformException & maybe I did not even need to include it?: Thanks! The exclusion I added to FARPartModuleTransformExceptions.cfg: The actual KerbalEDU Force indicator part.cfg: