Mikeloeven

It's really not so much about laziness as it is about getting notified of updates in a timely manner through version tracking. The alternative to CKAN or Version Checker plugins is to watch hundreds of threads for updates which would probably blow up most people's inboxes

I know it says CKAN is not supported but honestly it needs to be especially since its becoming the standard for mod management these version mismatches are kind of annoying. Not saying I am too lazy for manual installs but rather that the disconnect caused by manually updating can cause some issues

Might be noted that I am using contract configurator possible interference ? Though right now i am more concerned about the mission ending prematurely and the deletion of the command modules that goes along with this. .

Thanks for the diagram Skalou I have always had trouble with geometry and they were very helpfull

I re-uploaded the log and checked the contents sometimes gists will be truncated but there should be an option to view the full contents. If its still incomplete send me a PM. https://gist.githubusercontent.com/mikeloeven/33fd80ac4e8c6e715f8885d3e687fa8a/raw/3cc93bb450d9c154e428adae3083e8efb27f66e4/KSP.log

Can someone explain to me how fuel capacity calculations work because the capacity of a resized tank does not seem to be directly related to the scale. For example reducing a tank to half it's size results in a fuel capacity less than 25% of the original value wheres doubling the size of a tank increases capacity more than you would expect. Personally i think some of my confusion may come from the fact that half the parts scale by percentage and the other half by radius but when i tested this with the mono-propellant tanks which do use a percentage scaling i noticed that changes in fuel capacity were not scaling as one would expect

So i have been having some major issues with FMRS resetting and loosing save states. It seems as though when your monitoring a discarded stage once the stage touches down the game will either display the end of mission dialogue assuming a critical failure when recovering the landed stage or the act of recovering the stage will simply load a state where the main mission no longer exists. This resets FMRS and prevents the user from reverting to seperation or back to the main mission. I am not sure whats causing this but i suspect its the main capsule completing its parabolic arc and impacting the ground while your controlling the separated stage. I was under the impression that FMRS was supposed to maintain a separation between the saved states and that after recovery of a section the game would revert back to the main mission at the moment of separation to continue with the launch. I did see that you listed in the patch notes that you fixed an issue with the reverting to the main flight which might be related to what i am experiencing however I just installed the most recent release build and this issue seems to still be present unless these notes were for the Beta build? Here is a demonstration flight with the current release build of FMRS installed This is the log from when the video was being made KSPLOG_3-8-17-20:56.log

I think the most important changes that need to be made to the generation code is a failsafe that ensures that the kerbol system is not moved or relocated and that the stock planets maintain their original CBI's. It seems that most of the graphic issues at the KSC and physics problems on the launch pad are proportional to the distance that kerbol is offset from the center of the universe. (Yeah this is a bit cheesy but unless squad improves the game's handling of this type of relocation its needed for stability) Also on a side note one of the issues i had with the previous version of the generator was excessively large maps that would not run at a reasonable frame-rate. You may want to include a option for maximum number of stars to control the size of generated maps while maintaining the randomness of automatic generation.

Out of curiosity is anyone maintaining a master list of maps made for the kopernicus system ?

Seems to be an issue when using the strut snapping mechanism on offset parts. If one of the parts has been offset by the move tool the struts will always snap diagonal even when they were initially placed relatively straight

I am hoping this is a simple configuration issue but it seems as though this mod is suppressing or hiding stock contracts even when there is no contract pack overriding that category. Basically the only contracts i am seeing are those generated by the few packs i have installed which results in the game not generating any contracts in certain categories. I am hoping there is a way to default to stock contracts if there are no packs installed for the specified category.

constantly list's its self as a compatibility issue on 1.2.2

For some reason the SpaceY 10R Radial SRB's are not working with Tweak Scale. Scale settings are available on most of the boosters I have unlocked so far so I suspect they are just missing a config entry.

Is there any way to increase the precision of drag calculations during re entry. I keep having an issue where I line up the red X to the desired way-point however on re entry the deceleration keeps making the X drift and I end up missing the target. Even if the engine had not already been jettisoned, its not possible to reorient for a correction burn during reentry without destroying the ship. So how exactly do I compensate for this drift prior to reentry? Normally it doesn't matter because there is a significant margin of error around most way points however some contracts like the one I am currently doing requires the pod to splash down precisely in a tiny pond >.<

Would it be possible to add a button in the map view that allows you to toggle rendering of clouds on and off? they look amazing however they can interfere with planning suborbital flights as a clear view of the ground is sometimes needed for fine tuning a trajectory.

Has anyone been having issues with heat shielded stages being reported as burning up on reentry? I was experimenting with a launch vehicle designed to allow 100% recovery or the upper stages the last stage is jettisoned at a periapsis of 0 and has fins for atmospheric stability as well as heat shields. This stage is constantly being reported as destroyed on reentry however if I focus on this stage and follow it down manually the heat shield survives and the stage lands properly any ideas ?

Actually i was asking because i had been using stage recovery but it doesn't properly do the physics calculations for stages that have heat shields and they will be listed as destroyed

Can you please remove the pilot count 1 crew requirement from your contracts or at least set it as a bonus objective so that the contract can still be completed without it? This prevents completion of most of your contract packs when using remote piloted craft and takes up a un-needed crew capacity slot especially when using mods such as mechjeb that allow ships to perform much more precise maneuvers than a kerbal pilot.

Will this mod allow successfull landing of capsules that are not being actively tracked?? biggest issue i have is automatic destruction of capsules that should survive landings. for example a separated capsule with parachute pre-staged kept aligned to retrograde by mechjeb will always crash if it reenters while in space center or tracking station. I have lost several ships because of this inability to automate landings

I wonder if the continental shelf is obstructing line of sight ?

Is it normal for antennas to stop working underwater ? I recently started working on oceanic probes added by a mod however the second they splash down anywhere on kerbin and start sinking the antenna goes out and I loose the probe? I was under the impression that connections could be made to the space center pretty much anywhere on or around kerbin

any ideas when the 2.X branch is coming out ?

speaking of mechjeb's autopilot I have been having an issue with RT and mechjeb. I think this is a bug because it doesn't make sense in terms of how flight computers work. If the ship temporarily looses connection while mechjeb is executing a maneuver or series of maneuver nodes RT will activley block mechjeb's inputs causing the ship to stop responding mid maneuver and not execute any further queued maneuvers. I think its safe to assume that as soon as you tell mechjeb to execute a planned series of maneuvers that the maneuver data has already been sent to the system and while you would not be able to make manual corrections or send further instructions during a signal loss, RT should not interfere with mechjeb's ability to execute a planned series of maneuvers that were queued while the connection was still active.

Because flightGlobalIndex is the only number I can see in the configs and to the best of my knowledge one does not simply look up a celestial body index in-game

So can you explain the conversion math to me so I can find the index number more easily in the future ? also how does one determine where the flightGlobalIndex starts ?