The-Grim-Sleeper

You might be looking for the ''Recoupler" mod by Booots:

I've seen people engage AI-flown craft. Is that hard to set up?

Are there any example craft or prefab targets to test if the combat craft I'm designing are actually any good? Is there an easy way to prevent hostile targets from blowing up a craft on the runway? Or some way to set up a testing zone a short flight away from the KSC?

I tried using the mod 'FAR v0.15.11.4' with the mod 'Trajectories v2.3.3' on KSP 1.10.0, and there is 'stuttering' during flights. A brief look at the logs shows some sort of casting problem. Google drive link to 'Player.log' text file. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xkmiGlzFhucQhzRrOH93MKGq8DGgorFp/view?usp=sharing In my case, this is a not a pressing issue. So consider this as an FYI to others who may encounter the same problem. I have made a post on the 'FAR continued' topic as well.

I tried using the mod 'FAR v0.15.11.4' with the mod 'Trajectories v2.3.3' on KSP 1.10.0, and there is 'stuttering' during flights. A brief look at the logs shows some sort of casting problem. Google drive link to 'Player.log' text file. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xkmiGlzFhucQhzRrOH93MKGq8DGgorFp/view?usp=sharing In my case, this is a not a pressing issue. So consider this as an FYI to others who may encounter the same problem. I have made a post on the 'Trajectories' topic as well.

I can confirm that KSP 1.10 does not like something about using SimpleLogistics and the breaking ground part 'deployableSolarPanel'; My game stops loading at that part. I have no opportunity to contribute to a fix, but I am happy to see the issue is known.

Thank you for the feedback, I will look into it when I have time. Just to clarify: The error report from may 6th post is 'if a craft is loaded, while the Recoupler GUI is closed, the connections that are down-tree from the KAS/Robotics parts will not form (essentially falling back to default Recoupler behavior)'. Is that a full description of the problem? Does this behavior only happen in the VAB/SPH or also with craft in flight? The the issues with the default/start conditions in may 6th post, are not related to the correction from the may 8th post, right? Edit: work-around! I am having some trouble with the 'GUI-bug', as it seems to relate to the 'read/write the ReCouplerSettings.cfg'-step which on my workspace is troubled by default. But I do think I have a work-around till I can wrap my head around things. Go into the 'GameData/ReCoupler/ReCouplerSettings.cfg' file and set the 2 added variables there from 'false' to 'true' This should cause the 'default fallback behavior' to add the KAS/Robotics joints to the craft, so the craft will load properly. I am having trouble replicating the may 6th issue. When I load a craft, it will have the ReCoupler-connections that it it was stored with, and will keep those until the craft is modified, or the ReCoupler-settings changed to make the link invalid. The GUI itself does not update when a craft is loaded; it will store the settings the user had set with the previous build/action. But the craft will not update to these 'in GUI settings' the moment it is loaded, only after the user 'apply'-s or 'reset links'-s will the craft file get updated. I consider this behavior as correct; the craft remembers what recouplings it has until it is told otherwise (by using either the 'reset links' or 'apply' buttons in the GUI). The correction to the 'ReCouplerSettings.cs' is solid; a boolean is not a float, therefore that is improvement, even if I don't quite know what problems are solved downstream. The pull request has been updated with your suggested code (and a fresh compile of the 'ReCoupler.dll' has been uploaded as well) Check the update: https://github.com/DBooots/ReCoupler/pull/12/files

Sweet! Happy and proud to help.

You are blowing my mind right now. I get what it means, and that it works (I've only been learning about proper collective and cyclic since, well 1.8.1 really). But you'd think that all those 'this is how helicopters work'-video's, which specifically mention 'no, no plane change, it actually works using this really intricate mechanical device', could be bothered to mention "cept chinooks, those are WACK!" I think this isn't even properly stated on the Wikipedia page about chinooks. Which reminds me of this little tip: if you have a high level probe part, facing that probe upward, 'target Anti-radial', in surface mode, the craft will (try to) keep its pitch and roll zero. Very useful if you want to hover. It's the only way I can manage to land a helicopter on any pad smaller than the lvl3 runway.

Ditto. This is with KSP 1.8.1(.2694); LinuxPlayer x64-bit, both DLCs I will try a github install later. It is now later, github Version 2.0.3.0.4 worked; The SimLogistics button was listed in the Blizzy-toolbar option and functioned properly. However, it doesn't show in the ToolbarController menu or the Stock toolbar. I can upload a log-file if you want, but I always end up uploading the 'wrong one' somehow, and imhe, never actually helps to troubleshoot an issue. Can you provide a String to find in the .log so I can check for schenanigans before uploading the wall-o-text?

So I was looking for RPM updates, and the thread sent here. Is MAS the right choice for me? I liked having all the little IVA screens for the cameras and the mod-control screens were awesome, but I usually got button-lost went I was doing things under any pressure and so RPM isa fairly low priority mod for me. Looking at the OP, there seem to be very few 'ready-out-of-the-box' IVAs in the base version. There are a few floating around on this thread, but scrounging around for a complete set is too much effort for me atm. I don't really have time to troubleshoot big problems either. So is now a good time to make the upgrade? Have any of the RPM-enhanced mods already made the switch? Or would it be better to wait a while longer?

No. I was taking about the thing that ' MetalOre to StockOre Conversion' made by 'rabidninjawombat' . (Link to topic). Is there some concurrent equivalent to that? Or at least, some way to reconfigure EPL to reduce it's resource chain in a way that doesn't force IFS down my throat?

Does anybody still have that mod that makes all 'Metal Ore' in (Stock) 'Ore'? The link in the topic of that mod is a bit dead.

Hi, I could use a hand: I am trying to select all items that have at least the tag 'cck-eva-items', but the code below only selects parts which ONLY have the tag. @PART[*]:HAS[#tags[cck-eva-items]]:NEEDS[KIS]:FINAL { @category = none } What is the wildcard token I need to add?

animationName = LightAnimation is found in most cockpits and the spotlights, and can be toggled with a KAL-1000 controller. I've tested this with a simple variable wing craft, and sure enough, turning the lights on or off de-bricks the craft. The animation speed of the spotlights seems to be almost instant, and you can stager several of them for even more spam. So for anybody desperately wanting to build a Stock+DLC-parts only ornithopter, but somehow also using FAR, that will keep you going. Be sure to share your .craft (on the appropriate thread)! As for the propellers, they won't have FAR physics anyway, but they still do have Stock-physics; It will fly just fine, but also work fine in very unrealistic situations.

Are there any (stock) parts that (can reliably) trigger the mesh-update? Like landing gear, decouplers or fairing discarding? Is there any way to see the mesh-update as it happens? Or is it browsing through logging statements the only thing for it?

What are the 'Do's and 'Don't's of 'Breaking Ground' + FAR (+ IR)? I've been making helicopters both with and without the BG-propellors, and they went "up-ish". From what I understand, it's because BG-prop + BG-engines operate completely beyond the scope of FAR. But servo's+FAR-wings (stock parts with FAR active) seem like a working option but servo's + FAR-control surfaces do not. What would be the thing that makes a helicopter work vs a kraken-copter? I've never made a variable wing craft, but do I understand correctly that, with regards to FAR calculating the change in forces, that it "would only work if there is at least 1 IR-part that moves when the wings move"? What's all this I keep reading about Fairings? Is there any kind of craft design you would say 'FAR or Robotics, but not both if you want it to "not explode/nose-dive/disintegrate from aerostress"'?

Can you post a picture of the craft you are building? Are you using any DLC or Mod added parts?

Success! I've changed the behaviour of a mod! Thank you all for the information and tips.

You know what; If you want something, you got to do it yourself! I've pulled the repo and made a quick hack that never "'PartIsInvalidForPath' == true", and that works like a charm. But that is hardly an releasable result. I'd say that if other people want this feature, they would want it to be optional; the GUI would need a check-box that allows the user to turn the extra nodes on and off. But for making something like that, I'd need more information. @Booots, is it alright for me to bother you with questions? And if yes, is this thread the place to do it? Edit: you know what: BOOM! Pull Request!

Thank you for the reply. I tried to build the project and was required to add some more .dll's but I got a whole boat-load of errors relating to imports. The only thing or it was to import every single .dll in 'KSP_Data/Managed' and making an explicit reference to a class that was made by the mod author, that somehow fails to import (is 'using' a technical term?) I have successfully build the .dll that belongs to this mod. Can I just drop that in place of the existing .dll in the /Game_Data/<ModDirectory>/<whatevers> to test it in KSP? Are there any convenient ways to test things without haveing to (re-)launch KSP?

I am going to try and edit/personalize an existing mod for the coming year. So I've installed MonoDevelop (as per outdated wiki instructions) and have opened the 'solution' of the mod that I'd like to toy with. But now I'm stuck dealing with dependencies, I think...: - The option 'Project > Edit References' is greyed out unless I have selected something that IS NOT a 'solution'. - I tried to find the KSP.app in the 'Kerbal Space Program'-directory, didn't find it, but found seemingly a perfect directory named 'KSP_Data/Managed' that has contents that are named 'Assembly-CSharp.dll', 'Assembly-CSharp-firstpass.dll', 'KSPAssets.dll' and 'UnityEngine.dll'. - The current project doesn't like those 'new .dll's and still demands that I provide it with the 'proper versions' of those .dlls. - I will eventually have to turn this code into a .dll, and not a .exe (as most monoDevelop tutorials explain). How do I set that? Other info: Doing this on Ubuntu, so sometimes things aren't were one would go looking for them in Windows. But I don't know when or which times that is an issue. I've set the 'project/solution'-Options-General-'target framework' to '.NET Framework 4'. I don't know what means, but is was 'very required' according to a post on this forum I can't find anymore.

I am having some trouble using with the 'Breaking Ground'-parts. Any part that is connected to the main body via a BG-part will not form any re-bondings. But 2 BG-parts will couple together fine. I never had any problems when using 'Infernal Robotics', which I thought were functionally identical. Update: I misremembered; I had never actually made a craft with IR-parts that actually coupled a robotic part to a non-robotic part. ... And I need to read better. I am surprised that this is by design (I browsed through the code on github); I'd like to be able to use double hinges and things for making swash plates and multiple KAS winch for 4-wire cranes Is it alright for me to request that as a feature?

Can confirm that the Grid will not show. Also just being in the SPH slows the game to a crawl.

I've looked at the new .cfg file for the tron-suits, and the only new modules are for the ROC-science and a 'ModuleColorChanger', similar to the one used in command pods for the window-lights. Instead of color curves, it uses 3 solid 'xxxxxColor'-fields for color definition. I don't see an obvious 'this-field-required-for-inflight-editting'-field. I'm not the most savvy of kerbal file explorer. I can't find the 'this module controls visor-color'-module in the ARHoloVisorSingle.cfg either. Any recommendations? Edit: Ok, I found that FStextureSwitch2 module. It helps if I look at the correct HoloGoggles file. Still not very savvy.