JH4C

Members
  • Content Count

    416
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by JH4C

  1. That explains a lot, thanks everyone; I thought it might be related to RealPlume but couldn't see how, seeing as I don't have it - and it turns out that could well be the problem eh? I'll keep using JetSounds and await fixes to one or bpth mods before I try out BetterSRBs again - I have plenty of rockets, but I fly more jets and I would miss the sounds more!
  2. Well here's an interesting brainteaser... Cross-posting in both threads, apologies for duplication. FAO @OhioBob Today I installed BetterSRBs because, well because bigger rockets. However, on loading ModuleManager throws up some errors - not in BetterSRBs, but in Jet Sounds Continued! "Hm. That's weird," I think to myself, and I quit the load, save the log, remove BetterSRBs and retry - success, no errors: Obviously this isn't the end of the testing cycle; there could be a third party at work here, so I need to eliminate that possibility. I empty my GameData folder except for Squad, SquadExpansion, BetterSRBs, Jet Sounds Continued, and ModuleManager, and try again - and the errors are still there, albeit on fewer parts as it's not trying to patch the SXT engines. The log of this attempt can be found here, it progressed all the way to the title screen but it's still smaller and easier to decipher than the previous one. As far as I can tell, the mods don't interact with each other or any common parts, so how/why this happens? All I can say is "good luck!"
  3. Well here's an interesting brainteaser... Cross-posting in both threads, apologies for duplication. FAO @Patrick_the_big Today I installed BetterSRBs because, well because bigger rockets. However, on loading ModuleManager throws up some errors - not in BetterSRBs, but in Jet Sounds Continued! "Hm. That's weird," I think to myself, and I quit the load, save the log, remove BetterSRBs and retry - success, no errors: Obviously this isn't the end of the testing cycle; there could be a third party at work here, so I need to eliminate that possibility. I empty my GameData folder except for Squad, SquadExpansion, BetterSRBs, Jet Sounds Continued, and ModuleManager, and try again - and the errors are still there, albeit on fewer parts as it's not trying to patch the SXT engines. The log of this attempt can be found here, it progressed all the way to the title screen but it's still smaller and easier to decipher than the previous one. As far as I can tell, the mods don't interact with each other or any common parts, so how/why this happens? All I can say is "good luck!"
  4. *cough* https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DontExplainTheJoke
  5. Patches are applied in order, so it's natural that it happens at the same point every time if you've not done anything that would change that order. Knowing earlier that it occurred only when this one contract is being modified would have been a big help! It could be that this lack is the very problem, but again I must point out that the fault appears to lie in Kerbalism's file; the file is written to account for a lot of options on where it might find the module it wants to modify, but if that module's not anywhere then it seems to be unprepared for this. Honestly though, aside from a wordy error in the log I can't see that this is causing the problem you're seeing. It's far more likely to be related to the fact you appear to have multiple outdated mods and missing dependencies. Try getting everything updated first (you have AVC, use it!), then if it's still happening go through the usual problem-solving routines to identify the issue - for example, you could remove this single contract and see if it makes any difference. To be frank, that should have been the first thing you tried.
  6. Yes; if you check in the mod folder, you'll find ModuleTorqueControllerPatch.cfg. This is the basic patch that makes the mod work, and it also includes instructions for the codes you need to use to re-activate reaction wheels in selected command pods again. I've not done it myself but it looks straight-forward enough to use. If you just want them all to work again, or you wnt to vary how much control they offer, those settings are available from the Pause menu.
  7. That filepath would appear to suggest the issue occurs while MM is processing a file supplied by Kerbalism; it's certainly not a file that's included in CC, and I don't have that error when I load my game (which does not include Kerbalism.) As such, you might have better luck asking in the Kerbalism thread.
  8. You'll need to define "not working"; I just threw an unmanned command pod on top of a critter crawler and ran the length of the runway without issue.
  9. I would assume that it would be a .cfg file with a file length of zero bytes. It could also mean a .cfg without any defining statements, only remarks, but I wouldn't consider that truly "empty."
  10. Spacedock has the updated version (0.0.9) , but the description there still says that it's 0.0.8 and an update will be uploaded "later."
  11. Better Time Warp Continued is managed by LGG, which is about as dependable as you can get for mod maintenance. I'm not sure what you mean about it "mess{ing} with the physics" though? If you're referring to the potential issues that accompany increasing the speed of time in Physics Timewarp, that's due to limits of the game engine. As you appear to be suggesting only adding an intermediary step on the physicsless timewarp scale, you shouldn't notice any issues with Better Time Warp. I'd suggest you try it out first, before trying to re-invent the booster If you still think you need something different, there's two (abandoned?) alternatives mentioned in the first post of the thread:
  12. Sounds like you need to cross-pollinate CrewLights and Smart Parts:
  13. One player's must-have is another's "never would I ever." There's no such thing as an essential mod in KSP, it's all about what helps you play your game how you want; even the most lauded mods have their haters.
  14. Note you can't pre-attach things in the SPH, so either rig up some kind of temporary decoupler or activate the tender and trailer in separate launches.
  15. That'll be the streamlined crew tubes. Yes, I'm looking forward to playing with those as well... Should be able to make some very interesting in-atmosphere explorers with them.
  16. Depending on where the wings are positioned, rescaling the wings may change the amount of lift generated but not move the centre of lift. I don't use Tweakscale, but it's possible that you'll need to force an update on the graphing even if it's set to automatic; did you try that?
  17. Linking to replies works fine, you just need to be sure to click the top line to go to that specific post, rather than the OP of the thread. For El Sancho's post, be sure to click where it says "El Sancho replied to a topic" and NOT the thread title.
  18. +1 for optionality, please. I rarely if ever look at IVAs, and have no interest in joining the update cycle on another mod when all it's doing is sucking RAM and CPU cycles.
  19. Well, X and Z don't really activate/deactivate engines on *a* stage, they're the throttle controls and they work across *all* activated stages; turning the throttle to zero by pressing X doesn't deactivate a stage, it stops it from producing thrust unless/until Z or left-shift (or whatever you've changed the bindings to) increase the throttle again, whether that input is intentional or accidental. But I did say that I knew there's a lot of potentially unwanted side-effects that could go along with this. As such, it's probably best left as-is.
  20. I've used this to disable almost all the "music," keeping only the wildlife tracks on launch/KSP overview (why Squad programmed those to count as music and not effects tracks, so I could just mute the music, I'll never know...) I did try to keep the "opening credits" music as well, but for some reason it keeps looping during that scene even though I've told it not to?
  21. I'm well aware of that, which is why I indicated it as a typo. While the meaning is discernable to me as a native speaker, if English isn't your first language then deciphering homophones in a foreign language isn't going to be as easy. It benefits all parties if we work together to ensure accuracy.
  22. I love coming here & watching the updates. The bounce in those lander legs is a joy to behold, and I just want to pick up the rover and give it cuddles and feed it 6502 processors as snacks...
  23. Oh I really hope you find a way to stop the saves corrupting; that sounds brilliant.
  24. Hrm. Well, I tried switching back to 800, and it's a case of picking the one which works closest to what I need, I think. 801 has landed me on the KSP runways perfectly, but one time turned hard left when I tried to put a plane onto Island 27 and I ended up landing up the bank instead. 800 also seems to handle the KSP runways okay, but ditched me in the sea 500 meters short of Island 27! Also regardless of which version I'm using, the speed shown in the navball is usually 3/4 of the approach speed I've selected. (Oh, and in the Landing AP, there's a typo "Break on landing" should be "Brake on landing".) Regarding high-altitude work, I took exactly the same plane and ran it through identical manoeuvres, at least as far as I could. 800 took off more smoothly, and got up to the target altitude in a single run, and even held it (well, stayed within ±1km of it) but if I used Climb speed = 0 to hold altitude at unset points then the plane bucked like a bronco. 801 had to reach a higher speed before I took off, bucked instead of flying level at low levels, and still couldn't make it to the target altitude, but was much more predictable mid-flight. My plane's basically a very long fueltank with wings, and if I didn't know better I'd say it was slopping back & forth and causing instability that way... Oh, also spotted a potentially annoying quirk: if you mouse over the Autopilot settings box, even if it's not focused, flight control keyboard inputs are ignored. This is easily repeatable at any point, just put a plane on the runway and then move the cursor over the AP box, then try to activate roll/pitch/yaw control surfaces. I've only used MJ in space for auto-circularisation of GravityTurn launches at this point, so cannot comment on how it works in other aspects. I do appreciate what El Sancho was saying, but atmospheric flight is a significant part of the game unless all you do is build stations in space or on airless worlds. I wish I could offer anything in the way of practical assistance to achieve that goal, but until then I'll offer reports on how the provided tools function in the hope of aiding in their improvement.