Creat

I have a bit of feedback for the placement of the parts in the tech-tree. The stock tanks were moved around quite a bit, so the KW-tanks now provide much more fuel than the stock tanks from the same nodes, especially for 1.25m parts. Generally, part placement seems to be as it was in the old tech tree (pre-1.0), not adjusted for the overhauled version. The first node that unlocks any LF/O tank (Basic rocketry) only gives the stock FL-T100 (45/55 units), but includes SA-05 and both SA-1 tanks (up to 108/132 units). The stock 1.25m decoupler is unlocked with Engineering 101, but the KW-equivalent is still in basic rocketry. (all are just some very early examples, there are more like this obviously). Can we expect a the tree to be reshuffled soon(ish) or should we just write a MM-config to fix it in the meantime?

@DMFirmy: Sorry that I kinda disappeared after specifically asking you to put up the sources. Unfortunately I had a suprising and very inconvenient stay at the hospital for a couple of days (nothing serious, as it turns out though). So I might get around to looking at them tomorrow or (more likely) on the weekend, just wanted to let you know that I haven't actually just vanished

Well, I'm glad you're taking charge of this, and I'll gladly offer to help/collaborate, if you want. There is of course GIT/GitHub integration for VS, which means you can use it more or less the same as TFS. Fortunately the license is rather permissive, so just taking over while the original author isn't around is no problem at all. He hasn't posted anything since august '14, where the last commit to the GHud repository was in July. As for what changes I've made to the code, they're actually rather minor (added 42 and deleted 22 lines or so), but as I said the performance implications were quite significant for me. You can see and look over the specific changes here, and all of them are in GHud.cs. There's also a comment that links to the relevant documentation about coroutines, and most of my source should also contain comments where necessary. All things considered, the patch is rather minor though and you should be able to trivially integrate them on your end. I do hope you put your code up somewhere in a repository (or even just in a zip or something) so I can (hopefully) help or at least compile it on my end with the coroutine changes, as I simply have to do that or the whole game lags constantly. I haven't tried your build with the KSP 1.0 release so far (haven't had the time), there might've been something fixed on the KSP side such that it no longer causes any problems, but switching over to using coroutines should be done anyway if possible: it's just the better approach for this kind of plugin that doesn't actually interact with the images/frames on the monitor. Should the original author not return (soon-ish), I'd recommend starting a new thread so that the discussion is separate from this one. Also adding support for the more recent management-plugins might be nice (I could probably also provide that, if you want me to). By that I mean things like CKan or KSP-AVC.

As far as I can tell the contracts that have "autoaccept = true" don't seem to count toward your max. active contracts counts. So that's a plus. More relevantly though, I know that contract was accepted for me as I has it in my active contract list (see screenshot in my other thread), so that part had worked. I assume something went wrong with the completion trigger somehow, since the quicksave and (later) reload just caused it to vanish. I'd presume it was in some sort of intermediate state, not that I have any idea what specifically might have caused it or what made it "intermediate". I'd assume that when writing the quicksave, it didn't pass some sanity tests or something and the entry was possibly just discarded? Very likely this is something Squad themselves have to look into.

For at least one of my attempts I was outside of the atmosphere, it still didn't complete. At the time I wasn't much over the required speed, but I was over (both for Orbit and for Surface readings). I wasn't much outside of the atmo either, but still outside (71 km or so). So after that try I basically gave up and reentered (where I took the screenshot), and I went over by a whole lot and it still didn't complete. It was just confusing, but this whole thing makes it much more unlikely that it has anything to do with ContractsWindow+, which is the only mod I use that has anything to do with contracts... I'm having a look at the 1.0.1 thread now.

Thanks you very much for stepping in while BGog42 is away. I also had a quick look, but couldn't get it to run immediately and didn't have the time to check why... I had previously migrated the code from using update(), which is called on every frame, to a coroutine, which is called in much slower intervals and (mostly) prevented some severe stutters for me. Basically, we don't need the small LCD to refresh on every real frame, a much slower rate is perfectly fine. Please note that I didn't update the tests in the project, but that should be quite trivial as well. If you want to read about why I did that and what I did, it's in this thread and starts round about here. Unfortunately, he never got around to merge my pull request, but it's basically ready to go. You can just merge it if you want, and if you need (for whatevery reason) I can also send you a .patch file, or you can just have a look at my fork of the repository (the only changes are those mentioned). It would also be nice if you could put your source code up somewhere (GitHub?) so others can have a look at it (and/or help with the project). If you had a GitHub, I could merge the changes myself and all you'd have to do was click a button to apply them

The specific ones I wanted in a mission were two surveys I wanted to do together (so not the achievement-style auto-added contracts from the beginning). I added them in the SPH, clicked launch, and they were already un-assigned again. Later the same with the VAB. Then I'd assign them (just before launch, but on the pad/runway), fly/test some things and (eventually) I might revert, and they'd be gone from the category once again. I added them often, and they were gone on basically every scene change. For some reason, it hasn't happened in a while though. Maybe those contracts were just 'special' somehow? At the moment the issue seems resolved for me (at least everything I've stuck somewhere actually stayed there). As a second (slightly more worrying consideration) I also had some issues with contracts disappearing completely (specifically the 2500 m/s achievement-style contract). Since this is the only mod I've got that handles contracts, it may or may not have anything to do with that. I've made a thread about it here, but haven't gotten any replies yet (and I suspect I won't). Really, no idea how that could happen and I really don't think it's this mod, but I thought I might just as well mention it just the same.

While doing an early orbital mission in my new career game, somehow the "Speed Record"-contract for 2500 m/s vanished. I did reload a quicksave (or two) during the mission, but otherwise it was nothing special. I surely didn't cancel it, it was just suddenly gone after loading a quicksave. I even have a screenshot of me going faster than the required speed, with the goal not completed. The screenshot was taken (relatively deep) in atmo, but I also reached a high enough speed outside / in space. Also note that it's a prograde orbit, so the displayed "surface" velocity is lower than the orbial velocity would be. I had to reload a quicksave, and the contract (or goal) was just gone. I checked mission control, it's not in the archives (speed records ends at 1050 m/s), it's not available or active, and when manually checking the savegame files (both various quicksaves and the persistent file) this entry is also nowhere to be found. So all in all I'm just mostly confused now. What could've possibly happened that vanished this entry? As far as I know you can't manually cancel them or even fail them. I don't know how important that goal is, but the larger milestones usually have a significant payout (which I wouldn't mind) I do have a couple of mods installed, mostly GUI-stuff or tools though: kerbal engineer, PlaneMode, WaypointManager, Enhanced NavBall, ContractsWindow Plus, Alternate Resource Panel KSP-AVC and Module Manager. Everything is up to date as of noon CEST today.

I've only just discovered this mod (very helpful btw!), but for me the "Mission Lists" are not persistent. I assume this isn't intentional? I can add missions to lists as I desire, but every scene change resets all lists to be empty (though the lists themselves persist). So if I add the missions I want to do to a list in the VAB or SPH, I have to re-add them once I actually launch. If I have to abort/revert to change the craft, I have to add them again. I'm on version 5.0 (installed via CKAN), obviously with KSP 1.0. Edit: one thing I wanted to add is that I find it somewhat confusing that the icons associated with a contract are shown ABOVE the title. Especially since clicking the title collapses the contract, I'd like to also hide those displays. Could there maybe be a switch in the options, that moves them below?

The .version file has the wrong information (still says 1.0.16.1) which makes AVC complain that it isn't up to date. Otherwise it seems to work perfectly fine!

Why? Since this pack has been reworked it requires very little memory (~250 MB or something?) compared to it's size, part count and even previous versions. Whatever other mods/packs you are using that cumulatively put you over the memory limit for 32 bit, you're much more likely to get more mileage out of texture-reducing the others as they are probably bigger (or you wouldn't be over the limit). You could also just use the 64 bit version (if you have enough physical RAM), it works reasonably well with few exceptions (there are some, but very few, plugins that won't work with it).

If I manage to play a little later today or tomorrow, I'll install it to have a look at that, thank you

With stock engines that shouldn't be a problem, but if you're using KW Rocketry, those now have a spool-up-time, similar to jets. So for those it's often necessary to do this. I usually readjust the staging to check my Delta-V, and then switch the clamps back to the second stage for the actual launch. It's a bit tedious though, so I'm also looking forward to a fix

Yes, multiple entries of RT2 options in the context menu are basically always just multiple modulemanager dlls. Just search your GameData, you should only ever have exactly one (preferably the newest, 2.2.0 I think).

From what I understand, KER handles KW boosters correctly (since rather recently though, check the thread). So either head over to the MJ thread and ask them to handle them correctly (I'm sure these are not the only ones using non-zero-minthrust), or just come over to KER Well, I don't know if it's recommended as such, I've also used the fairings just for pretty lookin' rockets before I've ever used either, but they do work correctly with both if that's what you're asking. FAR and NEAR detect objects as shielded when inside a KW-fairing and act accordingly.