Booots

Members
  • Content Count

    318
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

436 Excellent

About Booots

  • Rank
    Rocketeer

Recent Profile Visitors

2,495 profile views
  1. Thanks everyone for the bug reports and for your patience. I think I've figured out why it's working for some people and not for others. It basically comes down to the way I implemented multi-threading and background threads. I did it in a pretty hacky way that works in lots of cases but fails in some cases that should have been expected. Fortunately, with the new tools available in the latest version of Unity, all of that should be resolved - once I finish porting it over to use those new features, which is a bigger job than I expected. I appreciate everyone's patience since I don't get a lot of time to work on this these days. I'm almost done porting it over to the new threading features but I expect there'll be a few weeks of testing to make sure it's working right and then a bit of time to squeeze out the performance I want so that it makes pretty plots in a reasonable amount of time. Cheers!
  2. That may very well be the case. If that mod has its own Class for lifting surfaces instead of the stock module, this mod will have problems accounting for it. I'll add that to the to-do list. Progress report on implementing .Net 4+ features: it's going well, but involves a fairly substantive overhaul of a large chunk of code so I'm taking my time to make sure I don't break anything along the way. Fun times!
  3. It is, unfortunately. This mod works by changing the orbit of your craft and the way landed vessels are tracked in KSP is very different from orbiting vessels. That's not to say it would be impossible to change this, but it would break some of the balance of this mod to be able to warp from the surface. Just use the F12 orbit modification screen to place yourself in the desired orbit. Thanks for the feedback. I'll make a note to re-examine the messages to make sure they're clear. As for the electric charge requirements, I've always thought they were well balanced, but I'm open to feedback.
  4. This mod only works with stack attach nodes, unfortunately. But there is a workaround to accomplish what you want. If your side booster is made up of two or more parts in a stack, you can attach one part to each radial decoupler and then position them so ReCoupler adds its structural link between the two parts. This will provide you with the look and extra stability that you're going for by having multiple radial decouplers.
  5. The new version of .Net supported by the recent updates opens up some new opportunities for multi-threading and makes some of my earlier hacky workarounds unnecessary. In and around some IRL renovations to my house, I'm going to be re-attacking this mod to make use of those and hopefully solve some of the bugs you've encountered. I'm still not making any guarantees about FAR support. I was running into some cross-threading issues last time using their API. These are always tricky to isolate to a specific method but maybe I'll get lucky this time around!
  6. I once emailed @SQUAD to tell them how I solved the problem and suggested the same.
  7. Thanks for trying out the Wind Tunnel mod. I'm sorry it isn't working for you; I'm going to be doing some troubleshooting today. I'll PM you if I need more info.
  8. Once upon a time, the RT team was looking at making a new release of RT that built on the CommNet system, so going this route was supposed to make that work out well with this little feature. I don't know for sure, but I think Commnet Constellation might also use CommNetManager. At least, I was working with the author of that mod so that this little feature and that mod were compatible. I can't recall if that ever went through or not. Sorry I wasn't around the latter half of the week - my parents came to visit me from out of town for my birthday, and hosting people is always time-consuming. Anyways, with the whole Covid-19 thing, I might end up with lots of free time for programming! I look forward to working with @linuxgurugamer on some new features for this mod.
  9. Maybe? I think it's possible. If it doesn't, and you need a version for 1.8, let me know and I'll compile one for you.
  10. Hey folks, sorry that work stalled on this. I'll try to get around to getting FAR support - with the update to .Net 4.6.1, threading things should become somewhat easier. I'll also look into the CSV output problems - last time I tested the export feature it worked for me.
  11. Thanks for the pull request! It definitely makes sense to be able to toggle that. I just realized that the 1.8 update broke all the mods, so I spent the evening fixing those. I'll try to get around to reviewing and incorporating your pull.
  12. Can confirm. Not a secret organization. I know because I never received my membership card or was taught the secret handshake.
  13. In case you haven't figured it out, you're looking for the massFctr number. Dropping that should do it. It was the fact that I was kind of cheating in how which resources the beacon consumes was stored that might have made it so that they always used Karborundum. Now it's truly up to the CFG file. I also added a new variable that was intended to work as an overall cost scalar, but I think I also need to add another one for scaling just the distance to better support other sized solar systems. Oh well, that'll be for the next release.
  14. Yeah... I got real close, but was running into threading issues (which are always a huge pain to sort out) and then got distracted with other projects because stock aero was good enough for me (since I don't personally use FAR). When I have more time for modding I'll take another crack at it. Probably in the fall or early winter when I'm less inclined to be hanging out outdoors or doing house renovations. This is true. I still mean to build a mode for gliders (to help with EDL), but that will involve a significant amount of work since the level-flight assumption is, by definition of gliding, no longer accurate. Thanks everyone for your patience!
  15. Interesting! It turns out the Accord Core library never loaded correctly, even on KSP 1.6. But, since the parts of Accord that WindTunnel relies on are in Accord.Math and didn't have any dependencies on Accord Core, the mod worked fine all along. I investigated exactly which types were not loading by comparing the loaded types vs nulls to the types that Accord contains. It turns out that the only types not loading are ones derived from System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations, which isn't included in the default Unity compilation. Anyways, since that's not likely to change any time soon, I extracted the needed classes from Accord.Math and published a release. This should fix any issues with this. It comes at the cost of not being able to receive updates to Accord, but compatibility with other mods is more important. Hopefully everyone's happy now! Sorry if I was grouchy the other day.