Jiraiyah

actually I think it would be better to keep the mod the way it is now, think about the design challenge this would give us, yes, the user should be able to change the signal on the fly, but, what if we assume the signals are fixed? if a player wants to play this way, he/she has to think about number of dishes and antenna he/she would need on the ship. Actually, if you ask me, there can be an option in the window that would disable the signal change during the flight !

Looks like it's working, antenas are working, constellation window is opening and functional, no more errors being loged.

Hi @zer0Kerbal was talking with another mod developer in private when an idea came out of the conversation about FTL and FTF mods you develop. Here is the idea : If we assume that kerbals know how to develop artificial intelligence, why would they really need a five star kerbal to train them? How about AI modules that can be trained by a kerbal once and then having this module side by side with FTL or FTF modules, other kerbals can learn from the AI without the need for another teacher to be on board? If we accept this idea, you can have two modules (parts and yes I intentionally ask for parts to make station designs a bit more interesting and a little challenge, and no, the parts should be big enough and can't be flat small objects), one module would be responsible for storage hardware and another for the cpu processor of the AI. And, for each skill, we need a separate AI module pair. Adding USI skills into the game and idea here, having a training station, would be interesting to develop because for each skill you have to plan two parts in the station. Also, for training the AI, you would need a five star kerbal in the CPU unit, time and lots of time for each round of training, and more than one round of training until the unit gets ready. If USI MKS is present, maintenance of the unit can use special parts (make it optional via options). At the end, we may need to train the AI at least one more round after some years because of malfunctioning or any other name you would use that causes the AI to mess things up or forget stuff. Finally, if we have AI units in the same ship/station with FTL or FTF modules, kerbals can learn the skill without a need for another teaching kerbal. If we lack the AI module for a skill, then we go back to the original mod design that forcefully asks for a teacher. You may ask why we may need something like this? The idea came out when me and another mod developer where talking about generation ships. You know, add civilian population mod to the game, some far far away star systems that would need hundred of years to reach the destination, add USI MKS and Life support, deep freeze and your FTL and FTF mods, all in one place for a game play !!! This way, we can have generation ships. You know, the ship that would leave home planet and it's star system for future generations... during the travel original crew will die but their children will be trained in space and when the final destination reached, you may have passed through four or five generations. In Sci Fi movies, training these children would be done by one of three choices : 1- Elders will train younger generation... what is sci fi about this?? nothing!!! as time passes some of the knowledge will be lost ! 2- Drone and Robots who look like normal population would sit and teach children. 3- Computer AI with holographic images would teach I think you got the picture,.... i'm a fan of the third option lol. So, what do you think about this idea?

Here we go : In this line of code, you are reading a key from dictionary without checking if the key exists or not, basically if the key is not there, you need to first add the key manually with proper values, if the key is there, change the values. This needs to be handled in case the key is not present. And I'm not sure if in my log file there will be more methods like this or not. In short, you should never "assume" that the key will be present. Always do the sanity checks while coding and handle possible exceptions if you can like this one.

@eberkain and @Stone Blue I will look into the links stone provided. But lets say for example that I'm gonna do a constellation for duna (or any other planet out side of home SOI), I would send a rocket with stupid amount of delta v and 24 sats. How ever, when we are talking about changing the inclination... this is where I'm getting lost. What should be the steps for inclination change for 6 orbits this way? remember the origin is at 0 inclination to make things easier for start. Also, I didn't get what is the point of resonant orbit calculator here? (not played with that much)

hello everyone. I was watching a video that was sending 4 sats at once, putting them in parking orbit of 776 KM and final Orbit or 1585KM, and he was launching 6 rockets, once an hour. Now, I understand how it came out and why the numbers, but.... Lets say that I want to put the same constellation around ANY other planet. I would eventually love to send all these 24 sats on a single rocket and toward that planet, and circularizing around it's orbit on 0 inclination. From this moment forward, we have a rocket with enough delta V for anything, sitting in 0 inclination, with all the 24 sats.... how should we produce the same constellation using inclination changes and how to calculate the parking and final orbit to have 4 sats in each orbit and 6 orbits as final result? This question,... made me scratch my head and look at monitor for hours without any result !

Here is ksp.log if you need any other log tell me to upload them too : https://www.dropbox.com/s/y9y0vtds2eg100a/KSP.log?dl=0 But I warn you, the log is huge and you may want to use something like Notepad ++ and search for keywords. And the mod list is in the spoiler (unistalled CNC already for time being)

using CKAN and ksp 1.11.0

Hi @TaxiService I'm having few issues in 1.11 : 1- Even when I have antenna on the prob, there is no connection to kerbin 2- The button for CNC is not opening the interface in tracking station, here is the log file section after I log in and hitting the CNC button (only that section, if you need, tell me to upload the whole file somewhere) There are more than few Null Point Exceptions from CNC and Also KeyNotFoundException here !

I found the reproducing steps, vanilla + trp, every thing is ok. Add USI stuff to the game data (will give us more kerbal types and skills) the UI for TRP will break as the picture I have sent. Looks like some how when the skill type buttons goes beyond the vanilla (first row) it breaks the UI.

Hi @linuxgurugamer Is there any known reason for this bug on GUI? Or can it be the result of playing with this mod on 1.11 ? If none, should we look into log files and dig it up to see if there is a conflict with one of the many mods I installed? SCREEN SHOT (sorry can't use imgur directly right now)

@Avera9eJoe, Hi I really enjoy your mod for the best visuals out there, how ever, when it comes to Aurora, you may want to adjust it, look at the picture bellow for reference As you see, it's not so flat at the pole and not only inside the atmosphere "Sphere" looking. it spikes out into space. looking at the aurora in spectra mod, it looks like a shader being slapped into a sphere geometry at poles. HERE is the link for the picture in google search, you can see more pictures for reference there.

confirmed, no more errors. thanks

The reason I didn't send the whole log was that I have tons of mods installed and there is over 75K patches for MM in this instance of game, the section with error entry is exactly what I sent

[LOG 13:14:00.505] Applying update FuelWings/Fuel Wings PW/@PART[B9_Aero_Wing_Procedural_TypeA,B9_Aero_Wing_Procedural_TypeC] to B9_Aerospace_ProceduralWings/Parts/Aero_Wing_Procedural/wing_procedural_typeA.cfg/PART[B9_Aero_Wing_Procedural_TypeA] [ERR 13:14:00.505] Error - Cannot parse variable search when editing key tempVolume = #$/MODULE[ModuleLiftingSurface]/deflectionLiftCoeff$ [LOG 13:14:00.505] Applying update FuelWings/Fuel Wings PW/@PART[B9_Aero_Wing_Procedural_TypeA,B9_Aero_Wing_Procedural_TypeC] to B9_Aerospace_ProceduralWings/Parts/Aero_Wing_Procedural/wing_procedural_typeC.cfg/PART[B9_Aero_Wing_Procedural_TypeC] [ERR 13:14:00.505] Error - Cannot parse variable search when editing key tempVolume = #$/MODULE[ModuleLiftingSurface]/deflectionLiftCoeff$ It's Both Type A and C

Take a look at spoiler

module manager is yelling about 24 errors in inventoryforall.cfg file, you may want to look into it.

Oh ya it is fixed, looks like if we install planet shine, CKAN goes for older version of spectra !

I'm totally ok with doing the patch myself and keep it for my own game play, how ever, would you be kind enough and confirm if the math I did for 0.8 mulch + 0.2 life support = 1 fertilizer, would be the correct ratio and result?

Ummm, why does CKAN say that spectra has conflict with my mod Green Skull Suites? Green skull is body suite mod for texture replacer, why would spectra conflict with that at all?!!!!

Reading through all of that, you are absolutely right in many things : 1- rover dude would use warp,... but with 100 people (civils) on board, it would be ..... :"D 2- I wasted my time near a year waiting for something like this and you are right there again 3- i can sit back and create a mod just with available parts and tweaking textures and through the MM patches out there. thanks for taking the stick and hit me with it lightly, I was looking for help to make sure values and resources would be right, but after reading your post and the previous ones.... looks like people who would play generation ships, are not that many at least in this thread post. oh well as you and goldenpsp said, i will go with try and see. at the very least, give me an idea @JadeOfMaar... if i would like to make electric charge a challenge for the convertor part but not impossible, what would be the suggested usage for this convertor? the part would be 1 part per 1 kerbal on the ship

oh sorry sorry, really sorry, I didn't meant to be demanding in any form, I'm just frustrated because I have asked for this for a long time, and of course it's not his responsibility, but still, he is the heart of this mod and knows better than anyone else what would be a good conversion way. The math you are indicating, is exactly what i just wrote above.. If we would want to go with the production/usage ratio.... for 1 kerbal in 1 day.... we would have extra 0.8 mulch and here is how it's being calculated : 1 kerbal per day uses 10.8 ls.... 1 ls produces 1 mulch.... so at the end of the day we have 10.8 mulch.... the conversion units use 10 of this mulch combined with 1 fertilizer to produce another 11 unit of life support.... now here we get an extra 0.2 life support.... the easiest way of converting,... would be to use this 0.8 mulch,... combined with 0.2 life support.... and maybe huge amount of electric charge (have no idea how much) and produce 1 fertilizer back ! if we read the numbers this would close the cycle of course but I'm not sure if it would brake the game in long flight run from one star system to another or not,... and also... i am not sure if this ratio would make the game ok to play or it would make the game soooo easy that it wouldn't make any sense to have it.

Well, here is the problem, USI life support is much more complex compared to other mods. For example, let's say that I would like to write the MM patch for my own personal needs, what should I do for converting one resource to the other? We know that one kerbal uses 10.8 life support unit per day, the nomomatics, use 1 fertilizer and 10 mulch, to produce 11 life support and 1 life support gives 1 mulch Now looking into this equation, if I would like to use mulch and close the cycle? How should be the converting ratio? we are going to use one mulch for example to produce 0.1 fertilizer ....... but.... with the above info, I am not sure if we really have closed the cycle truely or we just did a bad ratio convertions, that is why I am asking here and called for rover dude for help. I didn't meant for him to really change anything in the base mod, but maybe a new simple part mod with one or two parts that will barely need any maintenance in future? or at the very least help someone like me with information on a correct ratio to close the gap. I was thinking of using the same model Soylent mod is using (it's one of those old MIT parts that is circulating around) for 1 part per 1 kerbal base and the model from seti green house (another MIT part) for more than one kerbal per part. But again, I am not sure about the ratio of resources here and what to use as the base to produce the needed fertilizer.

How about removing the cloud settings from this mod and letting spectra do it? Would they behave side by side then?

Sigh, you did ignore a part of words here,.... Civilian Population MOD !!! Deep freezing won't help there, and alcubierre won't be a choice with the parts come from civilian population... and regarding the scifi point of view..... these kerbals are not meant to live for longer life cycle.... they live normally, make children... train them in space while they are moving to the new destination... die and the generations will pass until the ship gets to the new system. Freezing few kerbals like that won't help