Contract Pack: Giving Aircraft a Purpose (GAP) 1.6.1 - Milestones, Air Flights, Coast Guard

[inigma]

1 minute ago, Evanitis said:

I noticed that in that mission, I can switch to Inigma -before- the 'drive there' requirement is completed. This way his welcome popup window appears. I didn't test if that screws with the mission, but that might be the case here.

It shouldn't mess anything up as long as the player completes the mission in sequence at some point. I wasn't able to duplicate the issue in my testing.

Edited January 12, 2016 by inigma

[Kthulhu]

8 hours ago, inigma said:

There are two waypoints. Admin building, and R&D. You should be able to pick up Inigma Kerman and drive him to the R&D waypoint and complete. Do you see the R&D waypoint? It should be right on the sidewalk on the south side of the R&D, in front of the doors. The waypoint is compatible with any tech level R&D center.  You may need to activate navigation on the waypoint from map view. Or else use Waypoint Manager from nightingale.  Once checked, simply recover Inigma Kerman.

If the above isn't clear, or not working, can you post me a link to a savefile right at launch, or copy of your craft? Also list any mods it uses.

Of course since I posted about it, it works this time while I'm trying to document it with pictures. I made a change to the vessel - when I was failing it I was using 2 command chairs. This time I put a Kerbal Can on the back (Ven's Stock mod) and threw you into there, then switched control back to Jeb in his command seat. So, since I'm having a completion issue with the first 4-kerbal shore tour, I might as well mention that since I'd like to meet the requirements.

The first time I forgot an engineer, so I restarted and got Bill on there with the tourists. Then I got all the checks except for beaching/landing my boat, and very oddly - safely. I say that is odd because the two sub-checkboxes of without destroying / without killing are checked off. When I hit recover I was flipped upside down because of a physics glitch transitioning from the water to the shoreline, but I only lost 1 of the 2 engines. It seems to be stuck now as I've redone the tour 2 more times without flipping and haven't gotten the checks back yet.

[inigma]

43 minutes ago, Faptech said:

Of course since I posted about it, it works this time while I'm trying to document it with pictures. I made a change to the vessel - when I was failing it I was using 2 command chairs. This time I put a Kerbal Can on the back (Ven's Stock mod) and threw you into there, then switched control back to Jeb in his command seat. So, since I'm having a completion issue with the first 4-kerbal shore tour, I might as well mention that since I'd like to meet the requirements.

The first time I forgot an engineer, so I restarted and got Bill on there with the tourists. Then I got all the checks except for beaching/landing my boat, and very oddly - safely. I say that is odd because the two sub-checkboxes of without destroying / without killing are checked off. When I hit recover I was flipped upside down because of a physics glitch transitioning from the water to the shoreline, but I only lost 1 of the 2 engines. It seems to be stuck now as I've redone the tour 2 more times without flipping and haven't gotten the checks back yet.

Anytime your craft gets damaged and you try to run the same contract with another craft, it will probably not work since the contract assigns a unique identifier to the craft that passes the initial validation checks on launch. Essentially you've soft-failed the contract with the crash onto the shoreline rather than hard-failed it. It would be no different than a boat accident in real life just prior to landing your tourists...  just be glad the penalties for hard-failure didn't kick in.  Cancel the contract and retry and let me know if it works for you the second time.

[maculator]

The balancing is "interessting" the first wright mission gave me 50rep and 5exp, thats quite alot!

But the missions I played were good, and well designed. The only thing I dont like ist that I get offered the coastguard contracts even I dont have any other mods installed.

Will you make missions wich are impossible to complete without mods depend on those in a future update?

[inigma]

1 minute ago, maculator said:

The balancing is "interessting" the first wright mission gave me 50rep and 5exp, thats quite alot!

But the missions I played were good, and well designed. The only thing I dont like ist that I get offered the coastguard contracts even I dont have any other mods installed.

Will you make missions wich are impossible to complete without mods depend on those in a future update?

The First Flight rep and experience reward is the only boost a player gets. Other contract rewards are far less. So pick your desired pilot carefully. Another boost happens when you complete the carrier landing contract.

Coast Guard contracts can be completed with stock parts.  

By the way, I added all KAB altitude contracts last night to GAP dev. 

[GhostMonkeyNKHI]

I think a cut-and-paste error crept into one of the contracts.  I am doing KSP-IslandLanding.cfg, but the Island Airfield Tower waypoint doesn't show up.  I'm not a Contract Configurator expert, but I believe it's because "land at the KSC Island Airfield" parameter duplicates VesselParameterGroup from above, instead of being named the LandatIslandAirfield parameter.  I checked an older version of this contract, and the parameter was LandatIslandAirfield as I would expect.

In the WaypointGenerator, does "parameter" only control the visibility of the waypoint?  In other words, could I still salvage this contract by planting the flag in the right spot blindly?

[inigma]

7 hours ago, GhostMonkeyNKHI said:

I think a cut-and-paste error crept into one of the contracts.  I am doing KSP-IslandLanding.cfg, but the Island Airfield Tower waypoint doesn't show up.  I'm not a Contract Configurator expert, but I believe it's because "land at the KSC Island Airfield" parameter duplicates VesselParameterGroup from above, instead of being named the LandatIslandAirfield parameter.  I checked an older version of this contract, and the parameter was LandatIslandAirfield as I would expect.

In the WaypointGenerator, does "parameter" only control the visibility of the waypoint?  In other words, could I still salvage this contract by planting the flag in the right spot blindly?

good catch. updated for 1.1.

The only way you can salvage this is by setting up a flag near the tower anyways, fly back and land safely, and force completion of the contract by doing f12 and go to Contracts>Active and hit complete.

9 minutes ago, inigma said:

good catch. updated for 1.1.

The only way you can salvage this is by setting up a flag near the tower anyways, fly back and land safely, and force completion of the contract by doing f12 and go to Contracts>Active and hit complete.

the same was true for the next mission which I've fixed for 1.1. Go ahead and modify the landing VPG in KSP-IslandPrep with the same value. LandatIslandAirfield before you accept the contract. Hit f10 and reload to reload the contract system. You may need to cancel the contract once though if it's already offered up. To avoid this, make your change and reload contracts before you complete the landing contract.

Edited January 13, 2016 by inigma

[inigma]

Feedback requested:

https://bubbl.us/?h=934b/5fc8d0/37aoS1/A8mNuU&r=1585399700

I need help figuring out the best set of requirements to open up the Mach 1 project.

Should I make the Mach 1 project dependent on Aircraft Carrier Takeoff contract completion, or not? Currently it's dependent on both Carrier Takeoff, and KAB 5000m completion (and still require an unlocked jet or liquid rocket engine), but I was thinking most players will probably not do the carrier missions and will want to skip on ahead to the mach project so they can start their space programs. Thoughts? Should I leave the Carrier Takeoff requirement in or remove it?

Edited January 13, 2016 by inigma

[Evanitis]

I'd say remove it. Bruteforce solutions from players usually predate the need for precision.. the stock tech tree seems to reflect that too.

I'd even consider adding it after Wright contracts. That sounds Kerbal to me. 'Ok, we can fly. Now add moar boosters!'

[inigma]

Just now, Evanitis said:

I'd say remove it. Bruteforce solutions from players usually predate the need for precision.. the stock tech tree seems to reflect that too.

I'd even consider adding it after Wright contracts. That sounds Kerbal to me. 'Ok, we can fly. Now add moar boosters!'

I think you're right. I've also had the brilliant idea to make SSI do the altitude contracts and speed contracts, and use the new KAB agency to do the crew cabin testing.

[kcs123]

35 minutes ago, inigma said:

Feedback requested:

https://bubbl.us/?h=934b/5fc8d0/37aoS1/A8mNuU&r=1585399700

I need help figuring out the best set of requirements to open up the Mach 1 project.

 Thoughts? Should I leave the Carrier Takeoff requirement in or remove it?

I think that you should remove Carrier TakeOff requirement. Mostly, like you said, some people might not even a try, or find it too difficult, while they could probably reach 1 mach much sooner. Also 5km altitude as requirement is too low. For early engines, to breach 1 mach you should probably need to go above 10km where is much less drag from atmosphere.

Another thing is that it will be too easy to breach mach 1 with rocket engines/boosters, To make such contract more chalanging, craft could be alowed to contain only liquid fuel, without oxidizer or solid fuel on craft as resources. That would pretty much exclude all kind of rocket powered engines, regardless if it is from stock parts or moded part pack.

[Evanitis]

26 minutes ago, kcs123 said:

it will be too easy to breach mach 1 with rocket engines/boosters, To make such contract more chalanging, craft could be alowed to contain only liquid fuel, without oxidizer or solid fuel as resources.

That makes sense... but I'd also consider adding further Mach Missions as an alternative solution to the same problem... maybe up to 3, or even 5. It would be interesing to know how far can one get with the early career crafts..

[inigma]

2 minutes ago, Evanitis said:

That makes sense... but I'd also consider adding further Mach Missions as an alternative solution to the same problem... maybe up to 3, or even 5. It would be interesing to know how far can one get with the early career crafts..

Can you see the link i posted above?

[Evanitis]

Yup, just didn't bother to click... Mach 6, nice!

EDIT.. Ooow, that's nice and handy to click on.

Edited January 13, 2016 by Evanitis

[kcs123]

Found a bug with Buoy probe deployment contract.

 

I have repeated same contract several times - always same result, probe drop is not recognized properly. Only after droping second probe, first one is recognized as droped.

[inigma]

3 minutes ago, kcs123 said:

Found a bug with Buoy probe deployment contract.

 

I have repeated same contract several times - always same result, probe drop is not recognized properly. Only after droping second probe, first one is recognized as droped.

Are you using the latest GAP 1.0.2.1 and latest Contract Configurator 1.9.3?

If so, can you link me a craft file and save file?

Edited January 13, 2016 by inigma

[kcs123]

19 minutes ago, inigma said:

Are you using the latest GAP 1.0.2.1 and latest Contract Configurator 1.9.3?

If so, can you link me a craft file and save file?

GAP is 1.0.2.1 while CC is 1.9.3.1, I will send save and craft file shortly.

EDIT:

Here is link with craft and savegame files. It might be hard to control that heli without kOS support for autohover. Heli might become unstable on roll, once you drop first probe due to weight unbalance, but it is manageable if you are careful.

You will need to copy kOS scripts in main KSP/Ships folder, not within savegame folder if you need it.

Edited January 13, 2016 by kcs123
Link added

[inigma]

5 hours ago, kcs123 said:

GAP is 1.0.2.1 while CC is 1.9.3.1, I will send save and craft file shortly.

EDIT:

Here is link with craft and savegame files. It might be hard to control that heli without kOS support for autohover. Heli might become unstable on roll, once you drop first probe due to weight unbalance, but it is manageable if you are careful.

You will need to copy kOS scripts in main KSP/Ships folder, not within savegame folder if you need it.

It's not a bug, but a design. The buoy drop contract works by checking that you have 2 barometers (or least it will now to fix this - it was not checking before) and that you drop both barometers and have none remaining on your craft. Your helicopter has a barometer stowed in the back service bay. Remove that third barometer and the contract will complete. I'll make sure to inform the player in the future that the mother craft should not have any barometers on board and require a max of only two on board as a safeguard in GAP 1.1.

Edited January 14, 2016 by inigma

[inigma]

6 hours ago, kcs123 said:

GAP is 1.0.2.1 while CC is 1.9.3.1, I will send save and craft file shortly.

EDIT:

Here is link with craft and savegame files. It might be hard to control that heli without kOS support for autohover. Heli might become unstable on roll, once you drop first probe due to weight unbalance, but it is manageable if you are careful.

You will need to copy kOS scripts in main KSP/Ships folder, not within savegame folder if you need it.

btw, I LOVE your hover program. I will be using it.   You should publish that thing.

[inigma]

12 hours ago, kcs123 said:

I think that you should remove Carrier TakeOff requirement. Mostly, like you said, some people might not even a try, or find it too difficult, while they could probably reach 1 mach much sooner. Also 5km altitude as requirement is too low. For early engines, to breach 1 mach you should probably need to go above 10km where is much less drag from atmosphere.

Another thing is that it will be too easy to breach mach 1 with rocket engines/boosters, To make such contract more chalanging, craft could be alowed to contain only liquid fuel, without oxidizer or solid fuel on craft as resources. That would pretty much exclude all kind of rocket powered engines, regardless if it is from stock parts or moded part pack.

I will limit the craft to using liquid engines only, no solid fuel.  Bear in mind that the Bell X-1 itself was a rocket engine which used oxidizer, so for this reason I will permit its use.

[vardicd]

 

Uh, how does this work? throwing a kerbal out of a plane sounds like a bad idea, not sure how to go about getting a parachute on one of these guys.

[vardicd]

On ‎1‎/‎10‎/‎2016 at 0:32 AM, inigma said:

Sometimes GAP development can be quite fun...   

 

Jebediah Corliss's skydiving school, Corliss Paraventures class out on a jump together...

 

Okay, I found the eva parachutes mod from vanguard, but I cannot for the life of me make it work correctly, if I can get it to work at all, it will randomly kill kerbals or eject so hard they go onto an escape trajectory out of the kerbol system. most often, they just don't work at all. there are no parachutes on the kerbals, can't grab one from the parachute box, the eject system ejects the kerbals, but doesn't put parachutes on them. You seem to have gotten it to work correctly, can you tell us how?

[Almodeon]

The idea behind the mod is exactly what I was waiting for since career was introduced.

*rant* I really cannot fathom why so much effort was put into planes and aerodynamics in the last stock versions, while at the same time developing exactly zero career contracts around it... I will never understand this... */rant*

Anyway, the problem is... I don't think RO/RP-0 are supported in GAP in any way; heck, even RSS seems to break the mod. Has anyone managed to get the mod working alongside RSS?

I suspect the culprit is the fact that Kopernicus changes the names of the planets; in fact, as far as I remember the "debug" menu shows an error related to the name "Earth" which it does not recognize. I will post the log (and the error) as soon as I get home.

In the meantime, thanks for the awesome work.

[inigma]

2 hours ago, vardicd said:

Okay, I found the eva parachutes mod from vanguard, but I cannot for the life of me make it work correctly, if I can get it to work at all, it will randomly kill kerbals or eject so hard they go onto an escape trajectory out of the kerbol system. most often, they just don't work at all. there are no parachutes on the kerbals, can't grab one from the parachute box, the eject system ejects the kerbals, but doesn't put parachutes on them. You seem to have gotten it to work correctly, can you tell us how?

Use CKAN to search for keyword "EVA" and install EVA Parachutes and EVA Auto Equip (or something like that - I forgot what it's called.) You can use the kerbal's context menu to deploy chute or the hot key spacebar plus F I think it is. See their forum thread OP for details.

Edited January 14, 2016 by inigma

[kcs123]

10 hours ago, inigma said:

btw, I LOVE your hover program. I will be using it.   You should publish that thing.

I already did. Probably i didn't promoted it well enough though
Link for thread is in my signature, where you can find download link for KSP 1.0.5. craft files.

Although, you got improved version of howering script than one published earlier. there is also Mun landing script for rockets, that is still WIP, need to make a few more tests to see if it realy works from all heights and on all celestial bodies without atmosphere. When I check those, I will wrote some more info about it for better public usage.