[1.8.x] B9 Aerospace | Release 6.6.0 (Feb 5 2020)

[ZobrAA]

Bugreport: HX hollow structural modules are NOT working as cargo bays. I mean they not protect cargo from aerodynamic even despite it's config has right module:

	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleCargoBay
		DeployModuleIndex = 0
		closedPosition = 0
		lookupRadius = 4

		nodeOuterForeID = top
		nodeOuterAftID = bottom
	}

Is there a way to fix thix?

[blowfish]

4 hours ago, ZobrAA said:

Bugreport: HX hollow structural modules are NOT working as cargo bays. I mean they not protect cargo from aerodynamic even despite it's config has right module:

	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleCargoBay
		DeployModuleIndex = 0
		closedPosition = 0
		lookupRadius = 4

		nodeOuterForeID = top
		nodeOuterAftID = bottom
	}

Is there a way to fix thix?

I recall that they might require inner nodes.  Can you log an issue on Github so I remember to investigate?

[ZobrAA]

16 hours ago, blowfish said:

I recall that they might require inner nodes.  Can you log an issue on Github so I remember to investigate? 

I dont know how to do it... (-_-)" Perhaps user need an account on github to do this.

But I can make some experiments with adding inner nodes. I will notify for results here

[ZobrAA]

Looks like adding inner nodes do nothing... May it be so specialized mesh needed?

[blowfish]

10 hours ago, ZobrAA said:

I dont know how to do it... (-_-)" Perhaps user need an account on github to do this.

But I can make some experiments with adding inner nodes. I will notify for results here

Yes, you need an account.  If you're using a lot of mods I recommend creating one as many mods track issues through Github

[JadeOfMaar]

// The cargo module needs to look like this, featuring the nodeInnerxxIDs
MODULE
{
	name = ModuleCargoBay
	DeployModuleIndex = 0
	closedPosition = 1
	lookupRadius = 3.5
	nodeOuterForeID = top
	nodeOuterAftID = bottom
	nodeInnerAftID = bottom2
	nodeInnerForeID = top2
}

// The lines for attach nodes need to look like this. The suffix (after stack_) is the nodeID to use
node_stack_top = 0.0, 2.995, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 5
node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -2.995, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0, 5
node_stack_top2 = 0.0, 2.99, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0, 2
node_stack_bottom2 = 0.0, -2.99, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2
// When you add the inner attach nodes, be sure to offset them into the part just a little (the vector3, first set of 3-way coordinates)
// This offset is so the player easier avoids accidentally attaching to another part via the inner node which breaks the shielding
// Be sure to invert the orientation of the inner attach nodes (the second vector3) so that they can point to each other when KSP calculates the volume of the cargo shield
// The 7th digit is the size of the green ball atach node indicator. Valid values (that we can see) go up to 5, I think

 

[TheKurgan]

@JadeOfMaar Are you kidding me? is this all that is needed to make a non aerodynamically shielding cargo bay into an aerodynamically shielding one? I have been wondering about this for a long long time....

 

I am guessing that node_stack_top2 and node_stack_bottom2 are the inside nodes that are used in some sort of raycast to determine the hollow portion of the cargo bay.... and lookupRadius = 3.5  is the radius of that hollow space?

Edited July 26, 2018 by TheKurgan

[JadeOfMaar]

1 hour ago, TheKurgan said:

Are you kidding me?

Problem?  Also, the cargo bay part tends to need to have an animation, afaik.

1 hour ago, TheKurgan said:

I am guessing that node_stack_top2 and node_stack_bottom2 are the inside nodes that are used in some sort of raycast to determine the hollow portion of the cargo bay.... and lookupRadius = 3.5  is the radius of that hollow space?

That's exactly how I interpret it, and I figure the unit of lookupRadius is meters. (I've never installed a ruler mod and trial&error'd it to confirm.)

For whatever reason, OPT's cargo bays and hollow bays mostly tend to not work in spite of this and I've fought a losing battle with that code (namely, messing with DeployModuleIndex and closedPosition... notice that in @blowfish quote, both keys have 0 for their value. As for me I stopped caring and leave whatever value there is/was. I barely play anymore so I haven't had fresh cause to worry about it.), or there's a flaw in the part models that breaks the module regardless of its settings.

[TheKurgan]

Nope, no problem at all... quite the opposite

That's too bad about the OPT bays... I still get them into orbit in a hurry... that's all I care about really lol.

 

[blowfish]

@Oracle255 I set up a mirror here: https://s3.amazonaws.com/blowfish-ksp-b9aerospace-release-builds/index.html#releases/

Still looking at the HX cargo bay shielding issue.  I'm away from my main computer right so might not be able to work on it for a couple of weeks.

[JadeOfMaar]

What sorts of alternate propellants are B9 HX users interested in? I'd really like to know... I haven't seen enough screenshots to help me guess.

Spoiler

 

[H0FF1]

Is there no Inline extendable Docking port for the B9 Parts?

[dlrk]

The FAQ references procedural wings, but the link is for version .9. Is there a current procedural wing version?

[blowfish]

3 hours ago, dlrk said:

The FAQ references procedural wings, but the link is for version .9. Is there a current procedural wing version?

Yeah, check this thread: 

 

[dlrk]

@blowfish

Thanks!

[Apaseall]

Hi, here is a log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/5sdzcbltobydaoj/saves for LoadingScreenManager.1.output_log.rar?dl=0

Yes an odd name but the below is in it.

I see some of this:

Spoiler

Load(Texture): B9_Aerospace/Props/B9_MFD/images/pfdAttitude
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/DebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 51)

Texture resolution is not valid for compression: 'C:\KSP\KSP 1.4.5.2243 Live\GameData\B9_Aerospace\Props\B9_MFD\images\pfdAttitude.png' - consider changing the image's width and height to enable compression
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/DebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 51)

Load(Texture): B9_Aerospace/Props/B9_MFD/images/pfdHeading
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/DebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 51)

Texture resolution is not valid for compression: 'C:\KSP\KSP 1.4.5.2243 Live\GameData\B9_Aerospace\Props\B9_MFD\images\pfdHeading.png' - consider changing the image's width and height to enable compression

I seem to be pestering everyone to help clean up the log file today, I wonder if this might be a quick thing to do?

[Union Kerbide]

Hello, quick question here:

 

how do do I get the cockpit IVA displays to recognize internal and external cameras?  Thanks!

[Polyus]

Are the fanblades in the turbofans supposed to move? I could've sworn they did at some point.

[blowfish]

19 hours ago, Polyus said:

Are the fanblades in the turbofans supposed to move? I could've sworn they did at some point.

They should, it's part of the Firespitter plugin ... maybe make sure that is installed and up-to-date

[blowfish]

On 9/19/2018 at 11:17 AM, Apaseall said:

Hi, here is a log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/5sdzcbltobydaoj/saves for LoadingScreenManager.1.output_log.rar?dl=0

Yes an odd name but the below is in it.

I see some of this:

  Reveal hidden contents

Load(Texture): B9_Aerospace/Props/B9_MFD/images/pfdAttitude
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/DebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 51)

Texture resolution is not valid for compression: 'C:\KSP\KSP 1.4.5.2243 Live\GameData\B9_Aerospace\Props\B9_MFD\images\pfdAttitude.png' - consider changing the image's width and height to enable compression
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/DebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 51)

Load(Texture): B9_Aerospace/Props/B9_MFD/images/pfdHeading
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/DebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 51)

Texture resolution is not valid for compression: 'C:\KSP\KSP 1.4.5.2243 Live\GameData\B9_Aerospace\Props\B9_MFD\images\pfdHeading.png' - consider changing the image's width and height to enable compression

I seem to be pestering everyone to help clean up the log file today, I wonder if this might be a quick thing to do?

I'll look into it.  It seems that KSP attempts to compress all images now.  They can be excluded by putting them in some PluginData folder, but then whatever code needs them has to explicitly load them, and I'm not sure that RPM does this.

On 9/20/2018 at 12:01 PM, Union Kerbide said:

Hello, quick question here:

 

how do do I get the cockpit IVA displays to recognize internal and external cameras?  Thanks!

Is this a specific question about the B9 IVAs not being connected to the external cameras, or a general RPM configuration question?

[Union Kerbide]

The question was directed towards B9 cockpits originally, although I’m interested to hear any insights regarding RPM configuration.  

[mindseyemodels]

you think maybe you could make some more parts(mainly pods, engines, and adapters) that are either in the S1, S2 or HX format or maybe work to connect them? because using various parts of various aesthetics just doesnt look right there are inconsistencies that just drive my OCD up the wall... I mean some ships can use different parts but if I try to make ships using purely tetragon brand parts it has to LOOK right otherwise it just bothers me that some of the parts dont match in appearance or profile like trying to put an HX heavy propulsion device on an S2 body even with tweakscale it just doesnt look right as it doesnt align properly... so perhaps some adapters(and a wider selection of engines and pods) is coming soon? maybe some procedural adapters that are able to use tweakscale ?

Edited September 24, 2018 by mindseyemodels

[blowfish]

On 9/19/2018 at 11:17 AM, Apaseall said:

Hi, here is a log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/5sdzcbltobydaoj/saves for LoadingScreenManager.1.output_log.rar?dl=0

Yes an odd name but the below is in it.

I see some of this:

  Reveal hidden contents

Load(Texture): B9_Aerospace/Props/B9_MFD/images/pfdAttitude
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/DebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 51)

Texture resolution is not valid for compression: 'C:\KSP\KSP 1.4.5.2243 Live\GameData\B9_Aerospace\Props\B9_MFD\images\pfdAttitude.png' - consider changing the image's width and height to enable compression
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/DebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 51)

Load(Texture): B9_Aerospace/Props/B9_MFD/images/pfdHeading
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/DebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 51)

Texture resolution is not valid for compression: 'C:\KSP\KSP 1.4.5.2243 Live\GameData\B9_Aerospace\Props\B9_MFD\images\pfdHeading.png' - consider changing the image's width and height to enable compression

I seem to be pestering everyone to help clean up the log file today, I wonder if this might be a quick thing to do?

Based on a quick look at RPM's code, it's not possible to fix this.  It relies on the textures being in the game database, which means that it relies on KSP to load them, where it will automatically try to compress them and fail.

On 9/22/2018 at 10:10 AM, Union Kerbide said:

The question was directed towards B9 cockpits originally, although I’m interested to hear any insights regarding RPM configuration.  

The cameras are working as far as I can tell.  I didn't write any of the RPM configuration so if you want to write your own configurations it might be best to ask in that thread (B9 configs might be a good reference though)

[blowfish]

In other development news, I managed to fix the HX cargo bays not shielding anything.  It turns out that the cargo bay module really expects there to be an animation for the doors.  I found another module that it will talk to and does nothing the way I have it configured.

However, in the process I discovered that the HX cargo bay shields aren't detaching properly.  The colliders are just too big and hitting the colliders of the cargo bay itself.  I imported into Blender, modified the colliders, and re-exported, but then for some reason they looked really terrible under the highlight shader (highlighting that is active when you mouse over a part).  I might have better luck exporting through Unity.

It has also come to my attention that the HX engine isn't incredibly useful.  It was balanced against a combination of skippers and nervs, but with the expectation that you'll be using it for launch and long-range interplanetary operations, it's just too heavy/not efficient enough to be useful.  Now that the HX parts are a separate pack I think it might be reasonable to change the balance even if it ends up being out of line with the stock engines - after all, these are very late game sci-fi-esque parts.  If anyone has any input as to how it should be balanced I'm interested in hearing it.

[kcs123]

Having same or slightly better ISP than NERVs, but with additional need of extra power charge ? So wor very long burns you also need either, extra batteries or reactor on board. Some kind of futuristic engine that is fussion of NERV and EMV drive. It is probably not much in-line with real life science, but we are speaking of SCI-FI engine, so in gamebalance terms it should cover some gap between existing stock parts and parts from other mods. Just idea.