N70

[1.5.0 <-> 1.8.1] Kerbalism v3.2

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Sir Mortimer said:

 

I'm so confused, this video is more than a year old regarding 1.5.

...

I think he is saying he is going to release the newest version soon...  I shouldn't look at gift horse in the mouth.

Edited by mindstalker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, mindstalker said:

I think he is saying he is going to release the newest version soon...  I shouldn't look at gift horse in the mouth.

Yes - and you have to admit, that is one frickin' cool clip :)

It shouldn't be long now, the current dev version is quite stable and feature complete. We're just waiting for bug reports from people playtesting the dev builds, if things look OK that will be it.

Here's a summary of the recent changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JebIsDeadBaby said:

So is there an easy way to enable reliability when Real Fuels is installed by tweaking config files?

yes. to enable engine failures with real fuels, remove the second half in the file GameData/KerbalismConfig/Support/RealFuels.cfg (it's pretty obvious once you know where to look)

on a second thought: the support for non-stock engine modules is marginal. i don't know if it is real fuels that adds those engines, but to my knowledge the real engines already have ignition limitations built in.

Edited by Sir Mortimer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a bug report but something I just find hard to judge. Do the new parts get... what do they call it... voxelized properly by the new FAR? Do I have to do that myself? They are completely fine as far as I can tell, then again if they weren't I don't think I'd be the person to notice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tricky14 said:

This is not a bug report but something I just find hard to judge. Do the new parts get... what do they call it... voxelized properly by the new FAR? Do I have to do that myself? They are completely fine as far as I can tell, then again if they weren't I don't think I'd be the person to notice.

IIRC, FAR automatically voxelizes the collision mesh, so most parts work fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sir Mortimer said:

yes. to enable engine failures with real fuels, remove the second half in the file GameData/KerbalismConfig/Support/RealFuels.cfg (it's pretty obvious once you know where to look)

So after deleting this I see both rated ignitions and burn time in the in-game engine description (both VAB and on the launchpad) but neither reacts to engine operation. Both burn time and number of ignitions remain constant. RF ignitions seem to work properly (tested on an engine with 2 RT ignitions and 9 Kerbalism rated ignitions). I'd expect that at least rated burn time should work with no problem. Is this a bug then? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, JebIsDeadBaby said:

So after deleting this I see both rated ignitions and burn time in the in-game engine description (both VAB and on the launchpad) but neither reacts to engine operation. Both burn time and number of ignitions remain constant. RF ignitions seem to work properly (tested on an engine with 2 RT ignitions and 9 Kerbalism rated ignitions). I'd expect that at least rated burn time should work with no problem. Is this a bug then? 

yep, that's what I expected. RealFules seems to use a different part module for engines, which makes sense, but I didn't bother supporting those because as far as I know, they already do limited ignitions and burn durations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Sir Mortimer said:

they already do limited ignitions and burn durations.

Only limited ignitions but no reliability stuff, which I'd like to have the way Kerbalism now implements it. I'd switch to Kerbalism completely but RF introduces some other nice features, like ullage (which is a must have for me now) and engine development. This last thing would work perfectly with Kerbalism's engine reliability - in RF as you progress through the Tech Tree you unlock higher engine tech levels, which increase thrust and isp of your already researched engines (and in theory new fuel configurations are possible too but I never saw an engine that used this feature). If you could somehow plug your numbers into that system, it would be freaking awesome (now rated burn time would increase too). 

I really encourage you to take a look into possibility of making Kerbalism compatible with RF. What you guys do now would complement what RF already offers so nicely. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, JebIsDeadBaby said:

Only limited ignitions but no reliability stuff, which I'd like to have the way Kerbalism now implements it. I'd switch to Kerbalism completely but RF introduces some other nice features, like ullage (which is a must have for me now) and engine development. This last thing would work perfectly with Kerbalism's engine reliability - in RF as you progress through the Tech Tree you unlock higher engine tech levels, which increase thrust and isp of your already researched engines (and in theory new fuel configurations are possible too but I never saw an engine that used this feature). If you could somehow plug your numbers into that system, it would be freaking awesome (now rated burn time would increase too). 

I really encourage you to take a look into possibility of making Kerbalism compatible with RF. What you guys do now would complement what RF already offers so nicely. 

I can change the implementation to go look for ModuleEngine and derived part modules, which RealFuel engines seem to be - but there are no guarantees that it will work properly.

What Kerbalism does is track thrust of the engine. If it provides any it is on, if it provides thrust but didn't before, that was an ignition. This works for stock engines, but there is a lot of very advanced stuff going on in those procedural engines that effectively change quite a lot, so things could go sideways. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/12/2019 at 6:14 PM, aluc24 said:

@Sir Mortimer, I have a question. How exactly do science data transfer rates work in Kerbalism with RemoteTech?

We pretty much abandoned support of RemoteTech. It still has support code in Kerbalism, and it works to a degree, but starting from the next version you will get a warning message if you have RemoteTech installed.

The main reason for this is that none of the active contributors had been using RT for a while, so it is not being looked after. We get issues regarding RT but noone willing to look into them, and in my opinion it is better to let the player know up front that he's using something that might not work very well instead of letting him find out later in the game.

On top of that, the folks at RealismOverhaul have two different alternatives to RT that both seem to work well with Kerbalism and don't come with some of the baggage RT comes with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Sir Mortimer said:

If it provides any it is on, if it provides thrust but didn't before, that was an ignition. This works for stock engines

So do I get it right that ATM you can't detect ignitions on RF engines, hence the burn time does not work?

32 minutes ago, Sir Mortimer said:

the folks at RealismOverhaul have two different alternatives to RT

And what are these? Some separate mods? The only problem I have with Comm Net now is that to have kOS work with Comm Net you need to enable full control without the connection, which kinda contradicts the purpose of Comm Net. RT somehow allows kOS to have full control of the ship while obeying the connection rules for player input at the same time.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, JebIsDeadBaby said:

So do I get it right that ATM you can't detect ignitions on RF engines, hence the burn time does not work?

No, there was code explicitely preventing that from happening. I removed it today, will be in the next dev build (probably going to upload it in a few of hours)

7 hours ago, JebIsDeadBaby said:

And what are these? Some separate mods?

Yes. I never used them, so I don't know what they do, but they use the Kerbalism API to integrate and they do it well. 

7 hours ago, JebIsDeadBaby said:

The only problem I have with Comm Net now is that to have kOS work with Comm Net you need to enable full control without the connection, which kinda contradicts the purpose of Comm Net. RT somehow allows kOS to have full control of the ship while obeying the connection rules for player input at the same time.  

Isn't there supposed to be a choice in kOS that allows you to choose between two different connection managers? One is based on CommNet and will allow you to enter commands on the console only if the probe is online, the other one will always allow you to enter commands on the console, even on Vessels that aren't reachable. Or at least that's what I think should happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Sir Mortimer said:

Yes. I never used them, so I don't know what they do, but they use the Kerbalism API to integrate and they do it well. 

what are they called? Or are they integrated directly with RO and not usable without it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sir Mortimer said:

One is based on CommNet and will allow you to enter commands on the console only if the probe is online, the other one will always allow you to enter commands on the console, even on Vessels that aren't reachable.

The problem with CommNet is not about access to the console but that with no connection kOS can't control RCS, reaction wheels and throttling (at least when you start the script when there is no connection, if it drops during execution of a script everything seems to work just fine). So if at some point your script needs to turn the ship in some direction it will wait for this to happen in vain. But once the connection is regained RCS and reaction wheels spring to life (usually it's all too late). So it seems that with CommNet kOS obeys the same rules as a player (limited or full control, depending on settings).

EDIT: actually you're right, switching to PermitAll Connectivity Manager seems to solve the control problem, although now kOS allows to access the archive and run and edit scripts with no connection... 

Edited by JebIsDeadBaby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I have a Magnetometer Boom from DMagic on my vessel, I have an additional entry "scanner" in my "AUTO" tab:

YiuwV79.png

Is this intentional? Clicking it does nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, infinite_monkey said:

Is this intentional? Clicking it does nothing.

TBH I don't know, I think there is some SCANsat scanner installed on that part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a basic science question relating to kerbalism and missions where you need to collect a temperature reading (or crew report or anything) at a specific point (usually missions give you 3 areas you must go to) e.g. flying, below 18km, etc. . When I click on the crew report it starts getting data but there is no way to determine where it was taken. Are these kind of (area-specific) missions obsolete with kerbalism? PS I installed kerbalism after I accepted those missions.

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Tested&Launched said:

Are these kind of (area-specific) missions obsolete with kerbalism?

The configuration in the current release is supposed to disable this type of contract because they never completed. The current dev version might have fixed that, but I'm not sure because I never take this type of contract myself. Might be worth to try it again with the new release once it's out, or if you feel adventurous use the latest dev version.

 

Heads up regarding the next release and people already using the latest dev version:

Shape and location of the radiation belts around Kerbin changed considerably. The model is now a lot closer to the Van Allen Belts around earth. This means that the inner belt was moved closer to the surface, and the outer belt extends a lot farther out than it used to. So check the orbits of your crewed vessels after update, they now might be in a radiation field!

Radiation now also plays into reliability: some components are very sensitive and can fail sooner than expected if they're exposed to high radiation for too long.

In combination with the now extended outer radiation belt this means that you really should invest in high quality parts for stationary satellites, because the geostationary orbit now skims along the border of the outer radiation belt!

belts-2.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently installed the Cacteye and Tarsier orbital telescope mods. I'm not far enough in the tech tree for Tarsier, but just brought a Fungeye to orbit. When making a picture, it shows the stock science dialog, but I can't neither store or send the pictures, it says it doesn't have enough disk space. How would I write a config for such experiments? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/18/2019 at 1:57 PM, JebIsDeadBaby said:

The problem with CommNet is not about access to the console but that with no connection kOS can't control RCS, reaction wheels and throttling (at least when you start the script when there is no connection, if it drops during execution of a script everything seems to work just fine). So if at some point your script needs to turn the ship in some direction it will wait for this to happen in vain. But once the connection is regained RCS and reaction wheels spring to life (usually it's all too late). So it seems that with CommNet kOS obeys the same rules as a player (limited or full control, depending on settings).

EDIT: actually you're right, switching to PermitAll Connectivity Manager seems to solve the control problem, although now kOS allows to access the archive and run and edit scripts with no connection... 

I use kOS with connection required for control and im pretty sure this is false. Your script has full control over your vessel even when you lose connection.

Edited by subyng

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is there a way to get more data storage space? i appear to lack the space to do a simple test on a satellite because i have no space when its still at 100% availability and ive already upgraded my science center once

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Acronza1 said:

is there a way to get more data storage space? i appear to lack the space to do a simple test on a satellite because i have no space when its still at 100% availability and ive already upgraded my science center once

Data storage is in the probe core, not science center. Better probe cores can hold more. But generally you should be transmitting the results back as you collect them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.