Jump to content

[1.3.0] Kerbal Engineer Redux 1.1.3.0 (2017-05-28)


cybutek

Recommended Posts

Just now, dtoxic said:

hmmm, ok just so we are on the same page, the setting you are referring is "Build Engineer Overlay" there are 3 settings "Visible" this toggles the overlay on the mouse and the bottom panel, then there is "Names Only" and "Click to open"

none of these settings can remove just the Overlay when you hover with mouse over a part but leave the bottom panel

Not that one, that just turns everything off. Gimme a second I'll show you wich one is

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, EstebanLB said:

Sorry, my bad. I thought we had that option. Right now we can only hide the additional info, the name of the part will still show on mouseover

yeap, that's what i was thinking, anyway thx for checking!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/2/2017 at 5:16 PM, Drew Kerman said:

So it doesn't work with fancy setups like asparagus staging or if you plan to pump liquid fuel around, but for a rocket with several discrete stages it works great and also leaves you with modular pieces you can assemble into various configurations through the use of sub-assemblies.

KER does just fine with asparagus, in my experience. Pumping fuel around or running docking cycles will throw it for a loop though. Basically if you can run the ship through its staging with the spacebar only it will very likely give accurate results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/30/2017 at 2:57 PM, Drew Kerman said:

heads up, incoming bug report! It appears that the kerbalCrewMass setting in the physics globals file is also being applied to landing gear, of all things :huh:

@PHYSICSGLOBALS
{
  // http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/15451-the-mass-of-a-kerbal/
  @kerbalCrewMass = 0.03125
}

The mass of the gear changes according to the number of kerbals you have in a pod, if the gear is attached to a pod. Tested this under v1.2.2 with just Squad, MM, Kerbal Engineer and Loading Screen Manager installed. Was not a fun issue to track down, lol

Edit: ok, actually now that I know what to look for it seems the extra kerbal mass is being applied to everything - it's just the landing gear was the most obvious descrepancy to me since they don't carry any fuel or modules that would affect their weight when I was looking into why my aircraft suddenly weighed so much

But hey, thanks a bunch for accounting for kerbal mass properly in pods! Annoying the game itself does not do so in the editor.

Just noticed this bug too (in the RealismOverhaul setup).  I'm gunna open a squad bug.

EDIT: http://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/14679

Edited by rsparkyc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, rsparkyc said:

 I'm gunna open a squad bug.

This isn't a Squad bug. The stock Engineer Report always shows the correct mass. If you remove all the kerbals from the ship you'll see KER matches the mass of the Engineer Report. The only bug on the Squad side is not showing the increased capsule mass when you add/remove kerbals while building in the editor, and I'm not 100% sure whether that's an oversight or a design decision

Edited by Drew Kerman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Drew Kerman said:

This isn't a Squad bug. The stock Engineer Report always shows the correct mass. If you remove all the kerbals from the ship you'll see KER matches the mass of the Engineer Report. The only bug on the Squad side is not showing the increased capsule mass when you add/remove kerbals while building in the editor, and I'm not 100% sure whether that's an oversight or a design decision

Ahh, you are right.  It appears that mechjeb is plagued by the same bug then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I finally tracked down a long-standing issue with KerbalEngineer locking up the game when a ground base is targeted with the rendezvous window open. Posted issue #126 about it.

Somehow the intercept angle becomes infinity and this causes an infinite loop when trying to clamp it.

I can offer to make a PR to fix it, but I'm not really sure which of the possible fixes would be best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, The Aziz said:

Kinda suggestion, because I couldn't find it, or I'm just blind - it could show closest current distance to target. In meters, of course. Default text in map mode isn't accurate enough.

It's one of readouts in the Rendezvous section.

Edited by maja
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For anyone wishing to use KER with the KSP 1.2.9 pre-release, I have put together a build that seems to function reasonably well.  This is built from the test129 branch on my GitHub.  The only changes, so far, from 1.1.2.8 are to add the version suffixes.

Download KER 1.1.3.0p from my DropBox  (only for KSP 1.2.9 pre-release).

I'll try to find a bit of time to catch up with what's been happening for the last couple of months and also try to contact @cybutek to find out if he is still going to be active.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 16.04.2017 at 4:48 PM, The Aziz said:

Lol I'm blind, it's there. Nevermind.

On 16.04.2017 at 4:15 PM, maja said:

It's one of readouts in the Rendezvous section.

Nononono that's not what I meant (I'm fast). Now I found proper words, yay me. I wanted to know the closest approach. Like that one we see in map mode but in meters.

..Not to mention that map view is inconsistent. We see orbital distances in meters, but rendezvous data in kilometers. Pfeh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, The Aziz said:

Nononono that's not what I meant (I'm fast). Now I found proper words, yay me. I wanted to know the closest approach. Like that one we see in map mode but in meters.

..Not to mention that map view is inconsistent. We see orbital distances in meters, but rendezvous data in kilometers. Pfeh.

Yeah. Closest approach to target isn't there.

If you mean distance to a target, that changes units when you are close enough, if I'm not mistaken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Padishar said:

Can you find the cfg file for that part and have a look at what it says the mass is?

Spoiler
+PART[liquidEngine2]:FIRST
{
	@name = LR87LH2Vac
}
@PART[LR87LH2Vac]:FOR[RealismOverhaul]
{
	!mesh = DEL
	MODEL
	{
		model = RealismOverhaul/Models/LR-91eng
		//rotation = 0 , 180 , 0
		scale = 1.4, 1.4, 1.4
	}
	%RSSROConfig = True
	%rescaleFactor = 1.0
	%scale = 1.0
	@node_stack_top = 0.0, 1.0101, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1
	@node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -1.629, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0, 1
	%node_attach = 0.0, 1.0101, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1
	@attachRules = 1,1,1,0,0
	
	@mass = 0.74
	%maxTemp = 500
	%skinMaxTemp = 900
	%stageOffset = 1
	%childStageOffset = 1
	%stagingIcon = LIQUID_ENGINE
	
	@title = LR87-LH2 Vacuum
	@manufacturer = Aerojet
	@description = Aerojet developed the LR87 engine (used for the Titan series) into a liquid hydrogen/oxygen engine for prospective USAF contracts in the 1958-1960 period, at the same time Aerojet was converting the LR87 to burn Aerozine and NTO. NASA selected the J-2 over the LR87-LH2, however, and it was canceled in 1961. This version represents a version of the engine with a larger nozzle optimized for vacuum use.

	@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]
	{
		@name = ModuleEnginesFX
		@maxThrust = 667
		@minThrust = 667
		@heatProduction = 175
        	%EngineType = LiquidFuel
		%ullage = True
		%pressureFed = False
		%ignitions = 1

		IGNITOR_RESOURCE
		{
			name = ElectricCharge
			amount = 0.500
		}

		IGNITOR_RESOURCE
		{
			name = LqdHydrogen
			amount = 0.7454
		}

		IGNITOR_RESOURCE
		{
			name = LqdOxygen
			amount = 0.2545
		}

		@PROPELLANT[LiquidFuel]
		{
			@name = LqdHydrogen
			@ratio = 0.745
		}
		@PROPELLANT[Oxidizer]
		{
			@name = LqdOxygen
			@ratio = 0.255
		}
		@atmosphereCurve
		{
			@key,0 = 0 403
			@key,1 = 1 350
		}
	}
	@MODULE[ModuleGimbal]
	{
		@gimbalRange = 7.5
		%useGimbalResponseSpeed = true // = 7.5
		%gimbalResponseSpeed = 16 // = 100
	}
	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleEngineConfigs
		configuration = LR87-LH2-TitanC
		origMass = 0.74
		modded = false
		// Note: TitanC config is as of published numbers on engine performance
		// for the Titan C application (simmed at 780psi, 12Ae/At). Speculative
		// alternates and upgrades simmed by doubling area ratio and (for the upgrades)
		// increasing efficiency and chamber pressure to later LR87 levels (5.7MPa).
		// Large increase in weight is from reignition equipment.
		CONFIG
		{
			name = LR87-LH2-TitanC
			minThrust = 667.0
			maxThrust = 667.0
			heatProduction = 175
			PROPELLANT
			{
				name = LqdHydrogen
				ratio = 0.745
				DrawGauge = True
			}
			PROPELLANT
			{
				name = LqdOxygen
				ratio = 0.255
			}
			atmosphereCurve
			{
				key = 0 403
				key = 1 350
			}
		}
		CONFIG
		{
			name = LR87-LH2-Vacuum
			minThrust = 694.0
			maxThrust = 694.0
			heatProduction = 175
			ignitions = 2
			massMult = 1.14865
			cost = 500
			entryCost = 10000 // not paying the HL penalty
			techRequired = hydroloxTL3
			PROPELLANT
			{
				name = LqdHydrogen
				ratio = 0.745
				DrawGauge = True
			}
			PROPELLANT
			{
				name = LqdOxygen
				ratio = 0.255
			}
			atmosphereCurve
			{
				key = 0 419
				key = 1 312
			}
		}
		CONFIG
		{
			name = LR87-LH2-SustainerUpgrade
			minThrust = 801 // 180 klbf
			maxThrust = 801
			heatProduction = 175
			massMult = 1.08109
			ignitions = 2
			cost = 1200
			techRequired = hydroloxTL4
			entryCost = 36000
			entryCostSubtractors
			{
				LR87-LH2-VacuumUpgrade = 30000
			}
			PROPELLANT
			{
				name = LqdHydrogen
				ratio = 0.745
				DrawGauge = True
			}
			PROPELLANT
			{
				name = LqdOxygen
				ratio = 0.255
			}
			atmosphereCurve
			{
				key = 0 409
				key = 1 358
			}
		}
		CONFIG
		{
			name = LR87-LH2-VacuumUpgrade
			minThrust = 832.0
			maxThrust = 832.0
			heatProduction = 175
			massMult = 1.12163
            		ignitions = 3
			PROPELLANT
			{
				name = LqdHydrogen
				ratio = 0.745
				DrawGauge = True
			}
			PROPELLANT
			{
				name = LqdOxygen
				ratio = 0.255
			}
			atmosphereCurve
			{
				key = 0 425
				key = 1 323
			}
			cost = 1200
			techRequired = hydroloxTL4
			entryCost = 36000
			entryCostSubtractors
			{
				LR87-LH2-SustainerUpgrade = 30000
			}
		}
	}

    !MODULE[ModuleAlternator]{}

    !RESOURCE[ElectricCharge]{}
	
	clusterMultiplier = 1
}

@PART[LR87LH2Vac]:BEFORE[zTestFlight]
{
	TESTFLIGHT
	{
		name = LR87-LH2-Vacuum
		ratedBurnTime = 360
		ignitionReliabilityStart = 0.92
		ignitionReliabilityEnd = 0.975
		cycleReliabilityStart = 0.93
		cycleReliabilityEnd = 0.98
		ignitionDynPresFailMultiplier = 0.1
		techTransfer = LR87-LH2-TitanC:50
		
		clusterMultiplier = #$../clusterMultiplier$
	}
	TESTFLIGHT
	{
		name = LR87-LH2-SustainerUpgrade
		ratedBurnTime = 480
		ignitionReliabilityStart = 0.95
		ignitionReliabilityEnd = 0.99
		cycleReliabilityStart = 0.95
		cycleReliabilityEnd = 0.995
		techTransfer = LR87-LH2-TitanC:50
		
		clusterMultiplier = #$../clusterMultiplier$
	}
	TESTFLIGHT
	{
		name = LR87-LH2-VacuumUpgrade
		ratedBurnTime = 480
		ignitionReliabilityStart = 0.95
		ignitionReliabilityEnd = 0.99
		cycleReliabilityStart = 0.96
		cycleReliabilityEnd = 0.998
		ignitionDynPresFailMultiplier = 0.1
		techTransfer = LR87-LH2-Vacuum:50
		
		clusterMultiplier = #$../clusterMultiplier$
	}
}

 

As i understand, mass setted correctly (mass = 0.74)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I tried to apply the engineer to stock antennas to encourage me to use them more, but it didn't workout can anyone help?
 

@PART[SurfAntenna,longAntenna,mediumDishAntenna,commDish,HighGainAntenna]
{
	MODULE[FlightEngineerModule]{}
}

I tried it forth and back but I can't spot my mistake :S

edit (fixed):

@PART[SurfAntenna,longAntenna,mediumDishAntenna,commDish,HighGainAntenna]
{
	MODULE
	{
		name = FlightEngineerModule
	}
}

 

Edited by maculator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 19.12.2016 at 1:19 PM, Padishar said:

[WRN 21:23:56.204] KK: StaticDatabase.updateCache(): vPlayerPos is still v3.zero

@Padishar Did you pinpoint the source of this issue? Tried to google this and all that came up was this old post. Getting spammed by this lately (scene change does help)

Edited by SkyKaptn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 30/04/2017 at 4:55 PM, SkyKaptn said:

@Padishar Did you pinpoint the source of this issue? Tried to google this and all that came up was this old post. Getting spammed by this lately (scene change does help)

I believe that's an error from Kerbal Konstructs (?) when KSP has got into some dodgy state in some way.  I've not looked into it in any detail though as I don't have any reason to believe the problem is caused by KER, sorry...

22 hours ago, Anth12 said:

@Padishar 1.1.3.0 for 1.2.9.... OMG thank you!!

You're welcome...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...