Jump to content

[1.12.1] JNSQ [0.10.0] [23 Sept 2021]


Galileo
 Share

Recommended Posts

59 minutes ago, Miracle Magician said:

BTW, this is TWP's readout for Cruithne orbit version of minmus (DeltaV should divide by 2 since I'm playing 4X resized version)

That's almost 6Km/s of ejection dV!!! Don't know whether it is accurate though since it's in such a special orbit...

I don't think people asking for a Cruithne-like orbit really know what they are asking for.  It's much more difficult than meets the eye.

The orbit we tried in testing that @JadeOfMaar refers to was much simpler.  It put Minmus in an orbit that hovered around the L4 Lagrange point.  And even then transfers were tough.  If the ejection was perfectly timed, it could be done for relatively low delta-v, but the windows were really tight.  And it took a year to get there and a year to get back.  Complicating things further is that Minmus has a really small SOI, so getting an encounter is really tough.

Edited by OhioBob
spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, OhioBob said:

@JadeOfMaarIt put Minmus in an orbit that hovered around the L4 Lagrange point.

If it's at L4, I think time could be sacrificed to get a lower delta v?

By barely escaping kerbin's SOI, put the vessel in an orbit that has a slightly shorter orbital period than one year, And the vessel will slowly drift to L4. You know, not everything can be done by a simple Hohmann transfer.

I didn't test that and can't confirm whether it will work though...

Don't mind that @, I can't delete that on my phone for some reason

Edited by Miracle Magician
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Miracle Magician said:

If it's at L4, I think time could be sacrificed to get a lower delta v?

By barely escaping kerbin's SOI, put the vessel in an orbit that has a slightly shorter orbital period than one year, And the vessel will slowly drift to L4. You know, not everything can be done by a simple Hohmann transfer.

I didn't test that and can't confirm whether it will work though...

If I understand you correctly, that's what I did.  We can put the vessel in a solar orbit that has an orbital period 5/6th that of Kerbin.  So after the vessel completes one full orbit, it returns to its starting position 60 degrees ahead of Kerbin at the L4 point.  At least that's the theory.  The problem is that Minmus isn't at the L4 point.  Any inclination causes it to move up and down, and any eccentricity causes it to move forward and backwards.  So in effect, Minmus orbits around the L4 point.  So getting an encounter with it isn't a simple matter.  In practice I found targeting Minmus very difficult, and the margin for error extremely small.  The slightest error will cause a complete miss with no easy recovery.  Of course I only tried it a couple times.  Maybe it gets easier with practice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, OhioBob said:

If I understand you correctly, that's what I did.  We can put the vessel in a solar orbit that has an orbital period 5/6th that of Kerbin.  So after the vessel completes one full orbit, it returns to its starting position 60 degrees ahead of Kerbin at the L4 point.  At least that's the theory.  The problem is that Minmus isn't at the L4 point.  Any inclination causes it to move up and down, and any eccentricity causes it to move forward and backwards.  So in effect, Minmus orbits around the L4 point.  So getting an encounter with it isn't a simple matter.  In practice I found targeting Minmus very difficult, and the margin for error extremely small.  The slightest error will cause a complete miss with no easy recovery.  Of course I only tried it a couple times.  Maybe it gets easier with practice.

 

Is it done with Principia or stock physics? I believe with Principia this will somehow become a lot easier, since vessels will have a natural tendency to stay at L4, and minmus will slowly pull the vessel towards it. Rotating reference frame comes from principia would also come in handy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Miracle Magician said:

Is it done with Principia or stock physics?

Stock physics.  It is our intent to make JNSQ stable when used with Principia, but it is designed for use with stock physics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, OhioBob said:

Stock physics.  It is our intent to make JNSQ stable when used with Principia, but it is designed for use with stock physics.

Hmmm, is putting minmus at original place/inside the orbit of mun, but put it at L4 when principia is installed an option? Because I think provide a little unique experience for principia players gonna be fun...

That is, based on the assumption that getting there with principia is easier than stock. I'll test it out a few hours later when I get my hands on my laptop.

Edited by Miracle Magician
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ladies and gentlemen! I did it! I landed on L4 minmus with ion thrusters and 4X rescale! I used 5531m/s of DeltaV (that will be 2765.5m/s for original size, and it'll be persumably lower if used a conventional vessel).

Just to flex on all of you  Just to prove it is easy enough to get there, I only loaded my game once because stupid me forgot to set my thrust back to 100% when doing minmus circulization.

The thing is, don't set the orbit inclination of minmus too high. I set it at 3 degree, and it already wasted almost 1000m/s of deltaV for me, I entered minmus with a near polar orbit. Maybe 0.5 degree would be enough.

screenshots:

Spoiler

I hope Bob don't want to kill me after I put him in a chair for 2 years...

OmUZTjW.png

tMUKZx9.png

oRzF3Eg.png

0fckbVo.png

So what I mean is, yes, it's not hard to go to minmus with Principia because of its awesome planning features. However, 2 years of travel time (I got an encounter with minmus 2 orbits after launching) will make minmus significantly harder with life support mods.

Edited by Miracle Magician
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, 4x4cheesecake said:

Just came across the "SigmaRandomPlugin" and it seem to be a partmodule for parachutes but I cannot find the source code of it? I downloaded the source code of JNSQ and checked the github repository of @Sigma88 but no source code for the plugin. Is it available somewhere or am I just blind and missed it?

hmm it's weird, "SigmaRandomPlugin" is the name of a test plugin that I keep changing to test stuff before starting a new project

it's more than likely a plugin that I sent to @OhioBob to test something he wanted me to do with parachutes, but I thought I also sent him a more refined version, maybe that one was included by mistake?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@4x4cheesecakeI smashed the dll into a decompiler and it simply says this, maybe some code can't be decompiled:

protected override void FixedUpdate()
{
	if (deploymentState == deploymentStates.SEMIDEPLOYED)
	{
		base.FixedUpdate();
		return;
	}
	float deployAltitude = base.deployAltitude;
	base.deployAltitude = 0f;
	base.FixedUpdate();
	base.deployAltitude = deployAltitude;
}

Pls don't kill me for lurking into your file @Sigma88

Edited by Miracle Magician
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Miracle Magician said:

@4x4cheesecakeI smashed the dll into a decompiler and it simply says this:

protected override void FixedUpdate()
{
	if (deploymentState == deploymentStates.SEMIDEPLOYED)
	{
		base.FixedUpdate();
		return;
	}
	float deployAltitude = base.deployAltitude;
	base.deployAltitude = 0f;
	base.FixedUpdate();
	base.deployAltitude = deployAltitude;
}

Pls don't kill me for lurking into your file @Sigma88

don't worry, all plugins should have their source published somewhere to be posted to the forum anyways

let me check if I have the source somewhere on github

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, 4x4cheesecake said:

Just came across the "SigmaRandomPlugin" and it seem to be a partmodule for parachutes but I cannot find the source code of it? I downloaded the source code of JNSQ and checked the github repository of @Sigma88 but no source code for the plugin. Is it available somewhere or am I just blind and missed it?

Thanks for catching that! Yeah, we will definitely get that source (I’m sure sigma has it) and get it posted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, OhioBob said:

We actually experimented with that already, but moved Minmus back because we thought it made getting to Minmus too difficult.  But it is an option we may have to reconsider.

Yep, I suspected from the beginning that Minmus was going to be a problem.  It was one of the bodies I was most worried about it terms of orbital stability.

 

It seems a shame to depart so far from the original characteristics of the moon, but Minmus would be plenty stable if it were much closer to Kerbin.

You could get rid of some of the sadness points by balancing its angular size so it's just slightly smaller than Mun in the sky. Two big moons could be cool!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sigma88 said:

it's more than likely a plugin that I sent to @OhioBob to test something he wanted me to do with parachutes, but I thought I also sent him a more refined version, maybe that one was included by mistake?

I don't think you sent me any other version other than the one included in JNSQ.  If you have one, I should get it from you.  I guess we're going to need the source code, unless less you have it on your GitHub somewhere.

54 minutes ago, GregroxMun said:

It seems a shame to depart so far from the original characteristics of the moon, but Minmus would be plenty stable if it were much closer to Kerbin.

I know that.  I've already proposed revised orbits.  But internally the team still hasn't made a final decision about what solution we want to use.  I favor putting Minmus inside the orbit of Mun, but we'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since Sigma's plugin has come up, let me explain what it does.  It fixes what I think is a flaw in the way stock parachutes work.

Parachutes have two deployment modes:  (1) semi-deploy, which is a function of atmospheric pressure, and (2) full deploy, which is a function of height above terrain.  The problem, as I see it, is that parachutes will full deploy when they reach the height threshold regardless of whether or not they have reached the pressure threshold for semi-deployment.  I think this makes no sense; if the air is too thin for parachutes to semi-deploy, they shouldn't full deploy.

In stock KSP this really isn't an issue because there aren't any atmospheres that are so thin that the semi-deploy pressure hasn't been reached before the full deploy altitude has been reached.  (Maybe on some mountain tops on Duna, but I haven't investigated enough to confirm this)  But this "bug" puts a limitation on what planet makers can do with their atmospheres.  If a planet maker wants to give a planet an atmosphere, but one so thin that parachutes won't work, he can't.  Parachutes are going to full deploy when the height threshold is reached regardless on how thin the atmosphere is made.

Sigma's plugin fixes this.  Parachutes will not fully deploy unless the pressure for semi-deployment has also been reached.  Both conditions must be satisfied for full deployment.  In JNSQ, you won't have parachutes popping open 1000 meters above the ground on bodies with very thin atmospheres.

 

Edited by OhioBob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Cheesecake said:

Found an issue. Everytime I go on EVA a parachute is shown (look picture below). I use KSP 1.7.0 and only JNSQ with dependencies, KJR and TweakScale:

81RmAdG.png

Log:

KSP.log

 

 

That’s an issue in stock as well. Not exclusive to JNSQ or Kopernicus. Just saw a bunch of reports in this on reddit this morning. 

But for giggles, remove the SugmaRandomPlugin.dll from the plugin folder and see if that fixes anything.

im fairly certain that it’s not the issue, but we need to strip down everything to make sure. I would actually start by removing KJR and Tweakscale

if it is related to the SigmaRandomPlugin.dll, we will need to fix that asap

Edited by Galileo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Cheesecake said:

Found an issue. Everytime I go on EVA a parachute is shown (look picture below). I use KSP 1.7.0 and only JNSQ with dependencies, KJR and TweakScale:

81RmAdG.png

Log:

KSP.log

 

 

Did you update to 1.7.1, purchase the new DLC, and then go back to 1.7.0. This happened to me. I found the the folder for the DLC was still installed on my 1.7.0 copy after I copied a fresh version onto my desktop for modding. Deleting the “Serenity” folder from my 1.7.0 modded version fixed the issue.

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...