GabeTeuton

Please don't be sorry, what else can I ask for other than a reply whenever you happen to be able to reply, it's not that you took a year and a half haha, thanks anyway :)!!!! The cockpits that are missing a hatch are: Cobra MkII Cockpit valentina Can't Exit Combat Dragon II Kerzer Can't Exit Super Tucano Wehrgar Can't Exit Also the following can't make a Crew Report: KU-57 Cockpit Rafale Mk1 Cockpit no photo as i fixed this one by going into the files

I seem to have issues with many cockpits not having a crew hatch, did i miss installed something or is it inteded?, i love the parts but if i can't exit to repack the chutes i can't use them u.u

Sorry about asking this, but, i'm following Scott, i know i won't be able to achieve anything with the mod suggestion he's doing, because i'm not THAT good of a player, but on topic, that thing you said means that this mod won't show on ckan because it is not ready to be played with 1.0.4, right?

Okay i'm not sure if this is the correct place for this thread but i just saw a youtube video that made me think about something i was taking for granted, as the video host said... so this is just one way of trying to be thankful, though i know it's not enough, it's something i guess... Basically i would just like to say "THANK YOU" to all mod developers that there are, that consume their personal time just to make add-ons for people to have fun, and i have to say i couldn't tell how many hours i spent playing KSP, with mods (and of course without them, so thank you to the ksp developers aswell)... countless, and not only that, but i also learned lots of things from some of the more realistic mods, and the ones that weren't realistic opened my mind to imagination, while i'm writing this i keep thinking about lots of mods i used and i just can't mention them all, nor do i want to, as i'm sure i'll miss some of them and that wouldn't be fair... I'm just so sorry I realized this now, after all this years playing... So just Thank you guys, for sharing your knowledge and your time with us players for the sake of entertaining or whatever your motives were... Thank you PD: i believe i made myself clear as english is not my main language... too much emotions right now though it may sound stup1d... so i'll stop writing as i'm speechless...

For some reason my game it's not detecting the mod, avc doesn't detects it, i tried the source code version and the first download link version, i ignored avc's and tried to use it and it doesn't come up either while playing, pushing P doesn't bring it up, i decompressed PresiceNode in GameData (in both tries, the first compiled download and the source code)... Ideas? Suggestions? EDIT: BTW i'm quite advanced in my career mode, tracking station is at level 2 and upgrading to level 3 only adds the ability to track unowned objects which it's not what the mod affects, besides the things is the game is not detecting it, i'm not sure if i can add any more information rather than it's the steam version and it's up to date, i also have 4 other plugins: -AVC Plugin Checker -Kerbal Engineer -RCS Build Aid -Kerbal Alarm Clock Taking a look at the files i'm guessing this mod (i'm refering to PreciseNode) it's not compatible with AVC, which i don't mind, though i would like it to work, is it possible that AVC is breaking it?? NEVERMIND i guess i needed to have a manuever node created before i could bring up the interface!... My bad, sorry for the inconveniences!

Man i'm still using the ver 0.3, today was the first day i tried it, despite you telling me before, 'cause i kind of abandoned ksp for some weeks, and it's working sooooo fineeeee... I just need FAR's AoA for level flight for my desired cruise settings, and then it goes, i didn't updated to 0.4 yet 'cause i started the mission with 0.3 and then realized 0.4 was released but as soon as i finish this mission i'll certainly update, i want to check the new GUI features, my mission timer is t+1.47.32 with no failures whatsoever, in fewer words: IT WORKS LIKE A CHARM...

Once again, so much THANK YOU, or well, THANK YOU SO MUCH! My hero!

I agree, good idea. Though this addition shouldn't remove the option of doing it both ways.-

I always liked math, used to love the derivatives calculation, numerical integration, of course after years without practising it, (and the fact that i'm kind of away from my degree [i mean i'm not attending to university as usually as i should], as well as the fact that my career is not that related with hard math, being business management), i'm kind of rusty in that matter... but till today those calculations still amaze and amuse me... And what you say once again is logical... One question i wanted to ask since a long time ago, and didn't ask, is= can i set a condition for a number to be in between 2 numbers? like this is just an example of what i mean, not sure if it works and currently i can't test it, but i read on the docs that AND and OR is a possibility, though i didn't find much in terms of its usage... SET P TO 0. IF P < 500 AND P > 400 THEN { PRINT "P IS MORE THAN 400 AND LESS THAN 500" AT (0,0). UNTIL P = 1000 { SET P TO P + 1. WAIT 5. }. I believe if this is possible i can narrow down the wobbling by setting a margin for both below and above of desired altitude, using also what you just added in the quoted comment to change the step size the closer you are to the target.

(currently i'm away from my computer so development stopped until tomorrow morning/afternoon)... I see your point, once again I'm kind of amazed with what you present me, in a good way of course... (this way of thinking about it evaded me until now) So based on your thoughts and the fact that there is no workaround to such a true fact, i guess i will abandon this iteration and go back to the previous one, to try and make it wobble less, first i'll try to replicate the first iteration, in which the user had to adjust the value, i'll start by making that more precise, and then jump to the other iteration, the one that kind of automatically "maintained" altitude with a small margin of error, and try to make that margin even smaller i was also suggested by a pm to make a PID controller instead of what i'm trying to do, i'll check what that has to offer aswell... thanks guys!

Honestly this project sounds awesome, ever since i started playing ksp airplanes, and spaceplanes avoided me but with time, and exponentially closer to this days, airplanes are starting to like me a lot... I will obviosly watch your result and if there's anything i can do to give you a hand, just ask... (i'm not an ultra advanced player or anything though)... Yeah your computer will probably die... but there's a way to try to reduce this effect as much as possible, and it's not 64 bits... forget about it... and i would recommend you to use FAR... now to try to reduce the lag, you may try to use "weld it", if you are unfamiliar with it, it's a mod that allows you to transform 2 or more parts, into only one... it's tricky, as some combinations may not work properly... but you are trying to make a large plane, not a complex one with a lot of different functions... so for instance you could weld all the fuel tanks together, or by rows, or well, use your imagination according to the design you are trying to achieve... also you should try procedural wings, to avoid making larger wings with small parts... procedural wings will allow you to make a long wide wing with one part... i have to further test it with FAR, as it gave me some trouble in the past... but you can try it and see if it works for you, or you can also weld all small wings into one large wing... Also you can try to reduce the part count by avoiding things you may not need, i can't think of it right now, but many times i came across airplanes being unbalanced by stupid useless things... Another thing, rapiers are usefull to certain point, but i learned from guys i would call experts, that the best combination is turbo jet + lfo engines... you may want to try it... and there's one last thing you may want to try, the current B9 package adds a massive engine that has lots of thrust, you could use 2 or 3 or 4 of those, they have a quite good thrust in atmo, and vacuum, and remember that in atmo, planes don't need to have twr of >1, you can fly with TWR 0.3 if you have enough lift (wings), tough it may be hard to achieve almost orbital speed in atmo with low twr, you may want to research on that via trial and error, and adding more air intakes will increase the altitude, which will decrease air density, allowing you to go faster with the same effort, and with a large plane as yours you will be able to have lots of air intakes, if you decide to use turbo jets instead of the b9 i mentioned! I want photos of your development and iterations! That would be awesome!

now i have to leave... but thanks, i'll definately try this and see what happens! Thanks for the suggestions! Still getting used to think as a programmer!

IF VERTICALSPEED < NEEDEDVS { // if vertical speed is less than the neededvs UNTIL VERTICALSPEED = NEEDEDVS { SET P TO P + 0.00001. // until both are the same, add 0.00001 to P WAIT 0.001. // without this p would stay in 0.00001 rather than keep adding 0.00001 IF P < 0 {SET P TO 0.}.[I][U][B]}.[/B][/U][/I] // this is supposed to set p to 0 if for instance this clause started to work after the following one, so instead of going all the way to positive, it starts from 0. } this one is the closing bracket for this bunch in regards to the second, level flight means no vertical altitude change, in other words vertical speed = 0, and that is acchieved at certain AoA, which changes with the conditions, i believe every body that "flies", will have an AoA for level flight, as FAR calculates it for every plane... WHAT may change in regards to the design is the purpose of the plane, and whether the plane is desgined with an specific purpuse, for instance a bomber that is designed for 10k meters of cruise altitude, will be designed so the level flight at cruise speed is acchieved with an AoA that is closer to 0 or even 0, so it flights "straigt" into the stream rather than pitching up like most planes designed in ksp, though that's something you can achieve, it's just a matter of designing the airplane for a said altitude and speed, and check the AoA provided by far, then Angle the elevons (control surfaces that are specifically meant to change pitch), until the AoA is 0 for those conditions, and you'll have a plane that at said conditions, will flight "straight" or most likely straight... though you may have problems prior to getting to those conditions, like taking off, landing, climbing, etc...

Once again i need help in diagnosing the problem... I implemented the new things i learnt from you guys, but as one single coded block, it didn't work, so i thought i could kind of "debug" the software by removing the clause that locks the relevant variable to the ship pitch, and just let the program run and print what it does, without actually managing the airplane, so i could change the situation by controlling the plane, and see what the program would do... it worked (the idea of debuging it, if debug is the word to what i'm trying to mean)... Though the program was not doing what i meant... so i decided to test it by condition, so once the first condition worked, then the other ones should be easy based on the first one... so far, so good... now the first condition doesn't work, but as far as i can read in the code, it should work... so i need help identifying what's wrong... CLEARSCREEN. SET DESIREDALT TO 5000. // desired altitude setting LOCK ALTDIF TO (SHIP:ALTITUDE - DESIREDALT). // altdif setting LOCK NEEDEDVS TO ( - MIN(ALTDIF/250,20)). // needed vs setting, i changed from MAX to MIN, because using MAX, it would always use 20, instead if it's MIN, it will adjust slowly until it hits 20, though it never did. SET P TO 0. // i noticed that if i set p to anything else than 0, the clause set p to p + X, won't work, if it's in 0, it will work, i need further testing on this, but if set to 0 it works, so this is not a problem. WHEN AG6 = TRUE THEN { // this is set as so, because if i use "until false" it won't go to the next until false until this one is false, this way works pretty well... (anyhow i'll hear suggestions, though this is not PRINT "DESIRED ALTITUDE= " + DESIREDALT AT (0,0). // an issue so far PRINT "ALTITUDE DIFF= " + ALTDIF AT (0,1). PRINT "CURRENT ALTITUDE= " + ALTITUDE AT (0,2). PRINT "VERTICAL SPEED= " + VERTICALSPEED AT (0,6). PRINT "NEEDED VERT SPEED= " + NEEDEDVS AT (0,7). PRINT "CURRENT P= " + P AT (0,8). PRESERVE. }. UNTIL FALSE { IF ALTDIF < 0 { // if altdif is negative then IF VERTICALSPEED < NEEDEDVS { // if vertical speed is less than the neededvs UNTIL VERTICALSPEED = NEEDEDVS { SET P TO P + 0.00001. // until both are the same, add 0.00001 to P WAIT 0.001. // without this p would stay in 0.00001 rather than keep adding 0.00001 IF P < 0 {SET P TO 0.}.}. // this is supposed to set p to 0 if for instance this clause started to work after the following one, so instead of going all the way to positive, it starts from 0. } IF VERTICALSPEED > NEEDEDVS { // same as before but inverted, the thing is, this doesn't work, it will keep adding 0.0001 to p regardless of if it's less or more than neededvs************ UNTIL VERTICALSPEED = NEEDEDVS { SET P TO P - 0.00001. WAIT 0.001. IF P > 0 {SET P TO 0.}.}. } } ELSE {SET P TO 0.}. // just for completeness, i'm testing this condition always under 5000, so it shouldn't matter }. So the problem is what i explained in the ***************, it never checks if that is true or false, so it doesn't do what it's supposed to, if ALTDIF is negative, it assumes verticalspeed is always < neededvs, in other words it never susbstracts 0.0001 from p.- Ideas??? (i hope i made the problem clear) Thank you as always...

I meant that by the wiki haha, github calls it wiki, or the wiki in github is that one, haha, besides the other wiki it's not as well explained as this one from github... i guess instead of wiki i'll call it documentation from now on!

Very interesting way of setting that, quite compact... I like it... I didn't know you could use more than 1 else, i thought it was locked to one else per if, very good... I'm going to search more about MAX in the wiki, as it seems quite useful! --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Both ideas are really good, i guess i lack a sense of logic (in order to simplify things a lot) you guys have... I'll try to implement what i learned, maybe even try to merge both ideas !! Thank you!

Well I reached my limit of understanding... after trying several different combinations of commands and thinking of ways to do this i just can't make it work... so i'm after advice or something, if anyone is interested... To get this i made that flow chart or i guess i did to help you guys understand what i'm trying to do in a very visual way... i hope it helps... Thank you! (i can make it work manually, just adjust the pitch by a very small amount until the VS and VA is 0 (this i'll do when trim is released)... but i would like it to be automated, as an autopilot, if possible)

Quite interesting, and quite useful as well... i'll try that and keep the development going, and keep you guys posted, i will certainly need more help! Once again thank you Steven!

Logic just knocked my door and slap me in the butt... what a stupid question i made when it was as easy as if the loops never ends then it will never continue with the rest of the program xD! so UNTIL FALSE, what does it mean? when is FALSE? or when FALSE happens? (i just looked in the 2 wikis i usually refer to, the first one being the one hosted in github and didn't find anything...) should it be= CLEARSCREEN. UNTIL FALSE { SET T1 TO MISSIONTIME. SET VS1 TO VERTICALSPEED. WAIT 0.1. SET T2 TO MISSIONTIME. SET VS2 TO VERTICALSPEED. SET VA TO (( VS2 - VS1 ) / ( T2 - T1 )). PRINT "ACELERACION VERTICAL= " + VA AT (0,10). }. Still would like to know how it works if it doesn't bother you! thank you, and i apologise for being so stupid, how did i miss that...???? so logical now haha, i feel so bad!

It's like 1 < 0, i use that to make the loop go for ever, as radar altitude in terms of ksp will never go < 0, so the VA keeps being calculated, is there a "legal" way to make a loop go forever?

OMG those 2 things seem pretty useful, but to be honest, i'm no programmer at all so i don't really understand what you mean, i used the formula to calculate Vertical Acceleration with kOS' scripting system, and as far as i can tell is accurate enough, from observation in comparison to KE mod... the whole point of it is the autopilot i'm trying to make, which is currently stuck at how to relate the pitch up "manouver" with the VA and the VS... I'm waiting for some of the guys from that mod to help me out... i guess if i knew how to make an actual mod this would be much easier than scripting a sort of "program" inside a mod, inside ksp... but the first iteration of my program does work pretty well for long range flights, however i'm kind of perfectionist and until it's perfect or i get bored of trying i'll keep working on it... and perfect would mean 0 altitude deviation once equilibrium is found... Another thing to keep in mind is that when kOS guys release the version that can aswell handle trim rather than the actual pitch, it will be much easier for me, (though all that about trim is out of guessing so far)... I'm sorry i made you write all that valuable information i can't really understand, or even use! Thank you anyway !

Sorry to be bothering once again... I'm still developing a better autopilot system and well i made some progress but now i'm stuck... the main objective of this script is to keep gaining pitch up until the vertical speed is 1 m/s, then it should stop gaining vertical speed by making the vertical acceleration 0, which means it will stop adding pitch when vertical aceleration is 0, and then it will stay there until said otherwise... I've got this vertical acceleration script= CLEARSCREEN. UNTIL 1 < 0 { SET T1 TO MISSIONTIME. SET VS1 TO VERTICALSPEED. WAIT 0.1. SET T2 TO MISSIONTIME. SET VS2 TO VERTICALSPEED. SET VA TO (( VS2 - VS1 ) / ( T2 - T1 )). PRINT "ACELERACION VERTICAL= " + VA AT (0,10). }. (This code will tell me a very accurate vertical acceleration, now there's an until there to make the program recalculate it every time...) So far it works, by itself... Now how do I tell the autopilot to keep adding pitch until Verticalspeed = 1, in which case will have to stop adding pitch or even removing pitch until VA = 0? So far i've got his= CLEARSCREEN. SET PU TO 0. SET SHIP:CONTROL:PITCH TO "PU". UNTIL ALT:RADAR < 0 { SET T1 TO MISSIONTIME. SET VS1 TO VERTICALSPEED. WAIT 0.1. SET T2 TO MISSIONTIME. SET VS2 TO VERTICALSPEED. SET VA TO (( VS2 - VS1 ) / ( T2 - T1 )). PRINT "ACELERACION VERTICAL= " + VA AT (0,10). PRINT PU AT (0,5). }. IF VERTICALSPEED < 1 { SET PU TO PU + 0.0001. } ELSE UNTIL VA = 0 {SET SHIP:CONTROL:PITCH TO PU - 0.0001.}. (but this code doensn't work, it never gets to the IF statement, and if i put the if above the until, then it never gets to the until... so i don't know if the script is adding pitch... my head is about to explode haha.- I also tried using when and also until instead of IF, can't make it work either)! Ideas? TIA PS= this goal i'm trying to achieve now is an intermediate goal, as after this is done i'll set everything to happen around X altitude... but first this bit, then we'll see...!

Got'cha, gonna try that and see what happens! Thank you! EDIT: yeaaaah got it!!!!! i use a very small amount of time, very close to 1 game tick! THANK YOU!

Okay i'm trying to calculate it in real time, i kind of understood the way it's calculated, but i don't know, i'm confused, i'm sorry, this formula you presented to me allows me to calculate vertical acceleration in a period of time, but how does for instance kerbal engineer calculate it? what "time" (initial and final) does it use to calculate it in real time?

How do i calculate Vertical Acceleration knowing the vertical speed and the speed of the airplane? (or how do i calculate it regardless of what i have?)