linuxgurugamer

Was this with the CKAN version of AntennaHelper?

I would appreciate your doing the test in a brand new install, with ONLY AntennaHelper, CommNet Antenna Info and their required dependencies installed. Given that I looked into the code and saw the same calculation, I'm rather concerned that you don't have something else going on

Here is a rebuild of the mod, only change was to remove the multiplication: https://www.dropbox.com/s/xr635hd1t7wc65i/AntennaHelper-1.0.7.2.zip?dl=0

Would you be willing to test a quick build with that removed?

Quite possible, especially if it was added later. Do the antennas show up with the correct values in the editor? Correct as in already being multiplied?

I took a couple of minutes to look at the code. The only place that the rangemodifier is used is here: public static double TruePower (double power) { // return the "true power" of the antenna, stock power * range modifier return power * HighLogic.CurrentGame.Parameters.CustomParams<CommNet.CommNetParams>().rangeModifier; As you can see it's only doing a multiplication. Also, In @flart's CommNet Antennas Info, he uses it in two places: mdt.Fields["powerText"].SetValue( Formatter.ValueShort(mdt.antennaPower * commNetParams.rangeModifier) + moduleDT.Fields["powerText"].guiActiveEditor = false; double antennaPowerModified = moduleDT.antennaPower * commNetParams.rangeModifier; and double BuiltInPowerModified = GetPowerMostCommonInternalAntenna(partsDT) * commNetParams.rangeModifier; string BuiltInPowerModified_str = Formatter.ValueExtraShortSpaced(BuiltInPowerModified); double antennaPowerModified = moduleDT.antennaPower * commNetParams.rangeModifier; string[] DSNranges_str = new string[TrackingLevels]; As you can see, both mods are only using it in a simple multiplication. Now, I haven't done a lot of research, but what I think you might be missing is the fact that the OUTPUT power of the antenna is different than the sensitivity of the antenna for reception. Again, I haven't done a lot of work, this is merely the result of 5 minutes searching, and I'm not an expert in the intricacies of KSP antennas. But it seems to me that if two independent mods, both using the same calculation are both agreeing on the output, that maybe there is something else going on. I'm hoping that @flart can respond also, I'm interested in seeing what he says

Originally written by @nathan1, original thread here:https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/132209-122-maneuver-node-splitter-v170/ My thanks to forum user @Jacke for suggesting this to me for adoption. This is a tiny mod which does one thing very well. Maneuver Node Splitter provides a GUI interface to split a single interplanetary transfer ejection burn maneuver node into multiple maneuver nodes. Version 1.3.0 comparison of the Unity skin and KSP skin above. Also shows the new 1.3.0 "repeat" option. Version 1.2.0 picture of the four modes for splitting nodes below. Why does it exist? If your vessel has a low TWR then it may not be possible to perform your ejection burn in a single orbit. By splitting your ejection maneuver into multiple burns you can raise your apoapsis a bit with each orbit until your final burn gives you an escape trajectory. How do I use it? 1. Get into orbit. 2. Create a maneuver node. 3. (Optional) Use Precise Node to move your maneuver node forward to the transfer window. 4. Set up the maneuver node to give you your ejection and encounter with your destination. 5. Open the Maneuver Node Splitter GUI by clicking the icon on the toolbar. 6. Use the left and right buttons to select how you want to split the maneuver node. 7. Enter the appropriate values into the text boxes. For example: delta-V values for the amount of delta-V you want to burn in each maneuver. 8. Click "Apply." Your original maneuver node will be replaced by multiple maneuver nodes. Each of the first maneuver nodes will be created based on the values you entered, and the final maneuver node will have the remaining delta-V. Your final ejection burn maneuver node will be around the same time as the original maneuver node (depending on what values you entered). Example: After creating an ejection burn requiring 2500m/s I open the GUI and enter 250 and 300 then click "Apply." The mod will split my original maneuver node into three maneuvers: the first will be 250m/s, the second will be 300m/s, and the third will be 1950m/s (the remainder). Note: Once your maneuver nodes are created it's up to you to actually perform the burns. This is the hard part. If you do not perform the burns precisely enough then the subsequent burns will be impacted. Luckily, as long as you're close it's usually easy to do minor adjustments to the later maneuver nodes using Precise Node to restore your rendezvous. Usually what you will need to adjust will be the *timing* of the subsequent maneuver nodes (since burning a slightly different amount from what the maneuver node specified will give you a different orbital period) rather than the delta-V. Additional Tips and Notes: It works with both mid-course plane-changes and direct ejection burns. The additional maneuver nodes will be created prior to the timing of your original maneuver (if your maneuver node is far enough in the future) so that your ejection time is left as unchanged as possible. The GUI will modify your upcoming maneuver, so don't add extra maneuvers before your ejection burn. The GUI will preserve any maneuver nodes that come after your ejection burn as long as they're far enough later than the original maneuver. After clicking "Apply" there will be an "Undo" button that will restore your prior maneuvers, so it's easy to just throw some numbers in and see how they work out. If it's not to your liking you can easily undo it. The "+" button will add more text boxes (for splitting the original maneuver into more burns) and the text boxes will have "x" buttons next to them for removing them (when you have more than one text box). Stock KSP has a bug where projected orbits sometimes do not show when multiple maneuver nodes from separate orbits are placed directly on top of each other. This is not a bug with the Maneuver Node Splitter. It's usually best not to raise your apoapsis above around 7000km prior to your ejection burn because of the possibility of an encounter with the Mun. While the tool can convert your ejection burn into a dozen or more tiny burns, it's usually easier to perform the ejection in fewer burns rather than more (due to the impact on later burns of not performing the earlier burns perfectly). Your current orbit very slowly drifts when your vessel is not on rails (timewarp) due to floating point math. This can impact your ejection maneuver while you are trying to set it up, so it's best to set it up at timewarp, if possible. Reviewed by Kottabos: Dependencies ClickThroughBlocker ToolbarController SpaceTuxLibrary Availability Download: https://github.com/linuxgurugamer/ManeuverNodeSplitter/releases Source: https://github.com/linuxgurugamer/ManeuverNodeSplitter License: MIT Now available in CKAN

2.8.2 Initial Beta Release Adoption by LinuxGuruGamer Added support for ToolbarController Added support for ClickThroughBlocker Patch from github user @SumGuyTwitches: fix kraken location off by 8 degrees Patch from Github user @taniwha: Use dateTimeFormatter for time period lengths Fixed RSS compatibility with changes listed in this issue on Github: https://github.com/jrossignol/WaypointManager/issues/59

Hi everyone, I finally have a new thread and a beta release here:

Written by @nightingale, he has mostly left the scene, and has graciously allowed me to adopt this mod. Original thread here: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/94432-18x-waypoint-manager-v281-2019-10-22/ Have you taken a new survey contract and then been frustrated when you had to keep flipping between map and flight mode to find your waypoints? Did you crash your vessel? NEVER AGAIN. Waypoint Manager does the following: Renders waypoints in flight mode. Gives a GUI listing of all waypoints and allows you to activate navigation from that GUI. Allows the creation of custom waypoints. If you want to see it in action, check it out in @maxrsp's KSP Easy Mods series: Custom Waypoints @Miles Teg has provided some custom waypoint files! To use them, copy the to GameData/WaypointManager/CustomWaypoints.cfg (I'll have to add a proper file dialog in a future version) and hit the "Import Custom Waypoints" button. Included are files for the various KSC biomes and for marking off the runway and helipads. New Dependencies Click Through Blocker ToolbarController SpaceTuxLibrary Availability Download: https://spacedock.info/mod/3107/WaypointManager Alternate download : https://github.com/linuxgurugamer/WaypointManager/releases Source: https://github.com/linuxgurugamer/WaypointManager License: MIT Available in CKAN Documentation No documentation, just install and enjoy the waypoints.

You don't like it, you can fix it. I support over 200 mods, and don't have time to make changes I can't test. Maybe you missed the second line I wrote, I'll repeat it here for you: So. since you think it is necessary (I'm not saying it isn't), then you can go ahead, make the change locally, TEST IT, and when tested, submit a PR. So far all I've seen is a "I think". Since it's quite possible that if this change was done in both mods that there would be problems, it has to be tested. It's also possible that if it's in one and not the other, there could be problems based on which one it is in. And I don't have time to test it. You do. I didn't write this mod, I'm only supporting it. Specifically, this mod uses the stock values for Xenon, so it seems that Kerbalism is changing it. Ergo, it seems that Kerbalism is the one which needs to change. I'm not about to change a mod which has been working for many years because another mod, which has also been working for years, seems to have a conflict. The tank mass is a ratio of the fuel, using the basic formula which the game uses, which is based on liquid fuel, of 8 parts of fuel to one part mass, obviously updated for the Xenon density. It's been a few years since I redid the tank volumes and masses, but I use the same formula for all. Specifically about the tankMass, you are obviously using the B9 Part Switcher, since that is the only place where the tank mass is listed as that value. B9 recalculates the tank mass at run time, there had to be something there to avoid a nullref, I put the smallest value in to avoid changing the actual tank mass at runtime in any significant way. As Tonka Crash says:

New release, 0.3.29.5 Updated ShuttleCockpit internal location based on suggestion from github user @ncanceil

No, something must have changed recently, I'll take a look at it. It's not something that I use

That sounds mostly correct. In order to double the range, the power needs to be increased by 4. When you double the range, the area that the antenna must cover increases by 4. Too late for me to do any searches, but google it, you will be surprised by the results. edit: its the inverse square law, read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverse-square_law pinging @MalevolentNinja

?????

I don’t support Kerbalism. Kerbalism touches so many things i feel this needs to be fixed in that mod. I will accept a tested PR, if you provide one.

Are there any mods which still use it?

For me, a 4th grade teacher who was truly horrible, encouraged kids to pick on classmates but not her. Same level was a calculus teacher in college who actually fell asleep at the blackboard. Really old , shouldn't have been teaching

No interest for me. Sorry

Well, if the wing is twisted, then it definitely won't fly well. He should have an engineer try to repair it before taking off

@harrisjosh2711 There are two parts with the same title, seem to be the same part except for the size: KerbalizedDragon1.2 (3.75m dia) KerbalizedDragon1 (2.5m dia) One is 2.5m, the other is 3.75m Almost looks like you just copied the entire config and just changed the model name. I can simply add a "-2" onto the name of the larger one, but would like to know your thoughts first. Actually, on all the command pods, it seems that you did a copy/paste, because I see that the EC is 1200 for all of them The EC in the stock Mk1-3 has a max of 150EC. So, is this a mistake, or is there a reason to have so much EC Also, the monoprop seems to be very high, on top of the liquid fuel. The TR-5002 2.5m Advanced trunk holds 220 EC, I can't imagine the command pod holding more. Again, all the command trunks seem to have the same values.

I think I found why the Dragons are unstable, the deflectionLiftCoeff is way too low. Comparing it to stock, the stock value for the mk1pod is: deflectionLiftCoeff = 0.35 mk1pod_v2: deflectionLiftCoeff = 0.35 mk2Cockpit_Standard: deflectionLiftCoeff = 0.6 dragAtMaxAoA = 0.1 dragAtMinAoA = 0.03 While for KerbalizedDragon1: deflectionLiftCoeff = 0.0875 I'll compare the physical size of dragon to the stock parts and adopt the stock settings for the one which is the best match

That is because tanks do not generate lift the same way the pods do. The pods have the following module: MODULE { name = ModuleLiftingSurface useInternalDragModel = False deflectionLiftCoeff = 0.35 liftingSurfaceCurve = CapsuleBottom disableBodyLift = False omnidirectional = False perpendicularOnly = True transformDir = Y transformSign = -1 nodeEnabled = True attachNodeName = bottom } Tanks don't. The tanks lift is calculated during flight, based on various factors. Same with the pod, but the pods specify where the lift is. While I didn't open the model for the part, I believe that the liftingSurfaceCurve is a transform or node named CapsuleBottom in this case I'll look at the Dragons to see what's going on. IMHO, they should do the same as the stock Mk1/Mk2/Mk1-2 etc.

The button looks like one of these, depending on the mode it's in: From the Changelog for v 0.2.0: Added ability to enable/disable mouse wheel in Editors Added toolbar icon which turns green when WASD editor is active Disable WASD editor when part is selected From the Changelog for 0.6.13.2, released on 8/30/2018: Added right-click on button to disable

Try searching for "critt", currently the author is myself