scimas

If you want only axial tilt, check the starmods post in Daily Kerbal forum. The Tilt'em mod is supposed to do exactly that. It is a very new mod, so read through its thread for known bugs and stuff.

@N70 or whoever else is maintaining this mod, CKAN is currently installing the 1.3.1 version 1.9.0 for this mod on 1.4.5 KSP.. Please get this fixed, I spent so, so much time figuring out which mod was causing problems to kerbalism

@linuxgurugamer Wanted to point out that Toolbar Controller is not listed as a dependency on CKAN. It has worked properly until 1.4.3 and I spent 2 days figuring out which mod was causing AGExt to not load in 1.4.5

kOS (or any other mod) can only create stock nodes, not the principia ones. The MechJeb devs are working with the principia devs to make the principia data available to other mods (better ask in the principia thread about this, they can tell better). At that point if someone creates a principia addon for kOS, you will be able to do all kind of stuff. Until then you still can sort of access the principia nodes. When you click "show on navball" in principia, it creates a stock node that's continuously updated (except that its delta v doesn't tick down). So, although you can't create a node or edit it from outside of principia, you can partially access it and do things like 1. point in the maneuver direction 2. wait till execution time 3. whatever else you come up with that doesn't involve changing the node itself with kOS.

As far as I know principia does not draw the orbits of planets, only of ships and asteroids.

That doesn't work as you would expect. The orbit calculated by principia isn't exposed outside the mod. So the contract system just checks everything against the stock orbits. And that means that sometimes, even though your principia drawn orbit looks exactly like the one you need, the stock orbit is very different and the contract isn't fulfilled. This is usually only a problem in high orbit, not in low orbits where patched conics and n-body are more or less identical. Check out principia's faq. It turns out that n-body calculations is sometimes easier on your cpu than patched conics calculations. The faq talks about orbits of planets, not vessels, so I'm not sure whether the same argument applies or not.

Yup, agree with @nanomage. Looks like you were doing plane change burn, but didn't keep the flight planner window opened. That leads to the maneuver direction not changing during the burn. Another cause could be that you executed a decoupling staging or enbled / disabled engines after making the flight plan. That messes up the calculations too.

Hmm, I should read up on this. I have definitely misunderstood the concept.

I have no idea. That makes sense. Yes, principia modifies the stock system so that the Jool system is stable. But if you make any changes to stock, it will treat it as a new planetary system and won't make stability changes to Jool system, you will have to do those on your own.

No, that's not what ephemeris is. Ephemeris, in the context of principia, is how the integrates the motion of celestials. The integrator to use and the time step size of the integrator. But then you have the problem of not being able to extend to arbitrary solar systems. In its current state principia can adapt to any planet pack as long as it provides proper configuration files. Which means you can start playing RSS with the state of solar system at any time in the past or future as long as you provide the proper initial state. If you were to solve the system in advance for thousand years, you would need to store about 52 million instances of the system, an instance being position, velocity and angular orientation of each body. That is about 5 billion floating point numbers. And if I did the (rough) calculation correctly, that would be about 35 GB of raw data. Of course you could come up with clever tricks to compress it, but how much? And even then, I have no clue about the comparison between time taken for doing the calculation live vs looking up the values from a table for every update. Actually the number of vessels can grow quite big in a career game, and very quickly too. You have all those satellite contracts, your communication satellite networks, planetary bases, space stations and what not.. I'm not completely sure about this, but I think I remember it mentioned sometime that celestials do ignore vessel influence. Although I can't think why that would be; you are anyway computing the force on a vessel due to a celestial, the force on the celestial is just the negative of the one on the vessel..

Can confirm this happens. Don't know whether the devs are aware or not.

@eggrobin The change log says "this version supports 1.3.1 and 1.4.x," does that mean I can use it with 1.4.3 too, or only 1.4.4? Also, the topic title is still showing "[1.3.1, 1.4.3]."

So you want to rotate one vector towards another by some angle? Yeah, the rotate functions probably can do it, I personally find them hard to understand sometimes. So you can figure them out for yourself and in the meantime use https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodrigues'_rotation_formula , which I find easier to use.

Use the abs function. Let's say you want to limit steering angle to (-20 deg, +20 deg). And lets call your steering angle ANG. So, if (abs(ANG) < 20) then {steer as per ANG} else {steer with -20 or +20}

SHIP:VERTICALSPEED

I'm not a tech expert myself, but isn't almost every PC since at least about 2010 a 64 bit PC? I'm not a developer either, but seems like you figured it out

@Zeiss Ikon As far as I know, simply cloning the dev branch of RP-0 and using the GameData folder works in 1.3.1. Well, it works at least in windows, I have a working installation.

@Just Jim @Dman979 @Nivee~ Oh, I see. Of course I know who Gandhi is, after all I am an Indian! The wrong spelling got me. "Gandhi" is pronounced totally different from what the "Ghandi" spelling suggests.

Who or what is "Ghandi"?

https://github.com/mockingbirdnest/Principia/wiki/Installing,-reporting-bugs,-and-frequently-asked-questions Check the linux section. The working directory needs to be the KSP directory for principia to run on linux, apparently. On windows, there is an option in a shortcut's properties that determines in which directory an executable is opened. See if something similar is available to you if having the shortcut is important.

No, as of now such an option isn't available. It is also advised to not install or remove Principia in the middle of a save. Reference

Thanks guys! @Tyko I found the line you are talking about. I will test it for myself, but will probably end up leaving it as is since it's intended and not a bug.

I don't know if this has been reported before or not, or may be it's even intended. I'm still in 1.3.1. The Mk1 command pod from VSR is somewhat off centre. Exactly what is off centre? I don't know. But the kerbal engineer reports a torque of 0.07 kNm with as simple as a (Mk1 pod, FLT100, any liquid engine) configuration. The torque isn't present with the stock command pod. Is there any simple way of keeping all other parts from VSR and just remove this pod? Like 'move these bunch of files out of the game data of VSR and done'? The naming of the parts in Squad folder vs VSR/Squad folder seems very different and I can't figure out which files to play with. And if it's going to require changing some cfg files (for MM or something,) just tell me it's not possible. It isn't that big of an issue, I can wait till this is fixed in some future release.

You quoted the wrong guy there. I don't mind much at all, but if it was me, I would have said "reentry effects are the ugliest I've personally seen." They could have been uglier in older versions, but I've been around since 1.2.2 only.

I never said that, you clearly need to read again if you think that I did. You have written the rest of the post from the perspective of a person who has been following the development of the game from its earliest stages. For a new customer, precisely what you're expecting when you release a DLC, I don't imagine the game looking bug-free, let alone polished. I have written my post partially from that customer's perspective. If you don't appreciate that viewpoint, I can't do anything to convince you otherwise. You definitely haven't read through the rest of the thread or you wouldn't have said some of those things. Again, as some others have said, the difficulty level of a job is not a customer's problem. I, or any other KSP player I imagine, wasn't sitting in squad's office with a gun pointed at them and forcing them to release an update, they did it on their own schedule. If it's hard to diagnose and fix bugs, take your time and fix them. Don't release an end product that is even worse than the previous version. And just for fun, try using that "it's a hard job" excuse next time you have a university exam or something. "Professor, you have to give me an A for the answers I have written. I know that there are a lot of mistakes in there, but calculus is hard, you know? Give me an A now and I will have all of the mistakes corrected in 2 or 3 months."