darthgently

There is the middle ground of having KSP2 not make it harder for a mod to implement these kinds of things by modularizing code that a mod would need to override, not requiring a body named "Kerbin" for example

I wonder if Lagrange points could be faked in on top of the KSP Keplerian model as small SOIs with an assigned Mu bound to the relationship of the 2 bodies involved, so not n-body, but "sort of" 2.x-body? The point itself would have an SOI like a body, but would not be a true 3rd body as it would have no gravity affecting the 2 main bodies; only a tiny amount of gravity affecting craft in its tiny SOI. So the rails code would have to have a bit more to it to keep track of the points, not necessarily for all bodies (maybe just those above a certain mass, or only those the player enabled). Limiting to only points that allow stable orbits in N-body (L4, and L5?) would narrow down the overhead also. The KSP orbits in the lagrange point SOI would likely not need to be realistic compared to real lagrange orbits (I seem to remember that real lagrange orbits are a bit wonky and not Keplerian at all), but instead just normal ellipses around a pseudo body. Just throwing it out there as a possible half-way meeting point. KSP already compromises on n-body, understandably, so a further compromise that splits the difference between Keplerian an N-body doesn't seem crazy to me

This^^^, MJ absolutely has sporadic issues with a "sticky" autowarp such that even if turned off in MJ, it will re-assert. As previously noted the only time I've experienced this is when aborting a Landing (like I realize used West longitude instead of East in the target coords, click "Abort landing", manually cancel warp...then a few seconds later warp kicks in again. I have to change to another craft or tracking center and back to make it stop. I have no other warp modifying mods other that KAC that will cancel a warp for an alarm. I'd guess it happens about 1 in 5 times. Yes, I should probably be more careful about my target coordinates, lol

The autowarp misbehavior on landing is the only persistent wrinkle I've encountered. I had a one time occurance of either "launch into plane of target" or "match planes with target" (can't recall which now) where it put me in the same plane, but going in the retrograde direction of the target. Only happened once, never repeated. <shrug>. Ditto on the thanks to Sarbian. I use MJ as my ballpark design target for most of my kOS scripts. The functionality of MJ is well thought out and fleshed out for sure

It would be kind of fun if a klaxon sounded (in the EVA kerb's headseat presumable) and rotating/flashing lights fired up prior to things like warp or craft reorientation of more than a few degrees. As for EVAs and MJ warping as discussed above: I presume the kerbal is on a ladder; is MJ able to warp while a kerb is on a ladder? As for MJ warping, the only bad behavior I've had is when Aborting a landing in which 'autowarp' was on. Something kept restarting warp even after aborting the landing. I assume it was MJ as it was the only thing running that altered warp and the situation that it occurs, when it occurs, is always the same: aborting MJ landing with autowarp on. But other than that, very well behaved

I can't imagine what would have changed the perms there. I'm on linux and haven't type "chmod" or "chgrp" in about a year. Can module manager or other change perms? [Edit] Neither of us read the WRN message close enough. It isn't a perm error, it is the fact that both files end in .cfg and yet neither file has any config statements as they are example files and completely commented out. So there are zero WRN, EXC, or ERR msg in KSP log for DR. Hmmm. I'll try rebooting later as that is the path of least effort and nothing has been updated or altered install-wise since it worked fine. Probably spurious inductance from a cosmic ray hitting a bit that stuck up too far above the rest

I rarely have an issue with DockRotate but currently a craft that has worked for DR fine isn't working now. I haven't made any changes. The "rotate clockwise (+)" and "rotate counterclockwise (-)" are not appearing in the Part Action Window, but all other DR related things are there; the enable/disable rotate works "clicks" fine for example. I did find these in the log, but other than these there are no DR relate errors or warnings. Any ideas? [WRN 00:43:08.150] Cannot create config from file '/home/marty/ksp1.11.2/KSP_linux/GameData/DockRotate/DockRotate-Realism.cfg'. [WRN 00:43:08.150] Cannot create config from file '/home/marty/ksp1.11.2/KSP_linux/GameData/DockRotate/NodeRotate.cfg'.

Has anyone else here had an issue with the sspx-science-1875-1 mobile science lab appearing to transmit science, but no science actually gets transmitted? Trying to narrow down what could be influencing an issue. [edit] spammed log messages added for reference [ERR 20:57:55.542] Exception handling event onPartActionUICreate in class ModuleScienceLab:System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object at ModuleScienceLab.updateModuleUI () [0x00000] in <dc0e5f458c0f4571ad839b9c4153f347>:0 at ModuleScienceLab.onPartActionUI (Part p) [0x00025] in <dc0e5f458c0f4571ad839b9c4153f347>:0 at EventData`1[T].Fire (T data) [0x000b0] in <dc0e5f458c0f4571ad839b9c4153f347>:0 [EXC 20:57:55.918] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object ModuleScienceLab.updateModuleUI () (at <dc0e5f458c0f4571ad839b9c4153f347>:0) ModuleScienceLab.onPartActionUI (Part p) (at <dc0e5f458c0f4571ad839b9c4153f347>:0) EventData`1[T].Fire (T data) (at <dc0e5f458c0f4571ad839b9c4153f347>:0) UnityEngine.DebugLogHandler:LogException(Exception, Object) ModuleManager.UnityLogHandle.InterceptLogHandler:LogException(Exception, Object) UnityEngine.Debug:LogException(Exception) EventData`1:Fire(Part) UIPartActionWindow:CreatePartList(Boolean) UIPartActionWindow:UpdateWindow() UIPartActionController:UpdateActiveWindows() UIPartActionController:UpdateFlight() UIPartActionController:Update()

I didn't get into KSP until late 1.8xx or early 1.9.xx and these mythical tales of the GRAPPLE HOOK make it sound so great. It sounds like a ton of fun, even if not a completely necessary item. What are the reasons that it was dropped? Was it kraken prone? [edit] I just read back into the thread a bit and see the history. I'm chiming in. I'm also pretty sure that when I went looking for the grapple a few years back I did ask about it in either KIS/KAS/other forum on this site and only got crickets

Can stakes be used in combination with the disposable pad to orient the build? Whinging: I can't seem to grok how the pads work when mounted on a vertical surface. Inevitably I have to KAS them into a different rotation/position which is tedious as KIS on my system has a 15 to 20 seconds freeze every time I detach/attach something. Other than the freeze it works fine, but placing something by trial and error on a high part count base can take a very, very long time. The fact that KIS turns the part an even green jello during placement makes orientation particularly tricky as one has to remember how it attached last placement, then mentally apply the rotation. Currently I'm having to rotate the pad to face the part that will be added onto instead of having the colored compass rose facing out toward the new build in order to keep the new build from appearing back into the pre-existing structure instead of projecting from it. wtfrak am I missing here? I tried rotating the new assembly in the editor to face the other direction, saving, and reloading in EL at the base and it made no difference

If some kind of symbiotic organism combination of tardigrades, algae, fungi, along with a dydration resistant bacterial biofilm coating the entire glom...maybe some kind of tiny team approach could work. I include the tardigrades because they are tough and would give the "team" a way to move away from danger, perhaps burrowing underground during high radiation days, but still able to make use of photosynthesis when feasible. Basically a tardigrade in a "bio-EVA suit" that helped sustain it. A Martian tiny tardigrade Fremen in a bio-stillsuit

How about "Burning parachutes on Dres for warmth"

How about some IVAs with the KSP loading screen on one of the IVA screens. <mind blown>

Do you mean ships that have already been launched or just the design built in the editor? On non-console, In KSP1 you can copy .craft files from the ..saves/.../Ships/... directory from one save to another. But of course you need the same parts available so you'd still need to unlock the right parts in career mode or install the mods involved. I don't know about console. But yeah, KSP2 would do us a favor to have a way to do on all platforms

One of the main reasons I use CKAN is that it makes it easier to find the maintainers. The metadata tab in the lower right of the window when EL is highlighted, for example, has a link to this forum. Its my "Mod Forum Browser" as much as a way to install mods.

Lol

I'll just stick with modifying the savegame after instantiating clamps then. It will be far easier in the long run. Is there a drawback to my installing EL from CKAN given you don't do CKAN stuff?

I think I must be missing something as it seems like the NoLauchClamps would fit in well in EL as opposed to a separate mod that is not on CKAN. So unless there is a reason I'm not seeing I think something that can anchor a base would be a great addition to EL on CKAN. I try to keep things simple by keeping as much as possible to things on CKAN. Every time I don't do this I end up with too many loose ends and a very hard time tracking down what is causing what issue

It is a real English word now. About half of modern English is from French. Any word ending in 'tion' for example. Damn Norman invasion

I'm still on 1.11.2 myself for other reasons, but have you gone through the SR settings to make sure they weren't changed, especially since the re-install?

That sounds a lot like I've encountered when I had the wrong part selected as the control point. The main engines are not in line with the fore vector of the control part. Could that have been it?

Hello ELP'ers, Is there a way to disable staging of launch clamps used in base building? I tried editing my savefile and setting stagingEnabled = False in ModuleRestockLaunchClamp and deleting the Action body of the action in that module also. No joy so far Update: Not sure, but I think I had reloaded the wrong copy of savefile for the test. The above solution seemed to have worked. Any further suggestion very welcome. But crickets are ok also. I've gotten used to them. I like crickets

Duna is a rouge planet. But you probably meant rogue, not rouge.

Ok, that is clear now. In that case, all I have to add is that the concept of an ELEMENT is highly related to the concept of a stage, but goes beyond mere launch and gets into the different logical sections of a craft well into a mission. The idea of being able to assign a label to these ELEMENTs and have that reflected in the staging list (though ELEMENTS aren't necessarily a simple linear stack later in the mission several undockings/dockings later) I really like the idea of labels within the stock staging list. The more I think of it, the concept of labeling ELEMENTs, then be able to assign ELEMENTs to a stage (within logical reason by way of order order of decouplers and dock ports) like multiple radial ELEMENTS in symmetry that would still be in the same stage, for example. Again, an ELEMENT just being all the parts between a given set of decouplers/dockingports, whether the ports were mated in the editor or not an whether they've been undocked/docked in flight or not

A small and very quickly spinning icy moon that is so perfectly smooth that any craft landing on it slides around the planet in a "litho orbit" nearly perpetually. In fact, if a lander perfectly matches the surface velocity and so isn't sliding after landing, the spin rate would hurl it back into space on an escape vector except very near the poles; thankfully the friction is way too low for this to really happen. Current Kerbal theory is that it is possibly not a natural formation. Evidence is inconclusive as every research base built there eventually collides with a mysterious sliding green monolith that has a difficult to predict instantaneous surface location and velocity relative to the base First person to give it a name that doesn't contain "Mc" or "Face" names it. So no "Slicky McSlickFace" for example