cyberKerb

Here's the thread about charting funds: Closest I found was real time graphs on flight information Not quite graphs - but this mod track all achievements and events.

@icedown just curious if it was still in plan to add the new (lovely) model that @CobaltWolf created on the previous page?

Hey GD - curious what mod the study modules are on the left side of the misalignment are from? is it M.O.L.E?

Hi, I agree with everything you're said in the above post. However, just because that contract pack is in the unsupported section doesn't mean it doesn't work. (True for most of those packs tbh)

I'm pretty sure it checks the whole vessel. Thinking "in universe", I'll guess and say the reasons would be due to the mass of all the Karborundum creating a huge drag on space/time that adds such a huge EC requirement. I don't think it matters whether or not you have the fuel lines connected (ie docking port with no passthrough) to the "engine" when only doing the powering up stage of a beacon.

Update forum thread link for easy copy/paste. Notes: Modified a link name from "In-flight waypoints" to "Waypoint Manager", added link to scansat in the option section

Updated links for you - copy paste as you like.

Only one link to update here: maxhfx

Links updated is you wanted to use for OP

Might as well do the other thread and update any links to new forum threads so you don't have to be buried by the task - feel free to copy paste any content

Another update for you @nightingale - Links to forums threads and user profiles all updated for you to copy/paste. I left the links to external sites alone. So you are aware - I added a little comment about the new maintainer of the Historian mod in case you want to remove it.

Here you go @nightingale (No, I don't normally quote 4 year old posts) I only hope I've saved you a little bit of work with the above. Feel free to copy-paste / rework / modify the content again into your old post as an update for your OP. I've gone through and refreshed all the links and verified all are now correct (Including the old unsupported packs). I've also grouped the packs in some semblance of an order based on the contract pack forum thread-title for the supported KSP version. I also read the last few posts on each of the respective forum threads to determine if they are still active or unsupported - this is why there is more packs in the unsupported sub-list. (Reasons for move added in brackets) (Also a thanks to @Mark Kerbin for kicking off the check into the links too )

Can you provide orbit information for these beacons? Also, how much Karborundum do you have on board the beacon craft? Lastly - do you have a GMU on the craft with the beacon? You many want to double check the wiki regarding those points as it can be very helpful (https://github.com/TMarkos/ESLDBeacons/wiki/Electric-Charge,-Beacons-and-You)

While I was updating the others, I did one extra from @Gameslinx GPO pack. (Note that GPO isn't supported for 1.4.x yet, even though I've listed it on the chart. I did this just as they were updating after the 1.4 KSP release) I tried to throw the Cercani & Valentine systems (from Other Worlds and Extra Solar mods) into this chart... but they didn't look that good being so far out from this system, so I left them off.

Hey @Poodmund, just wondering out aloud here... Your calculator is based on a Kerbin/Gael starting point for the communications. I'm thinking of working out the necessary modifications to change in the systems tab so you could have a dynamic starting point? This would be Kerbin by Default, but the idea would like you pick (for example) Laythe as the CP1 start point or maybe have CP1 set to a circular orbit height of 600,000,000,000 around Sun to simulate CP1 being a satellite starting from far Plock orbit. I'm thinking of giving this idea a shot with some tinkering. Initial investigations found you have two different methods use to calculate the min/max distance from Kerbin / Gael. - For the OPM sheet you use a 1000 year table (from memory this is make to find the max distance by taking the Incl variations at different times. - In GPP you use a (Periapsis - source Apoapsis) for the min distance and something similar for the max distance and ignores inclination. Would there be any material different between the two methods you utilise? Or is it a close enough is good enough kind of thing given what I plan? Alternatively, could I just use a hyponenus calc to get max distance to "vaguely" take into account inclination of the CP2 location - even if it might not ever happen. For the minimum, I'm assuming would always be when they are on the same plane, so no inclination in that calc seeing as I'll be assuming the CP1 orbit wont have an inclination. To keep it simple, I'd probably keep the CP1 start point only able to be set with three values - SMA & Eccent (No inclination) and ArgofPer(Deg). After your opinion on this one - I worry that people might find it hard to get the ArgofPer(Deg) for a Satellite in an random orbit around the Sun. I know it's available to view it via the Hyperedit interface, but would that be too much of an assumption on my part (even WITH instruction of how to get the info) for the user to be able to get that piece of information?

I'm late to the party again - Only now got around to updating the chart for OPM to show the reverted antenna boost and new Level 4 DSN. (All credit to Poodmund's Spreadsheet Calculator for the numbers & Kergarin for the chart idea) Chart from this thread for those interested in other views / charts

Wow - thanks for all the details - First up, I'm not at all entertaining the idea to do a chart of all combinations. Just a few to cover the various different installs. As Per @OhioBobs above list (the first section) it may have a lot of permutations, but I only see 3 effective results. A lot of the various options only resulting from people modifying cfg files or are just too similar to other charts. I was mainly trying the restrict the number of charts based on standard installs. As such, some of those in the list can't come about "naturally" without a deliberate cfg modification. My chart breakdown with that viewpoint is: 1) Stock -----> Same as @Kergarin OP 2) Stock + OPM + JX2------> Stock + Jx2 antenna with range nurf (Link: https://i.imgur.com/BqglcNH.png) 3) Stock + OPM ------> Lvl4 Tracking station boost (Link: https://i.imgur.com/fBNqwSM.png) Couple of notes here regarding JX2 / @Snark I don't think there is any point doing a JX2 version for OPM 'with boost' as that doesn't exist without a mod to the cfg. Snark specifically "undoes" the OPM changes by default so that is what is charted. For other combinations, I wasn't planning adding any additional JX2 antennas charts, as this single one with OPM demonstrates it's range when it's installed. I used OPM in the chart as, much like in the JX2 thread, it gives an example as to 'why' you install it for that extra reach out to further planets. For other packs that it could be installed with (ie GPP) , I'd rather just focus on what effect that mod has on the various ranges with a default install and not so much how they effect other mods. The exception here is GPP & OPM which was a "for lols" effort as the ranges are so ridiculous, I wanted to see the ridiculousness visualised. 4) Stock + GPP -------> Same as stock ranges with an 88-88 & 100G part upgrade boost, different planets - keep reference to KSP 1.3 (Link: https://i.imgur.com/AUN7KNX.png) (Adding a JX2 here isn't needed. As you mentioned, GPP has part upgrades that makes the 100G effectively a JX2 ranged antenna - no point adding JX2 in a separate chart when it's just a change of label) .... So far no problems, nor any extra charts. I do need to modify the existing ones for that level 4 / titles change. I've been makes changes to the charts as I've drafted this post. So I should be including them at the end. Edit: Wow - just finished the OPM changes and see that with a level 4 DSN, there seems to be no need for antennas *at all* in the Kerbin SOI. Minmus and Mun are all covered using just the built-in antenna and the DSN4. Not sure I like that personally and will probably edit that when I get around to my own games. Edit2: Just realised how stupid that comment is seeing as stock lvl3 covers the Mun with only built-in antenna already and I didn't complain. Pls Ignore my non-thinking comments Fixing the remaining two charts, I'll think I have to remove the boosted chart. I originally did both because I found it personally interesting to see the difference in range / ease of a single antenna to cover everything. It also clearly shows that there actually was an option to use the non-boosted antennas cfg and still be able to reach into Grannus territory, albeit with 20 upgraded 100G antennas - that's a heck of a satellite! That surprised me at the time and now it's relevant with the level4 TS with not antenna boost in the correct version. As Ohiobob mentioned and from what I see in the OPM cfg, the level4 tracking station isn't added when GPP is also installed. That leaves only one default install configuration with that combination. 5) OPM + GPP ----> Boosted antennas from part upgrades, otherwise, no TS boosts for this combination. - keep reference to KSP 1.3 (Link: https://i.imgur.com/J3owL3k.png) Notes for @OhioBob I'm quickly realising that when I originally did the "for lols" charts of GPP and OPM I wasn't even thinking of GEP as it was still in development / didn't exist. I apologise that I don't think I even investigated GEP back then. This was mainly because I started to run out of enthusiasm and didn't want to add yet another full system of lookups to a new chart when I'd need to generate a whole new antenna range spreadsheet that would let me easily get the numbers I needed for the chart. My most recent mistake occurred when I revisited the threads to find what changed and upon reading the JX2 comments, I got myself massively confused with the various mods mentioned. Because it's been a bit of time from when I last looked at these charts, I initially thought GEP was the only way that OPM and GPP worked together when I posted my previous message in this thread. I understand better now. I originally did the charts based off reading that GPP has/had a config that shoved the OPM planets around Grannus if there were installed together. Unfortunately, I wasn't even considering GEP. As you stated, OPM now disables it's own config for a level4 TS as it has a NEEDS[!GPP] in the custombarnkit config. I checked the GPP OPM cfg again for specifics and see that OPM still is around Grannus when GEP not installed. I also see that when GEP IS installed, a new star called 'Robau' is added and is the location where the OPM stuff is placed and Grannus gets moved... elsewhere. As far as I understand is where you have your additional planets from the GEP mod, correct? I can't find anything about Robau other than that GPP cfg. It's not referenced in the wiki or mentioned in the release thread for both GEP and GPP threads. Side note: Your PDF on github still has Grannus old Ap of 2800Gm for the GEP installation. Should this be 1800Gm? If I was to do GEP (are you able to advise if the design is feature complete in GEP so I don't have to update every few months?), I'd probably OPM so all options are shown on the one chart. This is assuming there isn't much that GEP changes between OPM installed and not. I need to do some investigation into creating a modified calculator like I did previously for the OPM/GPP combination and then start drawing lines. Might be fun to draw up an all three together. Already started having a go and making the spreadsheet I need for the numbers. I've found that with OPM, GEP and GPP installed, the Robau star with the OPM planets has the following Periapsis = 4320 Gm Apoapsis = 5280 Gm. As advised, I added the level 4 Tracking station boosted to 2T and plugged in 20x JX2 1T Antennas (same as a 1T upgraded antenna) Found that I can still only get 62.3% / 81.8% coverage at Grannus. (Close to the details shown in GPP/OPM image below) For the new Robau star, I get 0% / 0.03% coverage (barely able to get a connection at min distance) I can get a 1.8% connection to Plock when Gael and Plock are on the same side of Ciro. (Just to be clear - all these numbers are from a modified version of Poodmunds spreadsheet - not in game) Are these what I should map or were you expecting coverage at Robau? I'm fine either way, I'm only looking at numbers here so I'm not sure what the design intent is only based on that. If the intent is to ensure the player adds a relay network or never does unmanned missions to Grannus with this, it sounds cool. I just want to make sure I'm reading the data correctly. Question: Should I remove/delete from imgur old images, or leave for history?

Hmmm.. I'm going over the extras that I created and need to edit (I think) two three all charts Charts I've so far added to the thread: JX2/OPM(Stock Range) - Unchanged as JX2 mod reverts the OPM level4 back to stock ranges (ToDo, change chart title to KSP 1.4) OPM Extension - Need to copy from JX2 chart ranges (ToDo: remove JX2 and add 4th level as new OPM range chart, OPM_CommNet.cfg reference here, change chart title to KSP 1.4) GPP Extension - Ranges Unchanged (ToDo, change chart title to KSP 1.4) GPP Extension + OPM (with Boost) - This one needs changing, but "to what" is a work in progress at the moment. I noticed this post that the specific changes are nearly done and should be implemented in a release sometime soon. GPP Extension + OPM (without Boost) - Ranges Unchanged (ToDo, change chart title to KSP 1.4) Should this be removed? I only created it for the edge case of someone using OPM and GPP / GEP together and letting the JX2 mod overwrite the ranges. As GEP is handling those configs internally, this situation would be such a rare occurrence I question the use of even referencing it here. Thoughts? Changes forthcoming: @Kergarin - you OK if I call it "Version 1.2 by Kergarin Aerospace"? Re-title all charts to have KSP 1.4 (I'm guessing it's fine to leave the .3 subversion off - let me know otherwise) Change OPM boost chart to add level4 and remove x4 /x8 boost Change GPP Extension + OPM boost: retitle to indicate boost is now / will be a GEP config Boost based on this post by @OhioBob and adjust figures once the boost is in a new GEP released Any other changes / edits I need to consider before needing to break open MS paint ?

Yowzah! Nixies sound like an awesome idea for output. What info were you intending to display on them? Unfortunately I'm unable to help with the power requirements. I'm still getting my hooks into segmented LED displays. Good luck with your investigations.

It was suggested and most people agreed on a new thread. But the original OP is still active and pops in every now and then. Unless the thread gets abandoned, or the OP prefers to lock this thread, I'd rather not rip it away from the original author with posting a competing thread. Any new thread would really just copy posts from this thread anyway with an updated OP summarising what had previously been posted - not adding much that's new. @Mulbin was already kind enough to originally collate the data and post the thread in the first place. As it's not really a time sensitive issue / subject, I see no harm in having patience and waiting for a response to my email to him. In the meantime there is this post I've pull together to act as a stop gap while the OP is out of date. I mainly did it as a personal list so I can keep track of what projects I regularly use as a reference while I working on my own controller. I posted it here as I figured it'll be a useful list for other people as well - It also shows projects from sites outside of KSP that might not be as well known as those on the current OP. Yes it would be good to update the OP, but that doesn't change the matter of the content within this thread still being useful. If I get time, I'd like to do some additional investigation on each project and update the table again. I'd like to add a quick reference to add info like; type (Cockpit / consolse / controller), what MCU(s) it's running on (eg Tennsy / Arduino / Raspberry) as well as maybe adding a little detail on what software is in use (eg KSP SerialIO / Telemachus / kRPC / etc...). That way I can look at specific past projects to see what bit's I might want to use in my own design decisions.

I much prefer the old school style on the ASET IVA for the Mk1 LanderCan https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/156131-mk1-lander-can-iva-replacement-by-aset11/ And for a more 'modern' lander Can - I love the ALCOR also by ASET. It's roomy and all the controls you'd want - plus a emergency power backup in case of.. err... issues. https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/50272-131alcoradvanced-landing-capsule-for-orbital-rendezvous-by-aset-08022017/

soooo... congrats? (I think)

Can you give us any hope that it might be this year? or more likely later?

Another great chapter! Thank you for your story! One thing I didn't get was how 15Minths made about 2 years... When I checked the numbers against the wiki (it that out dated again?), 15 x minths (about 49.87 Kerbin days) and found I'm still 2 Minths short of a year. Gah - Nevermind - Mixed up Sidereal and synodic again

Wow - I just checked how that post looked from work and it was hoooorrrible! I've resized the images so I'm hoping it looks much better now. Also quietly hoping it fits better onto peoples screens so you can review all projects at a glace. Updated Post here