cyberKerb

HI JPLRepo The Dawn ION Engine is the stock ION engine supplied with KSP - elogateumsato might be referring to my post a few posts back. Sorry I haven't logged an issue yet - I didn't want to bother you with an issue unless someone else can confirm it is a problem for someone other than myself. Being a stock part I figured was probably supported and I was just seeing a problem on my side. For those following along at home: Can someone/anyone confirm that the STOCK ION engine doesn't register as using EC is an issue for you as well - if so I'll log the issue with pics on GITHUB .

I'm looking to programmatically identify the celestial body (CB) a science experiment is related to. Note, I have the Experiment data first - the CB isn't known in this context. Ie the player isn't landed on the body the experiment came from. Looking at the resulting data object from ModuleScienceContainer, I can see there is a SubjectID. From that I found the function that specifically uses subjectID to get some information about the science status of a given experiment. However I can't find any direct reference to which celestial body it is related to. Example: SubjectID = "surfaceSample@KerbinSrfLandedLaunchPad" ScienceSubject scisub; scisub = ResearchAndDevelopment.GetSubjectByID(subjectID); print(scisub.title); This outputs the title of the experiment to the debug screen - in the example this would be: "Surface Sample from LaunchPad" but does contain the name as a property or within the text. There is also no property for "body" that I found. Only thing I did see was ScienceSubject.IsFromBody(cb) - Am I safe to say there is no direct reference and it has to be looked up via this method anytime I want the CB info/name? EDIT: Received an answer from @ShotgunNinja via msg (Thank you!) - the answer was surprisingly simple - even how stock does it.

If you do have a proof of concept bit of code, it'd be great to have a look. Is all the clean up necessary only if you want to keep a tree intact when pruning from the middle? I figures with craft always being broken via various impacts, that killing off a parts should be within scope of the default process. I'm looking to use a part I've built and add a part to that known piece as an "end node". Depending on when the player does down the track, I plan to remove it later using the part.die command. I was hoping with the information I already know about my parts location and orientation, spawning in a part attached to it could be a matter of working out the location if reference to the known part rather than from the root part.

I I'd also like to know how to spawn a part to a part in scene. From my mucking around I've been using the following to kill a via a button, however it also kills anything that was surface attached as well. Anything node attached becomes debris. Is there something that will keep surface attached items? thisPart.part.Die();

Awesome - thanks for the reply and mentioning which events to look into. Guess it's time to get started

I've done a bit of coding with work and thought I might try my hand at making a small mod regarding science. One thing I can't work out is if the function behind the "Store experiments" process for a Kerbal on EVA is an all or nothing process? I'm looking to hide the existing "Store Experiments" button and replace with a process of my own making. I figure this part should be fairly straight forward (at least I 'think' it should be) My question to the KSP coding community is: Can the experiment storage function be made to use filters so it only stores certain experiments? Alternatively, do you think it's possible to create a replacement process that does the filter specifics that I'm looking for as well as hide the stock "Store experiments" button? Example Scenario: Kerbal EVA's from command module Kerbal on EVA uses button "Take Data (15)" to grab all experiments from command module Kerbal on EVA uses 'custom' button to "Store Crew Reports(2)" This isn't the mod, but being able to filter the science reports when storing them upon returning from EVA is something I'd like to do for my idea to work. If not, my backup is to resort to a workaround post EVA, and have a function to move the specific experiments from one ScienceContainer to another within the same ship - I've seen 2-3 mods that already do a variety of that so I know that's possible.

Hah! Only just now learnt there is a mod for adding weight (Mass) to a Kerbal - made by @*Aqua* Might dig into the code and see if I can make a mod to add weight to surface samples. yay! time for some coding - as soon as I find out how to start a mod for KSP.

I trying to do a Satellite repair contract and I'm unable to complete it. I've docked with the Satellite that has a repair panel, EVA to the panel and click 'Open'. These is no option to "Test System" as instructed in the contract. I only get "Engineer CheckSystems" and "Start Repair" Both give a visual response message, but neither option effects the contact. Did I put on the wrong repair panel? (Images below) Side note - the contact is missing a step 5. http://imgur.com/a/rgh7x

Is anyone using the "Mission Controller 2" mod with [X]Science? "Mission Controller 2" has two parts that are science experiments but they don't show up under the [X]Science list. I figured it was an MC2 mod issue and checked the parts CFG file and saw that both the "Mass Spectrometry Tube" and the "Ionization Chamber" were listed under "category = Utility". Taking a wild stab in the dark, I modified the parts category to "Science" and added a tag for Science" but it still didn't seem to come up. THEN I found the reference to the [X]Science science.cfg file and added the following under the CelestialBodyFilters module. This seems to work, but wondering if I got the filters correct? LanderResearch = NeedsSrfLanded orbitalResearch = NeedsInSpaceHigh

Couldn't find this suggestion in any past post... Sorry if it's already been mentioned. Would it be worth moving the category for the parts "Mass Spectrometry Tube" and "Ionization Chamber" from Utility to Science? I've already changed the cfg file in my own game as I kept looking for these experiments under Science. The suggestion is only as I figured there might be other people that are doing the same.

Can anyone check that the Dawn Ion engine works in AMPYear? I keep seeing it a consuming 0EC

Hi JPLRepo - Thanks for your work on AMPYear and DeepFreeze - they are excellent and work great. I've been testing out my replica of @Kuzzter Intrepid starship to Jool and while trying to work out the life-support aspect of it, I found something that I can offer as a suggestion for AMPYear support of the mods for USI-LS / USI-Core. I'm using a 1.25m Nuclear Reactor that comes with the @RoverDude - USI Core (also bundled into USI-ART and MKS mods) and found that AMPYear currently only shows the parts max generatable Electrical charge eg: AMPYear only shows a static 230 EC for a 1.25m reactor. However, @RoverDude reactors work like the Harvester Drill so it has an ideal operating temp (1000K) and if it's above or below that, the reactors Thermal Efficiency rate degrades the amount of EC the reactor produces. eg 230EC at 10% effeciency = 23EC I tested this using AMPYear 1.3.4.0 and with 2x1.25m USI-Core reactors (460EC/s) and a healthy 115EC/s load on them. I also had the HotSpot mod installed to see the change in temp of the parts. With the radiators enabled and the Reactors close to their ideal 1000K temp, I'm getting about a positive 333EC/s adding to my batteries. When I shutdown the radiator panels and wait for the reactors to cool (takes a Minmus day or so), the Thermal Efficiency of both reactors drop below 10% (dropping from 460EC to somewhere <46EC) and I end up with a net loss of 62EC/s which matches up with expectations. As far as I can tell, the reactors Thermal Efficiency is visible. However, I've no idea if that's a values you are able to READ from within the AMPYear mod. If you are able to see the TE values, can I offer the suggestion to have these reactors change their EC production from a static number to a floating calculated rate dictated by the Thermal Efficiency? (Also logged as a GitHUB issue for you)

Question: I trying to work out how long EnrichedUranium should last in the .625 reactor... it only has two units and I'm doing some testing in sandbox (No NFT mods installed) Based on the cfg file it has a Ratio = 0.00000012. I might fail at maths here (please let me know if I'm wrong) (0.01 / 0.00000012)=83,333.33 seconds for 0.01 Units of EnrichedUranium 83,333.33 / 60 = 1388.89 minutes 1388.89 / 60 = 23.15 hours 23.15 / 6 = 3.86 days for 0.01 units of EnrichedUranium to be used. Is this right? I trying to test this in sandbox and time warp, but having the .625 reactor turned on, it took over 400 days for it to use the first 0.01 unit of EnrichedUranium. Am I stuffing this test up using time warp? Or is it due to the reaction load falling to 0.2 after warp step 5? I'm guessing the load is my issue. Is there a dummy load mod that people know of for testing like this?

I just stumbled over this mod today - I was fully expecting to see a part that you load a Kerbal into (In the dire situation of not enough food using TAC-LS) and then kicking off the algae process using a resulting organic kerbal/algae slurry. (ie Kerbals can be used as a food resource)

Thanks for that - I like the idea of restricting the fairing. I tried on my example and figure a limit of the 2.5m fairing should be good without being too restrictive. There will have to be 4 wheel arms that have to be included somehow and that fits in a 2.5m fairing fine. I used the 3m one in the example as I use a huge metal plate for a base to mount them on. I should of just mounted those to the fairing directly. OP modified accordingly.

Thanks for the replies - I'd added the craft files into the OP if it helps with people experimenting after seeing what I've done in the example.

My Challenge idea is something that I don't think I've seen on the forum as yet and I feel there should be some people that will get a kick out of trying this out. I found the design challenge section alone was fun in itself, but figured it needed something extra before being published. (Thanks to those that have help flesh this out!) Background: The idea came from me never really being comfortable with the idea of using a "brute force rocket" to lift a huge fully-formed rover off Kerbin and have it miraculously land on the Mun with all the leftover thrust from the gigantic thing that initially launched it. I built a rover that was broken up into its components (like how er.. "most" people would construct a KSP space station) and had its final steps of constructions performed in orbit using little RCS tugbots. I initially was going to have separate rockets from the different packages so it could fit into a somewhat slimmer fairing, but ended up with the single rocket example shown in the imgur album below that I built in career mode. I was pleasantly surprised how good decouplers are at being oh-so-slightly-flexible-shock-absorbers. Happy to take any additional suggestions/ideas for activities required for the built vehicle. Design Challenge Section - Launch Rover sections into Orbit and complete assembly in Orbit. All parts should be stock (No mod parts) Must be a 4 wheel rover with 1 x "Modular Girder Segment" used in each wheel "arm" (can't be a mini rover-in-a-can thing) Needs to be partially constructed in orbit (Getting wheel arms / landing tanks on straight is part of the fun) Rover has to has landing capabilities independence from vehicle that got it to orbit Capable of landing on Mun from a (Rough-maximum) 12k orbit (ideally should only carry what required to get down with a small margin of error) Launch with all rover parts within a 2.5m Fairing. (Can be multiple launches if you want to avoid lifting too much in one rocket) Requires the following sensors is minimum (Science Jr, Mystery Goo, Accelerometer, Gravioli Detector, Thermometer, Barometer, Surface Scanning Module) Activity Challenge Section - Land the constructed rover Get constructed rover into 9-12km Mun orbit Land the rover and drive at least a few hundred kms and jump a crater or two to check the durability of the rover Checking the submission guide, I figure the above should tick most of the boxes... new? pretty sure this is new from the searching I'd done Possible? Yep, did it myself, but the example doesn't count as it uses a 3m fairing. Fun? Trying to stuff a disassembled rover into a rocket, and reassemble in Zero-G... depends on your taste - could be frustrating if you're as bad as RCS contral as I am, but I still found it fun overall what are you doing? Partly design challenge with a couple of durability test of the resulting vehicle. Win conditions? Post pics of craft(s) in VAB, in construction and on glamour shot on Mun Needs to be able to be driven a few hundred Kms on surface Survived crater jump (RCS is optional if your overly Kerbal!) The maker of the entry that scores the highest number of likes is the winner Separate Bonus Section: Doing all the above and making it a "mining rover" - must include: Drill-O-Matic Junior Convert-O-Tron 125 2 x Radial Holding Tanks Here the .CRAFT file for the below rocket as well as a .CRAFT file for the rover in the SPH in case you wanted to test that separately

Leaving Earth is a card game by Joseph Fatula that was recently released by The Lumenaris Group, Inc. The Board Game Geek (BGG) link explains that the game is about planning and about managing risk of rocket flight. The designer, who is a user on the BGG site has suggested making a variant of the Leaving Earth game that is Kerbal themed. i.e. With the solar system replace with Kerbal locations and Kerbal names as the astronauts. Joe is posing the question of interest advised they'd need to get Squad (KSP) and Lumenaris (Leaving Earth) in touch with each other and get some sort of licensing arrangement in place. But only if people are actually interested. As an expression of interest, there is a poll on the site to see what kind of interest there is out there. BGG Poll: https://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/1445229/kerbal-space-program-tabletop-edition I've replicated the poll on this thread too.

Ah! Sorry about that. I assumed that if MIN value excluded numbers below, then it made sense for the MAX would do the same for the top end. I thought you'd be doing it do it for story reasons or possibily you designed it for maximum flexibility for those that used it it unexpected ways. *shrug* Gotta say again - this is a fantastic mod and thanks for your work on it Dmagic! - I love playing with this. (Just wish I understood the process more - still learning. )

Hi Dmagic, I checked the new update for the color filter for the resources and found that the lower end exclusion works, but the high-end exclusion is missing. To test, select the Mun, set your Min to 3% and Max to 6%. You'll find that anything less than 3% is not colored (all good there), but resources over 6% will still show with the high color rather than be excluded. (I'm hoping it's not just me.)

Having the crew have weight is all good, but how does that effect game play? It's make capsules slightly heavier and that about it no? Also, I can't think they would change any deltaV by much.

Hi there - I'm working my way through my first career mode game after a longtime of small bitsy mucking around the kerbin system in sandbox mode. In my modded career mode, I'm playing with Dang-it, Kerbal Engineer and some other minor mods. I've recently exhusted most of the science on Minmus. This was due to the massive science run when I found the crater that had 4/5 biomes in close proximity all in the same crater. I kind of regret getting almost all the science in 2 trips, as I wont get back to Minmus until I've got Ore extraction technology available. (assuming I work out how to transport it - that stuff is heavy!) Anyway - As I'm planning my missions to the Mun, I felt the overwhelming desire to make it 'mean more' that a science collection run. TLDR I'd like for the surface sample report to add weight to the ship for each report gathered. Too many surface samples and you'll find you might not be able to get back home.... how that's balanced in the game if the suggestion is ever taken up, I have no idea. Maybe the weight is an actual resource used in the science tree for something - no idea really. I couldn't find anything in the mods forum section that did that - I've assumed that the available API with regards to the science reports doesn't allow a lot of (mod) flexibility at the moment - other than within the current method of gathering the various data reports. So I cobbled together a few mods that allow me to do a slightly manual representation of something 'like' this suggestion... Mods I'm using to kinda sorta make this work for me: Resource Generation Module (RGM) ---I'm not a modder, but I can work out how to edit a cfg file. I found this old mod by Fel that still works in 1.0.4 and after following the doc Fel included, I managed to get it to add a button to a container that would add a resource (Rocks in this case) at a set rate while the button was on. If I click the button again, it would stop adding that resource to the container. Ok - now I can use this process to represent the surface samples I'm returning from the Mun. The resources themselves mean nothing other than the weight they add to the ship. The thematic bonus is that the RGM only adds the resource and I can't remove them. If I add too much - then so be it. (Obviously Bob found some rock samples that he absolutely couldn't leave behind.) CommunityResourcePack ---I tweaked the Rock resource to set the weight to be 150KG for every 10 units. I could of made a new resource for surface samples, but this was already there. Also - looking up the official lunar missions on wiki I see they returned about 110Kg of samples on their last trip, so I'm in the ballpark of a weight that seems right. The weight of the Rock resource was tweaked around some random requirements I made for myself: - make a small rocket for under 5.5K in funds (my rocket ended up with a delta/v of 2k) (and assuming a return trip needs 600 to land 600 to ascend and 300 to get back - all rough numbers from a delta V map I found on the net) - I wanted each 10 units of rock to knock off 200m/s off the return trip. - wanted 2 return samples to be a borderline achievable return trip (more so with my inability to land without using less than 750/800m/s of delta V with this design) - allow for adjustment of the sample weight until it was 'just enough' to allow a small rocket to land and only have enough delta V for a return trip to kerbin with 1-2 samples from the Mun. This edited resource, combined with the above RGS, meant I could add an amount of the Rocks resource to a container on my Mun lander/rocket. The downside was that the RGS adds resources like the fuel transfer system (but with only one container) which means it's not an integer number and there wasn't an easy way to get a specific number of said resouce. So I just set the transfer rate to be slow enough so I could stop the transfer at a close enough number. (again blaming Bob for any addition over the rough quota I'd set of 10.0 units per sample.) Custom Part I added a new part (used the model asset for another mod - KIS I think, but it could of been a goo canister. I just liked the look of the KIS crate container) This would act as my surface sample return crate. I added the rock Resource to it with a starting value of 0, max of 100 (10 reports). I also added the science container Module so it would allow a Kerbal to store their surface sample reports via EVA in the same crate. Lastly, I added the RGS module that allowed me to add the button that add rocks to my crate. None of how I'm playing this is a packaged 'mod' in any form. It's just a selection of existing mods and cobbled together ideas from mods that would be nice if someone put it together as a 'mod' or even an expandable option in the science reports API that allowed those reports have actions occur like add a resource to a tank/container when performed. How I play to achieve this effect If I get Bill to take a science report for a surface sample, I force myself to add about 10 units of Rocks to the container I set up. This lowers my available delta V for a return trip and ensures that I plan how much fuel I have with me and weigh that up against how many surface sample reports I want to bring back. Anyway, this surface-sample 'weight penalty' method is what I'm applying to myself to ensure it adds a 'bit' of a deterent to trying to grab a stack of science reports in one mission. And this meant something to me in achieving this because the surface samples were the highest paying science points. The actual science report also has to come back with the rock weight. I even managed to come up with a plan that involved 2/3 small sample return rockets that I would land in advance along my planned rover route. So I don't just beast-mode it and add a heap of fuel/high power rocket engines, I limited the sample return rocket to be under a 5.5k fund limit for the Mun decent/accent return stage. This severely limited how much delta-v that small rocket could have. This was done all so I could land a kerbal in a rover (I think I can land that too - it's heavy!), take surface sample science reports as I rove around the various biomes. When I eventually come across my sample return rockets (which also act as waypoints for the rover trip), I drop off the surface sample science report/s (adding ~10units of rocks to each sample report I added to the crate) and send it on it's way back to Kerbin while Bill looks for the next sample. If I managed to land the sample return rockets well, I could get 2 samples back, if not, I make do with 1 sample per rocket. If the entire venture gets old, I'll just load up 1 rocket and boost for the Mun station and get them to pick up the reports and deal with it later with a seperate return craft. I'm hopeless at designing rockets and I'm sure that adding a few 100kgs of deadweight to a rocket probably poses no problems to those who know what they are doing in the game. Having said that - I'm sure the "surface sample" weight could be tweaked to be more meaningful for those better at this than me, but it's just the idea I'm playing with at the moment. Hopefully pictures will help convey what I'm trying to suggest a lot better than the mess listed above.

DMagic, Thanks for the advise above - I unlocked the NB scanner and ran the test and the contact completed. Seperate question regarding the Big Map on the Color Mgt page... Just wondering if the Min/Max settings under the resourse selection area are just a 'filter' or are they supposed to set to range for the colors? Ie: Assume Map of Mun and resource setting of 'Low' to a yellow color and 'High' to blue. With Min of 0% and Max set to 7% - I'll see the map with graduation of color from yellow to blue If I set it to Min 5% and Max 7% - I really only see the blue end of the ore concerntration with no real difference on the map between 5% and 7% If those setting are just a filter, is it possible to set to colors so they "rescale" based on the min / max values? ie I'd see Yellow as 5% (anything less is not colored as already happens) and a graduation of values to the blue of 7%. Obviously this wouldn't be that useful with the low rez scan being whole numbers, until you get the NB scanner - but when it is available it make it easy to color deposits between 4%-8% and see the differences. Gameplay-wise I imagine that you may not want it so people don't simply go for the highest areas only as rescaling the colors would highlight those like neon. But I figure if the user had already gone to the effort of unlocking and using the NB scanner, it might be allowed. Interest to hear what you think.

Thanks for the pack severedsolo. Been having fun with all the requirements that keep popping up as I work through the tech tree. Adds a lot of fun to the already awesome mod from Dmagic. Cheers!

Ah - thanks for that - I'll test that with a new game and some hyper editing in the morning. The contract specifically says use the M700 and that's what had me confused. I think I'll keep my settings as-is if the additional NB scanner pass works. I'm in career mode and don't have access to the NB scanner yet, so the fact that it's required indicates it might need that little tweak you mentioned in that contract details - either to lower it so a M700 scan wil complete it or raise it to require the NB scanner 95%. Thanks again!