sarbian

Okay, version 1.5 is the official release. (1.4 shall be forgotten) Edited the first 2 post for link, changes and doc. Thanks to all who helped and shared their mind.

Just passing by to reply to that. The change allow for other mods to query FAR part for different info inflight. The one I have working now is control surface torque, but more will/should come. BUT this code won't come to MJ fast since I need to add some code changes (hooks) into MJ so we don't have to maintain a separate MJ+FAR dll. If you want to talk with me more about FAR support in MJ come to the MJ thread, no need to fill this one

Yes, if you turn the port when building the ship then the docking angle will change too. @K3|Chris : I ll work on this SAS bug this week. I know why it does that but I need to find a clean way to correct it. As I said earlier in the thread there is one thing bothering me : I don't see how it could have worked in earlier version, or I missed something obvious. As for the landing on Duna : I have seen this earlier but I'll need to dissect the whole landing AP code apart, and that's not the funniest thing to do But it's on my list, since I had problem landing there too. Right now I enjoy a few days away from the code and play KSP for a change, so please wait for a few days. I'll look into the pile of bugs, half merged patch and FAR compat later this week.

Yes, nothing fancy

It's in the utility window

NathanKell replied perfectly, and I won't go there anyway. NathanKell does the current version looks OK to you ? I think I'll do the release tomorrow.

The usual suspect : Disable Anti virus, move the install out of Program Files if it's there (try C:\games\ksp of something like that). If it still does not work launch the game, build a rocket with the AR202 module on in, send it to the launch pad. Then exit the game and copy your ksp\KSP_Data\output_log.txt to pastebin.com so I can take a look at it.

I looked into it and saw an other copy/paste fail on my end. After I fixed I saw that the second reload made things go strange (it seems it apply the patch before all the part are loaded). So for now I removed the reload part and uploaded it again. I'll work on it more later since it's not the more important feature (but I agree it's really useful for writing new patch file)

Did you try to click and drag with the right mouse button ?

Do you start a new career mode to test, or do you load a save ? Edit : this works fine here when I start a new career mode. @PART[KAS_CPort2] { TechRequired = start }

I edited my previous post a second ago to reply for the spaceplace/rover. The precision comes mostly from the landing sim, so if some design miss by a large amount it's most likely that the sim messed up. Post screens and/or cfg of the landers and I'll have a look.

Do you have errors in the log ? Did you try the dev version ? Did you add the part on the ship ? Does your install looks like that ? KSP\GameData\MechJeb2 \Plugins\MechJeb2.dll \Parts \MechJeb2_AR202\... \MechJeb2_Pod\... @TranceaddicT / Neutrinovore : it not exactly that anymore. Now it's the response time of a low pass filter. In the end it works the same and you should lower the value for agile ships and increase it for the sluggish one. @Galane yeah spaceplane need love but see my post on the previous page. Rover are on my list. @Carl unlikely for now, it would mess up the landing sim precision.

The @ is to edit something that exist. Since the TechRequired properties is not here you need to do @PART[KAS_Container1] { TechRequired = start }

I look into finding a way to more or less autotune Tf (some number derived for torque / mass most likely), but for now you'll have to tune it yourself. It's easier than the 5 numbers of the old pid however

Ok, fixed. That was one stupid bug on my ends... Uploaded, same name as before ( http://www.sarbian.com/sarbian/ModuleManager_1_5.dll )

The idea are sound. Lowering the throttle to land is not rocket science But writing the code is an other matter. Getting the correct alt from the landing gear is not hard since we have to code for that in the other landing AP. Having MJ slow down enough to land but still being fast enough to not stall is a bit more complex. Not that I don't roughly see how I could do it, but it's not an easy task. I had some thought on it since I work on something plane related right now, but I did not try to implement it. There are a few things that worked before and are more or less broken now, and that's higher on my list that feature that never really worked (AFAIK). If you have some reading on landing AP in real life or other game I would welcome them, even some simple theory on landing would be nice

Can we have 1 page in this thread without drama ? Thanks

I'll do it in the weekend once I squashed the last bugs and had replies by the dev who had problem with the old design.

I will not delete anything automatically for 3 reasons : - a bug could delete something that it should not have - some user won't like that for the same reason some don't want a DLL to call home for a version check - on windows you can't delete a DLL while it's loaded, so that would not work The current version works fine with more than 1 version present. The user can clean up if he feels the need to.

No, the exclusion node is dealt in a different part of the code. It should not impact anything else. I did a quick test with a Final and they work fine. The bug I found is they are processed first instead of last, but it's just a "!" missing in my code... Can you post the full code of one of the crashing :Final node ?

You have researched the full tech tree and you don't see all the module in the window ?

There is a minor problem with the UI. The terminal velocity limiter position make most thing it should not be active when the autopilot is not. But in reality it's a global option, not really related to the AP. This would be really bad if there was no way to know the limiter do something, but since the text turn green when it's active I don't think it's a big priority.

@Majiir Yes it's a quick fix but I'd rather spend more time on my current MJ project. @CAPFlyer I'll spend 100% of the money I get paid for MM to get an ISO 9001 certification. So can we move on more productive thing like having feedback on the current implementation ?

I have implemented the easiest solution. Adding "MODULEMANAGER[LOCAL] {}" to a cfg will make MM ignore all node in the same directory and its subdirectory. I'll keep the version number in the dll name : http://www.sarbian.com/sarbian/ModuleManager_1_5.dll I added a message if an old MM or MMSarbianExt are present, asking the user to delete them If this design seems to be agreed on by most then this will be released later this week as version 1.5

Why do you thing I made the post ? Did you miss that in the first post : "This version had many change so it may have bugs, don't distribute it with your mods yet but please test it and give me feedback about the changes." I still beelive my first idea is the better one, even if the transition is painfull. It won't stop me from impementing something else.