DiEvAl

Is this a bug or am I misunderstanding what simulate_aerodynamic_force_at does? >>> kerbin = space_center.bodies['Kerbin'] >>> jool = space_center.bodies['Jool'] >>> print 'Kerbin rotating:', vessel.flight(kerbin.reference_frame ).simulate_aerodynamic_force_at(kerbin, (kerbin.equatorial_radius+10000,0,0), (0,0,0)) >>> print 'Kerbin inertial:', vessel.flight(kerbin.non_rotating_reference_frame).simulate_aerodynamic_force_at(kerbin, (kerbin.equatorial_radius+10000,0,0), (0,0,0)) >>> print ' Jool rotating:', vessel.flight(jool .reference_frame ).simulate_aerodynamic_force_at(jool , (jool .equatorial_radius+50000,0,0), (0,0,0)) >>> print ' Jool inertial:', vessel.flight(jool .non_rotating_reference_frame).simulate_aerodynamic_force_at(jool , (jool .equatorial_radius+50000,0,0), (0,0,0)) Kerbin rotating: (7015.528009767944, -41.65580368041992, -37885.88657339831) Kerbin inertial: (0.0, 0.0, -0.0) Jool rotating: (196773485.3791723, -1886926.75, -93153130.4682703) Jool inertial: (136595783.37232614, -2246031.5, 220058997.8491733) If my vessel were 10km above Kerbin's equator and rotating with Kerbin, I'd expect to get zeros. If my vessel were 10km above Kerbin's equator and not rotating with Kerbin, I'd expect to get some huge values. If my vessel were 50km above Jool's equator and rotating with Jool, I'd expect to get zeros. If my vessel were 50km above Jool's equator and not rotating with Jool, I'd expect to get some huge values. ---- Flight.SimulateAerodynamicForce converts the coordinates to World Space, and calls StockAerodynamics.SimAeroForce (I don't have FAR installed). Then SimAeroForce treats this world velocity as if it were relative to the atmosphere (e.g. mach = v_wrld_vel.magnitude / soundSpeed). Shouldn't it convert the velocity to body.ReferenceFrame first?

Still happens in 1.2.1. A variation of this bug exists in KIS/KAS too: 1. Activate the decoupler. 2. Attach a part to the decoupler with an electric screwdriver. 3. Try to activate the decoupler again.

Sometimes when I'm recovering a vessel to SPH it says "Vessel Revovery VAB". It might be related to the fact that I've originally built this vessel in VAB.

@magico13 Both dev-branch and development result in 500 error. As for BPs, yes, I assumed BPs are additive. My bad.

Theorem: build time calculations are seriously f***ed up. Proof: EDIT: booo, you haven't pushed your code to github in 4 months

I haven't really noticed any gamebreaking bugs (other than the new game one). But here are a couple of minor things: 1. I don't really understand how ship edit times are calculated. Sometimes what intuitively seems like a small change takes a lot of time, but other times a large edit can take very little time. I'm not sure if this is a bug, or I simply don't understand how it's supposed to work (probably the latter). 2. It'd be really nice to have build list open by default when you go to the KSC screen. It's annoying to have to open it manually every time. 3. This scroll bar is bugging me, and I can't resize the window to get rid of it:

What does CTS in CTSGeometry mean?

Will you add something like this? ;-) const Unit<Length> Meter = Metre;

Can you give a lower bound on when you get something playable? ;-)

Have you looked how other mods do this?

Try this and see what happens: [KSPField(isPersistant = true, guiActive = false)] protected double _TimeActive; protected double TimeActive { get { return _TimeActive; } set { print(string.Format("TimeActive was changed from {0} to {1}", _TimeActive, value)); _TimeActive = value; } } BTW, I think you can do Math.Round(Percent, 2) instead of 0.01 * Math.Round(Percent * 100)

It's quite possible that you don't need a GUI, and can use boolean tweakables instead. Just add something like this to your PartModule: [KSPField(guiName = "Sun Tracking", isPersistant = true, guiActiveEditor = true, guiActive = true)] [UI_Toggle(disabledText = "Disabled", enabledText = "Enabled")] public bool SunTracking; If you actually need a GUI, start with looking at how other mods add GUIs. Here is the documentation and guide about GUI in Unity (keep in mind that it's not KSP-specific) http://docs.unity3d.com/Documentation/ScriptReference/GUI.html http://docs.unity3d.com/Documentation/ScriptReference/GUILayout.html http://docs.unity3d.com/Documentation/Components/GUIScriptingGuide.html

This sound like some combination of orbital construction, extraplanetary launchpads, and kerbal attachment system.

It'd be nice to have it in stock game, but for now you can use Kerbal Attachment System mod.

Well, this is not quite true. I think you could unload a stock class, inject some IL code into it and then reload it. But don't do it. It's a Bad Thing.

I don't think it's still alive, but it looks like the license allows someone else to continue this mod.

What parts should allow kerbals to go through? It'd look very silly if a kerbal can squeeze through an ant engine ;-). And squeezing through mainsail's nozzle, or swimming through a tank full of fuel isn't much better. I see 3 options here: blacklist, whitelist, or some fancy heuristic.

Sounds interesting. I'll try it. BTW, thank you for showing me a flaw in my mod manager: I haven't expected that a mod can be a single .dll, and not an archive;-)

@sharpspoonful Try turning on your RCS pack, and tap shift a couple of times as you try to enter. That worked for me.

Can you put it on spaceport?

I found a workaround. Basically I wrote a program that parses the xml file and outputs 100+ C# lines like this: elements.Add(new Element(1, "H", "Hydrogen", 1, 1, 1.008, 1)); Every time I edit my xml file, I run this program and copypaste the output into my source code. It's ugly (and doesn't allow players to edit their periodic table), but will work for now. Are there any plans for adding KSP.Xml?

How do I load and parse an XML file from my PluginData folder? I tried to use System.Xml.Linq.XDocument, but plugins are not allowed to use System.Xml namespace.

I'll need to remember this proverb! ;-)

What browser are you using? I hope it's firefox. Todo: Opera Edit:

I want to help with this project, but I suck at VB (that one-liner fix doesn't count). So I've been working on this: Everything you see on that screenshot is subject to change. I wanted to check that what I'm doing is allowed, and found this in kerbalspaceport's Terms of Service: One could claim that both my extension and Bridge modify "the site" (change/add the download button) to give advantage (installing mods easier) to people who use KSPMM over people who don't use it.