magico13

Can you get me the output_log.txt fie from the KSP_Data folder from the play session where that happened? I can probably tell you what mod is causing it. There is a chance it is KCT related. That sometimes happens when a null reference error occurs, sometimes on recovery. Do you use RealChute? KCT's booster recovery code may have an issue with stock parachutes in a really rare case which will be fixed in the next version. Ironically, using RealChute has less interaction bugs, which is kind of silly to me.

@Three_Pounds You could temporarily disable reconditioning or build times if need be to complete some of the missions (if their times are too short with KCT). @Malkuth I imagine the issues with prebuilding are two fold. One is that you may not know the requirements of a contract prior to it appearing, and the other is that when you start building the craft is when you have to pay for it. If you prebuild a lot of craft you're going to run into problems with funds. I'm not saying it's something you need to change, but with KCT it can be months before a craft is finished depending on user settings (in my specific case, I play with settings that make a low tech rocket still take about 30-50 kerbal days, but the average is about 8 days I think for defaults). If you do make any changes based on KCT, let me know if I can help at all. If you want access to anything KCT oriented (aka, you want me to make an API) let me know. I can always make user settings available to other mods and you could alter deadlines based on KCT's time modifiers (or simply on the presence of KCT. That's easy without an API). In short, if you need me to do anything just ask

Reusable spacecraft do in fact take less time to build. It should be about 1/10 of the normal time, assuming all parts are recovered. Spaceplanes are very, very advantageous with this and 0.24. Currently no one knows what the Administration building will do, so I can't begin to prepare for it. I know it won't involve construction time, based on the results of the thread that initiated this mod (where the devs said they have no intention of adding construction time in any form, and where many people objected to the idea of having it). So i'm not too worried about that. The nice thing about this mod is that pretty much everything it adds is things the devs don't want (which is why I love KSP's modability).

Upgrading is based on upgrade points. One is given for every tech node unlocked (upon spending the science, since this mod also adds time delays to the actual unlocking of tech node parts). You can also purchase upgrade points for 250 science or 250,000 funds (I may need to increase the funds cost). In sandbox games you are given a set number of upgrades (45 by default) but you can freely change that amount. In career games you start with 15 upgrades for free. I believe the Getting Started guide covers the upgrade system decently. You can spend upgrades in three categories: VAB upgrades, SPH upgrades, and R&D upgrades. VAB and SPH upgrades work the same way: by speeding up build rates or by unlocking additional build rates (meaning you can build multiple things at once). R&D upgrades have two options: Research, which gives you science based on how long a ship takes to build; and Development, which decreases the time that tech nodes take to unlock. It makes a lot more sense when you play with it, but the Getting Started Guide also describes it pretty thoroughly (if I recall correctly). Conceivably there shouldn't be any mod incompatibilities, since this acts very independently of any other mods. There are two cases of mod integration though. If DebRefund is detected then KCT doesn't perform any of it's own refunding of funds for dropped stages, but still recovers parts independently (for use in the inventory). If StageRecovery is detected, KCT transfers ALL recovery over to it and receives the percent refunded. From that, it determines whether parts are "too damaged to be used" and won't add them to the inventory if they are (basically, if you get refunded 75% (due to landing speed) then there's a 25% chance that a part will be unusable). The supposed mechjeb issue is questionable, since I really don't know what was causing the bug that made me think that, I just know that people who have experienced the bug also use mechjeb (but there may be some who don't). I think that was the camera lockup on simulation bug. And before I post this I'm gonna guess I got ninja'd But that's ok because I generally do a terrible job at explaining things. Edit: Surprisingly I wasn't this time! @WololoW It's too out of scope for KCT, but it doesn't seem like it'd be too hard to write. I don't have a whole lot of time right now, so I don't think I could, but someone could put it in the addon suggestions forum. KCT is too close to release and has had so much change of scope that I kind of just want it to stop growing for a little bit When I took over I thought this was going to be a small mod and it's grown to something far more complex then I ever could imagine. I love that, but I also worry about overstepping too much (which is why most features are configurable in some way or another).

@Vardicd That option won't affect any existing reconditiong, but should affect future ones. If you temporarily disable reconditioning, then reenable it, the new setting should take affect and you can cancel the current reconditioning. @autumnalequinox Do you mind if I quote that for the full release? Or at least provide a link to the post.

You could go into the configs for each part and set the crash tolerance to something really high. Or better would to use a ModuleManager config to do it automatically without permanent changes. Parts only get destroyed when they hit water at a speed higher than the crash tolerance. Don't ask me how to do it with ModuleManager, I don't ever mess with configs.

Working on that part right now. I may have something working now, but I basically had to break most of the core functionality to get it in there. JeffreyCor, you're going to have a lot of testing to do!

I'd love for it to be EVE or KAC. I don't think it will be anything like Karbonite, since that would likely crush the very open dreams of it (plus Squad's been pretty adamant that they want Resources done in a very specific way (so specific that they don't even know it)). SP+ would be interesting, but do we know how much Hugo got done with the plane parts? It'd be a shame for them to basically be replaced (this was probably discussed, but I don't want to read everything). I hope it's not DebRefund, because that means a large majority of StageRecovery's mechanics will be made useless (except the new powered recovery), but I wouldn't be surprised to see similar functionality in the future (also, I don't know if Squad would have to buy that code, it's fairly simple code and you could implement it into the stock game really easily without too much overlap. Mission Controller, Kerbal Construction Time, StageRecovery, and now DebRefund all have or have had variations on the same code. If they did buy it, I would hope they'd talk to me and Malkuth as well, since I'm the author of two of those mods and have been working on that code since February, and MissionController has had it for who knows how long before that. And they certainly haven't been talking to me.)

The costs should be ok (as in you'll be charged correctly) since that uses the built in KSP system for calculation (and thus will account for fuel and all that, meaning you pay exactly what is displayed). The time calculation is also based on cost, but on the cost of the fully fueled parts (aka, what's listed as the cost in the editor, or more specifically in the part config file). Tweakscale does pose an interesting problem that I haven't considered, though. Although tweakscale also basically eliminates the tech tree since everything can be any size (aka, 3.75 meter rockets in the first tech node.) I think it may be best to leave it how it is for now, because otherwise you could build a bunch of tiny parts really fast, then recover them and make them really big and have it build quickly because they're in the inventory. I may look into Tweakscale to see if there's anything simple I can do to split parts based on size in the inventory, which would be the best solution, but probably a bit of work. Edit: Looking into the Module that's saved to the parts, I could probable get the current scale and save it with the part name in the inventory. I could see an issue with if you didn't always have tweakscale installed though (aka, added it later or removed it later) since the normal stock parts would be considered different parts. I could work around that by not saving the scale if the current scale == default scale. Definitely doable, and might not be super hard. The only issue is that I would have to change how the total time (well, Build Points) is calculated to not use the costs in the config and instead use the current costs (and all the implications associated with that, such as fuel costs). Honestly, not too hard to do and it shouldn't make too much of a difference 90% of the time. I'll do it. Edit2: Except that method of calculating the cost may only work when I have access to a ShipConstruct, which is not true anywhere except in the editor. If I try to make one from a ship ConfigNode then the ghost ships come back, and they are bad. This may be harder than I thought. At the very least I can save them differently, but perhaps not have proper changes to the time. At least not yet. Edit3: Should be able to do it with the confignode of the vessel. Now I just need to rewrite the method that handles getting the Build Points.

Hmm, must be a linux specific bug since it's fine on Windows (at least on my end). Can you open the icons with a normal image viewer? They were made by Nezerroth, not me, so I don't know exactly how they were made. Can you open them in GIMP and try exporting them as PNGs again? Maybe it's related to an alpha channel or something like that, so save it with the bare minimum of settings. So weird that it's an icon issue, but I'll take that over other game breaking issues. If you've still got issues after that, send me the log and I'll see if I can see something in it.

New update, 1.4.0.0. This update should fix several bugs (specifically with an error calculating terminal velocity in flight, and hopefully the issues Vult was having). In addition, it adds Powered Recovery thanks to Malkuth from Mission Controller Extended! I've added a section discussing how Powered Recovery works on the first post, so you should check that out. Be warned that it is still in development, so if you encounter any serious bugs, try disabling powered recovery from the settings menu. It might make your problems disappear. Also, I've left a decent amount of debugging code in, I'll remove that next version but I'd like to see it if people have issues. With that said, if you encounter any bugs, please include the output_log.txt file with your bug report and I'll gladly take a look! Basics of powered recovery: Must have control of the stage (aka, a probe core or Kerballed command pod, but a probe core is better) Only activated engines are used. Atmospheric delta-v greater than or equal to 2.5 times the terminal velocity (after parachutes, so parachutes can reduce this considerably) Thrust to Weight ratio of at least 1 (even with parachutes) Additionally, it is designed around stock engines. If using mod engines with strange fuels or other weird requirements, it may not work as intended. Feel free to try, but no guarantees it will work properly. You can check how much fuel was consumed in the Info tab of the in-flight GUI. Also, the editor GUI now displays info for the current fuel values and for empty fuel values (if those are different). No more emptying out the stages needed to see if they will be recovered.

Oh, you're right I didn't see that! I'll take a look again. I was on my tablet before, so it's not always easy to debug on there (yay, 10 inch screens) but now that I'm on my desktop I'll take a look again. I also realized that the fix I was talking about before is a fix for something I haven't changed yet, meaning it won't really help the existing bugs. I'll let you know what I find, if anything. Edit: My guess is that because you're using stock parachutes, it's an issue with trying to reference the ModuleParachute without the module being loaded. I should be able to get around that by looking at the ConfigNode instead of the loaded module. Hopefully that's all the issue is. If so, it'll be fixed later today. That problem doesn't manifest with RealChute because of how I have to deal with that module. Edit2: Hmm, harder than I thought since the ConfigNode doesn't seem to store the fullyDeployedDrag (for some unknown reason). I'm going to have to just assume that the parachute has 500 drag if the PartModule is null. Luckily that only occurs in rare cases.

Unfortunately your particular problem looks to be with Haystack Continued, which the developer is aware of and is planning an update for, per this post: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/89920-0-24-2-2014-08-11-Haystack-Continued-%28v0-3-1-0%29?p=1357712&viewfull=1#post1357712 I say unfortunately since it doesn't specifically help me, but thank you very much for posting it anyway! Logs that may not directly help me are still better than no logs at all, because then I know what the problem is and can do more than just say "Sorry, can't help you." FYI, I don't do anything to the stages themselves. I get access to them when the game deletes them, but I don't change anything on them because other mods also get access to them at the same time (when listening to the OnVesselDestroy event). The next update will change things in the stage though, since powered recovery requires using fuel. Just informing you, in case you were curious. I have an idea of what may be a related issue that someone reported in the KCT thread and should be fixed in the next version. I'll hopefully have a new version out later today which will include a preliminary version of powered recovery and that fix (along with a couple other fixes). Currently powered recovery takes all the fuel, instead of just what it needs, because that's what Malkuth's code originally did and calculating how much fuel you need to burn with an arbitrary number of propellants isn't a simple task (Pretty sure it involves a series and I need to solve for every element. I'll likely do explicit calculations for special cases of 1 (planes), 2(stock rockets), or 3(nothing stock that I know of) propellants, and anything higher will just take all the applicable fuels). Or I can solve it with a simulation, "burning" a small number of each propellant at the correct ratio until I hit the mass required, but that would be more computationally heavy.

I made a change a few versions ago (probably with the start of the PR7 series I think) so that it should slowly warp down just like using the Warp to Complete button. SOI changes may cause it to suddenly stop warp, since that's different code that EkkuZakku wrote before I took over. You may have also been the one who requested that you be able to warp to any object's completion, instead of just the next one. I also implemented that (well, with ships and tech at least. I should probably add it for Reconditioning as well)

Generally each addon has its own GameData folder in the zip file. You just have to merge that with the one in the Kerbal Space Program folder and everything should work fine. Some addons don't include a GameData folder and with those you are supposed to put the highest level folder in the zip into the GameData folder (ie, if the zip has a folder called "AwesomeMod", put that in the GameData folder so you have ..\GameData\AwesomeMod\). You shouldn't have to make any folders yourself (and that is generally a bad idea to do since many addons require a very specific folder structure)

KAC integration will happen when TriggerAu has added an API that lets other mods interact with KAC. I've looked a little bit to see if there's a way I can manually add alarms, but it doesn't look like there is, at least not easily. I had begun working on another mod called Flight School that would have included a feature where Kerbals needed downtime (and you would also have to train them before you could use them), but once 0.24 was released I haven't had time to do any more work on it. It's so bare-bones right now that there's nothing worth releasing and I don't see a point where I'll get to work on it any time soon, unfortunately. Anything regarding Kerbals I've pretty much determined is outside of the scope of KCT. KCT is staying based around construction and the related aspects of running a Space Program. Kerbals are more geared toward a mod designed specifically for them.

Runescape, back in ... 2005? I wanted to go with Magic Mike (wow, that's lame) but that was taken. At the time I had been playing The Sims: Makin' Magic and the magic company there is called MagiCo. 13 is my favorite number, and since then I've had some variant of magico13 (magico 13, magico1313, themagico13, etc.) It started with a space between "magico" and "13" but some places don't let you have spaces in your username and it's easier not to have one.

This sounds like the same thing that was reported a few versions back (and is mentioned in the Known Issues). Unfortunately I don't believe anyone with the issue ever gave me a log to look over, or a consistent way of reproducing it, so I've never been able to debug it. Just looking at the code I haven't been able to find anything that could cause it directly.

I'm sorry about all the hotfixes lately. Unfortunately they each keep fixing one thing at a time, but I don't want to make the fixes wait. 0.7.2.3 just fixes an issue with checking resource mass when the resource reference is null. It may be the fix to autumnalequinox's problem and appears to fix an issue someone else reported through a PM. Hopefully no more hotfixes are needed. I'm going to try to get the official version 1.0 out next week, but I want to clean up the code a bit first (remove old commented out stuff, add comments to explain everything, and minimize debug messages). I should do a major refactoring later on to update some areas to use better code than the hacked together things that I have. Edit: If the update notifier is notifying you of an update but you're at the latest version, redownload. I may have forgotten to put the new version into the zip...

I'm looking into another issue that may be related. If the fix I just did for that actually works, then it might be the solution to your problem autumnalequinox.

Definitely not. I will look into it and report back when I've figured it out. Edit: Testing seems to confirm that, but I can't seem to figure out why yet. Edit2: The function for getting the ship cost appears to be putting out twice what it should be. I wonder if it's also charging twice as much to build them. Edit3: Found the source of the problem. You can't use the same variable in the out for the dry costs and fuel costs. Just made a second variable and it should work now. Edit4: Uploaded fixed version. Simulations should also cost half as much now I believe.

Here is what is being reported as the error, by the way. It looks like Shad0wCatcher's idea that it's related to the tech tree makes sense. I know I saw something about parts being in multiple nodes. If I can find that I'll include it as well. Maybe fixing those parts will cause everything to work properly. NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object at ResearchAndDevelopment.partTechAvailable (.AvailablePart ap) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at ResearchAndDevelopment.PartTechAvailable (.AvailablePart ap) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at TarsierSpaceTech.TSTTelescopeContract.MeetRequirements () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at Contracts.Contract.Generate (System.Type contractType, ContractPrestige difficulty, Int32 seed, State state) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at Contracts.ContractSystem.GenerateContract (Int32 seed, ContractPrestige difficulty, System.Type contractType) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at Contracts.ContractSystem.GenerateContract (System.Int32& seed, ContractPrestige difficulty) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at Contracts.ContractSystem.GenerateContracts (System.Int32& seed, ContractPrestige difficulty, Int32 count) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at Contracts.ContractSystem.RefreshContracts () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at Contracts.ContractSystem+.MoveNext () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 [VesselRecovery]: Big Boy recovered At Runway. Recovery Value: 100.0% Crewmember Jebediah Kerman is available again Added 24.99515 (25) reputation: 'Jebediah Kerman was recovered!'. NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object at ResearchAndDevelopment.partTechAvailable (.AvailablePart ap) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at ResearchAndDevelopment.PartTechAvailable (.AvailablePart ap) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at TarsierSpaceTech.TSTTelescopeContract.MeetRequirements () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at Contracts.Contract.Generate (System.Type contractType, ContractPrestige difficulty, Int32 seed, State state) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at Contracts.ContractSystem.GenerateContract (Int32 seed, ContractPrestige difficulty, System.Type contractType) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at Contracts.ContractSystem.GenerateContract (System.Int32& seed, ContractPrestige difficulty) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at Contracts.ContractSystem.GenerateContracts (System.Int32& seed, ContractPrestige difficulty, Int32 count) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at Contracts.ContractSystem.RefreshContracts () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at Contracts.ContractSystem.OnReputationChanged (Single newRep) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at EventData`1[System.Single].Fire (Single data) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at Reputation.AddReputation (Single r, System.String reason) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at Reputation.onvesselRecoveryProcessing (.ProtoVessel pv, .MissionRecoveryDialog mrDialog, Single recoveryScore) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at EventData`3[ProtoVessel,MissionRecoveryDialog,System.Single].Fire (.ProtoVessel data0, .MissionRecoveryDialog data1, Single data2) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at VesselRecovery.OnVesselRecovered (.ProtoVessel pv) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at EventData`1[ProtoVessel].Fire (.ProtoVessel data) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at VesselRetrieval.recoverVessel (.Vessel v) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at VesselRetrieval.recoverVessels () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at VesselRetrieval+.MoveNext () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 Flight State Captured [ProtoCrewMember Warning]: Crewmember Jebediah Kerman found inside a part but status is set as missing. Vessel must have failed to save earlier. Restoring assigned status. TreeLoader version 1.1.5 loading parts... TreeLoader: Part in multiple nodes:orbitaiespod - advExploration, spaceExploration TreeLoader: Part in multiple nodes:Thermometermt1 - experimentalAerodynamics, spaceExploration TreeLoader: Part in multiple nodes:PAPBarometer - advExploration, scienceTech Shad0wCatcher, if you're still having problems I can take a look at your logs and help you out, even though it's not a KCT problem. If it's just a matter of fixing some parts that are in multiple nodes, the parts are pretty easy to find in the log (look at the beginning of the "Scene Change: From MAINMENU to SPACECENTER". Search that with notepad, it will be the first result from the top)

The KSP-AVC update checker? Yeah, I have it setup to go to the forum page when you click the "Download" button. Cybutek did a good job with that addon. I considered a direct download, but this is probably safer and you can check the latest posts for the biggest changes.

Did you by chance have a contract started from Tarsier Space Tech? Something about a telescope. What happens if you don't have that contract active? I see an error with that when recovering a ship called Big Boy being flown by Jeb. Edit: 0.7.2.1 just fixes reconditioning being caused by runway items and default crews not being assigned when launching ships when there is already one on the pad/runway.

But you could before, no problem? In a simple test I wasn't seeing any issue in sandbox or career mode. All I was doing was building a small ship, launching it, then recovering it immediately. Anyone else seeing related problems? Can you get me you output_log.txt file from the KSP_Data directory? (or KSP_x64_Data if using 64 bit) Edit: Though I did just realize that things launched from the runway will probably cause launchpad reconditioning to take place...