diomedea

Sure. Here are screenshots of: 1. Optimizer Constraints 1.1 Central Body 1.2 Inclination 1.3 Radius of Periapsis 2. Optimizer Window (just when 1st iteration is done, a moment before the error comes) 3. Error Message Dialog This all with the same MA plan, the one I linked before. Going to try R2013a 64-bit, then R2014a 64-bit. Will take a bit of time, will report afterwards.

Same thing, still the optimizer stops with that error. Hope the following might be useful: I restarted the MA plan with step 7 (removed constraints, Optimizer works fine). Then reentered the constraints for step 8, but only distance to body and periapsis, not the inclination. Now the optimizers runs for 4 iterations, then stops (same error). The inclination constraint alone does nothing (optimizer does one step, outputs same solution as before, going right to the CoM of Laythe), no error. Only inclination + periapsis constraints (not distance to body), error at the first iteration. Only inclination + distance to body (not periapsis), error at first iteration (I know skipping constraints does not make for a good plan). I want to ask if the MCR version is a strict dependency for KSP TOT. Would it work if I install version R2014a (8.3) 64 bit on my PC? In case there is no strict dependency, I would like to test again with that other MCR.

Thanks for that, brings some hope back. May I ask you to reconsider the "[HIATUS]" written with the OP, then? Too often I found "hiatus" to be the final word with mods (not talking KSP mods here). When you keep developing for next releases, though at a slower pace than you (and us all) would like, that's not a hiatus at all. But, when a developer takes some time out, to come back is all the more painful (and more so if the code was not left is a clean state), often enough to prevent any effort at bringing a project back.

About the CDST, absolutely YES. I find myself wondering really how much that distance is, knowing would allow me to make final approach better. Too often I have to "look outside" to get situational awareness about that distance, or I would find closing laterally to end smacking the sides. About the update notifier. I don't think it is really needed, unless you are going to put new versions out real often. It is another bunch of code that will have some weight in memory (small, I know, but yet) and opens another outside connection (that I would not really like if not essential). I am actually considering to manually remove code that performs the check from the Toolbar plugin and recompile for my own use, just because of the above.

I sensed this was coming, and that is one reason I did not post here lately, no need to put further pressure on you. Still, sad . Too many new features were discussed since version 1.3.3 and knowing there was effort to bring some in for KSP 0.24 helped to mitigate the wait. You said you're going to release, but also you can't deliver. Quite vague, what we should expect to find with the next release (possibly final by you), just compatibility with KSP restored and the same functionality of 1.3.3?

Please choose a valid license for this mod and publish it on the Opening Post, as required at 5.2 of the Community Rules. EDIT: Happy to see the license! Thank you for it and for your nice addon.

Arrowstar, another (small) issue. As of KSP 0.23.5, Time can be changed from "Earth" days (24hrs, 365 in a year) to "Kerbin" days (6hrs, 426 in a year). KSP TOT shows only "Earth" days, would be nice to allow it to show "Kerbin" days too, for users who prefer that unit in game.

Yes, it works fine for me (KSP TOT v0.12, KSP 0.23.5.464). Just out of the box, no need to change any parameter in my case, only to allow my firewall to open ports for both the KSP TOT and the TOT Connect (seen as KSP.exe, being a plugin to that). Could it be your private network is configured with different IP numbering than standard? (In case, the IPAddressWhitelist.txt should include those valid for your PC).

Really happy to find the new version released . Even more happy to find a tutorial for Mission Architect with it :). I started doing exactly as the tutorial explains. At step 8, after inserting the constraints and starting the optimizer, there is a first pass but then it stops with an error message: "There was an error optimizing the mission script: Attempted to access eventLog(0,: ); index must be a positive integer or logical." Tried again and again, same result. Unfortunately, there is no log saved in this instance (a log was saved when the optimizer succeeded with the intercept of Laythe, step 7; but nothing saved about step 8). Attached the saved MA plan I did following instructions up to step 8. Hope that shows something. Running Windows 8, 64 bit, MCR R2013a (8.1) 32 bit.

Upgoer 5! That's brilliant . My names are all so boring (Probe 1, Munar 2, Test_craft 3, ...)

I tested (briefly) your version 6rc1 on a clean KSP 0.23.5.464 install (only SCANsat and Toolbar). Seems to be working fine, though it would require time to test in more situations. I was expecting you already implemented the variable number of orbits to be shown on the big map, hope it comes next (as well as other features you showed). Anyway, there is one possible issue that requires some tests to be better defined. The equatorial marks (that Damny introduced with build 2, see post #111) seem to be fine only for low number of orbits. If the markers are too many (that means to me, the resonance ha to be computed over a lot of orbits) the markers show to be nicely spaced even if the orbits are strictly resonant (tested with acceleration up to 1000x).

Are you planning to include debugging tools with the utilities for Jebnix? I am totally in favor of the compiled version, but need to debug. At least a step/trace with an output display. I admit I don't see a real difference, from a coder perspective, among an interpreter and a JIT compiler/launcher with debug options on (bear with me, I don't write compilers). But some hurdles you wrote about (e.g. the program counter) are certainly there in both an interpreter and a debugger.

I used the interactive mode in kOS just to see if kOS worked. Never to do anything useful, used programs for everything, even when debugging. Therefore, at least for me, you could let that mode go.

Many thanks, Malkuth. Followed your suggestions, and could make for the contract correctly. Mission completed, all worked fine.

Unless you can show evidence supporting such accusations, these are to be considered an attempt to discredit someone, as such against rule 2.2.d of the forum rules. Even in case you had a report from an anti-malware software, it could easily be a false positive. The toolbar is used by many users here (me included) and nobody else ever had such issues. But, in case, provide notice of what you found, that will allow to see what the issue was and to correct it, in case.

Thanks for your reply. Did activate the debug, cleaned contracts and generated ARM. Shows similar to what I had, so it must be good. Again amended to the asteroid name of my choice (BTW, is the "unloaded" text to have any effect? I see it is always set for any asteroid when going through the names) Please do, when you can. Would be a neat solution. The selection list is much better than having asteroid names taken casually from the game (to me, that is what MCE seems to be doing).

Using MCE, I had the opportunity to find a Asteroid Redirect Mission with the contracts near the start of a game career. Had to left go as the named asteroid was not coming close enough to Kerbin at the time (MCE was at version 0.62 back then). Now, there is another asteroid going to strike Kerbin dead-on. I have a slot free in the contracts, but unfortunately no ARM contract appears (MCE 0.65 now). More than 2 game days passed since that asteroid entered Kerbin's SoI, still nothing. The above makes me consider if MCE is made aware of the game state. Probably not, as it may mean to deal with very complex situations. Believe MCE reads only about the state of its own stuff (missions, budget, ships, kerbals, etc...) but there is no (at now) a system to check (e.g. from the persistent.sfs) if a specific situation exists, and use that for filling contracts slots. Anyway, I'm going for ARM with that 'roid above, can't let it come down without doing anything. So, tried to "generate" a user contract for ARM by copying the relevant section from MCContracts.cfg, and amended the name of the 'roid written in the MCE career *.sp file, to show the correct one. The contract shows fine in the contracts window, but there's something weird in the mission window, it only shows "This mission has docking Goal or Undock. It must be done in one sitting, the docking goals are not saved to bypass issues with Vesel ID's". No conditions shown. Would be glad to know if I'm doing something wrong, and how to correct that.

May I inquire if the surface attached passage feature may imply a better working of such parts as the Rockomax HubMax Multi-Point Connector? The HubMax has some issues about radial attachment. The only nodes it will get connected to another part, are the top and bottom ones (stack mounting). The lateral ones (left, right, front and back) can be used to connect another part to an already attached HubMax; but not to connect the HubMax to an existing part. To connect a HubMax to another part, it always must be rotated so to have top or bottom nodes facing the part. This is an issue of the stock game, not of CLS. Also, I get the above is tied to the vessel structure, any part can be connected to only another (but can have many parts attached to it), therefore creating a tree-like structure; having a part able to attach to more than one, would create loops and some of KSP functionalities are not devised to deal with them (e.g. the tanks/engines association). I would be real happy if CLS could in some way correct those "misbehaving" nodes, if only for crew passage (and, believe it is needed, structural joints), but not changing the vessel structure.

Another very interesting feature, the adjustable sea-level. I'm already set to use it to have at a glance locations that may be impacted when buzzing with a very low periapsis.

While reading the first part of your post (and after almost a month without updates), I had a feeling you were going to leave this project. Really glad instead to find you are back .

Numeric solver! Sticky functions! Transform coordinates! And... degrees (°.°) Now will have to spend a lot more time doing fancy things with this mod .

Let me start telling, I am strongly in favor of using the Toolbar plugin. Your motives to choose to implement it are sensible to me. However, there is no need to make the Toolbar mandatory. Generally the Toolbar is implemented with a wrapper, and it recognizes if the plugin is present or not, setting for use it in case. You only need to put code to call the wrapper and deal with button creation in both cases. Believe you may also find this thread useful.

You want to see how SM is used? Here is the central hub for a conceptual SS, 28 ports where to dock various modules. This hub is all about crew transfer, designed on purpose to verify how CLS/SM work.

Hi and welcome among us. Totally hooked here, too .

Of course you're right, unfortunately I couldn't take the output_log when it happened, and it shows some specific condition must exist for this to occur (just trying to recreate casually doesn't do). Since this happened a number of times to me, I am confident it will do again, and will have that log available next time. Thanks for your attention.