Tommy59375

Thanks so much for this tool Mythos! Like so many others here I had a vessel which refused to undock in my modded 1.9.1 savefile so I: made a quicksave in game with F5; loaded the quicksave into KML; right clicked on the warnings and selected repair docking connection for each one; saved the file from KML as the new quicksave.sfs; loaded the modified quicksave in game with F9 ... and the problem was resolved! So so much quicker and easier than editing the save file manually!

When I create a clean installation, my GameData\Squad\Parts\Command folder looks like this, clearly showing that I have two versions of some parts, some of which aren't in the zDeprecated folder. Could this possibly be causing the issue I'm having with some "test" and "haul" contracts being automatically failed? The post where I originally talked about this is in the Spoiler below. Since making that post, I have now had four contracts fail: Test RT-10 "Hammer" Solid Fuel Booster at the Launch Site, Test RT-5 "Flea" Solid Fuel Booster at the Launch Site, Test Mk1 Command Pod landed at Kerbin, Haul Mk1 Command Pod into flight above Kerbin. Note that (1.) and (2.) both happened at the same time as each other.

I see this too. Does anyone else?

I have found that even when I completely delete my KSP directory in steamapps\common after uninstalling the game through steam, if I re-install the latest version, 1.7.3, various old parts’ old CFGs still get downloaded (for example, the “non-v2” Mk 1 Command Pod, as well as the newer v2 version). Do you get this too? And could it be causing any issues with ReStock? Might this be the source of my problem a few posts up?

Thanks for confirming; kinda annoying it's a stock issue though! I can't say I'm seeing any Z-fighting in the tech tree either, although this would seem like a plausible explanation as to why it's always the boattail designs that get shown. I think I might have just discovered another issue, although I'm not yet entirely sure what's causing it and I'm fairly sure that this one's going to be much harder to diagnose. Some of my "Test xyz" contracts are being failed, even though their timers are nowhere near running out and I haven't done anything wrong which would cause them to be failed. This seems to only occur on a scene change. So far I have had this happen with: RT-5 & RT-10 boosters, and Mk-1 capsule. This gives me a somewhat garbled message through the in-game messaging system: (Don't worry too much about the specific funds & reputation penalties, I'm using custom difficulty options.) Here's a spreadsheet containing a list of my installed mods and their version numbers, as well as my KSP.LOG output_log.txt file: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1yLIyiIlQ2O76Bs8E1ela8dc5i3HzgsNW I really have no idea how to read the log file but if anyone might be able to provide some insight, then I can try to reproduce the issue more reliably. Performing a Google search for "Test No situation report available" (with the quotes) leads me here: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/109145-17-mk2-expansion-v1841-update-4232019/page/23/&tab=comments#comment-2496595, where a user by the name of tfiskgul seems to be encountering the same issue as a result of renamed parts in one of his mods. That's what made me think this was perhaps an issue with ReStock, rather than one of my other mods. Would you be able to shed any light on this for me?

I'm having a small issue with ReStock & ReStock+ in my 1.7.3 game, where some parts show a different default variant in the tech tree compared to the VAB. For example, most engines are shown with their boattail variant in the tech tree, but not in the VAB. Some fuel tanks are also different colours, such as the 2.5m tanks being metal in the tech tree but white and black in the VAB. Interestingly enough, hovering over the part in the tech tree displays the default VAB variant in the infobox. See this screenshot for example: I do have a few mods installed, but have just verified that the issue also occurs in a stock install of KSP 1.7.3 with ReStock 0.1.4, ReStock+ 0.1.4 and ModuleManager 4.0.2. Is anyone else having the same problem? And is this a known issue? Thanks!

Thank you!

When ejecting from Kerbin to go to another planet, how do I use the ejection angle which the calculator displays to me? Should I... Place my manoeuvre node at the calculated ejection angle, or Align my path to be parallel to the calculated ejection angle, or Do something else? Inside the spoiler tag below, I have attached screenshots illustrating the first two options. In this case, I am sending a flyby probe to Moho. Thanks! (and sorry if I did something wrong with the post...)

Don't worry, it's not a big problem! It's not hard to self-impose this limit (ie. just say "I won't set it any higher than 4"), although of course it would be nice to be able to change the hard limit. Potentially some people may require even longer fairings (although, I'm not sure why...) (I've just now thought it would be quite cool to have this maximum increase by researching certain nodes in the tech tree, or along with the VAB upgrades etc. Not sure if that's possible or if you eventually want to implement something like this at all but it would just add another element I suppose.)

I tried adding 'maxSegments = 4' just underneath the line 'numSlices = 2' but to no avail. Even after restarting the game, the maximum allowable number of (vertical) side wall segments did not change. Of note, if I added the line 'numSegments = 4' in the same place, the fairing would default to having 4 segments, but of course the whole slider range of 0-10 was still available to be selected. Could you send over an exemplar CFG file (or a screenshot) so I can figure out where I've gone wrong? The link below is the CFG file I modified for the standard 1.25m (non-expanded) fairing. https://www.dropbox.com/s/myyvbxelakhwc5r/KWFairingSize1.cfg?dl=0

How is this done? I tried to look in the CFG files for the individual fairings but couldn't find any setting of relevance.

Is it possible for one to change the maximum allowed number of vertical segments? I think in the old KW rocketry had a limit of four or five (so you'd need a wider fairing if you wanted it to be very tall).

Thanks!

Thanks for the work you've done to make this a thing, I much prefer these old style fixed shape fairings to the stock system. But please could you just confirm that the mod does actually work... i.e. That these fairings will shield my payload. I ask this because the Old School Fairings mod (which also worked to make these fixed fairings work with the updated aerodynamics model) was broken after KSP 1.1 then never able to be fixed. Here is the last page form that mod's thread:

Okay thanks for the clarification. So basically it could do those things but doesn't out of the box and someone would need to write a mod which uses backgroundprocessing to accomplish those things. Thanks also for all the work you've been putting in to fixing bugs in this mod, it's much appreciated!

Thanks for posting that... now I realise I should have posted there! It provides some details but it only really mentions charging batteries. So I'm wondering if it will allow other modules (e.g. The science lab) to consume EC when I'm not focused on the vessel. The original thread also doesn't say anything about other processes eg. Resource harvesting and converting. And of course since the last "proper" update was for 1.1 (although you have kindly maintained it for 1.3) it's not clear whether the mod causes Commnet relays to lose EC if you transmit science through them (which I think would be a really cool feature!)

Sorry if this is the wrong place to ask about the BackgroundProcessing mod but I'm really not sure where would be more appropriate... If I install this, will it cause EC to be consumed for other things too? Eg. Will Commnet relays start to lose EC when I transmit science through them, or will the science lab use EC when I'm not focused on the vessel? Will BackgroundProccessing also allow other processes to occur e.g. resource gathering when not focused on the vessel, or is it only for EC consumption? Thanks!

Yes, well I posted a request anyway, maybe someone else created a mod for this behaviour themselves that they would be willing to share or else a mod coded for 1.1.3 may actually work, provided this area of the game hasn't changed too much. Either way, it's not a huge deal because I can just fire them... can't believe I missed that button

I posted this originally in the Gameplay Discussions Forum, although was directed that this would probably be a better place. [Original Thread Here] When I rescue kerbals for contracts, they get added to the list of available crew for assignment to missions. But I don't want this to be happened. I want them to simply disappear after being rescued. After all, they're supposed to have been stranded up there by some other company's space program, aren't they? I have been told that I can simply fire them in the astronaut complex, which is much easier than editing the persistence file which I have been doing. But I would like to automate the process nonetheless, thus I'm requesting that someone make a mod to do so, or post a mod that has this behaviour. A complication is that I play KSP 1.0.5 still and will not be updating for the foreseeable future. As a result, I understand that this may be too much to ask. Perhaps a 1.1.3 mod may work, if this part of the game hasn't changed across the versions. But it's obviously understandable that most people would not be willing to mod an older version of the game. Thank you very much in advance.

This is what I have been doing, but it is of course a bit of a hassle to keep quitting the game, editing the persistence file, and reloading the game every time I rescue a Kerbal as I'm sure you can see. Does firing them not carry a penalty? I can't test it now, I just find it hard to believe I would have missed this obviously much easier option... to be honest I'm not that experienced in many of the aspects in Career Mode... A little complication, I suppose is that I still play in 1.0.5, for modding compatibility reasons. I personally see no reason to update to 1.1.3, for the way I play (long term, slow paced save file without excessive time warping). I shall post in the Add-on Discussions Forum, but I wonder if it may be too much to ask for someone to mod an older version of the game.

Well, as the title implies, I'm looking for some mod/setting/hack to disable the game adding any kerbals that I rescue to the list of available crews for assignment in my astronaut the complex. For example, I receive a contract to rescue Billy-Bobfred Kerman, and I do so. But then, Billy-Bobfred Kerman shows up on the list of available crews to be assigned to my next mission. I don't want this to happen. For those about to question my reasons, it's very simple. Not only does the list become cluttered up, but also the mechanic makes the astronaut complex all a bit pointless which I think is a shame. The idea of having to pay to get new crews appeals to me but if they're added for free from these contracts I'll never have a reason to buy any. Please don't suggest "Well just ignore them" or "Don't do those contracts" because suggestions like that don't address the problem, instead they create other ones. Thanks in advance and to the mods: sorry if I posted in the wrong section, I use these forums very rarely.

I am not looking to throttle the SRB, merely to adjust the thrust value with tweakables in VAB. However this solution of editing the part configs for minThrust all to 0 does work fine it seems. I have no idea the best way to include that as an option for people (incl. me if i ever update my game) that don't want to edit every part config file each time. Could I write a module manager script so I don't have to do this to the config files if I ever want to change my game version? But for now it is not an issue. I am able to use tweakables to get SRBs burning as low as 5% power etc and the exhaust flames are correct. Linuxgurugamer you might still want to look in to it though because it's a bit confusing for people when they first try to use the tweakables option for this, but probably not super important - it looks like the "problem" was like this in original KW, as I just modified the KW configs.

Thank you very much I updated it with CKAN and that issue is fixed. But I found another issue (?) this time with setting the thrust limiter for SRBs. In VAB it seems if you set the thrust limiter to 0% the SRBs actually burn with half of their full power capacity. Maybe this is intentional, maybe not, I do not know. Back in 0.23.5 when I last used KW this was not the case however. I am unsure in terms of more recent updates. That isn't really a big problem for me though (but it would be nice to have the full 0 thrust -> 100% thrust in the same way as the stock SRBs (compared to the current 50% -> 100%)). The real issue is again related to visuals I think. It seems that the yellow exhaust flame's size depends on the thrust limiter setting and not the real thrust of the booster, to where when the thrust limiter is set to 0% there will be no exhaust flame, despite the booster actually providing some thrust. I set up a demonstration. Here are some Globe VI SRBs. You can see that booster #1 has no exhaust flame, while booster #2 has a not very intense flame, and boosters #3 and #4 have brighter flames. According to the thrust limiter value this is correct, but according to the amount of thrust they are in reality producing it doesn't make much sense. For the stock boosters, a thrust limiter of 0% will make no exhaust flame and no thrust etc. EDIT also of note, is the SRB part descriptions. Some contain burn times for running at 100% and 0%, while others say 100% and 50%. So to me it seems that the minimum thrust value being set to half power is intended. But the exhaust flames are still wrong. EDIT 2 actually maybe it is supposed to be like this. In which case what are the instructions I could take to fix this issue for myself by "modding the mod"?

Hello again, I bet you're glad to see a message from me! But I have realised that the "engines glowing red hot" issue is not entirely resolved. The liquid engines seem all to be solved but every single SRB still has the issue. I did a fresh CKAN re install into a totally new directory which I created from the pure steam stock game download of 1.0.5 The tech tree problem is fixed and so are the liquid engines. But the SRBs are not. Shown below: all SRBs in power order (left-right) with an RT-10 stock booster in the centre for comparison.

Dawww what an idiot I am. Sorry for wasting your time with such a simple problem! I saw "modulemanager" in the GamaData and it didn't even cross my mind to check if it was the up to date version, especially since my other mods were working fine as far as I could tell... and I'm new to CKAN, have never used it before... I guess it was left over there from the last time I was playing KSP, was it really that long o.0 2014. *sniff* well I'll go and sit in a corner now.