RadarManFromTheMoon

You are trying to import orbital states from KSP, right? Can you provide some more information about what exactly you are doing? There are two ways of interacting with KSP. You can import from the persitent.sfs or you can download directly from KSP via ksptotconnect. Which one are you using?

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/99660-0-25-Adjustable-Landing-Gear-v1-0-4%28doors-fixed%29-Nov-14?p=1547104&viewfull=1#post1547104

Any plans on FMRS support? Would be great to be able to use these two mods together, but since both mess around with savegames I suppose it's asking for trouble, right?

Great Mod. Exactly what I always wanted. How is the compatibility with Kerbal Construction Time? Any known issues? Both mess around with savegames so I guess there is a lot potential for chaos. But it would be great to combine the two mods.

Use the Porkchop plotter to get the launch window, and then optimize the maneuvers in Mission Architect. The plotter uses a simplified model that will give "the right direction" but isn't that precise. You will have to optimize the maneuvers with Mission Architect to get accurate results. This post could be of interest to you if you want to learn more about how the porkchop plotter works.

When I started to mess around with KSPTOT, I ran into the same problem. You most probably must raise the number of synodic periods to plot. Go into the options (Edit/Options) and change the value to 3 or 4. You should get much more sensible results then.

A little peek on whats coming next: Additional editor infos. See if your airship is equipped for particular environments. I've also made an overview of features I plan to integrate in the future. You can find it on the OP.

I think rcs balancer just dont takes the envelopes lift into account. Try to keep the center of buoyancy as close to the center of mass as possible. You can see where your center of buoyancy is by activating the col marker in the sph. It is the grey marker. Also possible that you gone to fast. FAR adds a lot of drag. If you mean that the ballonets inflate/deflate too fast: Yep that could need some balancing indeed. A more fiery explosion would be really nice. I just havent found out how to do it Lifting gas names might change in the future.

I don't think that you can get them into outer space. The vacuum will make them pop, and they are way too big anyway. But you could use extraplanetary launchpads or use the deployable envelopes from hooligan Labs. edit: Another thing you could do is deactivating pressure damage in the settings.

Depends on what you are trying to do. Up in the athmosphere, air pressure decreases quickly so the lifting gas will need more room to expand. The higher you wanna go, the bigger you want to build. However if you want them to be smaller you can always go to the settings and change the buoyancy. You can set it from 1 (realistic) up to 15 (15 times more than realistic). Default is 5. Here is the airship from the op, standing on the vab for scale.

Wow, looks great. These ellipsoid parts are really interesting. You create them by changing the scaling right? Good idea, but I think it might mess up the volume calculations. I will totally do some research to see if I can implement something like that though.

I totally agree that retractable envelopes would be a cool feature. I'm not sure if it can be done with a reasonable amount of effort though. PA uses Procedural Parts for it's shape generation and I highly doubt that it supports changes in shape while in flight. I will see if I can find a solution, but ATM I would say if procedurallity is not so important to you and you really need to retract your envelopes. For example to bring them to other planets you might be better off with HL. Or just use both. The "future plans"-list is a good idea. I think I will add that soon.

Yeah, thats intended. One need to take care that the envelopes pressure doesnt get too high or low. You arent interested, but for everyone who is: There is a tutorial included that explains how the ballonets can be used to control buoyancy and pressure. I think it's a good starting point. Also there are two airships included (one for stock/NEAR and one for FAR). I will see if I get to create a building tutorial soon. Submarines? I don't know. I'm focusing on airships because there are quite a few features I still really want to implement and I'm not really that interested in these underwater deathtraps. But maybe in the future.

Now THATS a sight to behold! How does it fly?

I just released Version 1.2. It includes an in-game tutorial which should help beginners to get started with PA. Besides the tutorial there are no real changes. I just really wanted to get the tutorial out because I think that PA can be a bit overwhelming for beginners. I also created a release thread. From now on all new Version will be announced there.

Procedural Airships A ProceduralParts Expansion This is a release-thread. Intended for updates, announcements and support. If you are interested in ongoing development, dev-builds or planned features, you might want to visit the development-thread. Features Envelope and ballonet simulation. Including two lifting gas options. Supports FAR and NEAR In-Game tutorial Ballast tanks Center of Buoyancy Marker in Editor (activates with CoL marker) Installation Install ProceduralParts. This is absolutely mandatory. Delete previously installed ProceduralAirships installations. Copy the contents of the GameData folder, provided with this package, into your KSPs GameData folder. Copy the contents of the Ships folder, provided with this package, into your KSPs Ships folder. Copy the contents of the saves folder, provided with this package, into your KSPs saves folder if you want to use the tutorials. DOWNLOAD SOURCE LICENSE Mod recommendations Ferram Aerospace Research - I highly recommend this. Feels much more "floaty". Firespitter and/or KAX - for prop engines RCS Build Aid does not only aid in RCS thruster placement. It is also a great tool for airship engineers. Does your airship experience weird forces causing it to spin around uncontrollably? RCS Build Aid helps. Kerbal attachment System (KAS) contains anchors to keep your airship in place. Hangar Extender - break the boundaries of your SPH to build huge hindenburg-like airships

I see. Cool stuff. But I had hoped it would be a custom shape you developed for PP. Would have been great for Procedural Airships.

Damn! Whats that? A bug or a fancy new shape? Does it work with radial attachment?

Brillant! Sorry I couldn't help, but I've been on the road this weekend. Really looking forward to test it.

hmmm...thats not exactly what I mean. I know the numbers are not entirely correct. They more or less just point into the right direction. So what you do is copying them into MA and optimize like crazy, until you get what you want, right? So, when I can do copy n' paste, I'm sure the TOT could also just do it for me. For example generating a MA plan for me thats ready to get optimized. Or, probably easier to implement, at least an easier way to copy those burns. One click to flightplan won't happen, I'm awared of that. I just say: Make it more convenient. Regarding the Maneuver Module: Happy you wanna give it a try. I'll send you the class as soon as I am on the right computer.

And there is the first Hotfix. Oh the irony! This fixes a minor bug that prevents from starting games after returning to the main menu. Edit: I will open a new release thread in the appropriate subforum as soon as I have some time.

There it is! Procedural Airships hits stable release. This is new: Preferences window - Tweak your game by clicking on the little airship icon in KSC, some of the options are specific to the active savegame so it is possible to play hard mode in one savegame, and easypeasy in another. drastically increased buoyancy. You can change that in the preferences window if you don't like it. Set it to 1x for total realism, 3x for 3 times more buoyancy (like it was before) or whatever you like it to be. Included two example crafts (Tutorial Aircraft). One for FAR and one for Stock and NEAR aerodynamics As the name suggests: There will be an ingame tutorial soon. included a .version file. Fixed a little bug associated with the ProceduralParts cost handling I highly suggest a clean install. And when I say clean install, I mean delete previous installations before installing. Here are some instructions on the included crafts: on the runway, rightclick on the envelope in the middle between the two envelope caps. deflate the balonett just a bit, until the net. buoyancy gets positive. The airship will begin to rise into the sky. You can use Action Group 1 to pitch up and Action Group 2 to pitch down. Doing so adjusts the ballonets in the caps. After gaining some altitude right click on the envelope in the middle again and activate pressure control, start your engines and float around. Have fun! edit: Doh! Just uploaded the wrong version. Now it should be the correct one.

For example the multi flyby sequencer. Would it be possible that it generates a mission out of the calculated parameters? Maybe I overlooked something but last time I used it, I copy n pasted a lot of values into the MA. This was particularly tedious because some windows just can't be opened simultaneously. While KSPTOT is very good at optimizing trajectories, it is often hard to even hit the desired SOI in the first place. Running the optimizer is time consuming and often ends up with bad results if optimization values are choosen poorly. The way KSP is handling Maneuver node creation however, is very straightforward and visual, but not particularly precise. The idea is to get the best out of both worlds. Imagine a mission to another planet. After performing the transfer burn you realize that you screwed up the burn, totally miss the SOI, and will need a massive course correction burn. So, in theory, you import the current orbit into MA, setup a burn and optimize it until it delivers the desired result. If you are good in this and choose the right values, this will work on the first run. But often it is a game of multiple optimizer runs with optimization value tweaking in between. Now imagine you could just setup a maneuver node in map view that more or less achieve the thing you want. You load it up to MA and optimize it to meet the given constraints. So the improvement I would hope to get from a feature like this, is that I could tell MA in what direction I want to go and reduce the need of time consuming optimizer runs. Really? Everythings alright when you try it? I'm getting the same strange behaviour on a stock install no matter if I try it over the network or the loopback interface. All celestial body names are missing the last two letters and most values are messed up entirely. The code in KSPConnect seems to be alright. I even did a rewrite of most of it to use the new network system for sending, but it didn't changed anything. Couldn't inspect the network packages though. KSPTOTConnect converts plain text to doubles before sending them. Network sniffer tools don't like that. Is there any particular reason for such an approach? Does matrix laboratory like doubles more than other data types?

Would be nice if the FAR GUI would also appear while flying a craft without a pod, but with a Kerbal in a command seat.

Just found a bug in the procedural costs implementation. IPartCostModifier.GetModuleCost() always awaits a price for the full tank. foreach (PartResource r in part.Resources) { PartResourceDefinition d = PartResourceLibrary.Instance.GetDefinition(r.resourceName); if((object)d != null) cost += (float)(r.amount * d.unitCost); } must be: foreach (PartResource r in part.Resources) { PartResourceDefinition d = PartResourceLibrary.Instance.GetDefinition(r.resourceName); if((object)d != null) cost += (float)(r.[B]max[/B]Amount * d.unitCost); } This is a bit strange, but I think it's from the time when it was not possible to tweak the fuel of a tank. I made the same mistake with Procedural Airships. You can easily see the error when tweaking a tank until it's empty. The costs will go negative.