Shadowmage Posted January 4, 2016 Author Share Posted January 4, 2016 44 minutes ago, Jimbodiah said: Bug on the interstage fairing. When I select it all I get is a stick that can not be selected again or altered. I have some strange stuff going on with SSTU at the moment. The HUS now does have LF (still no LH/Ox options), and some craft I made that are missing parts etc. Also a craft I made with the B-CM-X and when loaded it turned into the regular one with heatshield again... Only happens on SSTU parts. Starting to think it's related to me not getting the TAC resources added as well. You do seem to have some very strange bugs going on that I cannot duplicate on my end. I would recommend trying SSTU on a clean/vanilla install (only ModuleManager), and see if the issues persist. If they do, file a bug report. If they do not, begin re-adding your mods one at a time testing after each one; when the problems re-manifest, the most recently added mod is likely the culprit. Be sure to clear the MM cache after every mod, as others have pointed out this can also solve some of the 'strange' problems that occur sometimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComatoseJedi Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 I think he has Interstellar Fuel Switch installed. I found that was causing all your LH2 configs to not work on my end, until I deleted all the MM cache files and re-loaded the load list. Also, make sure you got your LH2.cfg patch file named to LH2.cfg not LH2.cfg.disabled. If you can't get rid of the .disabled part, open up the file and save as LH2.cfg and it should save it like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowmage Posted January 4, 2016 Author Share Posted January 4, 2016 And...as its been awhile since I've worked on any 'new' concept stuff, and I'm bored at work today (inventory/audit day... not much going on in my dept), I took 5 mins to bash out this very rough concept of a new VTOL landing module: Loosely based on: (no clue where I found this image at... has been in my dropbox for like a year) Engines would be deployable; the flap things on the sides would actually be combination engine covers / landing legs (deploys as part of the engine deployment animation, so anytime legs are deployed, engines are as well, and vice-versa). Might make the covers partially fold up/slide inwards with the legs being only part of the width. This would be the 'heavy' landing module, with 2x J2 (and/or J2-x when I get it modeled) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComatoseJedi Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Shadowmage said: And...as its been awhile since I've worked on any 'new' concept stuff, and I'm bored at work today (inventory/audit day... not much going on in my dept), I took 5 mins to bash out this very rough concept of a new VTOL landing module: Loosely based on: (no clue where I found this image at... has been in my dropbox for like a year) Engines would be deployable; the flap things on the sides would actually be combination engine covers / landing legs (deploys as part of the engine deployment animation, so anytime legs are deployed, engines are as well, and vice-versa). Might make the covers partially fold up/slide inwards with the legs being only part of the width. This would be the 'heavy' landing module, with 2x J2 (and/or J2-x when I get it modeled) That's part of the Constellation Mars DRA 5.0 concept. Of course, it never made it past the concept stage like most of the plans NASA has done. Edited January 4, 2016 by lynwoodm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbodiah Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) Klockheed Martain Gimble was the culprit... don't know what mod it came from, but it does not play well with SSTU. Still no TAC supplies though, but the pedal-fairing thingy is working again. Fak me, it's back again... OK... did new installs of all my mods and the problem is not there in sandbox tests I did... but if I open my career save I DO have the problem. WTH is going on? Save corrupt? Is there any way it is techtree/career related, as I can see the specs (it's 1-2 pixels wide so almost impossible to select) but can not change the size. logs and screenshot: http://dasher.nl/kerbal/sstu_pedal.rar Edited January 4, 2016 by Jimbodiah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowmage Posted January 4, 2016 Author Share Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, lynwoodm said: That's part of the Constellation Mars DRA 5.0 concept. Of course, it never made it past the concept stage like most of the plans NASA has done. Sweet, thanks for the info; now I might be able to locate a few more resources https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/373665main_NASA-SP-2009-566.pdf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Design_Reference_Mission http://www.wired.com/2014/01/nasas-mars-design-reference-mission-goes-nuclear-2001/ Always better when I can base my designs on -something-. I'm terrible at coming up with original geometry (which is how the old SC-C stuff came about...). Edit: And here is what I (loosely) based the original SC-C stuff on (well, this and the Babylon-5 shuttlecraft...): http://www.wired.com/2013/07/international-lunar-resources-exploration-concept-1993/ Edited January 4, 2016 by Shadowmage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComatoseJedi Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 7 minutes ago, Shadowmage said: Sweet, thanks for the info; now I might be able to locate a few more resources https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/373665main_NASA-SP-2009-566.pdf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Design_Reference_Mission http://www.wired.com/2014/01/nasas-mars-design-reference-mission-goes-nuclear-2001/ Always better when I can base my designs on -something-. I'm terrible at coming up with original geometry (which is how the old SC-C stuff came about...). Check your inbox, may be something you are looking for in this department. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowmage Posted January 4, 2016 Author Share Posted January 4, 2016 6 minutes ago, lynwoodm said: Check your inbox, may be something you are looking for in this department. Sweet, checked out the link; looks like he had the lander nearly done as a single-part model. At least it might be a good reference point (probably can't re-use the exact geometry). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComatoseJedi Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 3 minutes ago, Shadowmage said: Sweet, checked out the link; looks like he had the lander nearly done as a single-part model. At least it might be a good reference point (probably can't re-use the exact geometry). No, you won't be able to use the exact geometry, but you get an idea on how things will look on the modelling side of things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbodiah Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) Also I am not nuts with the Orion CM/CMX just changing.. you gave them both the same unique name. Edited January 4, 2016 by Jimbodiah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowmage Posted January 4, 2016 Author Share Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, Jimbodiah said: Also I am not nuts with the Orion CM/CMX just changing.. you gave them both the same unique name. Noted and fixed. Will be available with the next update (possibly later tonight if I can work a couple things out). Edit: Working on sorting out the 'destroyed on splashdown' problem with the CM's. Apparently it is the parachute module; I'm thinking that the center of buoyency is calculated via render bounds, and that the parachutes are being calculated into these bounds; when the parachutes are auto-cut, the massive change in COB causes the vessel to be flung at relativistic speeds, which results in either A: flung into space at random high velocity, B: destroyed by overheating, due to being in the atmo at an insane velocity, or C: gets flung into the terrain and destroyed. Same thing causes all 3 depending on... well.. its KSP, so who knows. 2nd Edit: Nope, that wasn't it; it gets destroyed before the auto-cut even kicks in. But, pretty sure it is something I can solve, as splashdowns -were- working earlier in the dev of the parachute; so it is likely something changed later in the dev cycle. Now that I know where to look, I can go back through source-diff logs and find out what potential changes could be the culprit. 3rd Edit: Tracked it down to something to do with drag-cubes and the buoyancy model. If I cut the chute ~2m above splashdown, all is fine; but if I let it touch down with chute deployed, everything goes bonkers. 4th Edit: Located a buoyancy-drag-cube-override that I can specify, that -appears- to solve the problem. Will do a bit more testing, and then wrap this up for a release here shortly. Edited January 5, 2016 by Shadowmage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowmage Posted January 5, 2016 Author Share Posted January 5, 2016 (edited) Updated testing release is available: https://github.com/shadowmage45/SSTULabs/releases/tag/0.3.25-pre6 A few bugfixes, and adds a second variant of the fuel tanks. See the link for full details and downloads. Edited January 5, 2016 by Shadowmage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbodiah Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 2 hours ago, Shadowmage said: Same thing causes all 3 depending on... well.. its KSP, so who knows. LOL!!!! Will install the new patch and test tomorrow (3am here) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComatoseJedi Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 I think you nailed it Shadowmage. Everything appears to work okay. Even splashdown is a splashdown and not a trampoline. Re-entry is still good. Overheated a little bit, but a little shimmying rounds that off. If there's something more noticeable, I'm sure someone will catch it, but it works fine for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbodiah Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 (edited) I'm not seeing the new tank, it's file is not in the last release. Edited January 5, 2016 by Jimbodiah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowmage Posted January 5, 2016 Author Share Posted January 5, 2016 Aye, apparently I left the .cfg file in my /dev folder (which doesn't get packed up). They'll be available with whatever release comes out next (likely a 0.3.26-pre1; have some fairing bits that are nearly ready for testing). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbodiah Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Tell us about the fairing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMeeb Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 18 hours ago, Shadowmage said: And...as its been awhile since I've worked on any 'new' concept stuff, and I'm bored at work today (inventory/audit day... not much going on in my dept), I took 5 mins to bash out this very rough concept of a new VTOL landing module: Loosely based on: (no clue where I found this image at... has been in my dropbox for like a year) Engines would be deployable; the flap things on the sides would actually be combination engine covers / landing legs (deploys as part of the engine deployment animation, so anytime legs are deployed, engines are as well, and vice-versa). Might make the covers partially fold up/slide inwards with the legs being only part of the width. This would be the 'heavy' landing module, with 2x J2 (and/or J2-x when I get it modeled) Ooooooooh. I like it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbodiah Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 (edited) Double post forum bug Edited January 5, 2016 by Jimbodiah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowmage Posted January 5, 2016 Author Share Posted January 5, 2016 5 minutes ago, Jimbodiah said: Tell us about the fairing. The ones that are nearly ready are some standard stock procedural fairings, with a resizable base + payload support + decoupler. Pretty much clones of the KW rocketry stock-fairing-based parts but with a single editor-part that is resizable for various diameters. Initial tests will be untextured for the payload base, and using a temp placeholder texture for the fairing panels, but as the intent is to test the functionality of it, the textures shouldn't matter too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbodiah Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Sounds good! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbodiah Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Found this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riocrokite Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 (edited) Shadow, concerning that mars dra lander: Chris (ksp member: cxg2827) has done an extensive modelling of the lander as well as aeroshells some time ago and then abandoned the mod. He released his blender assets, they might help you with your concept; forum thread: Edited January 5, 2016 by riocrokite Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbodiah Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 (edited) The new (non-deprecated) docking ports are now causing huge fps drop on my end. Also the F12 debugger log show tons of altitude data with live-updates. Edited January 5, 2016 by Jimbodiah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowmage Posted January 5, 2016 Author Share Posted January 5, 2016 9 minutes ago, Jimbodiah said: The new (non-deprecated) docking ports are now causing huge fps drop on my end. Also the F12 debugger log show tons of altitude data with live-updates. Logs... Logs... Logs. You need to start posting logs with your bug reports; I can do very little without them, and it is all just guessing when trying to fix stuff without a log -- which is nothing but frustrating and aggravating on my end. It is even in the OP that you need to post logs with your bug reports (and that bug reports should go to GitHub and not to the forums...)... so its not like it should be a surprise. From the sounds of it, I might have just left the debugging in-place, which -could- cause FPS drop if your computer can't write out data to the log fast enough (probably not using an SSD?). Won't know without logs though (could be other errors in there...don't know). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.