[1.7.3] GPOSpeedFuelPump continued v1.8.19

[John JACK]

I got CryoTanks with Cryogenic Engines mod:

KSP 1.1.2 shows message "Cryo Engines unsupported version use 1.1", but the mod works fine. Pump with B9 switch on stock tanks works OK, trouble is only with Nertea's cryo tanks, like here (actual screenshot):

A peek into Module Manager cache show that fuel pump module just is not added to that tanks. But with config to add pump to everything, hydrogen tanks do get it too.

[SteveD80]

Is there a way to change the default pump level, preferably by tank?

[Gordon Dry]

I have a problem, I tried to use boosters with LqdOxygen/Kerosene nearby the main tank with the same setup.
Whatever I did, it was impossible to have the boosters burn out.

I switched to LqdOxygen/LqdHydrogen then, other problem, now the boosters sucked up Hydrogen and as Kerosene was empty, it was wasted.

Later stage, Hydrogen missing, Oxygen wasted.

I lost about 2000 ms/s.

Could it have something to do with the fact that MechJeb doesn't autostage the radial booster decouplers?

btw I used Procedural parts and fairings.

Log:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/73onwkq4zjvl3ng/2016-05-18-1%20Custom%20Booster%20Problem.7z?dl=0

[Superfluous J]

On 5/16/2016 at 6:02 PM, SteveD80 said:

Is there a way to change the default pump level, preferably by tank?

No but you can put down a tank, change its level, and then copy that tank with ALT instead of grabbing a new one. The copy will remember the level you set.

Edited May 18, 2016 by 5thHorseman

[John JACK]

About default pump level. May I suggest to hard set it from 0 (lowest) to 8 (middle)? That will allow to leave most tanks at default, and be able to alter it both uphill and downhill only for chosen tanks.

Now you make, for example, a refuelling station with level 8 and pumps on. Tankers have level 10 on transport tanks, and craft to be fuelled have 6. Everything set manually,  of course. Than you launch a tanker, have spare fuel in upper stage, and decide to bring it along. You dock. And all the fuel in station is sucked to that stage. Because booster tanks were left with default level 0 due to lazy and dropped anyway.

[hab136]

Haven't forgotten you guys, just been fighting jet lag past few days.

 

Default pump level should be overridable via MM, something like this:

@PART[*]:HAS[MODULE[GPOSpeedPump]]:AFTER[GPOSpeedFuelPump]
{
  @MODULE[GPOSpeedPump]
  {
    _pumpLevel = 8
  }
}

Haven't tested it yet though.

[Deimos Rast]

On 5/16/2016 at 8:26 PM, John JACK said:

I got CryoTanks with Cryogenic Engines mod:

KSP 1.1.2 shows message "Cryo Engines unsupported version use 1.1", but the mod works fine. Pump with B9 switch on stock tanks works OK, trouble is only with Nertea's cryo tanks, like here (actual screenshot):

 

A peek into Module Manager cache show that fuel pump module just is not added to that tanks. But with config to add pump to everything, hydrogen tanks do get it too.

Try this if you want more surgical precision. Untested, but CryoEngines sub mod CryoTanks adds this module. Could probably add a :NEEDS[CryoTanks] if you want an extra check.

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleCryoTank],!MODULE[GPOSpeedPump]]:FOR[GPOSpeedFuelPump]:NEEDS[CryoTanks]
{
	MODULE
	{
		name = GPOSpeedPump
	}
}

 

Edited May 29, 2016 by Deimos Rast
added NEEDS

[Gordon Dry]

I just recognized that the "Heat-shielded switchable procedural tank" (RO-ProcTankSpaceplane) from GameData\RealismOverhaul\RO_RecommendedMods\Procedurals\RO_ProceduralParts.cfg is not supported by GPOSpeedFuelPump, although it's defined like this

+PART[proceduralTankRealFuels]:FOR[RealismOverhaul]
{
	%RSSROConfig = True
	@name = RO-ProcTankSpaceplane
	%title = Tank [Procedural, Shielded]
	@description = Heat-shielded switchable procedural tank with heat shielded Includes normal (Structural), highly pressurized (Fuselage), and cryogenic tank options. Rated for LEO reentries on a spaceplane.
	@maxTemp = 1500
	%skinMaxTemp = 2500
	@MODULE[ModuleFuelTanks]
	{
		!typeAvailable,* = DEL
		typeAvailable = Fuselage
		typeAvailable = Structural
	}
} 

and in GameData\GPOSpeedFuelPump\ProceduralTanks.cfg it's like this

@PART[proceduralTank*]:HAS[!MODULE[GPOSpeedPump]]:FINAL
{
	MODULE
	{
		name = GPOSpeedPump
	}
} 

I'm not firm in editing .cfg files so please provide a fix to make the "Heat-shielded switchable procedural tank" work with GPOSpeedFuelPump.

Edited May 29, 2016 by Gordon Dry

[Deimos Rast]

@Gordon Dry

Try this. Just save it in a notepad as RealFuels.cfg and throw it in the GPO folder. Let me know if it doesn't work.

The patch you listed above should already cover most cases for Procedural Tanks, but you happened to find a special case.

 

//RealismOverhaul Support
@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleFuelTanks],!MODULE[GPOSpeedPump]]:FOR[GPOSpeedFuelPump]:NEEDS[RealFuels]
{
	MODULE
	{
		name = GPOSpeedPump
	}
}

---edit---

@hab136

I tightened up the procedural tank patch and a number of the included patches, and combined that with the few I've posted recently into a neat little package which I'll send you in a bit.

I'm just waiting to hear back on a question regarding B9PartSwitch (the previous patch I post for it works, but isn't precise enough for my liking).

Edited May 30, 2016 by Deimos Rast

[Gordon Dry]

13 hours ago, Deimos Rast said:

@Gordon Dry

The patch you listed above should already cover most cases for Procedural Tanks, but you happened to find a special case.

This is typical for me - and the reason why my modded games are borked so quickly.

And of course it's always my fault and only my fault alone ..

[Deimos Rast]

5 hours ago, Gordon Dry said:

This is typical for me - and the reason why my modded games are borked so quickly.

And of course it's always my fault and only my fault alone ..

I run a lot of mods too, so I know the feeling.

Did the patch work, by the way? I don't heave RO to test it, but it's basically the MFT patch, slightly altered.

[Gordon Dry]

It worked.

[hab136]

Just uploaded v1.8.2.  No changes to the plugin, this just rolls up the recent MM config changes:

• Moved all MM configs to "Patches" subdirectory.  Please do a clean install of the mod so you don't end up with duplicates.
• Added default pump level config (default = 8)
• Fixed B9PartSwitch config to work with CryoTanks
• Fixed Modular Fuel Tanks config
• Add FOR[GPOSpeedFuelPump] to all MM configs

[evileye.x]

Does anyone has GSO pump for 1.0.5? If so, please share.

This thread 

links to kerbalstuff...

[Stone Blue]

32 minutes ago, evileye.x said:

Does anyone has GSO pump for 1.0.5? If so, please share.

Its ALWAYS good practice to scan thru the last few, most recent pages of a thread to find your own answers to your questions

Try here:
 

 

[evileye.x]

1 hour ago, Stone Blue said:

Its ALWAYS good practice to scan thru the last few, most recent pages of a thread to find your own answers to your questions

Try here:
 

 

How embarrassing . Thank you, kind sir! 

[Stone Blue]

@evileye.x No problem... it happens, and it WAS back a couple pages...

[hab136]

FYI Github, SpaceDock, and Curse all let you browse through previous versions if you poke around on the page (click "releases" on Github, "Changelog" on SpaceDock, or "files" on Curse).

1.6 is the latest version compatible with 1.0.5: https://github.com/henrybauer/GPOSpeedPump/releases/tag/v1.6

I'm still playing 1.0.5 too   I was waiting for 1.1.3 with bugfixes, now I'm waiting for the official Asteroid Day mod to update.

[Stone Blue]

7 hours ago, hab136 said:

FYI Github, SpaceDock, and Curse all let you browse through previous versions if you poke around on the page (click "releases" on Github, "Changelog" on SpaceDock, or "files" on Curse).

EXCELLENT point!

And since SD is so new, I would like to see mod devs upload these older mod versions to SD, just FOR people who still wish to play old KSP versions, as well as for archival purposes... Of course, common sense should dictate in user's minds, that installing these old versions, SHOULD ONLY BE DONE, with the corresponding version of KSP, AND WILL NOT BE ACTIVELY SUPPORTED... Which should NOT be too much of a problem since most issues someone would be likely to run into will most likely already ahve been discussed and figured out in the release threads

 

[hab136]

Just uploaded v1.8.3, which is recompiled for KSP 1.1.3.  The old version (v1.8.2) seems to still work if you don't want to re-download.

[richfiles]

Has anyone seen some of the new fuel stuff int he Devnotes for 1.2? 

Could be interesting. I still see GPO being a very valuable tool and hope compatibility with he new system works out. I don't think flow priority is as refined as the GPO pumping system. I do believe it still needs a valid crossfeed path.

[Superfluous J]

4 hours ago, richfiles said:

Has anyone seen some of the new fuel stuff int he Devnotes for 1.2? 

Could be interesting. I still see GPO being a very valuable tool and hope compatibility with he new system works out. I don't think flow priority is as refined as the GPO pumping system. I do believe it still needs a valid crossfeed path.

I expect it's a pipe dream, but if GPO could somehow utilize this screen so you'd be able to see how fuel would flow based on your pump setup, I'd likely reach infinite contentedness.

[hab136]

No idea how accessible that screen will be to modders.  I could of course draw my own thing; I did something similar for visualization in AutoAsparagus:

 

Imagine instead of the "L3" text it was a pumping icon, and/or showed the pump level.  Arrows going from tank to tank would also be cool, but might be ridiculous on larger ships.  I can't tell from a static screenshot, but it's possible those lines on the stock system are moving, to indicate direction of flow.  That'd be cooler than an arrow.

 

The stock stuff will make GPO obsolete for some people, and that's good.  Personally, my main use for GPO is to auto-refuel when I dock to a space station, or fill up my container ships when they land at my mining base, so I'll continue to develop for that purpose.  If the stock system takes that over too, that would be awesome, but the devs hadn't indicated anything like that.  We'll see what happens when 1.2 actually ships.

 

My priorities for the future of this mod, in order:

1. KSP 1.2 compatibility when it hits, which it sounds like might be within the month.  SQUAD of course doesn't give dates, but the last devnote said QA was wrapping up, so.. Soon(tm).

2. Optimization.  Currently GPO is ridiculously inefficient, and also creates a lot of garbage for the garbage collector to collect, causing stuttering.  Fixing this unfortunately requires a pretty hefty rewrite to a controller model that maintains a "map" of parts which is updated when the vessel changes, instead of each PartModule iterating of the whole ship for every frame.  I have this sketched out but haven't had time to code.

3. Possible integration with the stock fuel tank priority system.  If stock already assigns a priority level to each tank, maybe it would make sense to use that number instead of assigning our own separate GPO pump level?  We'd still have to add in a "Pump" and "Balance" checkbox.

4. Visualization/UI.  Show what tanks are pumping where, both in the editor and in flight. Currently I use KSP Alternate Resource Panel to show the "time till full/empty" for all tanks and it makes it obvious which ones are changing.

 

I'm open to contributions, even if they're MS Paint drawings of what people think the UI should look like

[hab136]

GPOSpeedFuelPump pre-release for KSP 1.2 pre-release: https://github.com/henrybauer/GPOSpeedPump/releases/tag/v1.8.4

Surprisingly I didn't need any code changes.  Note that you'll need a newer version of Module Manager for KSP 1.2, which is not updated yet.  I used an unofficial one for testing.

BTW, it looks like I can indeed get the new stock fuel flow priority number with part.GetResourcePriority(), which ranges from -9 to +9.  I'm trying to decide whether it would be good to use that instead of GPO's "pump level" number.  The benefits are less clutter on the screen, smaller save files, less memory, possibly less user confusion.  The downsides are transitioning from the current system, and.. ??  Does anyone have a case where they would want the engines to pull fuel in a different way than GPO would pump it?

[Superfluous J]

On 9/15/2016 at 4:19 PM, hab136 said:

BTW, it looks like I can indeed get the new stock fuel flow priority number with part.GetResourcePriority(), which ranges from -9 to +9.  I'm trying to decide whether it would be good to use that instead of GPO's "pump level" number.  The benefits are less clutter on the screen, smaller save files, less memory, possibly less user confusion.  The downsides are transitioning from the current system, and.. ??  Does anyone have a case where they would want the engines to pull fuel in a different way than GPO would pump it?

It may have changed since the 15th, but fuel tank values seem to have a much larger range that -9 to +9. They tend to start at 10 and increase by 10s. I haven't gone past 60. The nice thing about that is all the tanks in a stack get the same number, and if you want to tweak them (to empty the top tanks last for example) you have from 0 to 19 (for the 10 stack) of wiggle room.

Regarding using these numbers yourself, I too like the idea at first blush. I'm thinking, what I use GPO for the most (other than to automatically balance fuel at launch, which the stock game does now so I don't need that anymore) is ISRU and refueling runs. I like to give the miner the biggest numbers, the fuel tug intermediate numbers, and let the ships that need fuel have the lowest numbers. Then I just make sure that for any fuel pumping I want to do, the numbers within each ship match those rules. There is absolutely no reason I can't do this with the stock numbers