Devnotes Tuesday: A week after the release!

[Superfluous J]

20 minutes ago, Apollo13 said:

The orbit bug, which occurs on bodies with no atmosphere, such as Mun and Minimus, was reported to Squad several weeks ago.  The response from Squad?  Deafening silence.

Well, the silence is totally expected because they ARE all on vacation. Taking a weeks-long vacation right after the 2nd bugfix release of a major version release... that's the questionable part.

[captainbinary]

23 minutes ago, Apollo13 said:

The orbit bug, which occurs on bodies with no atmosphere, such as Mun and Minimus, was reported to Squad several weeks ago.  The response from Squad?  Deafening silence.

There has not been deafening silence, you looked it up on the bug tracker at all?

It's been having replies from members of squad, just most of the programmers have gone on a Well Deserved holiday, maybe not the best time to do it, but none the less. As a programmer i know, when you spend 6+ months on a single project, you cant really work in it efficiently untill you have a break. Looking forward to there renewd vigor when they return.

[brusura]

42 minutes ago, Apollo13 said:

The orbit bug, which occurs on bodies with no atmosphere, such as Mun and Minimus, was reported to Squad several weeks ago.  The response from Squad?  Deafening silence.

Yeah I am with you on the matter of such an "unintended feature" , anyway just for thoroughness , also with no atmosphere planet have not an uniform gravity field so over time orbits will always decay

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_decay

[VaPaL]

If it's a bug, they can realy make it a feature if they provide means to counter it at some extend. The Orbital Deacy mod does this by providing a "Station Keeping" feature. Never used this mod, but I think it consumes propelant to keep the orbit, once it runs out, the orbit starts to decay.

 

[Dafni]

2 hours ago, brusura said:

Wondering if it is indeed an unknown feature  

Well, if it would only occur on bodies with an atmosphere we could indeed argue that it is meant a s a feature, a kind of simulated orbit decay. But since it happens on all bodies and all orbits, it must be a bug of the game. And a pretty game-breaking one for me.

 

Edit: just saw what you said about orbit decay due to gravitational effects, and yeah, you are right. But probably not at this rate anyway.

Edited May 18, 2016 by Dafni

[Laie]

2 hours ago, 5thHorseman said:

Well, the silence is totally expected because they ARE all on vacation. Taking a weeks-long vacation right after the 2nd bugfix release of a major version release... that's the questionable part.

Well, they planned for a few weeks worth of bugfixing after the release. We can second-guess that decision, but IMO it was reasonable. If you want to play it 100% safe the only time to go on leave would be just *before* a release -- which is not when I would like my own vacation, or could enjoy  it.

[Curveball Anders]

3 hours ago, 5thHorseman said:

Well, the silence is totally expected because they ARE all on vacation. Taking a weeks-long vacation right after the 2nd bugfix release of a major version release... that's the questionable part.

It's a well known wisdom that it's a dangerous move to release any piece of software right before staff goes on leave. (Which is why patches, from any developer, so often are released on Tuesdays).

But for smallish teams there's also the issue of how hard you can ride the team without a break.

So the powers that be at Squad knew that they had to let the devs off on vacation, regardless of the state of the release.

Releasing what they had (1.1.2) and then leave for some weeks was obviously regarded as better than not releasing 1.1.2 and leave for some weeks.

[smjjames]

Yeah, as questionable as leaving for a vacation right after the bugfix was and I want them to finish the bugfixes as much as anybody, I'd rather have them take a break for a bit to unwind and de-stress after that tough update and come back fresh.

[0111narwhalz]

In before a new phantom force towards prograde to "fix" the decay bug.

[Robotengineer]

Are they coming back?

[Curveball Anders]

5 minutes ago, Robotengineer said:

Are they coming back?

We can always hope

[Violent Jeb]

10 hours ago, 5thHorseman said:

Put a ship into orbit. turn off the engine and don't time warp. Go to map mode and right click your periapsis. Watch it go down and down and down.

Happens in every orbit, at every height, of every world, with every ship.

Does this only happen while you have right clicked on the periapsis? I left a station on a 75km orbit, i left and took a different ship round trip to duna.. when i got back the station was right where I left it almost 3 years later, doesn't seem to have any noticeable decay with this operation, but i'm interested in avoiding this bug.

 

[Gojira1000]

AFAIK it only affects active vessels

[Superfluous J]

1 hour ago, Violent Jeb said:

Does this only happen while you have right clicked on the periapsis? I left a station on a 75km orbit, i left and took a different ship round trip to duna.. when i got back the station was right where I left it almost 3 years later, doesn't seem to have any noticeable decay with this operation, but i'm interested in avoiding this bug.

 

 

18 minutes ago, Gojira1000 said:

AFAIK it only affects active vessels

More specifically, it only affects ships not on rails. So, to fix this you can time warp 5x while you're fiddling around setting up your next maneuver node (but not moving the ship or docking or whatnot).

I'd have to actually check but I seriously doubt it is only occurring while you're watching the periapsis/apoapsis. I know for a fact you don't actually have to click on it; hovering over it also shows the numbers decreasing at the same rate. Clicking was just to make it more obvious.

[Violent Jeb]

I feel like I mightve seen it happen, but i have MJ and my orbits read rock-solid, they don't move.

I've spent time with the station, I've done multiple docking operations and sat with it over entire orbits, so it must be only intermittent on my install.? i'm only mentioning because its really not game breaking for me at the moment.

How about under physics warp? Going to do some testing tonight.

[Waxing_Kibbous]

Re: the orbital decay bug- is there a workaround or way to prevent this? Also, does it affect to-be-rescued Kerbals already in orbit? I'm curious if it is something @Claw can add to the stock bug fix mod. I was just about to dive into 1.1.2 today but this may stop me

[NathanKell]

This will be the third time I ask this. Perhaps someone will actually come through this time, instead of claiming I have not responded.

Please grab 1.0.5, place a single part vessel in an orbit in which you experience this issue in 1.1, and watch its Ap and Pe.

 

Now do the same in 1.1.2. Place a single part vessel in the same orbit.

 

Please tell me what differences you spot.

 

[smjjames]

11 minutes ago, NathanKell said:

This will be the third time I ask this. Perhaps someone will actually come through this time, instead of claiming I have not responded.

Please grab 1.0.5, place a single part vessel in an orbit in which you experience this issue in 1.1, and watch its Ap and Pe.

 

Now do the same in 1.1. Place a single part vessel in the same orbit.

 

Please tell me what differences you spot.

 

Does this include single part debris and single part pods (like probe cores) split off from the main craft? I suppose I can do that.

Also, would it work for you if I transferred the save from 1.0.5 over to 1.1.2? It'd be a copy though and that way they'd be EXACTLY identical.

[NathanKell]

Yep, that works, as does an EVA kerbal (I tested with EVA kerbals, they were easy to get into position inside a pod and then go EVA with).

[smjjames]

I'll give you a CLOUD of debris. *evilsmiley*

Okay, maybe not a CLOUD, but my idea has lots of bits and pieces.

I'm thinking of maybe doing a video, but might not actually be neccesary really..... yeah probably not neccesary...

uhh @NathanKell, how do I revert to 1.0.5? I'm using steam..... I tried reverting to last stable version but that didn't go anywhere.

Edited May 18, 2016 by smjjames

[NathanKell]

That is odd, I thought Last Stable went to the last major, not minor, version.

[Superfluous J]

16 minutes ago, NathanKell said:

This will be the third time I ask this. Perhaps someone will actually come through this time, instead of claiming I have not responded.

Please grab 1.0.5, place a single part vessel in an orbit in which you experience this issue in 1.1, and watch its Ap and Pe.

 

Now do the same in 1.1. Place a single part vessel in the same orbit.

 

Please tell me what differences you spot.

 

I don't recall you asking this (though I didn't say there was absolutely no response. I did reply to someone who did and didn't correct them, however). I'll be happy to, if it helps fix the problem

I started a new sandbox save in 1.0.5 and using infinite fuel and the Kerbal X rocket, sent the trio up into orbit.

The ship itself, which was at periapsis when I reached orbit, experienced a slowly rising apoapsis and a slowly dipping periapsis, the rate was high as the ship was near periapsis and then slowed as it went to Apoapsis. When it got to about the halfway point between Periapsis and Apoapsis, both of these numbers' changes changed direction. Periapsis started rising and Apoapsis started falling. I didn't take exact notes, but by the time the ship go to Apoapsis I wouldn't be surprised if the numbers were the same as they were at Periapsis. Physical time warp made this far worse, maybe by about 4 times. As in, in real-world time the periapsis and apoapsis changed 16 times faster at 4x time warp.

Jeb on EVA experienced the same phenomenon. On the Apoapsis-side of the orbit, his Periapsis slowly rose and his Apoapsis slowly fell. On the Periapsis-side of his orbit, the opposite was true. This was worse in 4x time warp as well, and the changes slowed and reversed midway between Periapsis and Apoapsis.

I will test in 1.1 (if I still have it. Is 1.1.2 okay?) when I can.

[smjjames]

3 minutes ago, NathanKell said:

That is odd, I thought Last Stable went to the last major, not minor, version.

It didn't actually go anywhere. Though I had deleted most of the stuff in there, which might have had something to do with it. I put it on opt out and then back on 'previous stable release' and I'll see if that does it.

NOPE.

Looks like I can't roll back to 1.0.5, at least not through steam.

Edited May 18, 2016 by smjjames

[NathanKell]

@5thHorseman apologies, post edited to say 1.1.2.

Please also make a note of the rate of change (in meters change per second, say) at each point, for the single part case.

 

@smjjames fingers crossed.

[Superfluous J]

Just now, NathanKell said:

@5thHorseman apologies, post edited to say 1.1.2.

Please also make a note of the rate of change (in meters change per second, say) at each point, for the single part case.

 

@smjjames fingers crossed.

I'll try to do this a little more scientifically later, and record it so I can let it run for a full orbit without sitting staring at my computer for 30 minutes