[1.12.x] Near Future Technologies (September 6)

[Nertea]

  On 10/3/2017 at 7:47 AM, DaMaster_Architect said:

Just noticed that cargo bays for 7.5m parts are on the roadmap. This is absolutely fantastic, I'm really looking forward to those parts! I think they will complete the line up of parts, so that we can build our own BFS'es :-)

Do you have a teaser to share, Nertea?

Expand  

Nope, sorry. Working on other things.

  On 10/4/2017 at 12:01 AM, Zombiefreak said:

Okay I just have a really quick question that I want to ask just in case I missed something or installed it wrong. But I believe the part is the Lv-85 orbital maneuvering engine, which is the smallest one, in the description it says it uses monopropellant fuel but on the details portion it says LF/O is used. I did some searching on the web and the only thing I can deduce is that maybe it went to monopropellant and broke some things so maybe it's back to lf/o? Is this the case or did I screw something up? I think I got all the dependencies but I'll check again and add an edit if I don't while I wait for a reply but I'm like 95% sure. Thanks in advance.

Expand  

Sounds like you installed the optional patch that sets those engines to LFO. If check your gamedata folder.

[Zombiefreak]

  On 10/4/2017 at 5:39 AM, Nertea said:

Nope, sorry. Working on other things.

Sounds like you installed the optional patch that sets those engines to LFO. If check your gamedata folder.

Expand  

Ah you know what, I think you might be right. I think when I started installing your mods I noticed that some had optional folders to enhance the gameplay like the decaying RTGs. I guess I installed that optional folder thinking it was an enhancement and not a fuel switch. Doh! Oh well I'll just go delete it. Haven't put any of them on my ships so I think I should by okay. Thank you very much for the help, also big fan of your mods too

Edited October 4, 2017 by Zombiefreak
Typo.

[SilverlightPony]

So I'm getting back into KSP after a long hiatus, and trying to bring over my old 1.1.2 career file to 1.3.0.  Naturally, I'm having to sort out lots of "missing parts" problems, mostly from mods that haven't officially updated to 1.3 yet.

Got an odd issue with NF Spacecraft though.  I don't remember what they're labeled as in-game, but it's saying "inlineCmdPod" and "servicetank-25" are missing, despite the fact that I have NF Spacecraft installed.  I'm guessing something got tweaked between the 1.1.2 and 1.3.0 versions of NFS such that the game doesn't recognize them as the same parts any more.  How would I fix this?  (Even if it means editing .craft files, I'm willing to try it.)

[steve_v]

Probably the simplest solution is to grab the parts from a previous release, retire or modify the craft using them, then remove the old parts again.
Adding parts from a 1.1 compatible release probably won't cause any serious problems, as long as it's just parts. A text search on the .cfg files should identify those you need.

[Plecy75]

Question: Do these mods work with RO? i'm kinda concerned about messing up my install

[Streetwind]

  On 10/8/2017 at 12:35 AM, SilverlightPony said:

Got an odd issue with NF Spacecraft though.

Expand  

Some parts in some NF packs were deprecated. Some other parts in some NF packs were renamed internally for consistency. You're running afoul of one of these two, probably the latter. @steve_v has the right idea.

 

  On 10/8/2017 at 1:54 AM, Plecy75 said:

Question: Do these mods work with RO? i'm kinda concerned about messing up my install

Expand  

"Work with" as in "can install without breaking something"? Probably. I can see only a single issue: namely, I have no idea how RO handles resources. Near Future does not ship its own resources, but rather pulls them from Community Resource Pack. If a RO install does not contain CRP, then NF parts need to be patched to work with RO resources, or the game will crash on startup trying to load parts with a nonexistant resource.

"Work with" as in "is supported by RO components like RealFuels"? I have no idea.

"Work with" as in "is properly balanced for use next to other RO parts"? Absolutely not. Even the few patches for NF engines that RO ships are - last I checked - poorly made, years out of date, and in many cases wholly nonfunctional due to plugin changes. I offered to fix this last year but requested help with figuring out how things would need to be statted, and was completely ignored by the whole RO thread, so yeah. You're on your own here.

[Quoniam Kerman]

  On 10/8/2017 at 12:48 AM, steve_v said:

Probably the simplest solution is to grab the parts from a previous release, retire or modify the craft using them, then remove the old parts again.
Adding parts from a 1.1 compatible release probably won't cause any serious problems, as long as it's just parts. A text search on the .cfg files should identify those you need.

Expand  

I can one do that if, like me one only has downloaded the latest version of NF mods? How to modifies the craft files accordingly? (I'm new to editing files, I'm no computer specialist and i don't want to break anything, simply get these mods to work, because at th exception of NF solar and Launch vehicles, the other NF don't work for me. And do they work for 1.3.1, btw?

[Streetwind]

  On 10/8/2017 at 12:05 PM, Quoniam Kerman said:

I can one do that if, like me one only has downloaded the latest version of NF mods?

Expand  

Both SpaceDock and CurseForge allow you to download past versions.

  On 10/8/2017 at 12:05 PM, Quoniam Kerman said:

How to modifies the craft files accordingly?

Expand  

What he meant is, you can modify your saved crafts ingame while you have the old parts installed, and bring existing craft home.

  On 10/8/2017 at 12:05 PM, Quoniam Kerman said:

simply get these mods to work, because at th exception of NF solar and Launch vehicles, the other NF don't work for me.

Expand  

Without teling us what the problem is, I'm afraid we can't help you resolve it. All the NF packs are perfectly functional on my end, so long as you intall them correctly (instructions are included in the download).

  On 10/8/2017 at 12:05 PM, Quoniam Kerman said:

And do they work for 1.3.1, btw?

Expand  

A question easily answered by looking at the thread title.

[Quoniam Kerman]

Thx for the info.

I guess many of you run KSP with OpenGL to make all these mods work, could be that I have to do that in the end.

btw does it help to force OpenGL when running KSP 64bits or is it only for 32bits users?

[Streetwind]

Not sure. I have 16 GB RAM and have yet to pick a selection of mods that fills it up. I also don't like the reduction in visual fidelity, so I've never run OpenGL.

[Wyzard]

  On 10/8/2017 at 8:08 PM, Streetwind said:

I also don't like the reduction in visual fidelity, so I've never run OpenGL.

Expand  

What's different visually?  I've seen posts saying that KSP uses less RAM with OpenGL, but I don't think I've ever seen anything saying that it looks worse that way.  I play KSP in Linux and (occasionally) macOS, which always use OpenGL, so I'm curious how the game would look different if I was running in Windows with Direct3D.

[Streetwind]

Well, I'm not sure how KSP looks on mac and Linux, never tried it. Since those are primary OpenGL platforms, the game might be tweaked for them. But on Windows, compared to DirectX, the lighting and shadows are significantly decreased in quality (to the point of missing outright in some cases). Textures also don't look as good, but you mostly notice that with mods, not with the stock textures.

[Nertea]

As my time is fairly limited these days, I'd appreciate any help establishing any issues with 1.3.1 compatibility. I've had time for some limited tests but am of course worried about thermal issues and the like.

In addition, I'm in the middle of a major reno of the NFProps package for SSPXr. This is going to probably delay any update for this package until that is done.

[RaiderMan]

1.3.1 crashes with ANY mods installed, its equal opportunity crash city.

[failurecascade]

  On 10/9/2017 at 5:11 PM, Nertea said:

As my time is fairly limited these days, I'd appreciate any help establishing any issues with 1.3.1 compatibility. I've had time for some limited tests but am of course worried about thermal issues and the like.

In addition, I'm in the middle of a major reno of the NFProps package for SSPXr. This is going to probably delay any update for this package until that is done.

Expand  

@Nertea - I've started testing KSP 1.3.1 with Near Future, Far Future, USI, GPP and two or three quality of life mods.  So far only USI caused a crash (fixed by Roverdude's latest update).

One possible problem with Near Future...  Nuclear engines do not seem to reject heat when reaction mass is flowing through them (testing this with NV-50 Stubber and NTRsUseLF patch).  In a test without any radiators, the core temp of the engine seems to go up when thrusting, then back down (rapidly) when thrust is turned off, then slowly climbs as the engine's "Heat Rejected:" value falls.  This is nearly opposite behavior from the same version of Near Future Propulsion (0.9.4.0) running in KSP 1.3.0.  It's as if heat rejection isn't applied until after thrust is cut.

Additional note:  Heat rejection works as I remember in 1.3.0 while running reaction mass through the engine if the reactor is turned off.

Edited October 9, 2017 by failurecascade
Additional note

[Nertea]

  On 10/9/2017 at 10:49 PM, failurecascade said:

@Nertea - I've started testing KSP 1.3.1 with Near Future, Far Future, USI, GPP and two or three quality of life mods.  So far only USI caused a crash (fixed by Roverdude's latest update).

One possible problem with Near Future...  Nuclear engines do not seem to reject heat when reaction mass is flowing through them (testing this with NV-50 Stubber and NTRsUseLF patch).  In a test without any radiators, the core temp of the engine seems to go up when thrusting, then back down (rapidly) when thrust is turned off, then slowly climbs as the engine's "Heat Rejected:" value falls.  This is nearly opposite behavior from the same version of Near Future Propulsion (0.9.4.0) running in KSP 1.3.0.  It's as if heat rejection isn't applied until after thrust is cut.

Additional note:  Heat rejection works as I remember in 1.3.0 while running reaction mass through the engine if the reactor is turned off.

Expand  

I'll investigate this one, thanks.

[Nertea]

  On 10/9/2017 at 10:49 PM, failurecascade said:

@Nertea - I've started testing KSP 1.3.1 with Near Future, Far Future, USI, GPP and two or three quality of life mods.  So far only USI caused a crash (fixed by Roverdude's latest update).

One possible problem with Near Future...  Nuclear engines do not seem to reject heat when reaction mass is flowing through them (testing this with NV-50 Stubber and NTRsUseLF patch).  In a test without any radiators, the core temp of the engine seems to go up when thrusting, then back down (rapidly) when thrust is turned off, then slowly climbs as the engine's "Heat Rejected:" value falls.  This is nearly opposite behavior from the same version of Near Future Propulsion (0.9.4.0) running in KSP 1.3.0.  It's as if heat rejection isn't applied until after thrust is cut.

Additional note:  Heat rejection works as I remember in 1.3.0 while running reaction mass through the engine if the reactor is turned off.

Expand  

Ok, I don't know whether this is because I did a rebuild for 1.3.1 or not, but I can't reproduce this. Everything seems fine.

[failurecascade]

  On 10/10/2017 at 3:41 AM, Nertea said:

Ok, I don't know whether this is because I did a rebuild for 1.3.1 or not, but I can't reproduce this. Everything seems fine.

Expand  

If you want to point me to it, I'll be glad to try your new build in that save.  I can also put together a stock+NF save (but this will take a bit of time).

[Nertea]

  On 10/10/2017 at 3:51 AM, failurecascade said:

If you want to point me to it, I'll be glad to try your new build in that save.  I can also put together a stock+NF save (but this will take a bit of time).

Expand  

dev branch of the main repo linked in the OP. I just pushed the latest DLL

[failurecascade]

  On 10/10/2017 at 3:54 AM, Nertea said:

dev branch of the main repo linked in the OP. I just pushed the latest DLL

Expand  

It's still happening with that new dll, so I created a stock + NF mods + dependencies.  Same result...  Are any of the following helpful?

Gamedata folder:  https://www.dropbox.com/s/nyq2j0evb7u8uw9/1.3.1 Stock%2BNF Gamedata.png?dl=0

Output log:  https://www.dropbox.com/s/ve47grylg1rdo81/output_log.txt?dl=0

Game save (there's a test craft in Kerbin orbit):  https://www.dropbox.com/s/ahyy9vf3tigh43q/NF test.zip?dl=0

[Nertea]

  On 10/10/2017 at 4:55 AM, failurecascade said:

It's still happening with that new dll, so I created a stock + NF mods + dependencies.  Same result...  Are any of the following helpful?

Gamedata folder:  https://www.dropbox.com/s/nyq2j0evb7u8uw9/1.3.1 Stock%2BNF Gamedata.png?dl=0

Output log:  https://www.dropbox.com/s/ve47grylg1rdo81/output_log.txt?dl=0

Game save (there's a test craft in Kerbin orbit):  https://www.dropbox.com/s/ahyy9vf3tigh43q/NF test.zip?dl=0

Expand  

Nice report, thanks. I will investigate this tomorrow morning I hope, I get small 1 hour work chunks these days.

[Psycho_zs]

  On 10/9/2017 at 9:12 PM, RaiderMan said:

1.3.1 crashes with ANY mods installed, its equal opportunity crash city.

Expand  

From my extensive mod list I've isolated three that cause crash: EVAFuel, Action Group Manager, Orbital Survey Plus.

I haven't done any extensive testing, but at least NF mods do not cause any trouble on 1.3.1 for me.

[RaiderMan]

doesnt seem like everyone's experiences are identical, then again, no two kerbal installations are alike, even with identical mod sets installed and all..

[Nertea]

@failurecascade: I installed NFElectrical, NTRsUseLF and KerbalAtomicsNFE in my 1.3.1 install. I loaded up your save to test, switched to 'Minmus shuttle', with the following results:

1) Reactor on full power, engine full power. No temperature climb, everything steady at 3405-3507K.

2) Reactor on full power, engine off. Instant temperature climb as expected.

3) All systems off (no screenshot) , temperature decays slowly, all good.

So I'm at a loss here - everything behaves just fine. I also tested various combinations of both engine modes, which also showed all expected behaviours.

I might recommend you wait for an official release (maybe Thursday) and then report back?

 

[RaiderMan]

will this release be compatible with 1.3.0 for those of us waiting on other mods to get their 1.3.1 compatible updates?