[1.8.x] DMagic Orbital Science: New Science Parts [v1.4.3] [11/2/2019]

[DMagic]

@Corvorosso Top line of the the log file:

Kerbal Space Program - 1.0.5.1024 (WindowsPlayer)

You need to get the latest version of KSP (1.0.5.1028). Steam will update automatically if you allow it, I'm not sure what the process is for the store version.

Send regards to Squad. 

[SpaceNomad]

14 hours ago, DMagic said:

@SpaceNomad As it says in the editor description, all of the recon parts can be used for low space results at up to five times the normal altitude. This is specifically so that different orbits are allowed while still allowing for the science collection part of the contract to be fulfilled.

Ohh, stock trained me to ignore the description texts (They normally pose more questions than they answer.)

Sorry to say that (since other than that, I really love your mod(s)), but I'm not that happy about the decision to invent extra situations and extra biomes for single experiments. There's already a lot to remember, about which experiments are possible in which situation and when they are biome-specific, and the altitude limits for different bodies (for the latter at least mods like KER help a lot). Experiments making up their own rules don't really help with that.

For the contract you could just let the experiment fulfill the requirement in high or in low orbit (you have to enter the required orbit anyway, so not much room for cheating, or just require the orbit to be entered before enabling the criteria about performing the experiment).

52 minutes ago, DMagic said:

@Corvorosso Top line of the the log file:

Kerbal Space Program - 1.0.5.1024 (WindowsPlayer)

You need to get the latest version of KSP (1.0.5.1028). Steam will update automatically if you allow it, I'm not sure what the process is for the store version.

Send regards to Squad. 

At least the Windows version contains the build number. My KSP Linux Version identifies as 1.0.5.0 in-game. That makes the "silent patch" really sneaky (well, at least, the README contains the build number).

[Corvorosso]

I downloaded the last version on steam, and now everythings work perfect

thank you @DMagic for the help and thanks for the effort you put in your mods

 

[Jimmy P]

DMagic,

I suppose since the last update the only experiments that produce any science when transmitted are the stock ones (presmat, thermometer, etc). When I use a DMagic Orbital Science experiment, it goes through the motion of uploading data to KSC and gets to 100% then says done but awards no science. I have the current version of KSP and the mod but I also use RO/RSS/RP-0 which, I suppose could be causing the issue since telemetry also doesn't work. My logs, if they would be helpful, are located here:  https://www.dropbox.com/s/yo8fyuf7tu2npqc/output_log.txt?dl=0

Any idea what the issue could be?

[jcthemc]

Question about an Anomalous Signal contract. I need to return Mystery Goo data "from above near the anomalous signal" ... i've tried hovering 50 and 100m directly above the Anomaly (it's a monolith) and, doing the Mystery Goo observation and then transmitting the data, but for some reason it's just not registering. What should i be doing differently?

[vardicd]

1 hour ago, jcthemc said:

Question about an Anomalous Signal contract. I need to return Mystery Goo data "from above near the anomalous signal" ... i've tried hovering 50 and 100m directly above the Anomaly (it's a monolith) and, doing the Mystery Goo observation and then transmitting the data, but for some reason it's just not registering. What should i be doing differently?

"I need to return Mystery Goo data" I think that means it needs to be physically returned to kerbin and recovered, not transmitted.

[jcthemc]

The contract states "return or transmit" - poor phrasing on my part there.

[DMagic]

@jcthemc Are you using one of the goo pod instruments from my pack, or the stock part? The anomaly contract will only complete when using my parts. I thought I had put a note about that into the anomaly contracts (there is one for the asteroid contracts), but apparently not. You don't have to complete all of those requests though, so if you can finish the other ones it should work fine, or you can just manually complete the contract in the Alt+F12 menu.

@Jimmy P DropBox isn't cooperating now, I'll edit this if I find anything when it's working. If you Remote Tech installed (I don't think it's a requirement of RO, but is suggested) that is known to have problems with science transmission in some cases. There is a patch available somewhere in the Remote Tech thread somewhere that I think fixes the issue.

Edited March 14, 2016 by DMagic

[Jimmy P]

Thanks for the replay DMagic, I do have remote tech but would that known issue only prevent some experiments from transmitting? I will take a look at that thread to see what I can find but I can transmit some experiments but not others.

[jcthemc]

5 hours ago, DMagic said:

@jcthemc Are you using one of the goo pod instruments from my pack, or the stock part? The anomaly contract will only complete when using my parts. I thought I had put a note about that into the anomaly contracts (there is one for the asteroid contracts), but apparently not. You don't have to complete all of those requests though, so if you can finish the other ones it should work fine, or you can just manually complete the contract in the Alt+F12 menu.

I just reviewed the contract, and it does not explicitly state that you can't use the stock experiment for this. I fixed it by just editing my save - didn't even realise you can fulfil contracts through the F12 menu

[Brigadier]

KSP 1.0.5 32-bit (Orbital Science 1.2, Contracts Window+ 6.1, CapCom 2.0, Contract Parser 1.0), Win7 64-bit

Should I be concerned about this line twenty times in the output log:

[DM] Error detected in setting up long term recon orbit parameter; deactivating
  at DMagic.Parameters.DMSpecificOrbitParameter.testOrbit () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0

I doubt it's related but I'm also getting:

ContractConfigurator.ContractType: Errors encountered while trying to load CONTRACT_TYPE 'FirstPlanetFlyby'

and

ContractConfigurator.Parameters.VesselParameterGroup: Unable to get vessel display name for 'Kerbin Orbiter' - ContractVesselTracker is null.  This is likely caused by another ScenarioModule crashing, preventing others from loading.

I'm not getting these often (two of the first type and 65 of the second type, but with different contracts and vessel names, respectively).  I've never named a vessel "Kerbin Orbiter" or any of the others.

output_log.txt

Edited March 16, 2016 by Brigadier

[DMagic]

@Brigadier When does the first error happen? 

The recon contracts rely on the stock specific orbit parameters in part, but there are some cases where the orbit doesn't get initialized so I have to do it myself.

That error comes from when there is a problem with that orbit. I think it might always happen once in the editor. But if it's happening somewhere else, or repeatedly, that could be a problem.

Have there been any problems with the recon contracts resetting it not recognizing the orbit?

I'm not sure about the CC errors, though I do seem to remember that it uses stand in names for contracts that ask for a specific vessel. 

And if it's right about a scenario module crashing you probably have bigger problems. I'll check the log file when I get a chance.

[Brigadier]

DMagic, it would be really appreciated.  I've restarted a career save three times now and I'm in no mood to grind through the first year again .  I would love to get a Kerbal to Duna someday before 1.1 is released.

I don't know when the error occurs. There doesn't seem to be a significant game impact but that doesn't mean it isn't causing something and I'm not recognizing it.  I'm not sure I'm understanding what you're asking, though.  Where could it occur?  You refer to the editor (?), but I'm not editing anything.  Do you mean a contract editor?

No, there have been no recent problems with recon contracts resetting or not accepting an orbit.  I have seen others with that problem.

Re: vessel names - yes, I've noticed that too.  I will fly a satellite for a contract that refers to vessel name (Maxwell I and II come to mind for the mag surveys).  Future contracts that call for a repositioning or deorbiting, sometimes refer to that name even though I've renamed the vessel.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Brigadier

[Neutrinovore]

Quick comment:  I've noticed that most of the newer science parts don't have a 'systems check' function so that one can check their deployment in the editors.  The seismic hammer in particular, I feel, needs to be tested in the SPH/VAB so that one can be sure that it will contact the ground when landed, don't you agree?  Plus, I just think it's really cool when I can see what the thing does in the editors without having to launch a craft (and potentially crashing the game... yeah, I have a few issues...) to check it out.

Later, all! 

[JPLRepo]

On 23/03/2015 at 0:26 PM, DMagic said:

Oh not at all. If it does break this it's only in a relatively minor way (it's all dependent on scenario module load order and I'm not really sure how that is decided, maybe based on the order they were installed?). But old version of Tarsier break in one of the worst ways possible. It interrupts the scenario module loading process, preventing any further scenario modules from loading. Many mods are completely dependent upon that happening (SCANsat won't work at all, for instance).

This line, which shows up every time a new scene is loaded, is one of the first things I look for when I see Tarsier in the list of installed addons.

 

 

[TST]: Getting Telescope Galaxy Status
NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
  at TarsierSpaceTech.TSTProgressTracker.OnLoad (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at ScenarioModule.Load (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at ScenarioRunner.AddModule (.ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at ProtoScenarioModule.Load (.ScenarioRunner host) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at ScenarioRunner+	.MoveNext () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

 

Lucky I picked this up.Shame no one ever reported it on the TST thread.. I did not know about this problem. In fact this code is original from when I took over the mod.
I'll fix it in the next TST version.

[DMagic]

@Brigadier Editor as in vessel editor. It's the generic and internal name, and is easier to type than VAB/SPH. It appears that the messages only show up there, which is fine. But I should probably make sure that they don't, since I know that test is going to fail anyway.

@Neutrinovore I don't want to put in the 'systems check' for the seismic hammer in the editor because I think it would be misleading. The logic that determines how the hammer is deployed depends on there being an actual planet underneath the vessel and for the distance to the surface to be accurate. None of that really happens in the editor. The best way to check the hammer is to test the final lander craft on the launchpad. The only other part that doesn't really have an editor deploy is the SIGINT dish, which is for technical reasons (the dish part isn't actually there in the editor).

@JPLRepo That looks like a really old error. I think it was a 0.90 error that broke the scenario module loader. I haven't seen it again since you picked up TST.

[Neutrinovore]

4 hours ago, DMagic said:

I don't want to put in the 'systems check' for the seismic hammer...

Okay, it's your mod. 

But, for the sake of argument, one CAN check to see if things can or will reach the ground without leaving the editors.  Just have your landing gear extended, and physically lower your ship down until the legs visually touch the floor of the VAB/SPH.  Since every landing gear and landing leg in the game (that I know of) is always shown at full extension... well, wait, all the Kerbal Foundries wheels are shown in their fully retracted, or compressed, state, but anyway... one can get a good sense of how long a ladder or a drill needs to be. Or, in the case of DMagic, the various lasers and core samplers and now the new seismic experiment (if it had the capability, is my point) can be checked to see if they'll reach the ground.

So, like I said, I see things a little differently, but it's cool, we can agree to disagree.    I still use this mod every time I build a ship or a rover, I really like all of the parts and how they work.  Keep up the great work, DMagic, and I continue to look forward to seeing what you come up with next.

Later.   

[DMagic]

@Neutrinovore I think you misunderstood. It's not about visually confirming the position of the hammer.

The seismic hammer doesn't use visual cues to determine the angle about which it must rotate to face exactly down, or to determine the distance that the variable length section of the hammer must be extended.

As you can see in this picture, the hammer can be theoretically placed in any orientation, and at a variety of heights and still work.

Figuring out the angle that the hammer must be rotated requires figuring out the location of the point on the surface directly below the hammer. I'm not really sure how to do that in the editor (figuring out the distance from the end of the hammer to the floor is probably simple though). 

I could play the deploy animation without any changes, but then the hammer would just point straight out and would give the misleading impression that it can't be used in any orientations other than vertically mounted.

It's probably possible to get it working right in the editor, I just don't really want to spend that much time on it when testing it on the launchpad is so much easier. 

[JPLRepo]

6 hours ago, DMagic said:

 

@JPLRepo That looks like a really old error. I think it was a 0.90 error that broke the scenario module loader. I haven't seen it again since you picked up TST.

You're right.. and looks like I fixed it way back (had forgotten). But I've gone ahead and improved it anyway for next version as the way it was wouldn't work well if the user changed the planets (like installed Kopernicus during a save) and you never can control what people are going to do.
I've got the Orbital Science telescopes functioning as TST telescopes. But want to do a tweak to TST code to allow control of the animations a bit better.

EDIT: Actually although working the transforms are orientated the wrong way in the models.... pondering fixes other than getting @DMagic to change the models.
I could... but, messy. @DMagic is it possible in your next version to add empty transforms to the big and small brother models for the aperture that point out from the aperture (Z axis out in blender)?

Edited March 16, 2016 by JPLRepo

[Kerbas_ad_astra]

1 hour ago, DMagic said:

I could play the deploy animation without any changes, but then the hammer would just point straight out and would give the misleading impression that it can't be used in any orientations other than vertically mounted.

Would it be possible to put up a circle or something to illustrate the hammer's range?

[Neutrinovore]

12 hours ago, DMagic said:

@Neutrinovore

12 hours ago, DMagic said:

@Neutrinovore I think you misunderstood. It's not about visually confirming the position of the hammer.

The seismic hammer doesn't use visual cues to determine the angle about which it must rotate to face exactly down, or to determine the distance that the variable length section of the hammer must be extended.

As you can see in this picture, the hammer can be theoretically placed in any orientation, and at a variety of heights and still work.

Figuring out the angle that the hammer must be rotated requires figuring out the location of the point on the surface directly below the hammer. I'm not really sure how to do that in the editor (figuring out the distance from the end of the hammer to the floor is probably simple though). 

I could play the deploy animation without any changes, but then the hammer would just point straight out and would give the misleading impression that it can't be used in any orientations other than vertically mounted.

It's probably possible to get it working right in the editor, I just don't really want to spend that much time on it when testing it on the launchpad is so much easier. 

 I think you misunderstood. It's not about visually confirming the position of the hammer.

The seismic hammer doesn't use visual cues to determine the angle about which it must rotate to face exactly down, or to determine the distance that the variable length section of the hammer must be extended.

As you can see in this picture, the hammer can be theoretically placed in any orientation, and at a variety of heights and still work.

Figuring out the angle that the hammer must be rotated requires figuring out the location of the point on the surface directly below the hammer. I'm not really sure how to do that in the editor (figuring out the distance from the end of the hammer to the floor is probably simple though). 

I could play the deploy animation without any changes, but then the hammer would just point straight out and would give the misleading impression that it can't be used in any orientations other than vertically mounted.

It's probably possible to get it working right in the editor, I just don't really want to spend that much time on it when testing it on the launchpad is so much easier. 

Oh, I see now!  Well, your explanation certainly... uhhh... explains that.    I had no idea that the part could actually orient itself correctly no matter how it starts out, so yeah, I see how you couldn't have that function in the editor.  See, I have a secret:  I haven't actually even tried to use the part.  I play sandbox, and when I put science parts on my ships, I only do it to use them in a roleplaying type of way, I don't actually care whether or not they provide any 'Science' points, or whatever they're called, in the game.  I just like building cool-looking ships and probes and stuff and then, if and when I actually go fly them to other planets (or to somewhere on Kerbin for that matter, like 'investigating' an Anomaly or something), I ACT like I'm running science experiments if I feel like it, but it doesn't matter if they really do what they're supposed to do or not. Point is, in the case of this particular part, I haven't actually built anything that I've wanted to use it on, so that's why I didn't know how the part actually worked.  Capisce?

Anyway, thanks for the explanation, and once again, keep up the great modding work, DMagic! 

Edited March 17, 2016 by Neutrinovore

[smjjames]

I think this contract might be giving me an impossible to achieve orbit because in order to get to that angle, it won't be at 89.2 degrees.

 

Having problems with this one too, or maybe I'm just not doing it right, no idea.

Edited March 17, 2016 by smjjames

[armegeddon]

2 hours ago, smjjames said:

I think this contract might be giving me an impossible to achieve orbit because in order to get to that angle, it won't be at 89.2 degrees.

 

Having problems with this one too, or maybe I'm just not doing it right, no idea.

 

Actually, you can get that orbit, with that inclination. After changing you Longitude of Ascension will probably have to redo the inclination.  Also, MechJeb most likely will not do the longitude change correctly from the Equatorial AN nor DN, you will have to tell it when to start the burn when your current orbit crosses the desired orbit. That's the only way I was able to do it, and it put me in exactly the correct inclination. 

[Kill_off]

First: I really like this mod and all those experiments.

I am just confused by the Asteroid experiments - i did a few on a Class A - it said so in the tracking station - but when i reached it the experiments said ".... of a class S asteroid". So does this mod change the asteroids too, i couldnt find anything about it in the description and that class S was 16.000t.

[Napseis]

Hello,

I'm confused but the seismic pod and hammer.

I'm doing like said in the thread: jettison a pod, another one further. Toggle Hammer: two green lights and a rectangular light that is lighted from  red to green: it seems to me that it means it found two pods, and that it will bring  lot of science. Then i do "hammer test", the hammer goes out, not too much nor not enough, performs some bangs, comes back...and nothing.
What did i do wrong ? I'm in the biome of Kerbin Shores just next to runway with a little rover.

thanks