[1.0.5 - Alpha 6] Dang It! (12 september 2015)

[Ippo]

Any word on either you or Malkuth making your mods play together? At the moment your mods kill each other.

We exchanged some PMs and we diagnosed the problem to be:

**** if we know

Sorry guys, we have no idea what's up with that. It's really, really weird.

[Mulbin]

Thats a shame, doesnt look like malkuth is trying to fix it either. MC is popular in modded installs... death knell for dangit?

I'll be keeping Dangit though as it's essential for gameplay in my view.

Have you considered trying to add support for the resource transfer thingy that MC uses in case that fixes it?

Edited January 17, 2015 by Mulbin

[Ippo]

Thats a shame, doesnt look like malkuth is trying to fix it either. MC is popular in modded installs... death knell for dangit?

I'll be keeping Dangit though as it's essential for gameplay in my view.

Have you considered trying to add support for the resource transfer thingy that MC uses in case that fixes it?

It's not that we are not trying to fix it, it's that we have no idea whatsoever what could be even causing it. Neither of us is doing anything weird with the resources: we both checked each other's code and everything looks totally normal to us.

We are both using the stock resource mechanisms, so there's no reason on earth why they shouldn't work together... yet they don't.

[Mulbin]

How odd :/ The only problem occurs when you try to remove parts from the pod. It reduces the count in the pod, but then for some reason forgets to increase the count in the kerbals inventory. I guess this is where the two mods clash... on how parts are stored on a kerbal.

I did consider a workaround where I remove the parts (which then disappear), quit out, edit my save file and drop the parts into the kerbal's pocket! But I think it will get pretty tedious on long missions and make maintenance unbearable.

A real shame as I only really want MC for one thing and that's the space station crew supply mission... its the only stock part mod that gives any point to building a space station in career.

[Ippo]

I guess this is where the two mods clash... on how parts are stored on a kerbal.

Not really: we just add a new RESOURCE node to the Part that is the EVA Kerbal. Which is also the only way to do it, as far as I know... as I said, we both took a look at each other's code, and found nothing suspicious.

*shrugs*

[Mulbin]

I'll post this in both mod threads in case it helps....

OK... I've found what might be a very obvious problem with your mods.

Dangit tells KSP that a kerbal can carry 15 spare parts.

MC tells KSP that a kerbal can carry 1 spare part.

Could this be the root of the problem?

Edited January 17, 2015 by Mulbin

[John Nowak]

>I did consider a workaround where I remove the parts (which then disappear), quit out, edit my save file and drop the parts into the kerbal's pocket! But I think it will get pretty tedious on long missions and make maintenance unbearable.

Thanks for the workaround. I agree that's not a great solution, but at present I'd prefer that to losing either of these mods.

I'm sure this can be fixed, even if it's necessary to isolate the two mods entirely. One uses "DangItParts" and the other "MCParts."

[Mulbin]

>I did consider a workaround where I remove the parts (which then disappear), quit out, edit my save file and drop the parts into the kerbal's pocket! But I think it will get pretty tedious on long missions and make maintenance unbearable.

Thanks for the workaround. I agree that's not a great solution, but at present I'd prefer that to losing either of these mods.

I'm sure this can be fixed, even if it's necessary to isolate the two mods entirely. One uses "DangItParts" and the other "MCParts."

Unfortunately I've discovered that this doesnt really work. MC forces you to only carry 1 spare part, many items in DangIt need 2 or more parts to repair.

[Ippo]

Another reason it won't work is that Ippo is a bad, bad code-monkey and has hard-coded the name of SpareParts in a couple of places :/

[Coffeeman]

Luckily, TrypChangeling over on github found a workaround.

@ippo: they have a pull request at https://github.com/Ippo343/DangIt/pull/93 , it's not the cleanest solution , but it should work. You should look it over.

@everyone: I'll build an alternate DLL later today with MCC compatibility, and hopefully we'll merge TrypChangeling's patch, or find a less hacky solution

[Coffeeman]

I've built a Pre-release with compatibility with MC2. Soon it will be released as an official release. As it is, get it directly from GitHub here: https://github.com/Ippo343/DangIt/releases/tag/0.5.4-pre . As of now it will NOT show up on CKAN, you need to update manually.

Edited January 18, 2015 by Coffeeman

[John Nowak]

Unfortunately I've discovered that this doesnt really work. MC forces you to only carry 1 spare part, many items in DangIt need 2 or more parts to repair.

Ah, too bad.

[Scientist]

first page says this does not work with procedural parts tanks, is that due to the module TankContentSwitcher?

if i switch to using MFT, and put a module ModuleFuelTanks on my PP tanks (which works) will dangit work for the PP tanks?

[Coffeeman]

...will dangit work for the PP tanks?

No, unfortunately it won't work. We need to add a special ReliabilityModule to work with PP.

Sorry , it is on the todo list for the next version . If I find some time not consumed by FRC I'll try to patch that soon.

Good luck!

[Scientist]

when you remove PP - TankContentSwitcher and use MFT - ModuleFuelTanks instead, part becomes an MFT question not PP question

also for the to-do list, something for Connected Living Space would also be nice

though a thought, instead of making all these Reliability*Module, what about making a ReliabilityGenericModule

inside declare the name of the module you want affected, might be a bit more tricky to code, but futureproof

[cantab]

To activate an event (the button thingy to repair stuff) you need to be within a maximum distance from the part. KSP computes this from the centre of the part: this is particularly important for huge, long tanks: you need to go near their centre for the event to show up at all.

Also note that the default distance is set to 2 metres, which is just enough to interact with 3.75m parts: this should be enough to interact with the NASA tanks, but maybe you might want to increase it to allow a little more room. It will also be necessary if you have any modded 5m tanks in your game.

Where can I change the maximum distance setting? I've hit this same issue with the Joolian Discovery pod - pretty much spherical and about 5 m diameter. (And I also have some 5 m tanks in my install).

[Coffeeman]

Where can I change the maximum distance setting? I've hit this same issue with the Joolian Discovery pod - pretty much spherical and about 5 m diameter. (And I also have some 5 m tanks in my install).

It should be in the DangIt button (stock toolbar) on the SpaceCenter screen.

[Astrofox]

KSP definitely needs more explosions, considering that just about every launch goes really well for me. I am considering on downloading this mod for the fun of test flights.

[Scientist]

what exactly does the blacklist.cfg do? i have other resources i made manually, wanted to decide if they need to be added there

[UnanimousCoward]

what exactly does the blacklist.cfg do? i have other resources i made manually, wanted to decide if they need to be added there

From the wiki:

Blacklist

You can exclude any resource you like from the tank leaks by adding it to the blacklist located in

GameData/DangIt/PluginData/DangIt/Blacklist.cfg

This already defines some resources to ignore to be compatible with other mods: if you find any that I have missed, please let me know!

[ZeroGravitas]

Hi all, just a bit of feedback regarding the interactions with MC2. I've edited the Dangit .cfg files so that 'MaintenanceCost:' and 'RepairCost:' are set to 1, under the assumption that this would mean only 1 'SparePart' would be required and therefore repairs would be possible. Well I've had mixed results, on one flight a fuel tank started leaking so I EVA'd out and right clicked, it said 1 SparePart was required which I then went and collected and the leaking part gave me the option to duct-tape the hole! Great I thought, it works!

I recognize that this crude fix removes the balance of the mod, so to compensate I've also reduced the number of SpareParts carried on each capsule.

However, a while later I was flying a twin engine jet when one of the engines turned red and cut out. I killed the throttle and managed to glide to a safe landing. When i confidently EVA'd to repair the damage I was sad to see it required 2 SpareParts to fix, and was therefore impossible. I guess this means that the RepairCost isn't as simple as I imagined...

Thinking about it more I will continue to use this combination of mods, because realistically there are some problems which can't be fixed in the field, and not being able to repair a jet engine while landed in a literal field actually adds to the immersion! From now on I will have to build craft with a 'plan B' in mind for when the unfixable failures strike!

Thanks for your great mod and good luck crushing this weird interaction bug.

[Coffeeman]

Actually, you can download a fixed build from here: https://github.com/Ippo343/DangIt/releases/tag/0.5.4-pre . It'll come out with 0.5.4 officially pretty soon. Sorry, until I've gotten my life back from FRC, you can use the pre-release.

Hopefully soonish I'll be able to merge that in and add a few other features in the pipeline (including PP support!)

(P.S. If you set RepairCost for EVERYTHING to 1, jet engines really should only cost 1... :/ I'll try to figure that out... )

[Scientist]

i got Dangit to work with proc parts tanks if MFT is used in the mix

have to say, watching 200k kethane tank have issues...not making me happy, good thing was a test!

[Maars]

i just perused the wiki but thought i'd shoot the question off anyhow : I've docked a small science probe at my minmus base, it's rcs powered and does remote survey contracts - after each mission it lands and always both engines fail, i can repair them with my present crew but only to a terrible condition and not beyond. So it's throw-out time for my probe.

Thing is, this has happened exactly the same way 3 times in a row now - 3 minmus probe deliveries and 3 engine failures after about a 2000m/s delta V trip surveying minmus with every probe. Does this mean that the monopropellant engines are sh*t and my crew aren't skilled enough to repair them? Or is it actually some kind of annoying loopy ......"bug"? - i dare use the word.

[MartyG]

i just perused the wiki but thought i'd sho

---

ot the question off anyhow : I've docked a small science probe at my minmus base, it's rcs powered and does remote survey contracts - after each mission it lands and always both engines fail, i can repair them with my present crew but only to a terrible condition and not beyond. So it's throw-out time for my probe.

Thing is, this has happened exactly the same way 3 times in a row now - 3 minmus probe deliveries and 3 engine failures after about a 2000m/s delta V trip surveying minmus with every probe. Does this mean that the monopropellant engines are sh*t and my crew aren't skilled enough to repair them? Or is it actually some kind of annoying loopy ......"bug"? - i dare use the word.

I don't have this mod installed (yet), but have had a browse on the forum posts here, and I would *guess* that the mean time between failures (MTBF) isn't set to be conducive to long duration usage of RCS thrusters as primary propulsion.

Perhaps go into the part config files and manually edit them? Previous posts offer advice on where to find the settings.

You might want to think about realism, if that's your thing... RCS is pretty reliable IRL for station-keeping and so forth, but I'm not sure about number of engine restarts and so forth.

PS - Is this the radial monoprop engines? Or RCS thrusters? If the probe is small enough you can probably get to orbit on RCS thrusters on Minmus, so I'm not sure which part(s) you're talking about. I can imagine the RCS thrusters might have a low MTBF set in the config files, because they don't fire for long durations and otherwise they'd never fail.