[0.90.0] Fine Print vSTOCK'D - BETA RELEASE!!! (December 15)

[forsaken1111]

In the first place my Pe and Ap were a little bit higer, didn't work...

I'm using a lot of mods, but I don't think that is the problem (mods don't "change" the orbit of my probe...)

You confirm that I should just need to match the orbital waypoint on the screen and voila ?

In every case where I have successfully completed an orbit contract I have just matched my orbit line to the projected waypoint lines (and in the correct direction! I did a retrograde orbit once. Oops!) and it has worked for me. Once you are on the track the 2nd objective should go green and then you just have to neutralize controls for 10 seconds or so.

[Arsonide]

In the first place my Pe and Ap were a little bit higer, didn't work...

I'm using a lot of mods, but I don't think that is the problem (mods don't "change" the orbit of my probe...)

You confirm that I should just need to match the orbital waypoint on the screen and voila ?

This happens to me quite a bit in testing. I see that you have multiple contracts to orbit around Kerbin active, but only one can fit in the tracking window at once. Scroll down the tracking window and make sure that the orbit you are matching is the one that you are looking at in the objectives. You might be completing one, it just isn't the one you're looking at.

[ToyToy]

I had the same thaught, so I made a quicksave in the KSC and then tried cancelling every other satellite mission I had. When returning to the tracking building, I saw that I just had my polar orbital waypoint left (so I can't be on this one) but that didn't solve my problem... :\

[Arsonide]

I had the same thaught, so I made a quicksave in the KSC and then tried cancelling every other satellite mission I had. When returning to the tracking building, I saw that I just had my polar orbital waypoint left (so I can't be on this one) but that didn't solve my problem... :\

Did you return to the flight scene after this and make sure that you were matched up? The two screenshots you've shown were close but might not be matched. It's hard to tell without being able to rotate, but I see some deviation of altitude. I had one other report of this yesterday, so I double checked all my math in the matching logic, turns out the person was just not matched yet, but deviations of 7% generally give you quite a bit of leeway, so I'm not sure. Maybe the inclination/LAN is flipped?

Is anything popping up in the debug log by chance?

[Phi Function]

I take it you're not running FAR / NEAR / AJE then? With the current release of FAR basic jets won't go much beyond mach 1 so while reaching those altitudes is possible, staying there is another story.

Don't complain too loudly, I do my aerial surveys with the KAX prop engines. Try flying around Kerbin with a prop plane, and designing one that can fly that high.

That's the problem. Which mods should Fine Print use for balancing aerial survey missions? The current values are good for vanilla aerodynamics, they are bad for anything more realistic. And yes, I am using the vanilla aerodynamics as I do not build or fly planes very often. My comment was written under the assumption that the missions are balanced for the vanilla aerodynamics.

[Superfluous J]

That's the problem. Which mods should Fine Print use for balancing aerial survey missions? The current values are good for vanilla aerodynamics, they are bad for anything more realistic. And yes, I am using the vanilla aerodynamics as I do not build or fly planes very often. My comment was written under the assumption that the missions are balanced for the vanilla aerodynamics.

Yes. This mod should function well with stock aerodynamics and there should be a plugin, or an alternate download, or something for FAR, or for prop engines, or for whatever other particular cocktail of mods people use.

Some or all of these may even be created and maintained by the original mod author, but they should be adjuncts to the works-with-vanilla mod, not defaults.

[ToyToy]

Did you return to the flight scene after this and make sure that you were matched up? The two screenshots you've shown were close but might not be matched. It's hard to tell without being able to rotate, but I see some deviation of altitude. I had one other report of this yesterday, so I double checked all my math in the matching logic, turns out the person was just not matched yet, but deviations of 7% generally give you quite a bit of leeway, so I'm not sure. Maybe the inclination/LAN is flipped?

Is anything popping up in the debug log by chance?

I corrected my orbit to put it absolutly perfect regarding to the orbital waypoint, but this still doesn't work... Anyway, I tried another satellite launch mission, and this one worked without problem !

[zarakon]

The satellite missions could really use an ap/pe description and a way to target them to see the ascending/descending nodes

Trying to eyeball a 3% match on a tundra orbit was a real pain in the ass

[Arsonide]

The satellite missions could really use an ap/pe description and a way to target them to see the ascending/descending nodes

Trying to eyeball a 3% match on a tundra orbit was a real pain in the ass

That's next patch sir. I actually spent all day trying to figure out why the ascending node isn't calculating properly for my GUI markers. Kind of hit a brick wall with that, but rest assured I am working on it.

[ozzmeister00]

Hit a bug today:

Accepted two polar-orbit contracts

Finished one

Was unable to complete another being what appeared to be "pretty damn close" to it's target orbit

Reverted to launchpad on the 2nd satellite mission

Exited the game

Booted back up

Noticed in tracking station that two orbital waypoints existed, despite only one active polar contract existing, and one my originally-completed satellite being in a similar orbit to one of the orbital waypoints.

[Arsonide]

Hit a bug today:

Accepted two polar-orbit contracts

Finished one

Was unable to complete another being what appeared to be "pretty damn close" to it's target orbit

Reverted to launchpad on the 2nd satellite mission

Exited the game

Booted back up

Noticed in tracking station that two orbital waypoints existed, despite only one active polar contract existing, and one my originally-completed satellite being in a similar orbit to one of the orbital waypoints.

The tracking station shows all current contracts that are shown on the contract board, not only the ones you accept. When you completed the first deployment mission, another one probably generated to fill the void.

[Thorium]

This sounds great, I'll try it when I get home!

[zarakon]

I got a contract for a 5% accurate orbit around Minmus that I just can't complete. It seems like I should definitely be within 5% of it though. It's like it's looking for 0.5% or 0.05% instead

Save file: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz_Zk5oTok77VGFpWW16cjE3SVE/edit?usp=sharing

I actually had it matched up even better before, and it still wasn't counting

[Hannu]

I took a contract to put a satellite on Minmus orbit. Orbital parameters are about AP 498 km, PA 444 km, inclination 167 deg (I assumed that retrograde rotation direction of markers in map view is correct direction). Tolerance is 5 %. But I can not get mission accepted. Everything else is OK, but it does not accept orbit.

Now a question. What does that 5% means? I am not sure is my orbit accurate enough. Periapsis, Apoapsis and inclination is certainly within 5 %, probably well within 1 %. If I focus to Minmus and zoom so, that the orbit fills screen, error is about one pixel in orbital plane (maybe overlapped lines seems little wider on some points of orbit) and one pixel in inclination. If I focus to satellite I can see some error, but it is comparable to orbital calculation and draw accuracy. I found it impossible to adjust because orbit changes every time. Is there an error in mod or do I something wrong? I have 64 bit windows version of 0.24.2 and some other mods (for example Mechjeb).

[sreinmann]

On orbital contracts where the statement is "... build a satellite to our specifications and deploy it ..." and "Launch a new unmanned probe that has ..." does that mean that the entire flight must be unmanned? Or may the satellite be brought to space in a manned space plane for instance and launched once the orbit is achieved.

[forsaken1111]

I've just been avoiding the satellite contracts until dev does another pass on them personally. Its been very hit or miss.

[vardicd]

Geo-stationary orbit around Minmus. Isn't that outside of Minmus' SOI?

[Arsonide]

Geo-stationary orbit around Minmus. Isn't that outside of Minmus' SOI?

No. Minmus can handle geostationary orbits.

Save file:

This actually allowed me to reproduce the issue, and I can see the problem. Thanks for this.

Edited August 13, 2014 by Arsonide

[Kevin Kyle]

Thank you for your efforts, really looking forward to the next release and the next, and the next....!

[webkilla]

Is there a way to limit how many of these missions that will be thrown at you?

I keep getting 6 Fine print missions (satelite missions, survey missions, that sort) and only very few of the vanilla missions... its actually kinda annoying - because I'm getting a lot of them before I'm barely able to do them.

Like, getting aereal survey missions that require heights of +20.000, when I don't have the turbo-jet engine unlocked, only the normal jet unlocked. Ok, i'm sure it could probably be done, but it is DIFFICULT - far more difficult than the mission rewards justify.

plus, I got a rover survey mission on kerbin that was scattered over a mountain range. A few of the locations were pretty much impossible to drive up to.

[juanml82]

Question, would the rover contracts qualify if the "rover" is only using aircraft landing gear and it's moving through a combination of ion power and monopropellant (gotta love Minmus gravity) instead of being a rover moving through it's electric legs?

I have such a craft on Minmus, driving through the rover nav points and I get the message of the anomaly, but the contract remains incomplete, and I don't know if it's a bug or if it's my ion powered vessel.

I'll also agree with webkilla, I'm too many fine print contracts instead of vanilla. May it be because I have many incomplete fine print contracts?

[webkilla]

I think that having rovers with RCS and ion propulsion is quite legic for Mün and Minmus missions - it makes sense when you need to navigate difficult terrain

my main issue with with there being too many of them at once and what else I talked about in my post

[Arsonide]

Anything with powered wheels touching the ground is considered a rover juanml82. I do not constrain your creativity other than that stipulation.

As far as missions spawning in difficult areas, that is a good thing in my opinion. I advise you to check the tracking station before accepting a rover mission to see where the agency is sending you.

The Contract System determines what missions are chosen, and I have not modified that system in any way. What I have done is put limitations on my missions so that only a few can spawn at once. Beyond that I have little control over how the system chooses what it chooses. This is part of RNG. There have been times in my testing where I've had many stock missions and not any of mine.

I've found a problem with the orbital matching algorithm, and I'm working on fixing that as well as adding more information to orbital waypoints.

[Fiontar]

Any chance you can make this mod compatible with DMagic Orbital Science? http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/64972-DMagic-Orbital-Science-New-Science-Parts-V0-4-%281-11-14%29

Full compatibility with missions that use some of the science unique to the mod would be great. However, immediate to near term, I really most want to see Fine Print recognize the Universal Storage analogues to the stock science parts included in DMagic Orbital Science as fulfilling Fine Print mission requirements. I really prefer the clean footprint of a Universal Storage Octocore slotted with science equipment vs. stock science parts. Adding this compatibility would be very much appreciated.

[vardicd]

I really most want to see Fine Print recognize the Universal Storage analogues to the stock science parts included in DMagic Orbital Science as fulfilling Fine Print mission requirements. I really prefer the clean footprint of a Universal Storage Octocore slotted with science equipment vs. stock science parts. Adding this compatibility would be very much appreciated.

Could this be a thing? Please?!?