[1.4.1] Kerbal Construction Time 1.4.0.69 (2018-03-24) - Unrapid Planned Assembly

[lordyod]

There was a similar issue in Release Candidate 2, but it was fixed for release. If the vessel isn't even being removed from storage then there's likely a bug that is preventing KSP from loading saves completely (could definitely be my fault), and I'd need to see the output_log.txt file to figure out what it is.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/r5uttn62fgttjmc/output_log.txt?dl=0

Got it working... once. Then I tried different difficulty setups and it broke, and I couldn't get it working again.

[NihilRex]

Due entirely to those who regularity use these mods not assisting with testing.

Sorry, I dont use procedural parts other than fairings, and I don't recover those...

[westamastaflash]

I'll admit, the procedural parts support didn't get a very thorough testing. I'll have to take a look at this. Are you using full Realism Overhaul, or just procedural real fuels?

Procedural Parts & Real Fuels. I'm also using RSS (6.4x version), but I don't expect that it would impact the parts, would it?

[JeffreyCor]

Sorry, I dont use procedural parts other than fairings, and I don't recover those...

Those actually are recoverable if you stick a chute on them after they form. KSP graphics will appear to have them fall off when the fairing jettisons the part mechanics still indicates them as being connected (as of the latest testing) so can save a few bucks and time recovering if you so chose The part count also functions properly.

Wings and tanks on the other had had an interesting feature of 1 equaling around 32,000 for a while. Now those were some WAY off figures

[magico13]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/r5uttn62fgttjmc/output_log.txt?dl=0

Got it working... once. Then I tried different difficulty setups and it broke, and I couldn't get it working again.

Looks like Kerbal Stats is having an error, which causes all subsequent OnLoad functions to not work. I'll cross post to that thread as well. As long as that issue happens, KCT isn't going to work properly at all (and likely other mods won't either).

[KS] OnLoad

ArgumentOutOfRangeException: Cannot be negative.
Parameter name: length
  at System.String.Substring (Int32 startIndex, Int32 length) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at KerbalStats.Gender.PickGender (System.String name) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at KerbalStats.Gender.AddKerbal (.ProtoCrewMember kerbal) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at KerbalStats.Gender.Load (.ProtoCrewMember kerbal, .ConfigNode node) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at KerbalStats.KerbalExt.Load (.ProtoCrewMember kerbal, .ConfigNode ext) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at KerbalStats.KerbalStats.OnLoad (.ConfigNode config) [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 

Procedural Parts & Real Fuels. I'm also using RSS (6.4x version), but I don't expect that it would impact the parts, would it?

Probably not, but I'd like to have a similar setup for testing.

... The part count also functions properly.

Wings and tanks on the other had had an interesting feature of 1 equaling around 32,000 for a while. Now those were some WAY off figures

I never gave a thorough explanation of how Procedural Parts support is supposed to work on the forum, only on the GitHub issue, so maybe I should do that here to avoid confusion.

Firstly, the numbers for procedural parts in storage are supposed to be HUGE. The way it works is that a procedural part (pp) is stored/retrieved as 1000 times their cost. A part costing 123.456 funds will be stored as 123456 of that part. Additionally, due to their convenience, pp only have 1/10 of the InventoryEffect applied to them (so, the default of 100 which normally results in a reduction to 10% of new, instead results in a reduction to about 33% of new). Only the dry cost of the part should matter, and a procedural part is detected as procedural by the modules on the part (specifically, at least one module with the word "procedural" in its name). Several popular procedural parts mods only use "proc" in their module name, which I can't use as the requirement because of words like "processor", so I need to probably add special cases for them.

[SaintWacko]

I'm just starting to use KCT, and I had an interesting idea for calculating simulation cost. What if the cost was decreased based on the fraction of science reports you've completed on that body, showing that the more you know about a body, the easier it is to simulate it. This would make it so running simulations around a body would be quite expensive when you first visited it, and, as you got more used to visiting it, simulations would become cheaper.

It would be really neat if you could use the Kittopia terraforming tools to make it so the simulations became more accurate as you did more science on/around the body. For example, at first, before you've visited a planet, all you could do is simulate the size of the planet and its gravity. In the simulation, the planet would have no atmosphere, so it would really only allow you to simulate getting a craft into orbit. As you collected more data, the atmosphere would become available in the simulation, although you could make the simulation cheaper by not having the atmosphere present. Once you began entering the atmosphere and gaining science there, the atmospheric makeup (for air-breathing engines and resource collection mods) would become available. Once you collected science on the surface, surface resource collection would begin to be available in the simulation. I'm not sure this is at all feasible, but it would add a lot of depth to the simulation process.

Edited December 30, 2014 by SaintWacko

[karamazovnew]

A few problems:

- Simulations don't seem to work with Kerbinside when using alternate launch sites. Ending the simulation does nothing, recovering the vessel gives a CTD.

- In Sandbox, when simulation time expires, the interface appears incomplete (only a small part appears) and makes the entire interface unclickable. If I keep the KCT button in the stock toolbar, I have no choice but to ALT-F4.

Since the latest Kerbinside mod now gives back recover money based on the closest base, it means that Stage Recovery might become a bit OP in KCT (if it get's fixed to work with Kerbineside). Is it possible to provide a few new options for Stage Recovery? A simple cfg is all we need, no need for a complicated interface, just a few example settings for people to choose their poison.

- Maximum distance to base: if stage lands outside this radius, it can not be recovered at all. If you have a kerbal in your stage and you land outside, he doesn't die, but you loose prestige as if for killing the kerbal (the poor guy had to swim back to base and complained to the fishermen who put it on youtube etc.)

- Recovery site Finding Cost: a cost for organizing the operation i.e finding the landing site. Proportional to distance to closest base (and maximum distance allowed), goes down if you have a working antenna (same mechanic as for parachutes). Massively reduce cost if part actually communicating with remotetech. Also inverse proportional to stage size, big stages are easier to see

- Max Distance Between Recovery sites: if two stages land close to each other, only pay the finding cost once. For simplicity, just checks for the distance to nearest base and time of landing.

- Cost per mass, cost per distance: two multipliers proportional to part mass and distance to nearest base, that deduct money for actually transporting the parts back to base.

- Refurbishing Costs: the actual cost of making the part available in the inventory again, proportional to initial part cost. Can be negative or positive. Negative means you GET money, positive means you LOOSE money (but you build your rockets much faster, so it might be worth it).

- Scrap bonus: If you choose not to refurbish a part, you get a bit of money back from the part, from selling it or dismantling it to basic materials.

- Get bonus science: you get a proportion of the "science per BP" for simply recovering the parts (even if not refurbishing), the boys at the labs need burned wrecks to improve the parts, right?

- Allow recovery of separate science: a boolean option. If true, science is recovered anyway. If false, you have to recover the part itself and get the data at the base.

- Allow recovery of individual parts: a boolean option. If false, the entire stage has to be recovered (more expensive). Links in nicely with the previous option.

Of course, by making the proper settings above, you can get the current working mechanic (everything off or zero, except the Refurbishing cost with a negative value to get money)

Of course, this ONLY makes sense if it's possible to break into the stock recovery mechanics for your lander and it needs a bit of extra interface. The message normally showing the recovery for stages should simply say "Stage landed, available for recovery". At which point you'd click the KCT button and see the stages and costs for finding and choose if to continue with recovery. Then you'd get the option to choose which parts to recover and which to refurbish.

Hope that's possible.

[magico13]

I'm just starting to use KCT, and I had an interesting idea for calculating simulation cost. What if the cost was decreased based on the fraction of science reports you've completed on that body, showing that the more you know about a body, the easier it is to simulate it. This would make it so running simulations around a body would be quite expensive when you first visited it, and, as you got more used to visiting it, simulations would become cheaper.

It would be really neat if you could use the Kittopia terraforming tools to make it so the simulations became more accurate as you did more science on/around the body.

I kind of like that first idea, since I'm planning on making some changes to simulations in the near future and was intending to require science transmission to unlock new bodies. As for the integration with Kittopia, I don't quite have the time to do anything that large, but it certainly sounds awesome.

A few problems:

- Simulations don't seem to work with Kerbinside when using alternate launch sites. Ending the simulation does nothing, recovering the vessel gives a CTD.

- In Sandbox, when simulation time expires, the interface appears incomplete (only a small part appears) and makes the entire interface unclickable. If I keep the KCT button in the stock toolbar, I have no choice but to ALT-F4.

Since the latest Kerbinside mod now gives back recover money based on the closest base, it means that Stage Recovery might become a bit OP in KCT (if it get's fixed to work with Kerbineside). Is it possible to provide a few new options for Stage Recovery? A simple cfg is all we need, no need for a complicated interface, just a few example settings for people to choose their poison.

...

Hope that's possible.

I've got some other issues to take a look at as well, so I'll add those to the list. A log file from either (or both) occurring would help on the off chance I can't reproduce them.

Edit: I couldn't reproduce either issue. KCT + KerbinSide's "LaunchPoints" pack let me launch from KSC2 without issue. I couldn't use KCT's revert to editor function properly (but didn't see an error listed...), but could still exit to the SpaceCenter which properly reverted things. As for sandbox+running out of time, the window appeared without issue and responded as normal. </Edit>

I wasn't planning on integrating StageRecovery too thoroughly with KerbinSide, and unfortunately I have not yet found a good way to override the stock recovery mechanics (just ways to work around them somewhat). Even if I could override them, it would likely create incompatibilities with other mods that rely on the stock recovery mechanics. Additionally, as I mentioned above, my time is quite limited these days so I'm reluctant to try to do anything too time demanding.

Specifically for StageRecovery though, I do have a bit more freedom with regards to the recovery mechanics since I wrote and implemented them, meaning I can change them however I like. But changing the recovery mechanics too far from what landed stages do obviously has its faults.

The system you propose does sound interesting, but unfortunately I don't think I'd be able to make it happen

Edited December 31, 2014 by magico13

[SaintWacko]

I kind of like that first idea, since I'm planning on making some changes to simulations in the near future and was intending to require science transmission to unlock new bodies. As for the integration with Kittopia, I don't quite have the time to do anything that large, but it certainly sounds awesome.

Yeah, that seemed like it would be a massive undertaking, essentially making KCT rewrite the universe for each simulation, but it would certainly make things interesting if you could only simulate what you knew. I'd really like to see the science one, though.

I've only launched with KCT a couple times now (ran into an issue with HotRockets) but I'm really enjoying it. Oddly enough, one of my favorite things is that it shows what Kerbals are in the rocket before launch. No more accidentally launching Bill, Jeb, and Bob! Usually I end up sticking them in a little rocket and lobbing them on top of the VAB to wait for eternity.

[magico13]

https://www.dropbox.com/s/r5uttn62fgttjmc/output_log.txt?dl=0

Got it working... once. Then I tried different difficulty setups and it broke, and I couldn't get it working again.

So, I posted this in the KerbalStats thread and apparently the issue is that you have kerbals that don't have spaces in their names. If that is the case, how come you have kerbals without spaces? If your kerbals are "normally" named, then I'm afraid that KCT is somehow messing something up with the kerbals.

Here's the related post/thread in the kerbal stats thread: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/99018-0-90-KerbalStats-v1-1-0?p=1638642&viewfull=1#post1638642

Yeah, that seemed like it would be a massive undertaking, essentially making KCT rewrite the universe for each simulation, but it would certainly make things interesting if you could only simulate what you knew. I'd really like to see the science one, though.

When this thread last discussed changes to simulations, one of the proposed ideas was that the simulation would end if you tried to enter the atmosphere or land on a body you hadn't returned science from in that situation (so ending as soon as you hit atmosphere if you don't have atmosphere or landed science, or ending after touchdown if you don't have landed science). There's a good chance I'll end up doing something along those lines.

Edited December 31, 2014 by magico13

[SaintWacko]

When this thread last discussed changes to simulations, one of the proposed ideas was that the simulation would end if you tried to enter the atmosphere or land on a body you hadn't returned science from in that situation (so ending as soon as you hit atmosphere if you don't have atmosphere or landed science, or ending after touchdown if you don't have landed science). There's a good chance I'll end up doing something along those lines.

Oh, that would work too! And it would be a lot easier to do. I like it.

Another thing I realized would be cool, but I'm pretty sure is also impossible, would be to show the rockets rolling out/back. I really don't think there's any way to do that, though. At least not until Squad makes it so vessels show in KSC view.

[karamazovnew]

As for sandbox+running out of time, the window appeared without issue and responded as normal. </Edit>

Sorry 'bout that, here's a few more details: After game strart, I go to sandbox, start any simulation and then pass beyond the simulation time limit, instead of the full "add more time window", just a tiny bit of the interface appears. The game pauses, the small Time Left window indicates "PreLaunch" but I can not click the interface anymore. Here's where the log starts to show errors.

[LOG 06:06:08.178] Packing Untitled Space Craft for orbit

[LOG 06:06:27.051] Game Paused!

[EXC 06:06:27.062] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object

KerbalConstructionTime.KCT_GUI.DrawSimulationCompleteFlight (Int32 windowID)

UnityEngine.GUILayout+LayoutedWindow.DoWindow (Int32 windowID)

UnityEngine.GUI.CallWindowDelegate (UnityEngine.WindowFunction func, Int32 id, UnityEngine.GUISkin _skin, Int32 forceRect, Single width, Single height, UnityEngine.GUIStyle style)

And it keeps repeating the last error for about 2 seconds in the log (a few thousand times)

This happens either I use the stock toolbar, or blizzy's toolbar. The big difference is that if I use blizzy's toolbar, after the error, I can still click the KCT button which then correctly shows the window (the one without the "add more time" button). This allows me to restart the simulation or exit to VAB as normally. If I then switch to career mode, then back to sandbox, the error seems to fix itself. This is not a new error, I actually saw this in 0.25 too with the old KCT version, but this is the first time I write about it

Anyway, it's not game breaking, I'll just use blizzy's toolbar for the KCT button. My bet is that it must be somehow linked with the lack of money in Sandbox.

As for Kerbinside, you're right, launches for KSC are not affected, while launches from anywhere else have to be reverted by the normal recover button. However, I must point out that if I first try to recover with the KCT window, the stock toolbar disappears until I restart the game. Weird

Edited December 31, 2014 by karamazovnew

[raath]

Testint v 1.1.2 and it seems to break any craft that I attach air intakes too. Stock, B9, they're all effected.

In the assembly screen, you have one chance to place an intake, then after that you are unable to select any existing or add any further parts with an error in the player.log of

Exception: FSM Error: Cannot switch states before starting. Please call StartFSM() before running the FSM.

Click in simulate and I get the hell cracken screen and the player.log shows everything loading normally until it gets to

NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
  at KerbalConstructionTime.KerbalConstructionTime.FixedUpdate () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

Then after that all other parts and mods throw NREs.

If the carft doesn't require an intake then it simulates fine

[magico13]

KCT should be fairly agnostic to what parts are on a ship, so I'd like to see the full log file if possible. I don't know what an FSM is (the first error) so I'm not sure how KCT is causing it. Just to be sure, I'll try loading up a craft that has intakes if I get a chance to turn on my laptop today.

Edit: @karamazovnew I think I figured out the issue with simulations ending in sandbox mode, so that'll be fixed in the next update for sure (and should be fixed in the latest dev build).

Edit2: @raath I ran into no issues using stock intakes (well, with Ven's Stock Revamp also installed) during simulations during my somewhat limited testing of crashing the Ares 3A with structural intakes instead of the old radial ones into the ground many times.

Edited December 31, 2014 by magico13

[Mars Mullo]

Hi quick question.

Can I warp the roll out time?

Or do I have to wait a real 1 hour 2 minutes and 34 seconds for this to happen?

http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o75/Martin_Ellis/Martins%20KSP%20screen%20shots/screenshot0-1.png' alt='screenshot0-1.png'>

[magico13]

Timezones mean that this reply is quite late, but yes you can warp through rollout or any other times. Just press the "Warp to Complete" button at the top, or manually warp. If you've got Kerbal Alarm clock installed it'll make an alarm for you automatically, so you can run other missions and not worry about warping past completion.

[Mars Mullo]

Thank you... sorry I do feel like a silly duffer... I wasn't quite aware that the warp button works for all actions. I think this was because the other actions have the little press button to the right of them.

Great plug in ... thank you for answering my silly question. Happy new year.

[magico13]

Thank you... sorry I do feel like a silly duffer... I wasn't quite aware that the warp button works for all actions. I think this was because the other actions have the little press button to the right of them.

No worries! Sometimes the way I design things isn't very intuitive, and in this instance they don't have a "warp to" button because of space. In general, whatever's listed in the "Next:" section is what gets warped to when you press the 'Warp to Complete" button

Happy New Year to you as well!

[Mars Mullo]

I'm not sure what is happening is a bug or not.

I'm launching three stage rockets

Consisting of two stages of RT-10 SRB's, and MK1 pod

Each stage has 2 x Mk2-r radial chutes and all calculate in Stage Recovery to be 100% recoverable.

The first stage SRB auto recovers.

The send stage doesnt. The Mk1 pod catches up with it on the descent and then the 2nd stage gently chutes to ground.

The Mk1 pod also chutes to ground a few minutes later. They separate by more than 3-4km during flight.

I have to switch to the SRB and recover using the overhead green button. I think the money is recovered. Then re-pilot the Mk1 pod on the ground and then recover the vessel the same way.

However in the VAB in Kerbal Construction time the SRB's and MK2-R's never appear in the parts list.

I have to make them new every time.

Are all parts supposed to recover..and if not don't you get a message they are scrapped? Because I don't get that message.

- - - Updated - - -

One other thing I noticed while reading the PDF explaining things is the R&D seems to be described in an opposite fashion.

Development = Science time to unlock the tech node.

Research = the engineers learning to build the tech.

Wouldn't that be the other way around ?

Research = Scientists discovering the principles of the tech "research" and prototyping it.

Development = Engineering "developing" the prototype to a production model of the technology.

Or am I not Kerbal enough to get it? :-)

[Probus]

Magico,

I haven't played with KCT for a while, but WOW! You have really included a lot more features and it is working rock solid for me. There are a couple things I would like to suggest (or maybe its in there already and I don't realize it). These are all ideas (your mod is great just the way it is):

1) What is the easiest way to add new technology to ships in the construction queue? If I invent a barometer and want to add it to my stock rocket I have 3 copies of, how do I do this?

2) In RL all the stages are built simultaneously at different factories so the construction time should be for the most complex stage built. The roll out time should include the integration of these stages.

3) The first design of a stage is 10x more time consuming than the next copies.

4) Usually the construction queue will build a lot of the same thing in an assembly line 7 (6) Mercury missions, but I believe 14 were built. What is the best way of simulating this?

5) If I want to build 10 Atlas boosters (ahead of time) in storage, and fit each with a different payload as they are designed, how do I do this?

Keep up the great work! Thanks for this mod,

Probus

Edited January 2, 2015 by Probus

[magico13]

The first stage SRB auto recovers.

The send stage doesnt. The Mk1 pod catches up with it on the descent and then the 2nd stage gently chutes to ground.

The Mk1 pod also chutes to ground a few minutes later. They separate by more than 3-4km during flight.

I have to switch to the SRB and recover using the overhead green button. I think the money is recovered. Then re-pilot the Mk1 pod on the ground and then recover the vessel the same way.

So far everything is as expected. StageRecovery only "kicks in" when the vessels get unloaded in the atmosphere and are going to be deleted by KSP.

However in the VAB in Kerbal Construction time the SRB's and MK2-R's never appear in the parts list.

I have to make them new every time.

Are all parts supposed to recover..and if not don't you get a message they are scrapped? Because I don't get that message.

You should be seeing the parts when you enter the VAB, click the Part Inventory button, and then choose command or propulsion. If you aren't, then there's a bug and I'll need logs from after you recover something.

One other thing I noticed while reading the PDF explaining things is the R&D seems to be described in an opposite fashion.

Development = Science time to unlock the tech node.

Research = the engineers learning to build the tech.

Wouldn't that be the other way around ?

When I was making the features, it was the "Development of new technologies" and the "hands on research experience of working with the parts".

1) What is the easiest way to add new technology to ships in the construction queue? If I invent a barometer and want to add it to my stock rocket I have 3 copies of, how do I do this?

2) In RL all the stages are built simultaneously at different factories so the construction time should be for the most complex stage built. The roll out time should include the integration of these stages.

3) The first design of a stage is 10x more time consuming than the next copies.

4) Usually the construction queue will build a lot of the same thing in an assembly line 7 (6) Mercury missions, but I believe 14 were built. What is the best way of simulating this?

5) If I want to build 10 Atlas boosters (ahead of time) in storage, and fit each with a different payload as they are designed, how do I do this?

Several of these can be answered by the same feature, but I'll respond in the same numbered series for clarity:

1) If you want to add a part or two to a ship after they're in storage (or even during construction) just press the "*" button and go to "Edit". This will let you make changes to the ship, but will require additional build time to add or remove parts.

2) You are certainly welcome to think of it that way if you want The build times are somewhat arbitrary, and can be reconfigured to whatever you think is appropriate for them.

3) Parts that are used in multiple builds will take less time to build. It's less dramatic than 10x (The 4th identical build will take half the time), but the build times are also less than real life by default.

4) You can build a bunch of identical copies of something and have them all queued up if you want. You pay for them when you queue them, but you can scrap them at any time.

5) This is kind of like 4 and 1 combined. Queue up a bunch of boosters and use the edit function to add a payload. Or scrap the booster into parts, then build a new vessel that is the payload+booster.

Don't forget that having multiple build rates means you can build two things at once (or three, or more) and that additional rates are cheaper than buying faster primary rates. So if you've got a lot queued up and are planning on doing that often, I suggest buying a second rate.

I hope that answers all of your questions

[Fizwalker]

This is a really interesting mod Magico, and I am very interested in using it... That said, I have run into an issue. I am not sure if it's a bug or if I simply am missing something. I started a new career in .90 and I have designed and built my first ship. (I warped to completion) and I went to the launch pad, put crew in it and hit launch. Here's were the issue comes in. Instead of actually launching the ship, it runs the simulation (which is probably just as well seeing as I've killed Jeb each and every time I ran it.... >.>) I've gone over the guide a few times now without illumination. (I've also just redownloaded the mod, tho I believe I have the most up to date version already.....)

Thank you for the help/insight in advance!

[magico13]

Just to be sure, you are launching the ship by pressing the "launch" button in the build list window, not by clicking the launchpad, correct? If not, then that's the problem Otherwise that does sound like a bug (and I'll need log files and all that, as mentioned in the first post) It sounds like its the first thing though, cause clicking the launchpad will result in a simulation starting.

[Fizwalker]

Will try that next!

[Mars Mullo]

flew a mission to observe a location.

New rocket. 2 x RTx10 boosters dropped and because this was not a straight up and down test the SRB's did auto-recover.

The second stage is a liquid fuel engine and kinda stayed with the pod and dropped to the ocean. It didn't auto recover through SR because it was too close.

I did switch to it and recover it manually. And yes the funds came through for the LFE.

However on navigating back to the VAB and clicking on the parts menu in KCT and then clicking on the propulsion menu non of hte SRB or liquid fuel tanks or LVT-30 show.

I put the output log here

No hurry I know its holiday time.

Look on the bright side ..at least we don't have to time warp for recovery operations... or BP's for recovery crews oh dear.. hope i didn't give you an idea?