Jump to content

[1.2.2] B9 Aerospace | Release 6.2.1 (Old Thread)

bac9

By bac9
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

Flashblade

Flashblade

Posted
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, kcs123 said:

How many people use those VTOL engines anyway ? If there is not significant number of users, maybe it can be pushed to legacy part pack along with firespitter plugin as dependency ?

Don't get me wrong, those VTOLs are cool, but somehow not way too practical for usage. I always end with either, combination of engines with fixed vertical thrust and additional engines for longitudinal thrust or with usage of Infernal robotics. I assume that VTOL craft builders end up with usage of TCA to control their craft and TCA is not way too good in calculation with rotating engines. Therefore they end up with fixed vertical engines.

 

Our Turbofan engines also use a firespitter module to make the turbine spin. We would need a replacement there as well before we could remove firespitter completely from the regular release.

@blowfish new pull request my man.

Edited by Flashblade
Work done
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ss8913

ss8913

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, Vrana said:

This is correct in my case. I built quite a few VTOL craft but always with double, fixed engines.

The two of us hardly constitute a relevant sample tough. Indeed i doubt you could get a significant number of users to express themselves on the forum at all.

The answer to: "How many people use those VTOL engines anyway ? " will have to be a guess.

I wasn't sure it could be done due to their high weight and low thrust,.but with the use of tweaks calendar I was able to make something flyable with them.  in kerbin atmosphere anyway, they aren't like... superconducting electric arcjet engines like KSPIE has which I need for space missions, but I had a flyable b9 vtol jet with useful range and handling back in 1.1.3.

 

That said if this is the only thing holding up a b9 release, I'd vote for moving it out and releasing the rest of it sooner.  just the lights alone in b9 make it a must-have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Flashblade

Flashblade

Posted
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, ss8913 said:

That said if this is the only thing holding up a b9 release, I'd vote for moving it out and releasing the rest of it sooner.  just the lights alone in b9 make it a must-have.

Hardly, a full release hasn't happened because RasterPropMonitor hasn't come out of a beta release yet. The turbofan engines also require firespitter so moving the vtol engines wouldn't make that dependency dissappear anyway. That said if you haven't grabbed the pre-release, no need to hold back. The lights are certainly functional as is everything else as a matter of fact. Some RPM things aren't displayed correctly but that is all. :wink:

Edited by Flashblade
Link to comment
Share on other sites
smotheredrun

smotheredrun

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hello again.  Finally had a moment in my office (instead of using my phone) so here is the specific fix to the looping RCS boom animation I mentioned earlier:

Credit for this fix goes to @dtoxic and @Deimos Rast

 

Edit: Yes, it's after 3 am.  KSP and the forums (with a few ounces of single malt) how I unwind after a gig

Edited by smotheredrun
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kcs123

kcs123

Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, Vrana said:

The answer to: "How many people use those VTOL engines anyway ? " will have to be a guess.

Well, don't know how many people will respond, but it does not hurt to create new pool thread about this in addon discussion forum.

If you are able to get workaround for jet turbines nothing else stops to exclude firespitter as dependency.
Don't get me wrong, firespitter plugin was quite good, helped a lot moders to create propeler engines, landing gears and various other things that need special animation touch that is not covered by stock game. But with each KSP update seems that more things become broken, you need to wait for dependency update and so on.

Less other mods for dependency will also mean less things that can become broken between releases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
_Astra_

_Astra_

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, blowfish said:

For what it's worth, the jet spinner would be pretty easy to replace with a custom module.

 

Blowfish,

you can also add the S3 Hypersonic Cockpit and CDP Shielded port - both parts have the same animation loop

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Flashblade

Flashblade

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, _Astra_ said:

 

Blowfish,

you can also add the S3 Hypersonic Cockpit and CDP Shielded port - both parts have the same animation loop

I have allready taken care of replacing the FS animation module in the latest pull request. And until a new release @_Astra_ do yourself a favor and reinstall firespitter from the B9 release for example. It will fix the problem for now. It did for me promise. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Flashblade

Flashblade

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, blowfish said:

One option is to mark the VTOL engines as :NEEDS[Firespitter] so that they only show up if Firespitter is installed.

That is also a neat idea, btw. I have taken care of our obvious problems with RPM aka color tags are working again. I have created a new pull request. :D

Edited by Flashblade
Link to comment
Share on other sites
joebopie

joebopie

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

On ‎04‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 2:21 AM, Flashblade said:

Hardly, a full release hasn't happened because RasterPropMonitor hasn't come out of a beta release yet. The turbofan engines also require firespitter so moving the vtol engines wouldn't make that dependency disappear anyway. That said if you haven't grabbed the pre-release, no need to hold back. The lights are certainly functional as is everything else as a matter of fact. Some RPM things aren't displayed correctly but that is all. :wink:

Well if that's the case could it not be released without the RPM part. Personally I couldn't care less if its missing RPM, to me B9 is mainly a plane parts pack as im sure it is for most people.

it would be nice to stop all the whining as B9 hasn't had a release it what feels like a year or so.

it seems RPM is just not necessary for what most people use B9 for. out of the few friends i know using b9 none of them use RPM infact one of my friends just removes it altogether.

just a thought.

Edited by joebopie
Link to comment
Share on other sites
blowfish

blowfish

Posted
Posted

The IVAs depend heavily on RPM.  Running without RPM would generate a bunch of errors (they might or might not be game breaking, haven't tried).  Replacing all the props with static ones would also be a ton of work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Flashblade

Flashblade

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, joebopie said:

props? you mean the inside views would be missing all the switches and textures?

well I wouldn't even notice but I suppose it would just look unfinished to most people.

That is exactly the point YOU wouldn't even notice and neither would some of your friends I am sure, but let's say we went ahead with a release and our IVAs are in shambles. I guarantee you that at least 4 or 5 people and maybe even more would show up in this thread asking us why we had a release with none functional IVA or just reported that as a bug in general. I am sorry but you and the friends you know are not a reliable sample size of our userbase.

But that isn't really an issue, as of now everything in B9 basically works. People who are playing the pre-release haven't reported any further bugs. We could have a release but @blowfish doesn't like the idea to put a dependency (RPM) in that hasn't come out of beta yet. We also kind of still need to figure out what to do about the VTOL engines and blowfish are you going to code a module for the turbofan engine turbines?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joebopie

joebopie

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Flashblade said:

That is exactly the point YOU wouldn't even notice and neither would some of your friends I am sure, but let's say we went ahead with a release and our IVAs are in shambles. I guarantee you that at least 4 or 5 people and maybe even more would show up in this thread asking us why we had a release with none functional IVA or just reported that as a bug in general. I am sorry but you and the friends you know are not a reliable sample size of our userbase.

But that isn't really an issue, as of now everything in B9 basically works. People who are playing the pre-release haven't reported any further bugs. We could have a release but @blowfish doesn't like the idea to put a dependency (RPM) in that hasn't come out of beta yet. We also kind of still need to figure out what to do about the VTOL engines and blowfish are you going to code a module for the turbofan engine turbines?

 

Yea.... thats what i meant when i said "it would just look unfinished to most people"

no need to get uppity im just discussing things.

Edited by joebopie
Link to comment
Share on other sites
XOC2008

XOC2008

Posted
Posted

So I haven't seen this mentioned or maybe I missed it entirely.. the prerelease version, 6.2.0, I have found does not get along with version 2.0.8 of B9 Pwings. (I know there's a 2.1.0 now but after I installed it it treated everything as mirrored badly and I haven't had problems with 2.0.8.) When I install 6.2.0 with PWings 2.0.8, the wing editing functionality disappears. I can't hover and press J, it's not recognized. Just wondering if anyone else has had this issue, if they fixed it, and how. If it's a "I'm stupid and should use the current version" issue, then I'll just continue to be stupid. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joebopie

joebopie

Posted
Posted (edited)

what is the problem with using firespitter anyway. 

only reason I could see to remove it is cos its not being updated, but it seems like it is.  

feels like a fuss over nothing.

Edited by joebopie
Link to comment
Share on other sites
blowfish

blowfish

Posted
Posted

Main reason to mark it as a prerelease is so that CKAN doesn't try to index.  It will never show up on CKAN until RPM is updated anyway.  Similarly, calling it a prerelease increases the chance that people won't go looking for in in CKAN.  Also did not poke bac9 to update the OP, so maybe that decreases its visibility a bit.

3 hours ago, Flashblade said:

We also kind of still need to figure out what to do about the VTOL engines and blowfish are you going to code a module for the turbofan engine turbines?

I'll see if I have time in the next few days.  If not, it can wait I think.

38 minutes ago, joebopie said:

what is the problem with using firespitter anyway. 

only reason I could see to remove it is cos its not being updated, but it seems like it is.  

feels like a fuss over nothing.

It's being updated, but there's a lot of really old code in it that isn't being maintained.  We've seen some of these features break even in this thread (leg animations, hover mode on VTOLs).  Plus, each additional dependency has to be managed, and Firespitter more than most since the plugin has to be separated from the parts.  I think it comes down to this: if it's easy to remove then it's worth removing, so we're trying to decide exactly how much work would be required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
linuxgurugamer

linuxgurugamer

Posted
Posted
On 11/24/2016 at 3:42 AM, ThirdOfSeven said:

I suspect "up-to-date" firespitter may be source of this issue.

7.4.2 -> B9 legs folding&unfolding in endless loop.

7.4.1 -> Beautiful!

Can't find what is missing in parameters for FSAnimateGeneric to stop it from doing this endless animation, btw. Maybe it is a bug in Firespitter itself.

Hi all, 

I'm looking into this problem now

Link to comment
Share on other sites
V8jester

V8jester

Posted
Posted

Hey @blowfish would you be willing to add an attachment node to the shielded docking port in a future release? I really like using them, but when building a mother ship docked to a lander in the SPH. I must build them either in two seperate ships, or simply clip a squad docking port inside the shielded one.

 

Thank you sir for all you do around here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
blowfish

blowfish

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, V8jester said:

Hey @blowfish would you be willing to add an attachment node to the shielded docking port in a future release? I really like using them, but when building a mother ship docked to a lander in the SPH. I must build them either in two seperate ships, or simply clip a squad docking port inside the shielded one.

 

Thank you sir for all you do around here.

I'll take a look.  Should be pretty simple...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...