[1.12.x] Mark IV Spaceplane System (August 18, 2024)

[JoaquinJAR]

So, Now the mk4 cockpit 2 is back? 

anyways now that i know the mod has RPM i may donwload it again, idk.

[Nertea]

5 hours ago, JoaquinJAR said:

So, Now the mk4 cockpit 2 is back? 

anyways now that i know the mod has RPM i may donwload it again, idk.

It never left. People using an unsupported 1.3 mod in 1.4 just didn't have it.

[JoaquinJAR]

12 hours ago, Nertea said:

It never left. People using an unsupported 1.3 mod in 1.4 just didn't have it.

OHH Lol i didnt know that was even possible.

 

but you know how games are, one update could break EVERYTHING

[Voculus]

Nertea, thanks so much!

[Wrench Head]

Mark IV build of Mars TV show type lander. The 1st test went well working on an LB now, building for Duna landing.

Album here https://imgur.com/a/UUrqzB3

 

[Wrench Head]

Here is the LB to carry Lander, Made it to orbit and maybe enough fuel for transfer to Duna. We will see this afternoon.

https://imgur.com/a/QeW4QSK

[ss8913]

so.. prior to 1.5.1 ... I made some modular fuel tanks MM patches for MarkIV which allow me to use other-than-stock propellants such as HTP, hydrazine, etc.  Without changing everything, I'm now getting an error from b9 mesh switch claiming that it and MFT cannot manage the same resource; even though it always worked before.  This causes a fatal exit-to-desktop error.

I've looked through the MarkIV part configs and it seems pretty tightly tied to B9 mesh switch.  Is there any way, save rewriting all of the MarkIV part configs, to restore the older behavior, or would it be easier to modify the B9 mesh switch code to take out the "conflict" (not sure there actually is a problem) detection?

[JH4C]

6 hours ago, ss8913 said:

so.. prior to 1.5.1 ... I made some modular fuel tanks MM patches for MarkIV which allow me to use other-than-stock propellants such as HTP, hydrazine, etc.  Without changing everything, I'm now getting an error from b9 mesh switch claiming that it and MFT cannot manage the same resource; even though it always worked before.  This causes a fatal exit-to-desktop error.

I've looked through the MarkIV part configs and it seems pretty tightly tied to B9 mesh switch.  Is there any way, save rewriting all of the MarkIV part configs, to restore the older behavior, or would it be easier to modify the B9 mesh switch code to take out the "conflict" (not sure there actually is a problem) detection?

Your best bet would probably be to recode your MM patches to fit the B9 format so that the fuel management on any one part is handled by a single mod.

Edited November 23, 2018 by JH4C

[Nertea]

9 hours ago, ss8913 said:

so.. prior to 1.5.1 ... I made some modular fuel tanks MM patches for MarkIV which allow me to use other-than-stock propellants such as HTP, hydrazine, etc.  Without changing everything, I'm now getting an error from b9 mesh switch claiming that it and MFT cannot manage the same resource; even though it always worked before.  This causes a fatal exit-to-desktop error.

I've looked through the MarkIV part configs and it seems pretty tightly tied to B9 mesh switch.  Is there any way, save rewriting all of the MarkIV part configs, to restore the older behavior, or would it be easier to modify the B9 mesh switch code to take out the "conflict" (not sure there actually is a problem) detection?

I would ask - why have both? Have your MM patch remove the fuel switching components that use B9 and only use the MFT ones. This may need some work, you're correct, in the instances where the art changes with the contents. Hard to reconcile that.

I mean this was happening before for sure. Two separate modules can't manage resources on the same part, they would need to talk to each other. What would have been happening was that one mod would have been overwriting what the other did, potentially with unclear undesired behaviour. The newer B9 versions have better error detection so you can ensure that your patches are silent-error free.

[ss8913]

On 11/23/2018 at 9:36 AM, Nertea said:

I would ask - why have both? Have your MM patch remove the fuel switching components that use B9 and only use the MFT ones. This may need some work, you're correct, in the instances where the art changes with the contents. Hard to reconcile that.

I mean this was happening before for sure. Two separate modules can't manage resources on the same part, they would need to talk to each other. What would have been happening was that one mod would have been overwriting what the other did, potentially with unclear undesired behaviour. The newer B9 versions have better error detection so you can ensure that your patches are silent-error free.

I have been using these patches, with B9, for as long as I can remember; if there were silent errors, they were not affecting gameplay or impacting me negatively in any way.  B9 doesn't seem to support the non-stock fuels, so that's out.. may try a recompile of B9 with that fatal error detuned to a warning, and see if it lets me get away with what I'm trying to do.
What's really weird is that the B9 parts *themselves* work just fine with modular fuel tanks.  I can put KSPIE fuels in any of the actual B9 parts, just not in the MarkIV parts.

 

update: @Nertea I'm by no means an expert on MM patches.. I have made a few but I'm 100% sure that you and many others know this far better than I do... I tried removing the B9 patches for MarkIV and got a loading error saying that various tank types do not exist; I looked at the MarkIV part configs and they seem to explicitly reference B9 part/mesh switch objects in the part configs themselves - I'm not sure how to divorce MarkIV from B9 without completely rewriting the part configs.  Am I incorrect in thinking that?  What would you recommend?

Edited November 26, 2018 by ss8913

[linuxgurugamer]

@Nertea

Found the following typo in the mk4cargotail-1.cfg:

MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleAnimateGeneric
		animationName = RampOpen
		sstartEventGUIName = #autoLOC_502051 //#autoLOC_502051 = Close
		endEventGUIName = #autoLOC_502069 //#autoLOC_502069 = Open
		actionGUIName = #autoLOC_502078 //#autoLOC_502078 = Toggle Ramp
		allowDeployLimit = true
		revClampDirection = false
		revClampSpeed = true
		revClampPercent = true
	}

The startEventGUIName has two s's

 

Also, I found something very odd when trying to fix All Y'All for the cargo bays in the mark IV system.

 

The Mk4 Service Bay when created in the editor is closed, and the setting closedPosition = 0

The Mk4 Tail Cargo Bay when created in the editor is open, and the setting closedPosition = 0

 

All the other Mk4 cargo bays when created in the editor are open, and the settings closedPosition =1

The following data was obtained using debug statements after adding all the modules to a vessel, launching it:

part: CRG-120 Mk4 Cargo Bay, animTime: 0, closedPosition: 1
part: CRG-240 Mk4 Cargo Bay, animTime: 0, closedPosition: 1
part: CRG-240 Mk4 Cargo Bay, animTime: 0, closedPosition: 1
part: CRG-60 Mk4 Cargo Bay, animTime: 0, closedPosition: 1
part: DRP-120 Mk4 Ventral Cargo Bay, animTime: 0, closedPosition: 1
part: DRP-240 Mk4 Ventral Cargo Bay, animTime: 0, closedPosition: 1
part: DRP-240 Mk4 Ventral Cargo Bay, animTime: 0, closedPosition: 1
part: DRP-60 Mk4 Ventral Cargo Bay, animTime: 0, closedPosition: 1
part: Mk4 Service Bay, animTime: 0, closedPosition: 0
part: Mk4 Tail Cargo Bay, animTime: 0, closedPosition: 0

It seems very odd about the Mk4 Tail Cargo Bay, wondering if that's a bug

 

When I changed the closedPosition in the Mk4 Tail Cargo Bay to 1, things started working as I expected.

[mrvice]

Did i do something wrong...?
iam missing engine parts, intake parts, and most of the other´s that are shown in the gallery.

the basic cockpit and cargo parts i do have.....

edit:
solved my missing engines.
----------------
in all honesty i appreciate every modder who continues work and iam very thankful for that.
But Pls at least link in the op somewhere the download links so i can more easily download the full package.

It gets in general more and more confusing to find all that stuff, for one single mod to have it complete.
i mean i cannot understand why for example this mod got split up, its pretty much useless without the engines.

i really hope in the future some of this stuff changes again many many mods i knew beforehand got split in ways i cannot follow anymore.

This is not meant bad or so pls don´t get me wrong as i said i really really appriciate every modder who continues mods.
 

Edited December 2, 2018 by mrvice

[Nertea]

16 hours ago, mrvice said:

Did i do something wrong...?
iam missing engine parts, intake parts, and most of the other´s that are shown in the gallery.

the basic cockpit and cargo parts i do have.....

edit:
solved my missing engines.
----------------
in all honesty i appreciate every modder who continues work and iam very thankful for that.
But Pls at least link in the op somewhere the download links so i can more easily download the full package.

It gets in general more and more confusing to find all that stuff, for one single mod to have it complete.
i mean i cannot understand why for example this mod got split up, its pretty much useless without the engines.

i really hope in the future some of this stuff changes again many many mods i knew beforehand got split in ways i cannot follow anymore.

This is not meant bad or so pls don´t get me wrong as i said i really really appriciate every modder who continues mods.
 

I should probably remove the engine slides from the OP, but the majority of people prefer the modularity. It also makes the mod way easier to maintain for me. 

[mrvice]

2 hours ago, Nertea said:

I should probably remove the engine slides from the OP, but the majority of people prefer the modularity. It also makes the mod way easier to maintain for me. 

hmm yeah i personaly think if you can, link the other mod that holds the engine parts in the op so everyone can understand that better.

specialy for people who cannot keep constant track of mods and when they get split its sometimes really frustrating to find out about stuff like this.

edit: even when you would youtube the mod to get some more information it would lead into problems because you would still see that the mod normaly contains engine parts, and you would assume something is wrong or you did something wrong because the parts are "missing".
if i would not accidently stumbled accross the information that the mod got split up i would still assume something is wrong or not working.

Edited December 2, 2018 by mrvice

[TheSaint]

Just thought you'd like to know that Mark IV is alive and well in my latest save:

[RaiderMan]

is this an SSTO?

[TheSaint]

1 hour ago, RaiderMan said:

is this an SSTO?

Yes, I was just taking it for a spin to get some nice shots. 40 tons of cargo to 400km.

[Deus_99]

Is it possible to combine this mod (Mark IV SS) with a rasterpropmonitor mod ?

[JonathanPerregaux]

A few KSP/MechJeb versions ago, I noticed a strange thing... my rocket-launched "space plane" twists at a 90° angle and flies like a knife on ascent. I can look out the right window and see the water. This wasn't always the case, so I assumed there was a bug in MechJeb's "Ascent Guidance" module (I use their developer builds). But now I'm wondering if there's something up with the MK4 cockpit itself.

In MechJeb, there is a setting to control the rotation angle, but it has no effect on a MK4-topped rocket. Regular pod-based rockets launch just fine and will fly level. But with the hypersonic MK4 "pod," my ship (which once flew fine) goes slightly bonkers and flies apart as though trying to reach Camp Kitomer before the new Klingon Chancellor can be assassinated. I tried re-orienting the ship 90° in the VAB, to no avail.

Without MechJeb, the ship is stable, flies level, and can be made to ascend to space just fine.

Now that 1.6 is out, and also an update to MechJeb to refine ascent guidance wobbling, I gave my problem rocket another go. Same exact fail. So, I created a new rocket with the MK4 cockpit and watched it go the same amount of crazy with MechJeb in control. Then I replaced just the MK4 cockpit with a stock aero part. The rocket flew normally—level flight, no weird gyrations. Put the MK4 cockpit back on and yippity hoinky-boinkies.

[ss8913]

On 1/1/2019 at 2:33 PM, JonathanPerregaux said:

A few KSP/MechJeb versions ago, I noticed a strange thing... my rocket-launched "space plane" twists at a 90° angle and flies like a knife on ascent. I can look out the right window and see the water. This wasn't always the case, so I assumed there was a bug in MechJeb's "Ascent Guidance" module (I use their developer builds). But now I'm wondering if there's something up with the MK4 cockpit itself.

In MechJeb, there is a setting to control the rotation angle, but it has no effect on a MK4-topped rocket. Regular pod-based rockets launch just fine and will fly level. But with the hypersonic MK4 "pod," my ship (which once flew fine) goes slightly bonkers and flies apart as though trying to reach Camp Kitomer before the new Klingon Chancellor can be assassinated. I tried re-orienting the ship 90° in the VAB, to no avail.

Without MechJeb, the ship is stable, flies level, and can be made to ascend to space just fine.

Now that 1.6 is out, and also an update to MechJeb to refine ascent guidance wobbling, I gave my problem rocket another go. Same exact fail. So, I created a new rocket with the MK4 cockpit and watched it go the same amount of crazy with MechJeb in control. Then I replaced just the MK4 cockpit with a stock aero part. The rocket flew normally—level flight, no weird gyrations. Put the MK4 cockpit back on and yippity hoinky-boinkies.

MJ ascent guidance for spaceplanes is relatively poor... MJ in general is pretty poor in atmosphere, if you have FAR installed (it's maintained again, now), at speeds over about 100-150 KIAS.  The advanced fly-by-wire mod and Kramax Autopilot are what you want - you can have all 3 for different situations, but it's generally best to have only one active at a time, as they will fight each other, otherwise

[Fireheart318]

I have a bit of a problem - Cargo bays aren't working as intended; objects in cargo bays still have aerodynamic physics enabled, whereas stock bays don't as long as they're closed. Let's just say it's been a real drag on my Eve space station city-plane project. Planes landed in the rear garage for crew transfer and other "needs" still generate lift and drag. It wouldn't be as big of a problem if I could reliably dock with a double-pair of normal docking ports, but my piloting skills aren't up to that yet, so I have to use the Klaw, leaving everything at weird angles. I think you can see where this is going... right into the ocean.

Aside from the cargo bay issue, I am loving this mod!

[TheSaint]

1 hour ago, Fireheart318 said:

I have a bit of a problem - Cargo bays aren't working as intended; objects in cargo bays still have aerodynamic physics enabled, whereas stock bays don't as long as they're closed. Let's just say it's been a real drag on my Eve space station city-plane project. Planes landed in the rear garage for crew transfer and other "needs" still generate lift and drag. It wouldn't be as big of a problem if I could reliably dock with a double-pair of normal docking ports, but my piloting skills aren't up to that yet, so I have to use the Klaw, leaving everything at weird angles. I think you can see where this is going... right into the ocean.

Aside from the cargo bay issue, I am loving this mod!

It wouldn't by any chance be related to this long-standing bug?

https://github.com/ChrisAdderley/MkIVSystem/issues/36

[Fireheart318]

9 hours ago, TheSaint said:

It wouldn't by any chance be related to this long-standing bug?

https://github.com/ChrisAdderley/MkIVSystem/issues/36

Probably. I tried the rapid-closing workaround but it doesn't wanna work.

[TheSaint]

14 hours ago, Fireheart318 said:

Probably. I tried the rapid-closing workaround but it doesn't wanna work.

Yeah, that didn't really work for me either. If you look at my design above, I've bookended the cargo bays with fuel tanks, that seems to work.

[Nertea]

Mark IV System 3.0.3

•  KSP 1.6.x
•  Updated ModuleManager to 3.1.3
•  Updated NF Props to 0.5.0
•  Updated B9PartSwitch to 2.6.0
•  Changed licensing of code/configs to MIT

Also please note the removal of the Dropbox D/L. It was annoying to update, if you want you can now get it from the Github releases page.