[1.9-1.10] Throttle Controlled Avionics

[drhay53]

On 5/13/2016 at 2:29 PM, FirroSeranel said:

According to the manual, maneuver engines are only activated upon control input, whether rotational or translational, just like RCS thrusters. Otherwise the autopilot attempts to minimize their thrust at all times.

I believe for a space-based craft you'll want most of your engines to be "Main Engines", which control both vertical velocity and attitude. For an atmospheric VTOL I think you'll want most of your engines to be "Balanced Thrust" which only control vertical velocity, while minimizing torque. Then if you want longitudinal engines for rocket-orientation burns at maneuver nodes and the like, you'd put those on "Manual Control" and switch them on and off as needed. You -could- put them on "Maneuver Engines" and use your fore translational control to activate them... but that would mean giving up throttle control, which can be very helpful for precisely hitting maneuver nodes. Still, if you also have RCS, you could use that to fine-tune once you've done the bulk of the burn with the maneuver engine.

But I'm not an expert, so if anyone else has a better idea, feel free to correct me!

I was thinking more like a VTOL that would be good at following waypoints, like in the video in the OP. One of the crafts has engines on the back that seem to fire to give it horizontal velocity, however, when I've tried stuff like that, setting horizontal engines to maneuver engines doesn't seem to be the right setting; it always seems like TCA ends up using those engines to help with hovering.

So really what I'm wanting is the engine mode setup for something that uses say 4 vertical engines to control altitude and a single horizontal engine that controls surface velocity. I've played around with it a bit, though not extensively, and haven't quite found something to work.

[allista]

Sorry for my absence lately. Had much work. And unfortunately much more to come.

On 5/12/2016 at 6:57 AM, Rushligh said:

While it's certainly cool and complicated... im having some... trouble with it.

not only with it NOT completely turn off unless i uninstall it, it causes my ships so go into an out-of-controll spin; nose up. I've been using a number of mods that correct certain aerodynamic rations... even after removing them i get the same problem.

just as a test i imported a craft i used in 1.0.5 with your older version... same issue. i tries using the old version in 1.1.2 but it seems to be disabled or unrecognized.

Version for 1.0.5 cannot work with 1.1.* due to incompatible dll references; don't even try.

As for the spin problem, I can't tell anything having only this description. For all I know this may be a mod conflict, or a simple ship design flaw. Make some screenshots or better yet a video of it. Post the logs. In other words, follow the usual bug-reporting procedure.

On 5/12/2016 at 9:00 PM, FirroSeranel said:

I'm having trouble with this, and I'm kind of at a loss as to why.

I have a ship that I'm trying to land on the Mun. It is entirely comprised of RoverDude's Karibou Rover parts (very tubular rocket-like rover with segments with VTOL engines). It has a cockpit that is oriented just like a rocket's, only no engines aft. Instead the only engines are the VTOL engines (perpendicular to the cockpit's axis). Therefore, it also has a probe core oriented such that its vertical is normal to the thrust vector of the rockets, for easier manual control.

With stock SAS it works beautifully. If I control from the cockpit, it orients just like a rocket. If I control from the probe core, it orients according to the engines (so if I set it to Retrograde for example, it will thrust retrograde and decrease orbital velocity appropriately). The only problem is that (predictably) as fuel burns, it grows increasingly unbalanced, until engine torque can no longer be compensated for by reaction wheels and RCS. So that's where TCA comes in.

Only... most settings for TCA don't act anything like what the manual says. First off, the manual says that it should orient the thrust vector, regardless of the orientation of the command module. This is clearly not the case for this craft, as it definitely -tries- to orient according to the active control module.

I say tries, because the only modes that really seem to work at all are Kill Rotation, and Hover. Any other mode causes it to begin oscillating, seemingly at random but dynamically unstably, about all axes,  until the ship is wildly spinning and gyrating out of control. Meanwhile TCA is quite happily firing engines and RCA thrusters to -increase- the oscillations rather than stabilize them. The error reads correctly, oddly enough. So for example, if I have the ship under the probe core's control, and have Jeb point the engines Retrograde, it orients so a burn would slow it down. I then activate TCA, and push the Retrograde switch. It turns green, it shows Error=0.0. Then it starts to slowly oscillate in all three axes, swinging back and forth about three times before the error gets to about 180°. There, it seems to dampen briefly, before it, for all intents and purposes, completely loses its mind and just starts spinning the ship wildly and indefinitely, with engines and RCS all firing at random.

This behavior persists no matter how I set up the action groups, and no matter whether RCS is on or off, the engines are on or off, the engines are set to a group or not, the engines are set to Main Engines, or Balanced Thrust, no matter whether I'm controlling from the cockpit or the probe core...

Stop seems to make it choose a random vector and thrust to match it while gyrating wildly.

Both stock SAS and MechJeb behave as expected, though both orient according to the active control module. But MechJeb's PID tuning is way too weak to even begin to control a craft with any degree of torque, and even the stock SAS gets overwhelmed once fuel is at about 2/3.

So... what am I doing wrong? Is there something about the Karibou Rover that is incompatible with TCA?

The described behaviour is definitely out of the ordinary for TCA. Could you post a craft file so that I could test it?

EDIT: in fact, I see the problem in the AttitudeControl module. This accounts for at least part of these symptoms. Thanks for the report!

Edited May 16, 2016 by allista

[allista]

6 hours ago, drhay53 said:

I was thinking more like a VTOL that would be good at following waypoints, like in the video in the OP. One of the crafts has engines on the back that seem to fire to give it horizontal velocity, however, when I've tried stuff like that, setting horizontal engines to maneuver engines doesn't seem to be the right setting; it always seems like TCA ends up using those engines to help with hovering.

So really what I'm wanting is the engine mode setup for something that uses say 4 vertical engines to control altitude and a single horizontal engine that controls surface velocity. I've played around with it a bit, though not extensively, and haven't quite found something to work.

For that you need to set those horizontal engines to Manual mode. I know, this is counterintuitive, but I don't know how to set things up more straightforward. I mean, I could separate this into yet another engine mode named, say, "Transation Engine", but then you couldn't use such engine manually.

[Steel Dragon]

6 hours ago, allista said:

For that you need to set those horizontal engines to Manual mode. I know, this is counterintuitive, but I don't know how to set things up more straightforward. I mean, I could separate this into yet another engine mode named, say, "Transation Engine", but then you couldn't use such engine manually.

Would you please explain what you mean by "couldn't use such engine manually" I don't understand what Manual mode really means then. I do have a few craft (that fly very well) using multiple vertical engines with 2 horizontal (thrust) engines. The vertical engines are main and the horizontal are manual. This controls the craft very well. I just don't under stand what Manuel is supposed to mean as I'm not manually controlling anything, I use cruise or way points 99% of the time.

Also when is 3.2 coming out I really want the no atmo settings.

[allista]

1 hour ago, Steel Dragon said:

Would you please explain what you mean by "couldn't use such engine manually" I don't understand what Manual mode really means then. I do have a few craft (that fly very well) using multiple vertical engines with 2 horizontal (thrust) engines. The vertical engines are main and the horizontal are manual. This controls the craft very well. I just don't under stand what Manuel is supposed to mean as I'm not manually controlling anything, I use cruise or way points 99% of the time.

Also when is 3.2 coming out I really want the no atmo settings.

Simple: thrust limiter of manual engines may be controlled manually either from part menu or from TCA gui (profiles or Manual Engines section). The original purpose was just that: to allow manual control of some engines; among other things to use them as horizontal propulsion. But then I thought: if a player uses Manual engines for horizontal propulsion of VTOLs, why can't autopilot do the same? The result you see. Perhaps, I just need to rename them somehow?

As for v3.2: I have working deorbit and ballistic autopilots; but have some trouble with the Lambert solver of the rendezvous one. I can either release the first two, or reimplement the solver using the more robust algorithm and release all at once. In any case, I can work on this mostly at weekends.

[allista]

On 5/12/2016 at 9:00 PM, FirroSeranel said:

So... what am I doing wrong? Is there something about the Karibou Rover that is incompatible with TCA?

Nothing at all!

Thanks to you I've found a very nasty bug. It's amazing that a bug like this (the problem was in transformation of inertia tensor) didn't show up earlier   They key thing was the probe core orientation: when you try to surface-attach one, it is placed upside down, but since it has no markings you don't see this.

The fix will be included in the next release. For now you have to either ensure the correct orientation of the secondary probe core, or just use a single command module.

[allista]

15 hours ago, ss8913 said:

Long-time user, first (or second) time poster here... with the previous version that I had in 1.0.5, I knew what I was doing.  Now I feel like I don't.  I built a craft in 1.1.2 similar to my old designs, with two augmented arcjet ATILLA thrusters pointing downward, both in front of and behind the CoM.  In the previous version with the default settings, I'd fire up the engines, set SAS and RCS to on, turn on TCA, throttle up and the craft would balance thrust between the two engines and lift my craft majestically into the air.

Sadly this seems to no longer be the case (I have read the manual, just now, before posting and before flying, it doesn't seem to address my question).  It... basically does little or nothing to control the attitude, and I have to set the thrust limiter on one or both of my engines manually to avoid flipping backwards or fowards.  The effect is worse with TCA off so I know TCA is doing *something* but it seems to be relying only on RCS authority and not engine limits.  I've tried setting the VTOL engines to "balanced thrust," which made very little difference (if at all).  What am I missing here?

Second issue - the Exception Tracker mod is claiming that TCA is throwing thousands of exceptions per minute in the RCS initialization function.  This may be because I'm using KSPIE's 5-way retractable resistojet thrusters and not stock RCS; however in 1.0.5 I was using these same parts and not seeing any problems.  I do not know if my 2 issues are related however.  As I said, I was using these same RCS (and those same ATILLA VTOL engines) in 1.0.5 and TCA "just worked" out of the box when I turned it on.  If I'm doing something wrong here please correct my behavior   thank you.

It looks like a API-1.0 vs API-1.1 issue to me, because there's no difference between versions for 1.0.5 and for 1.1 except for the API changes. Could you post the log with those errors?

[drhay53]

Count my vote on releasing the ballistic and de-orbit sooner rather than later. I've wanted something like your ballistic code since like the 3rd day I started playing ksp. And mechjebs de orbit code is currently borked and I'd like to see how TCA does.

 

Ive been designing all of my craft for the last week with TCA in mind, trying to get a nice mix of engines that can do lots of things with torque.

[drhay53]

I noticed some people in this thread managed to get jet engines and also the KAX helicopter rotors to work. Anytime I try to use the KAX helicopter rotors, TCA leaves them at low thrust, even with 'main engines' on, and the craft just falls to Kerbin and explodes. Can someone post their setup for the helicopter rotors?

edit: I got it working! The craft has 5 rotors on it, I set them all to balanced thrust. Then I included 6 KAX "Jump Jet" engines around the outside of the craft set to maneuver engines, for torquing the craft. Then there's three jump jets along the back in manual mode for horizontal speed control.

Edited May 17, 2016 by drhay53

[Rushligh]

FYI. i figured out one bug. TCA can't seem to compensate for the lift ratios place by the stock bug fix modules. after removing the lifting surface module that fixed the problem. my ship now handles okay.

my problems are now as follows:
-if i use engine groupings, tca turns its self on when i turn those engines on. if i have any engine of nay grouping turned on, or off, it turns the rest of the engines of any grouping on or off with it. this is extremely annoying because i have a pair of main engines on my craft that are manually controlled. (my ship resembles a helicarrier). essentially if i use engine group TCA won't turn off, and the engines won't function individually; regardless of their group number. for now im using staging hotkeys (1-9) for engine control.

-the set altitude for hovering does not work with any non stock engines. i tested it with stock rocket engines on a truss and it worked, but if i use karbonite fans ot kspi thermal engines.... nope. it just keeps going up.  selecting a vertical velocity seems to work fine. i use that with rotation cancellation for flying my ships. but seting the altitude causes my ships to go full thrust upward.
 

-i've also noticed that TCA can't compensate for engine response time. it behaves as though engine throttling is instant.

-also, the landing auto pilot seems to give up about 200m above the ground and go full thrust upwards as described in the previous problem. it also sometimes retracts landing gear any time i try and deploy them. landing on delicate thermal engines doesn't end well....

my center of lift is just slightly behind my center of mass. excluding the rear engines, my center of thrust is centered on mass. it uses thermal engines from KSPI so there's no fuel consumption to change the mas ratios. it's stable.

[drhay53]

Is it easy to add the fine control and even-coarser control (left alt) to the heading and altitude keyboard controls?

And BTW, I think I found a bug; while attempting to use fine control on the heading, I found that pressing a and d both moved the heading in the same direction.

[ss8913]

On 5/16/2016 at 2:17 PM, allista said:

It looks like a API-1.0 vs API-1.1 issue to me, because there's no difference between versions for 1.0.5 and for 1.1 except for the API changes. Could you post the log with those errors?

Working on getting you the logs.  IN the meantime, I can tell you this - turning off RCS entirely causes TCA to balance thrust among my engines as expected.   Which gives me great pitch control but no yaw or roll, since I have no RCS authority   Is there any way to just turn off the TCA RCS controls and have it only balance engine thrust?  I just want it to balance engines to hold a desired attitude, and I want that attitude controllable manually or by MJ2 or I suppose by the internal autopilot, but I apparently need TCA to have hands-off-my-RCS since it appears to Hate the Resistojet RCS from  KSPIE

I'll try to scare up those logs.

[ss8913]

Here's the log message.  There are *thousands* of these, they start throwing like crazy whenever I turn TCA on, whilst  using a craft containing the KSPIE RCS parts.  When this happens, all the active engines stay at 100% as though they're not being managed at all.  It's making things quite difficult in terms of precision VTOL operations, to say the least

[EXC 04:00:06.685] IndexOutOfRangeException: Array index is out of range.
        ThrottleControlledAvionics.RCSWrapper.InitState ()
        ThrottleControlledAvionics.EnginesProps.Update ()
        ThrottleControlledAvionics.VesselWrapper.UpdateCommons ()
        ThrottleControlledAvionics.ModuleTCA.OnFixedUpdate ()
        Part.ModulesOnFixedUpdate ()
        Part.FixedUpdate ()

[ss8913]

Any updates on the issue with KSP interstellar engines and RCS?  I've run a few more tests.. TCA definitely works with stock engines and stock RCS.  I used to use it all the time with Interstellar engines and RCS (before the new UI, before it started talking to RCS at all, back in the 1.0.x days), and it worked very well.  As of right now it's not functional in any meaningful way with the KSPIE propulsion systems and if the RCS module is the problem, there doesn't seem to be a way to turn it off from the in-flight settings that I can find.  Pasted the log message as requested a few days ago, from the RCSWrapper exception that it's throwing.

[allista]

14 hours ago, ss8913 said:

Any updates on the issue with KSP interstellar engines and RCS?  I've run a few more tests.. TCA definitely works with stock engines and stock RCS.  I used to use it all the time with Interstellar engines and RCS (before the new UI, before it started talking to RCS at all, back in the 1.0.x days), and it worked very well.  As of right now it's not functional in any meaningful way with the KSPIE propulsion systems and if the RCS module is the problem, there doesn't seem to be a way to turn it off from the in-flight settings that I can find.  Pasted the log message as requested a few days ago, from the RCSWrapper exception that it's throwing.

I've tried to work it out, but in vain: KSPIE for v1.0.5 crashes my KSP; and as it turned out I still don't have the v1.1.2 because I'm on Linux and this version is still not available for the OS. This also means, that TCA-v.3.1.0-for-KSP-1.1.2 is actually for KSP-1.1. So it's a miracle, actually, that it works so well.

Until Squad releases v1.1.2 for Linux I'm helpless...

On 5/18/2016 at 3:06 AM, drhay53 said:

Is it easy to add the fine control and even-coarser control (left alt) to the heading and altitude keyboard controls?

And BTW, I think I found a bug; while attempting to use fine control on the heading, I found that pressing a and d both moved the heading in the same direction.

Finesse of altitude control may be set in the "advanced" tab; for heading there's no such option yet, but I'll patch the same slider to them as well.

As for the 'a-d' problem I can't reproduce it here.

Edited May 21, 2016 by allista

[TheDestroyer111]

On 5/15/2016 at 9:45 AM, kcs123 said:

Almost all of mods have dependency on module manager. MM is not the one that breaks your game, most probably you have wierd situations where some other mods are in conflict with each other. Or you didn't install something properly in the first place.

If MM is made to modify stock parts, how do i know a mod using it won't make the LV-1 Ant engine get a 9999kN thrust with 9999s Isp?

//EDIT: Thanks for the explanations! If it's not a simple issue with MM as i may have thought, I think that my problems are worth of a technical support thread. The problem is basically that my 1.0.5 game started crashing on save file loading.

Edited May 21, 2016 by TheDestroyer111

[Vrana]

3 minutes ago, TheDestroyer111 said:

If MM is made to modify stock parts, how do i know a mod using it won't make the LV-1 Ant engine get a 9999kN thrust with 9999s Isp?

You don't. But such a change cannot be hidden either.

 

All MM configs are plain text files. You can read them, modify them, delete them. Many users, such as myself, write their own MM patches to modify stock or mod parts to their own liking or needs.

 

This requires additional effort on the part of the user, if you want to make sure they don't do anything you don't want you need to understand and keep an eye on these patches, but you will hit a brick wall with mods very soon if you refuse to use MM.

And lets be honest if the mod makers can donate the time and effort required to make mods least we(mod users) can do is not make things even more difficult for them by refusing to use a tool which makes mod making a lot easier.

Another thing you should consider. If you think MM patches might be somehow harmful to your game you should ABSOLUTELY stay away from any mod which distributes a library (files with .dll extension, such as this mod) because these can do a LOT more then MM patches.

[allista]

 

4 minutes ago, TheDestroyer111 said:

If MM is made to modify stock parts, how do i know a mod using it won't make the LV-1 Ant engine get a 9999kN thrust with 9999s Isp?

If a conversation may be intercepted by FBI, should I throw my phone to a trash can and never talk to anybody again? If I know there're computer viruses should I ever touch a PC?

You confuse technical means with malicious intents. MM by itself does nothing bad. On the contrary, it allows all changes that are made to any configuration (stock or mod) to exist in runtime only. If you found an offending mod that modifies something the way you disagree with, delete that mod and all the "changes" will be gone with it.

But without MM you can't have almost any mod now; we, modders, all use MM, because without it almost anything apart from simplest new parts wouldn't be possible to add to the game.

[kcs123]

On 21.05.2016. at 10:58 AM, TheDestroyer111 said:

If MM is made to modify stock parts, how do i know a mod using it won't make the LV-1 Ant engine get a 9999kN thrust with 9999s Isp?

Like Vrana said, you don't until you install some mod and try it in game. In other games,for example, Stalker, X3 serial, Silent Hunter, Fallout, etc. if you want to modify game to personal liking, you must overwrite all files that game engine read for ingame asset properties. If you want to merge two differnt mod that change the same object in game, you have to combine changes made by bothj mods by yourself in some editor (either something from SDK or just simple notepad). That way you have actualy made some new mod that combines previous two. That is not something for ordinary player, only for some that have experience with moding and bit of coding.

Because of MM, you don't have to do such thing in KSP. MM does not alter original files, from either, stock or modified game. Instead of that, MM  search for possible config files and do altering of some part properties as it is specified in that config file. Those changes exist only in memory while you run game, it does not change original files.

That is why it is possible to just simply delete mod folder and all changes on parts that comes from that mod no longer exist when you next time run game. This is also reason why literally hundreds of mods that alter same parts can work together in KSP. Without MM such thing will consume too much time to be feasible by merging each mod "by hand".

Of course, not all MM configs on each mod is "friendly" with some other mod. There always be situations when some mod simply does not work properly with other mod. Such things were reported from users to mod authors, if possible that is solved in future versions of mod. If not, at least you community will know what mod conflict with each other and you should avoid such combo.

Due to way how MM work(it think that some mod is installed only if folder for that mod exist in "gamedata" folder) it is possible to create faulty installs. CKAN, for example don't delete whole folder if some other file is created there after mod install. You may think that you have uninstalled some mod, but if main mod folder is still present, MM can consider as whole mod is installed and do some patches/changes to parts, while it should not do any changes at all.

And last piece of advice - if you are afraid to loose gameplay progress, backup your save game files before you do any changes with mods - either, install or uninstall. If you are steam user, you can sonsider to copy whole KSP folder elsewhere and mod that copy, leaving original game intact.

Edited June 30, 2016 by kcs123
found typo

[Rushligh]

10 hours ago, allista said:

I've tried to work it out, but in vain: KSPIE for v1.0.5 crashes my KSP; and as it turned out I still don't have the v1.1.2 because I'm on Linux and this version is still not available for the OS. This also means, that TCA-v.3.1.0-for-KSP-1.1.2 is actually for KSP-1.1. So it's a miracle, actually, that it works so well.

Until Squad releases v1.1.2 for Linux I'm helpless...

Finesse of altitude control may be set in the "advanced" tab; for heading there's no such option yet, but I'll patch the same slider to them as well.

As for the 'a-d' problem I can't reproduce it here.

ahh, that would do it.
I bet squad is having trouble with the x64 render for linux. they went out of their way to make a windows one and i bet their design backfired.

not that i care because the work around actually generates less crashes than the intended 64bit version XD

by the by, KSPI-E does seem to work perfectly fine with TCA, just with a poor response time for altitude control. considering.. ya know. all my ships use solely opt and kspi engines.

RCS straight up doesn't seem to work at all.

[ss8913]

6 hours ago, Rushligh said:

ahh, that would do it.
I bet squad is having trouble with the x64 render for linux. they went out of their way to make a windows one and i bet their design backfired.

not that i care because the work around actually generates less crashes than the intended 64bit version XD

by the by, KSPI-E does seem to work perfectly fine with TCA, just with a poor response time for altitude control. considering.. ya know. all my ships use solely opt and kspi engines.

RCS straight up doesn't seem to work at all.

I made a test craft with all-stock engines and stock RCS nozzles, and it worked as intended (at least, as I understand it to be intended to work).  The only way I can get the KSPIE engines to exhibit any throttle balancing at all is to turn off RCS completely, and even so they don't balance *enough*.  I'm working around it now by doing some painstaking parts placement and adding a LOT of RCS authority (KSPIE RCS is more powerful than stock) to hold attitude.  It works OK on Mun/Minmus/etc but on bodies with heavier gravity and atmosphere (like Kerbin, Duna, Eve, Laythe, etc) it's a bit more dicey.

I suppose it will have to wait until the new Linux release then.  You might want to report to FreeThinker about the 1.0.5 crash, I know he's still maintaining a KSPIE fork for 1.0.5.

[Rushligh]

On 5/22/2016 at 6:51 PM, ss8913 said:

I made a test craft with all-stock engines and stock RCS nozzles, and it worked as intended (at least, as I understand it to be intended to work).  The only way I can get the KSPIE engines to exhibit any throttle balancing at all is to turn off RCS completely, and even so they don't balance *enough*.  I'm working around it now by doing some painstaking parts placement and adding a LOT of RCS authority (KSPIE RCS is more powerful than stock) to hold attitude.  It works OK on Mun/Minmus/etc but on bodies with heavier gravity and atmosphere (like Kerbin, Duna, Eve, Laythe, etc) it's a bit more dicey.

I suppose it will have to wait until the new Linux release then.  You might want to report to FreeThinker about the 1.0.5 crash, I know he's still maintaining a KSPIE fork for 1.0.5.

if you're using campaign it WON'T work. TCA only takes the fully upgraded values of the engines (ie sandbox values). also, you'll have to stick to engines with a relatively good response time. i use thermal turbo jets for the most part. nozzles seem to work to.

also, since KSPI engines are so powerful, you'll have to consider craft design even more. if you have a VTOL airship you cannot have to many wings, or only wings on the front/back, it will NOT work. also, if you have the stock bug fixes, you MUST delete the lifting surface fix.

RCS doesn't work with kspi engines; however, you can use small engines in thruster mode AS rcs engines with TCA; that's what i do. Umbra's explorer pack: it has an electric rcs/fan engine that uses electricity. use it like a linear rcs jet and set the engine to thruster mode. also, if you have KSPI, then you have access to the inline radiator/reaction wheel which works WONDERS in larger craft if you put multiple in strategic places.

make sure you have klougheed gimbal.

i've found there's a bug in ksp 1.1.2 with air intake symmetry. it gives priority to one side of the ship in a shortage: i suggest adding different intakes at different angles; it may help.

[ss8913]

1 hour ago, Rushligh said:

if you're using campaign it WON'T work. TCA only takes the fully upgraded values of the engines (ie sandbox values). also, you'll have to stick to engines with a relatively good response time. i use thermal turbo jets for the most part. nozzles seem to work to.

also, since KSPI engines are so powerful, you'll have to consider craft design even more. if you have a VTOL airship you cannot have to many wings, or only wings on the front/back, it will NOT work. also, if you have the stock bug fixes, you MUST delete the lifting surface fix.

RCS doesn't work with kspi engines; however, you can use small engines in thruster mode AS rcs engines with TCA; that's what i do. Umbra's explorer pack: it has an electric rcs/fan engine that uses electricity. use it like a linear rcs jet and set the engine to thruster mode. also, if you have KSPI, then you have access to the inline radiator/reaction wheel which works WONDERS in larger craft if you put multiple in strategic places.

make sure you have klougheed gimbal.

i've found there's a bug in ksp 1.1.2 with air intake symmetry. it gives priority to one side of the ship in a shortage: i suggest adding different intakes at different angles; it may help.

I'm using the same craft that worked fine with TCA in the old version, and does not in this version.  Part of it's the RCS thing, part of it is that it doesn't control the thrust *enough* when RCS is off.  TCA didn't touch RCS in the old version, the systems were completely independent.  Now it's broken because it doesn't understand the KSPIE RCS... maybe the solution would be to just implement a toggle for the RCS module?  Also I have the tech tree completely opened up, I'm using the fully upgraded versions of everything already.  It behaves no different in sandbox mode (I checked) with the same craft file.  I'll check the stock bugfixes thing though, can't remember if I installed that or not.

[Andronetix]

 

 

Hello. Maybe I did not read . As technologies fashion is, and you do not see the buttons activate windows .. Version KSP 1.1.2.V what could be the problem , prompt.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Andronetix

[ss8913]

12 hours ago, Andronetix said:

 

 

Hello. Maybe I did not read . As technologies fashion is, and you do not see the buttons activate windows .. Version KSP 1.1.2.V what could be the problem , prompt.

if i'm understanding you right, you're not seeing the button to turn on TCA.  It generally uses the blizzy toolbar, you'll have to configure the toolbar to show the TCA button by right clicking on the little down-arrow on the toolbar.
Or it could be that if you're in career mode, you haven't unlocked any TCA functionality yet.  It works like MJ2 now where features are unlocked as you progress through the tech tree.