<lamont>
!tell theysen TF was trolling my A-4 engines really hard last night, reducing the thrust to like 1.01 SLT right at launch so they only hovered…. i was wondering if someone had made it harder…
<Qboid>
lamont: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
<Agathorn>
TestFlight does not troll. Trolling implies it gives a shit about you :)
<lamont>
lol
<lamont>
“the blind fist of TF was pummelling my engines last night…”
<Agathorn>
:)
leudaimon has joined #RO
xShadowx has joined #RO
<taniwha>
iow, the PRNG was trolling you ;)
<Pap|Away>
so I am trying to test out the SSTU Pull Request, how do I download just the changed files?
Pap|Away is now known as Pap
<acc>
hullu
<Pap>
o/ acc
<Pap>
I am booting up your SSTU changes right now
<acc>
hey Pap
<acc>
cool :)
leudaimon has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<Pap>
acc, it appears to me that the PARTUPGRADE file is not overwriting the one in SSTU, so the upgrades are showing in the Tech Tree in the wrong spots still with incorrect descriptions
<acc>
huh?
<Pap>
In SSTU_Tanks_PartUpgrades.cfg, it is not overwriting the SSTU upgrade files from what I can tell. I am running a 2nd test here to check again
<acc>
ok. as I tested yesterday (ingame and checking the mm config cache) it worked
B787_Work is now known as B787_Bed
<Pap>
acc, it might be because I had a MM Tech Tree Cache saved, will let you know
<rsparkyc>
well, i was going to work on a propellent utilization mod, but instead we did a hotfix for work
<rsparkyc>
so maybe that will get done a different day
<rsparkyc>
for me, off to bed
<rsparkyc>
later all
<acc>
heh
<acc>
good night
rsparkyc has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
Hohman has joined #RO
<acc>
Pap: you're right. I see the same thing
<acc>
weird. it worked yesterday
<Pap>
Do you have SSTU Expansion installed?
<acc>
no
<Pap>
damn, i was hoping that might have been it, it is loading up again now
<acc>
but in the mm config cache it looks right
<acc>
at least the part stats
<acc>
leme check the partupgrade nodes
<Pap>
Search for SSTU-MFT-D1
<Pap>
that is the one that I saw that was wrong
<acc>
yeah, seems all right in the mm cache
<acc>
very weird
<Pap>
ok, according to my MM Config, it is correct in some spots and wrong in others
<Pap>
Search multiple times for that same part: SSTU-MFT-D1
<acc>
oh, yeah, I see
<Pap>
ok, I am testing something, give me 5 minutes
<acc>
but as far as I can see that's only wrong on unpatched/unsupported parts
<acc>
and that's ok. the general partupgrade nodes look right
<acc>
at least in the cache
<acc>
ingame it's wrong
<acc>
oh, I might know what's going on
schnobs has joined #RO
<acc>
I think I need to apply AFTER[SSTU] on the nodes
<Pap>
Sorry, my daughter woke up, had to have a dad moment
<Pap>
I tried doing that on one of them to test it, and it didn't work, but I think adding AFTER[SSTU] is needed as well
Wetmelon has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<acc>
yeah, can't hurt
<acc>
I added :FOR[RealismOverhaul]:NEEDS[SSTU]:AFTER[SSTU]
<acc>
to each
<acc>
and deleted the mm cache files
<acc>
let's see if that fixes it
<Pap>
Let me know how it goes
Wetmelon has joined #RO
TM1978m has joined #RO
<acc>
I'll do
<acc>
Pap: nope, didn't work
<Pap>
hmmm, damn, mine is booting up, i am trying a different approach
<acc>
I don't get why it's right in the config cache, but not right ingame
<acc>
that makes no sense
<Pap>
ok, so i got it working so that all of the MM config cache is correct, but it is wrong in game still
<Pap>
I had this same issue when I tried to place these parts in my HPTech Tree as well
<acc>
what was the cause there?
<Pap>
Never got it all the way figured out
<acc>
well, very weird
<Pap>
extremely
<Pap>
one last idea...
<Pap>
give me 5 minutes for it to load
<acc>
I'm out of ideas atm
<acc>
syntax of the patch seems all fine
<Pap>
ok, that one didn't work, but I think I had bad syntax, this will be my last attempt
Hohman has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.93 [Firefox 53.0/20170413192749]]
<acc>
yeah, mine too for now. hungry and need coffee
<acc>
nope, no luck
waerloga has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
waerloga has joined #RO
<acc>
but the stuff applied to the parts itself work
<Pap>
right, it is just the techs not working
<acc>
when I unlock the 1.8m node I get the 3.05m on the main tank
<acc>
yep
<Pap>
yes, but it isn't until advRocketry, right?
<acc>
mature orbital rocketry
<Pap>
yes, that is the advRocketry node
<acc>
ah, ok
<Pap>
I am trying something with TECHLIMITS right now to see if it is still somehow affecting things
<acc>
I don't think so
<Pap>
I wouldn't either, but I can tell you it still shows up the MM cache, and the sizes / techs are what we are seeing the issues with
<acc>
the most weird thing is: the partuprade nodes are overwirten. the game should'nt even know them anymore
<acc>
partupgrade
<Pap>
I know why those aren't working, there are multiple places we need to set the UPGRADE removal like you did in the MFT area, but I cannot figure out the DAMN techs
<acc>
I did only the supported parts, that's why there are still parts with the old stuff. that's fine until we get to integrate those parts
<acc>
all supported parts are patched
<acc>
so that's all fine, only the technode crap refuses to cooperate for no obvious reason
<Pap>
ok, as expected TECHLIMITS does nothing
<Pap>
The MM config shows no trace of these PARTUPGRADES put in the wrong nodes and there is no reference in MM Cache to that node or description of the part
<acc>
and they get referenced by the parts via the names
<acc>
so that is all right
<Pap>
The fact that this is not showing up in the MM makes me think it is happening somehow in the SSTU DLL plugin
<acc>
yes
<acc>
had that thought too
<acc>
it's all there. no syntax error or something like that, so something else must messing with it after the patches load into the game
<Pap>
I looked at the SSTU source and do not see anything out of the ordinary, but I am not great with understanding code, i have one more crazy idea and then I HAVE to go to bed
<xShadowx>
sleep is for the weak
<Pap>
I agree, but if I was to fall asleep this second (which is possible sitting in my chair) I would only get 5:45 minutes
<xShadowx>
thats what loud music is for
<acc>
I put the info to the pull request, so no one is pushing it
<acc>
we'll find out at some point
<acc>
but I need a breakfast now
<Pap>
alright acc , we'll talk later
<acc>
yep. good testing session
Pap is now known as Pap|zzzzz
<taniwha>
xShadowx: lack of sleep makes one weak :P
<xShadowx>
taniwha: thats just propaganda from the government to keep you more docile
<taniwha>
I think you've got that backwards
<xShadowx>
nah, after being awake 72 hours, you start to see the truth
<acc>
and unicorns
<taniwha>
xShadowx: the truth as told by unicorns :P
<Pap>
JeeF, I think (I am not positive on this) that there is a Calculator excel sheet put together by NathanKell|AFK that also includes a Thurst Curve editor
rsparkyc has joined #RO
<JeeF>
Awesome, thank you Pap!
<Olympic1>
acc: you're changing the tech to 'basicConstruction'
<Olympic1>
such a nod doesnt exist anymore
<Olympic1>
node*
<Pap>
Olympic1, that will cause some problems!
<Pap>
I have contacted Shadowmage (from SSTU) directly and hopefully we can figure it out, I think the .DLL he has is modifying something that does not show up in the MM cache
<acc>
Olympic1: it's just renamed in the rp-0 techtree
<acc>
and that would'nt eplain why it shows the orginal nodes instead of the modified
<acc>
explain
<acc>
that are the same technodes used for the procedural parts
<stratochief>
a crappy/lazy Molinya would just need a period of fairly close to half a day, high ecentricity, no?
<stratochief>
a good one has a fairly specific perigee, inclination, all that jazz. I just like the idea of an intro contract that helps guide people toward being able to complete the real, complex one
<rsparkyc>
i think principia requires you to have the right inclination to maintain that orbit properly
<stratochief>
hmm. I'm not sure if it is possible to have a contract keep track of how many days you stay within the parametres, and your (optional) payout depends on how long that was. so, if your craft stays within the Molniya parametres longer due to being placed really well, or active adjustment with RCS you can get more money
<rsparkyc>
I would think the best way to handle that is "extension" contracts
<rsparkyc>
would be useful for orbits that need to be maintained
<stratochief>
good point
<rsparkyc>
for instance: L1 and L2
<Pap>
stratochief, the contracts allow you to have a Deviation of hitting a specific orbit, so you can make it very forgiving. There will need to be some testing to see an appropriate value
<stratochief>
Pap: yeah. again, I like the idea of having a first contract in a branch that is very forgiving, then future offers are tighter
<stratochief>
and I like testing :)
<stratochief>
I think my next historical progression contract is an Eve flyby, which I think will be challenging with Principia
<rsparkyc>
why harder?
<stratochief>
rsparkyc: which statement is that directed at?
<rsparkyc>
I think my next historical progression contract is an Eve flyby, which I think will be challenging with Principia
<rsparkyc>
and what should the Propellent Utilization mod be called?
<stratochief>
rsparkyc: because I'm a mechjeb addict, who just uses 'advanced planetary transfer' and boom goes the porkchop plot. setting it up with Principia's flight planner, adjusting the settings so it predicts out that far, switching reference frames, etc.
Sigma88 is now known as SigmaAFK
<rsparkyc>
ahh, i see
<rsparkyc>
mechjeb is cheating
<rsparkyc>
HA! i can't believe i just said that
<rsparkyc>
i use mechjeb all the time too :)
* stratochief
kicks rsparkyc for being an elitist douche :P
<stratochief>
we all play the way we find to be enjoyable
<stratochief>
rsparkyc: ReallyBurnItAll ?
<rsparkyc>
you should kick me for being hypocritical
<rsparkyc>
one guy at works said "LeaveThemDry"
<stratochief>
nah, we're all hypocrites from time to time, squaring an awareness of that is important.
<stratochief>
rsparkyc: yeah, that would be good too. really, it is worth thinking about for a bit so you can get a good acronym
<stratochief>
without a good one, you're mod won't go very FAR :P
<rsparkyc>
haha
<stratochief>
what about Rsparkyc's Utilization Burn? RUB
<rsparkyc>
i was just EMR
<rsparkyc>
Engine Mixture Ratio
<stratochief>
that would also work
<Pap>
Propellant Unique Utilization Program so we can call it PUUP (long u's)
<Pap>
ok, my teenager joking time is over for the day
<rsparkyc>
haha
<rsparkyc>
maybe just EMR Controller
<Pap>
That is probably pretty good
<Pap>
Will the mod be able to allow different fuels to be used for the same engine?
<Pap>
The only example I can think of the is the Redstone Engine that went from not so toxic to very very toxic to not so toxic again
<rsparkyc>
i think the mod that lets you choose engine variants already does that
<rsparkyc>
for example, the 1kn thruster takes all sorts of fuels
<rsparkyc>
this is just for engines that can vary their fuel/oxidizer ratios mid-flight
<Pap>
gotcha, I understand now
<stratochief>
the engine for the first stage of the Titan II could burn hypergols, kerolox, or hydrolox. lots of very different varients there
<Pap>
stratochief, what RO mods could possibly affect the PARTUPGRADE functionality in KSP?
<stratochief>
Pap: zero point zero clue. no idea how partupgrade even works
<stratochief>
why not fiddle with it w/o RP-0? RP-0 does fiddle up the tech tree, after all
<Pap>
OK, there is some major issues with the SSTU tank sizes and the tech tree
<Pap>
I have attacked it from all angles (as far as I can tell)
<Pap>
The Module Manager cache is showing everything as good, so it has to be something conflicting in a DLL file (we think)
<stratochief>
does PARTUPGRADE work well with any other mods that rely on CommunityTechTree?
<Pap>
I don't know, I had severe issues getting it to work with my tech tree, but I think I might have been doing something wrong. I need to look at it in a modified form in a stock game to see what happens
<Pap>
This is really affecting my Contract writing, but I need to get this done since SSTU is my main mod in RO that I use
<stratochief>
or... use proc tanks temporarily? or keep yourself honest in which SSTU tank sizes you use?
diomedea has joined #RO
<acc>
the part upgrades work, it's only the technodes that make problems
<stratochief>
acc: what kind of problem? is it like proctanks, where you expect unlocking a certain tech to allow larger tanks?
<acc>
exactly
<stratochief>
does SSTU already use that functionality in stock, or no?
<Pap>
yes stratochief
<acc>
and mm does apply the patches, but ingame it's still placed like in original SSTU
<Pap>
I am running a Stock test now to see if it works
<acc>
yeah, that's the whole point why we need to do that
<acc>
all was fine placed until SSTU changed to the new partupgrades method
<Pap>
stratochief, That is how it WAS done, but according to Shadowmage, that is deprecated an no longer functions
<stratochief>
ahh
<Pap>
I think that shadow might have some old code doing some funky things to the tech tree placements
<acc>
duno, I'll launch the game and provide him some data to work with
<stratochief>
fair enough, I'll step back and look at the backchat here later. this, in part, is why I stopped fiddling with SSTU. quick changes, random unexpected deprications, maze of craziness
<acc>
let the infantery deal with it heh
<stratochief>
*infantry
<acc>
oh, yeah
<acc>
in german it's infanterie
<acc>
mixed up
<acc>
I speak international :D
<acc>
Pap: ah, just seen your post
<acc>
(comment, whatever)
<acc>
so, yeah, according to your latest testing it's like we thought
<acc>
the SSTU plugin must mess things up
<Pap>
That is my guess, acc, it would also explain why I could never get it working with my Tech Tree
<acc>
yep
<stratochief>
so, try editting the SSTU file itself, rather than patching? or removing the AFTER[SSTU] ?
<Pap>
If you edit the SSTU files directly, it works fine
<Pap>
That is how I had it working when I was playing with it not in RO
<acc>
and without the AFTER statement it was the same result
<stratochief>
right; so you need to ask him to have the plugin check in after MM has been run?
<Pap>
stratochief, that might be true
<xShadowx>
in french infantry is spelled "white flag" ;3
<acc>
could be the solution
<stratochief>
you could also try going BEFORE[SSTU], instead of AFTER ?
<Pap>
You think it is checking beforehand, that would make sense
<Pap>
let's try that maybe
<Pap>
I am trying one thing in stock right now
<acc>
well, but then SSTU would add the original nodes too. duno what fuckup that would be, with everything defined twice
<acc>
and the patch does not apply, since that nodes do not exist at that point
<stratochief>
acc: right, good point
<acc>
and even when we change the patch to create, instead of edit, then it's still: mm created the nodes and SSTU creates the nodes
<stratochief>
he could change the original SSTU PARTUPGRADE to be :FIRST or something?
<stratochief>
that is something you could try locally, to see if doing that would correct our issue, if he were to do it
<Pap>
i am going to look at the KSP log to see what is going on, but in order to do that, I need to restart. Be Back Soon
<acc>
that are no mm configs
Pap has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<acc>
the originals are regular configs
<stratochief>
acc: sure, but can't you add MM flags to 'regular configs' ?
<acc>
actually good question
<acc>
yeah, should be no difference
<stratochief>
if that works, we could even PR SSTU, requesting that it add :FIRST flags to their UpgradeParts bits, which shouldn't affect anything else negatively anyway, right?
<stratochief>
and just be ignored if MM isn't present in an SSTU install?
<stratochief>
ahh, no MM come with SSTU, so all is good there.
<acc>
but hacky solution. he simply should fix his plugin to load in a mm compatible fashion :D
<xShadowx>
MM to regular configs? like pick a squad part and edit to say PART:AFTER[mymod]? that you can do yes
<stratochief>
acc: think like him; what is easier, changing the order of operating of a dll, or accepting a PR to add :FIRST flags?
<acc>
changing dll, because it's the right thing to do :)
<xShadowx>
^
<stratochief>
yeah, going to seriously check out; sometimes I just can't take a joke
stratochief is now known as stratochief|away
HypergolicSkunk has joined #RO
SigmaAFK is now known as SigmaTrain
<xShadowx>
so MM is running before SSTU, and trying to edit stuff not yet there since SSTU adds yet?
<xShadowx>
think MM had somethin in it to call you (the modder) so you could run code before MM did its thing didnt it? if im not imagining it, then SSTU should grab that :P
<rsparkyc>
yep, does absolutely nothing right now though :)
<Pap1723>
acc, stratochief|away So I did some more testing and even added FIANL to the MM configs. I also looked in the KSP log to see what was going on but didn't learn too much from it
<xShadowx>
rsparkyc: when you're done with makin the sliders work, you can grab the PAW when it opens, and re order to put the sliders under the thrust line :)
<rsparkyc>
yeah, never messed with moving those around before
<rsparkyc>
yeah, i'll hope in there when I get stuck
<rsparkyc>
i like digging around first
TM1978m has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
rsparkyc has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
<Olympic1>
Pap1723: Does changing a PARTUPGRADE using MM work for other mods? I know removing works, but now modifying
<Olympic1>
oh no, I mean the UPGRADE node in the partfile itself
<Olympic1>
Because when KSP loads the PARTUPGRADES, it links them to the respective UPGRADE node. When you delete the node, it loses that link iirc.
rsparkyc has joined #RO
<stratochief|away>
acc: did you see shadowmage's recent point? have you been making a new career save for each test?
stratochief|away is now known as stratochief|remote
<stratochief|remote>
as he says, the tech tree is saved to the save game persistence file at creation. so, if the MMcache looks good, that could absolutely be the issue
Olympic1 is now known as Olympic1|Nomz
aradapilot_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
aradapilot_ has joined #RO
<Pap1723>
stratochief|remote, I have been creating a new career each time
<Pap1723>
I am going to create a PARTUPGRADE in a different mod and see what happens if I try to change the tech tree
<Pap1723>
I think Olympic1|Nomz might be on the right track here and it all is because KSP might be calling that info before MM goes to work
<acc>
yeah, I started new saves multiple times
<acc>
I'll continue tomorrow. need some sleep
Olympic1|Nomz is now known as Olympic1
<stratochief|remote>
does SSTU do any patching to those bits that makes the AFTER[SSTU] necessary? I still think removing that, and possibly adding :FIRST to the SSTU definitions themselves may do the trick
<stratochief|remote>
otherwise, if doing this requires a DLL change from SSTU, it won't be happening until KSP 1.3, and to be frank I'm not doing any work personally to make RO/RP-0 work for 1.3
<acc>
the patches are fine, when you look at the mm config cache. if that would be the problem, there wouldn't be the patched nodes in the cache
<acc>
I also tested it without all the NEEDS, AFTER and so on
<acc>
whatever parses that config nodes is the problem, as far as I can tell
<acc>
but I don't know if that's a SSTU plugin or community tech tree oder a mm bug
<Pap1723>
acc, I just responded again
<acc>
s/oder/or/
<Qboid>
acc meant to say: but I don't know if that's a SSTU plugin or community tech tree or a mm bug
<Pap1723>
I think it is a Squad issue
<acc>
yeah, also possible
<stratochief|remote>
so for now, Pap1723 may have to keep himself honest in RP-0, or use hand editted SSTU files to play RP-0 w/SSTU. not the worst interum solution :)
<acc>
so far the patch works good enough to play with the parts. it's just not sync with procedural parts heh
<Pap1723>
stratochief|remote, yeah, I play with no Upgrades required and infinite size allowed from the beginning
<Pap1723>
I don't cheat it, I try to play as realistic as possible, just makes it more fun for me
<stratochief|remote>
Pap1723: monster! :P
<Pap1723>
Back to the contracts, on to the Sun Synchronous and the Tundra Satellites
<stratochief|remote>
Pap1723: have you made any rover contracts before?
<Pap1723>
Yes, plenty
<Pap1723>
Lunokhod 1 is in the contract pack you are playing now
<Pap1723>
As well as Pathfinder
<Pap1723>
Also the other pack, Career Evolution has rover contracts for every solid body in the game
<stratochief|remote>
might I suggest adding easy (or previously done) contracts like that to RP-0 soonish?
JeeF has quit [Ping timeout: 180 seconds]
<Pap1723>
Soon TM?
<Pap1723>
Or actually soon?
NomalRaptor is now known as UmbralRaptor
regex has joined #RO
SigmaAFK is now known as Sigma88
diomedea has quit [Quit: Bye!]
dormantdex is now known as DuoDex
<stratochief|remote>
Pap1723: within 1-4 weeks, so it can be in the release of RP-0?
<Pap1723>
that should be doable
<Pap1723>
Currently, 24 of the planned 170 contracts are completed
<Pap1723>
That number is very inflated though as many of them are duplicates of others that just have the targetBody changed
<stratochief|remote>
to me, that feels like a more effective leverage of your time & past work, since RP-0 has zero rover contracts, so the addition of any would be a big change. in comparison, we have a few satellite contracts already, although the ones you're working on are certainly worth doing and interesting :)
<stratochief|remote>
Pap1723: nice! do you (or anyone) know if there are SSO satellites in Mars orbit or are any planned? that might also be useful there for observing subtle changes over time, in the same lighting conditions just as SSO are used for here, right?
CobaltWolf has joined #RO
<CobaltWolf>
o/
stratochief|remote is now known as TungstenTiger
<TungstenTiger>
\o CobaltWolf
<egg|zzz|egg>
Pap1723: you rang?
<Pap1723>
egg|zzz|egg, I had a question on a Molniya orbit and was told you were probably the one to ask, but I figured it out
<Pap1723>
TungstenTiger, the Mars Reconaissance Orbiter is Sun Synchronous
<egg|zzz|egg>
ok, what was the question, and what was the answer :-p
<Pap1723>
I was going to ask if you knew the Argument of Periapsis and RAAN of a true Molniya orbit
<Pap1723>
APe = -90 and RAAN can vary and will based on how many you want in the constellation
<egg|zzz|egg>
RAAN *will* vary with time
<egg|zzz|egg>
the orbit precesses nodally
<egg|zzz|egg>
though not apsidally
<Pap1723>
Sorry, I meant the LAN
<egg|zzz|egg>
that's the same thing
<egg|zzz|egg>
the node precesses
<egg|zzz|egg>
try it out in principia, you'll see
<Pap1723>
Interesting
<Pap1723>
These are the orbital parameters I set for an RSS contract:
<Pap1723>
SMA = 26,290,000, ECC = 0.737200456, INC = 63.4, LPE = -90, LAN = 90
<egg|zzz|egg>
see the wikipedia article: "For a Molniya orbit, the inclination is selected such that {\displaystyle \Delta \omega } \Delta \omega as given by the formula above is zero but {\displaystyle \Delta \Omega } \Delta \Omega, as given by the other equation, will be −0.0742° per orbit. The rotational period of the Earth relative to the node (i.e. the synodic day) will therefore be only 86,129 seconds, 35 seconds less than t
<egg|zzz|egg>
he sidereal day which is 86,164 seconds.
<egg|zzz|egg>
"
<egg|zzz|egg>
ΔΩ is nonvanishing
<egg|zzz|egg>
Pap1723: specifying a LAN is a bit silly
<egg|zzz|egg>
Pap1723: no, make it so the contract doesn't check (not sure if that's an option, it should be, and if it's not change the code so that it is :-p)
<Pap1723>
I will test to see how that works
<egg|zzz|egg>
same thing as requiring "a polar orbit", you don't care about the LAN
<soundnfury>
egg|zzz|egg: unfortunately, people generally expect contracts that specify the orbit to show the target orbit in the Planetarium
<egg|zzz|egg>
but that makes no bloody sense
<soundnfury>
and that's not something you can do when some of the parameters are "yeah, it's silly to specify this, so we don't care"
<egg|zzz|egg>
!#$@%@!$
<soundnfury>
egg|zzz|egg: you expect KSP to make _sense_?
<soundnfury>
wow, you really _are_ tilting at windmills
<egg|zzz|egg>
no, I expect people playing RO+principia to make some sense
<soundnfury>
oh is Pap1723 writing contracts specifically for principia?
<egg|zzz|egg>
well molnyia orbits hardly make sense otherwise anyway?
<soundnfury>
I assumed he was just writing RP-0 contracts (which being based on realistic orbits would therefore work ok in principia too)
<Pap1723>
soundnfury, no, not yet, possibly in the future
<soundnfury>
egg|zzz|egg: some people like to do this thing called "roleplaying"
<Pap1723>
egg|zzz|egg, the idea of a Molniya orbit still makes sense in stock
<egg|zzz|egg>
scott is apparently making an RSS+principia save
<egg|zzz|egg>
Pap1723: no, the point is to eliminate apsidal precession
<Pap1723>
I am not messing around with Principia until we get RP-0 contracts fully completed
<soundnfury>
where you do something that would be required IRL, even if the game doesn't enforce whatever makes it necessary
<egg|zzz|egg>
Pap1723: otherwise the magical inclination makes no bloody sense
* egg|zzz|egg
stabs soundnfury with goblin metrology
<Pap1723>
egg|zzz|egg, yes, but it is also to create a contract with a high inclination and a large eccentricity in order to "hover" over the norther latitudes
<soundnfury>
!wpn
* Qboid
gives soundnfury a planetary cardinal
<egg|zzz|egg>
yes, but without principia the specific inclination is just weird
<egg|zzz|egg>
whereas with principia it arises naturally (other inclinations will make you hover over random latitudes as time goes on)
* soundnfury
partitions egg|zzz|egg over the planetary cardinal
<Pap1723>
I know, but it is more for the simulation of it
<egg|zzz|egg>
anyway, I hear scott is making an RSS+principia save
<Pap1723>
I am guessing in the not too long future, Principia will become the norm for RO and the contract won't have to be changed then
<egg|zzz|egg>
I should fix landing on airless bodies
<Pap1723>
lol
<egg|zzz|egg>
right now it's apparently broken
<egg|zzz|egg>
also maybe quickloading in atmospheres? I'm wondering whether the crash in his latest video was my fault
<egg|zzz|egg>
he's not there anymore though, so can't give me stacktraces...
<soundnfury>
Pap1723: I don't think Principia will become the norm for RO this decade. I'd have my doubts about "this century" tbh ;)
<egg|zzz|egg>
but you can't even have an accurate moon without it! :-p
* soundnfury
reminds egg|zzz|egg that KSP (even with RO) is a *game*
<soundnfury>
and that accuracy (lunar or otherwise) may not be everyone's primary consideration :-p
<xShadowx>
id argue ksp is more kinex than lego, because attaching to fixed nodes
<soundnfury>
xShadowx: hmm, perhaps. But I think you're being too literal
<xShadowx>
and bendy-not-quite-solid joints
<Pap1723>
What set of lego type things makes you want to Rage Quit? That would be Buzz Aldrin Race Into Space
<Pap1723>
Don't forget Lincoln Logs
* xShadowx
built a loincoln log resort when he was little before knowing what a computer was
<xShadowx>
lincoln* XD
<Pap1723>
you built resorts out of loin cloths? Are you a caveman?
<Pap1723>
lol
<xShadowx>
bought wooden dowels and made slots for custom pieces
<xShadowx>
i was like 7 >.> no computer til like 9
<xShadowx>
you should feel sorry for me!
<Pap1723>
That all depends on how old you are now...
* xShadowx
points at 2 yr old kids with ipad now
<xShadowx>
born in 83 so whatever that gets
<Pap1723>
Ah, same as me
B787_Work is now known as B787_300
<Pap1723>
I still know some DOS commands because in 1990 Joe Montana Football came out and I needed to learn BIOS and other information to free up enough RAM to get the damn thing running
<soundnfury>
xShadowx: '91 here; we had a DOS machine when I was young (fond memories of tetris, sopwith, pango and hero)
<xShadowx>
i never accually played 'tetris' the original game
<xShadowx>
every style i played came after, stuff like bombs etc added to it
<xShadowx>
first flight sim, armourgeddon
<xShadowx>
i think
<Pap1723>
!tell acc We are not crazy! The PARTUPGRADE issue is confirmed to be a Stock KSP "thing". I'm glad we figured it out, but fuck that was painful.
<Qboid>
Pap1723: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
<xShadowx>
whats borked?;o
<Pap1723>
I am pretty sure I had others, but my first that I remember was AH-64D Longbow, the graphics had to be terrible, but I remember that it was so realistic
<xShadowx>
i had a diff heli game, had a few helis in it
<Pap1723>
xShadowx, the way that PARTUPGRADES are populated in KSP. They are taken direct from the source directory and do not take into account Module Manager changes
<xShadowx>
o.O
<xShadowx>
re reading the files?
<xShadowx>
that seems...sloppy
<Pap1723>
yeah, I am surprised by it, but it might just be that Module Manager didn't modify its code to account for that
<Pap1723>
The Part Upgrade stuff I know was partially written by NathanKell
<xShadowx>
he was a big fan of MM, reading from files again rather than gamedatabase doesnt sound like somethin he'd do :|
TungstenTiger is now known as stratochief
<stratochief>
Pap1723: best to assume Principia is optional, but recommended. so core contracts should work w/o principia. rsparkyc has his mod for supporting principia specific contractsr
<Pap1723>
yeah, that is what I guessed stratochief I am not really considering Principia in my thoughts
<stratochief>
I'm so used to be planetary transfers being practically effortless w/ MechJeb's planning tools, just select planet, porkchop, and go
<soundnfury>
stratochief: have you tried transfers with konrad?
<soundnfury>
I'm biased, of course, but I think it's a really smooth process
<stratochief>
Principia's planning tools are great (props to egg|zzz|egg), yet still take considerably more effort to plan a transfer
<Pap1723>
What is konrad soundnfury ?
<soundnfury>
(though it doesn't do the porkchop, it's for finding the exit burn after you're already at the window)
<stratochief>
soundnfury: IIRC, konrad isn't an option for me for one reason or another, without spreading my game across multiple computers (windws & linux)
<soundnfury>
Pap1723: it's my frontend for Telemachus
<soundnfury>
Python program, curses display
* soundnfury
hunts for link
<Pap1723>
ah, telemachus
<stratochief>
soundnfury: right, Curses doesn't like Windows, or at least my Windows IIRC
regex has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<egg|zzz|egg>
stratochief: I tend to think they're really clunky (something something UI design by backend engineer)
<soundnfury>
egg|zzz|egg: still better than my UI design ;)
Theysen has joined #RO
<stratochief>
egg|zzz|egg: I imagine adding pork chop plots and having maneuvers created using that would be... not possible, right?
<Pap1723>
alright, I am off, see you at a future time, yet to be determined.
Pap1723 is now known as Pap|Away
gazpachian has joined #RO
Senshi has joined #RO
<Theysen>
hey and bye
<Qboid>
Theysen: Agathorn left a message for you in #RO [04.05.2017 23:38:55]: "nothing has changed in TestFlight internally with how failures are calculated. It is possible that the RO config made things more reliable but I don't think so. Most likely your perception is simply wrong due to the annoyance of statistics :) You are having better luck now than in the past."
<Qboid>
Theysen: lamont left a message for you in #RO [05.05.2017 01:32:32]: " TF was trolling my A-4 engines really hard last night, reducing the thrust to like 1.01 SLT right at launch so they only hovered…. i was wondering if someone had made it harder…"
Senshi has quit [Client Quit]
<egg|zzz|egg>
stratochief: uh, everything is possible, give me a budget of half a million dollars per year so I can get an engineering team :-p
<lamont>
i still need to fix the optimizer in mechjebs transfer planner
<lamont>
i’m curious about what it would take to ‘port’ MJ over to principia
<egg|zzz|egg>
stratochief: the thing is the porkchop is very much a conic thing
<egg|zzz|egg>
stratochief: lamont: it'd be interesting to write a proper optimizer
<egg|zzz|egg>
"interesting" as in "once we get started on it, let's print 50 papers and in a year maybe we'll have a design doc and in another year more years we'll have the numerics libs underlying it and we can start having a prototype"
<egg|zzz|egg>
s/more years //
<Qboid>
egg|zzz|egg meant to say: "interesting" as in "once we get started on it, let's print 50 papers and in a year maybe we'll have a design doc and in another year we'll have the numerics libs underlying it and we can start having a prototype"
<lamont>
i don’t think it would be quite that hard
<egg|zzz|egg>
because it's mostly not the same kind of problem as what we're currently doing, and functional analysis/control theory and the like aren't easy
<egg|zzz|egg>
lamont: the above is pretty much a description of the complexity of current principia, I literally have a pile of ~50 papers I looked at for this stuff
<egg|zzz|egg>
and well, it took us a long time before we had the first playable prototype
<lamont>
but the transfer planner in MJ now makes a lot fewer conic projection assumptions and just uses KSPs engine to project orbits forwards in time to see how they do
<egg|zzz|egg>
yeah, but still, they're going to do conicy things, even if you use KSP to solve Kepler's equation
<lamont>
if those orbits were N-body integrations instead of conic projections not a whole lot would change
<egg|zzz|egg>
trajectory optimization is hard
<egg|zzz|egg>
something something Global Trajectory Optimization Competition
<lamont>
the actual optimization function is annoyingly hard
<lamont>
those competitions though are for computing flybys, the average MJ user expects to do lots of mid-course corrections and doesn’t expect that high of accuracy and packs extra dV
<soundnfury>
lamont: yes but if you're going to do _that_ you can just assume catchy ponies^W^Wpatched conics
<egg|zzz|egg>
yeah but the fun problem is the hard one :-p
<lamont>
oh true
<soundnfury>
you can't exactly draw a porkchop plot for weak stabbity boundary transfers :P
<lamont>
but MJ doesn’t support any of that now — you can’t just crank out a 3-hop gravity assist in mechjeb
Theysen has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<egg|zzz|egg>
it's not a porkchop, it's a plate of ham
* egg|zzz|egg
applauds lamont for correctly using RIGHT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK (’) for apostrophe instead of APOSTROPHE (') btw
<egg|zzz|egg>
(Unicode is confusing)
<egg|zzz|egg>
(but you should not use APOSTROPHE for apostrophes)
<lamont>
hahaha, i just use my keyboard and this irc client and it works...
<lamont>
i do get all the encoding error exceptions to fix at work, though, it was the first niche i fell into…
* egg|zzz|egg
works in i18n now
<egg|zzz|egg>
\o/
<egg|zzz|egg>
lamont: you'll have noticed all the fun Unicode identifiers in principia
<egg|zzz|egg>
and version names too
<soundnfury>
lamont: s/exc/eggc
<Qboid>
soundnfury thinks lamont meant to say: i do get all the encoding error eggceptions to fix at work, though, it was the first niche i fell into…
<lamont>
i did notice them all..
<lamont>
lol
<egg|zzz|egg>
lamont: anyway, if we ever want to do optimization, we'll go for the hard problem, not because it is easy, but because we like drowning in a sea of papers: https://twitter.com/eggleroy/status/838756704401641473
<egg|zzz|egg>
(trajectory optimization that is)
<lamont>
i too have a pile of astrodynamics books and papers… most of the papers are Lambert solvers though…
<soundnfury>
egg|zzz|egg: trajeggtory
<lamont>
anyway as far as that goes my bigger and simpler question is why burn nodes in principia don’t burn down?
<lamont>
because that’s like bread-and-butter for every prior generation of ksp autopilot code across the board
<lamont>
if thats inherent then it all needs to get reworked so that autopilots just pick a time, direction and dV and track the burn ‘internally’
<egg|zzz|egg>
lamont: it's inherent because if we try to burn down and show the residual we're actually lying to ourselves and starting to do guidance
<egg|zzz|egg>
lamont: and we're doing it badly
<lamont>
yeah that’s sorta what i suspected
<egg|zzz|egg>
so instead we default to "here's the spec of the burn, follow it as best you can and do a TCM later on"
<egg|zzz|egg>
if we wanted to show guidance we'd want to look into control theory
<lamont>
yeah, okay that’s what an autopilot should do
<egg|zzz|egg>
[prints fifty more papers dives into the sea]
<egg|zzz|egg>
lamont: control theory is hard :-p
<egg|zzz|egg>
(it's a running theme with principia, nothing is simple)
<egg|zzz|egg>
(especially compiling principia :D)
<lamont>
yeah, but like if you want to do a circularization burn, you’d have your autopilot continuously recomputing from your current orbit how you needed to burn to circularize, then adjusting the burn in progress to match. and it probably looks similar to stock ksp where once you come up with a wonky angle to burn at then you can’t do any better. but fundamentally recompute and adjust in a loop and then figure out when you’re done.
<egg|zzz|egg>
lamont: yes, there are also approaches by functional analysis
<soundnfury>
egg|zzz|egg: that approach (spec burn, eggsecute w/o residual tracking, then find a TCM) is what konrad astrog does too :)
<egg|zzz|egg>
soundnfury: yeah, so principia does that, and tells you "go and compute your TCM yourself"
<soundnfury>
oh yeah, konrad doesn't find a TCM _for_ you, that'd be crazy
<soundnfury>
all it can do is, you tell it a burn time and a direction (in one of a handful of frames) and it tells you where you'll end up if you do that