OtherBarry

Just bringing across this post to give a start.

Created a post here to keep track of all the career mode related discussion.

Release Thread Here Intro This thread is a discussion forum and pre-release development thread for Realistic Progression Zero (RP-0), a lightweight realistic career mode mod, designed for RSS/RO. Major Contributors: Myself Felger e_14159 pjf and NathanKell Places of note: The GitHub Repository #RP0 on espernet (our IRC channel) Latest Pre-release FAQ

If no one else steps up, I'd be happy to look after the thread and/or some of the configs once my exams finish (about 2 weeks). I'd also really like to do some work on a highly simplified RO career mode.

Have a look at the title of the thread.

By infinite I do mean truly infinite. I use them for RSS, and have no issue building rockets so large that the launch clamps hang several metres off the side of the launchpad. There are a few limitations on the lower end of the spectrum though. I don't think you can go below 0.01m radius or height, so no 2 dimensional objects unfortunately.

Myself and NathanKell were having a discussion about this earlier. Realistically, there shouldn't really be any limits on tank size, for many of the reasons you mentioned. With the new advent of procedural costs, once they are properly balanced, I think it would be a good idea to completely get rid of the tech limitations, or at least severely reduce them. What do you think? Also, what does everyone else think? To answer your question more directly, you'll unlock infinite part sizes once you unlock the "Meta Materials" tech node. For an in depth view of the tech limitations, look at the cfg files for the different parts. they're well documented there.

As jrandom said, use the procedural nosecones when applicable, as they have no top node. Theoretically all the weird shapes in procedural parts should play well with FAR, but I believe that was broken in a recent update. If you want to use fuel tank nose cones, then the mod would need to be reconfigured to have no attach nodes on parts with 0 diameter. Maybe make a request on the github issues page, which should increase the chance of it being in a future update.

Just Dispelling some rumours here. When we made our procedural heatshields, we put a lot of time into getting it to look right and work as close as possible to the DRE's standard heatshields. This took quite a bit of work from me on testing the two in many an environment (Yay HyperEdit), and much more work on the coding side form Swawp_ig and NathanKell. At the time they were made, to fit the best within scaling laws, they should have similar ablative amounts to the normal heatshields, when made to the same size (that's visual size, not claimed diameter size) and have as similar statistics as possible. Obviously this means that when you scale them to any other value, you'll end up with some odd effects, although they should still function relatively well. However, with many updates to both mods since, this may have changed. Once RealHeat is released, more work will be put into making procedural heatshields work as perfectly as they should.

Not yet. It's being worked on. Hopefully in time for 0.25...

No idea. What I suspect is happening is that crossFeedEnabler is sending the fuel one way, and your fuel lines sneding it the other, and due to the fact that you have stages with equal burn times (assuming that's a delta IV heavy replica your using there), theres not really anyway to tell. Personally, i'd just delete the mod. I know RO recommends it, but in my experience, it's been nothing but annoying.

Decouplers break fuel flow. This almost certainly the cause. Unless you meant radial decouplers? It could also be crossFeedEnabler, if you've got that installed (not that it should do this though).

Seems like that would be caused by another mod. Procedural parts "shouldn't" affect how fuel flow works what so ever.

The same way as all the other parts. Is that not working for you?

No one else has mentioned any issues with it, so chances are its on your end. Try reinstalling Procedural Parts, and if that doesn't work, try reinstalling Procedural fairings,TweakScale and Infernal Robotics if you are using any of them. If your still having issues, post your log file and we'll try to decode what's wrong.

Ah, I see what you mean now. So you want the ability to use a variety of different flags (gathered from a small set of textures) on the same vessel, as well as having the flags freely scale-able. Unfortunately, there's not really any mods around that can do that, and the way Procedural Parts is designed, it's most likely not going to happen for quite a while if ever. If you have any experience in coding, you could look into how Procedural Parts uses textures and try to copy that. Or, if you have skills in the 3d modelling area, you could build a part for each flag texture you would like, and then import that into the game, and then add tweakscale to it. There's several great resources on the forum for both of these things. Otherwise, if different flags are that important to you, you can always split your ships into several launches,choose a different mission flag for each one, then dock them all in orbit. Sorry I couldn't be of more help. If your lucky you might be able to get an experienced modder to make an entirely separate mod, as I'm sure many people would love it.

Yes. Somewhere relatively easily accessible in your ksp folder, you'll find a "resources.cfg" file. This will allow you to change the density of solid fuel. Also in this file, you can change the way solid fuel 'flows' and by making it the same as liquid fuel (STACK_FLOW or something similar), you'd be able to simulate SRB segments. If you want to use PP for those segments, just copy the liquid fuel tank cfg, change the part name, and replace the liquid fuel modules with that of the SRB. Also, the plugin I believe you were reffering to, the name of which escapes me, is still alive and well, as it has chosen to do things slightly differently to real fuels. I'll clarify this more when i'm more awake.

Seems to be working fine for me. What happens when you click it?

Hey, welcome to the wonderful world of KSP. With the current state of the mod, unfortunately this is not a possibility. What you could do however, is try and find a flag part somewhere (there used to be a few on the old mod site that were presumably lost in the transition), assuming there are some that exist. Then you could add a TweakScale module to the cfg file. That'd effectively give you a 'procedural flag'. If none of that makes sense to you, I can explain it better once I'm more awake.

It doesn't seem to have been updated in a few weeks, but you can compile it from TriggerAu's github page, which you can find a link to in his/her/its signature.

I know little about TOT (could never get it to work on mac) but yes, it seems as if Earth is in the correct departure position and Venus is in the correct arrival position, so your transfer is not going to work. Also your ascending/descending node are irrelevant to departure time, but relative inclination and normal/anti normal velocity in your departure burn. For reference, RSS starts on 1/1 1951 at 00:00, so you should be able to add your KSP Universal Time to that, and then use TOT to get an exact date rather than relying on angles.

While I agree with the rest of your post, I think inclination should be included, as IIRC the reason the the web based calculator didn't have inclination was for simplicity's sake, in that the user would have to input large amounts of data that's not accessible without MJ/KER. Unless you were referring to relative inclination, in which a mechjeb-esque warning would probably do.

I agree with Krasimir on this. I'd say you should stick with (relatively) circular orbits for now, and then put out a release, then start with elliptical stuff. Not many people try to go interplanetary from an orbit more than a 100km or so off circular. As long as it works with varying inclinations, it should be great.

Having an issue with the Thiokol (ATK) GEM 40s. They seem to subtract thrust rather than add it. When I attach them to my delta II core, when I have MechJeb set to include cosine losses, it shows the thrust as decreasing, and when I turn the cosine option off, the thrust goes back to what it should be like. This is also true on launch, in that the rocket won't leave the launchpad until the cosine loss included TWR goes above 1. Haven't tested this with the other boosters yet, but will look into it. Edit - Also, the node heights on the RS-27A seem to be a fair bit higher than they should. There's about a 30cm gap between the top of the engine and the fuel tank above it. Edit 2 - Turns out the node problem is with all KW engines. Doesn't seem to apply to any of the other engines.

As someone who already kind of does this (for Procedural Parts) and who's seen many similar people helping out, particularly in complicated to use/install mods like the RSS/RO suite, this seems like a great idea. Though maybe something slightly less formal, like a note in the OP of the thread detailing the non-modder supporters, and a note in each supporters signature explaining their role.