Jump to content

OhioBob

Members
  • Posts

    3,740
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

3,860 Excellent

About OhioBob

Contact Methods

Profile Information

  • About me
    Junior Rocket Scientist
  • Location
    Dayton

Recent Profile Visitors

21,902 profile views
  1. Something is definitely not right, but I don't know enough about either KSRSS or Principia to offer any advice. My only experience with Principia was to install it with my own planet packs just long enough to see if there were any unstable orbits. I don't recall if there were any tricks in getting it to work. I do remember that that it's necessary to start a new game, it won't work with an existing save.
  2. To get Principia to work, you just need to install it. No config is necessary. Of course that doesn't mean all the orbits will be stable. For instance, in JNSQ some of the moon orbits became unstable with Principia installed. That is, the moons would be ejected out of their initial orbits into interplanetary space. So when we say JNSQ includes support for Principia, we just mean that some of the orbits had to be modified to assure stability. These changes are included in the body configs rather than in a Principia config. As I recall, the bodies that include changes are Mun, Minmus and Bop. If you look in Minmus.cfg, for example, you'll see two different values for semiMajorAxis, one without Principia installed - NEEEDS[!Principia] - and one with Principia installed - NEEDS[Principia]. Probably all you need to do is install KSRSS with Principia and inspect it to see if everything works and is stable. If so, then you won't need to do anything. If not, you'll need to make whatever modifications are necessary to keep bodies in their orbits. It is my understanding that Principia can also do axial tilt, which I suppose it probably does for RSS. The axial tilt portion of Principia is something I know nothing about, so I can't advise you about that.
  3. I don't know what [x]science is, so I can't comment on that. "removePQSMods = PQSMod_VoronoiCraters" would only remove craters from the template, if there actually were any. But Moho doesn't use that mod, so you'd be removing something doesn't exist to start with. I don't fully understand the problem, but you probably should delete the biome from the config. Try deleting this part from Moho.cfg: Biome { name = VoronoiCraters displayName = #LOC_JNSQ_Biome_VoronoiCraters value = 1 color = #916991 }
  4. Multiply by the square root of 2.5.
  5. I've thought about writing a patch that would do it. But I don't have the time right now. Perhaps something for the future.
  6. Perhaps you should delete ModuleManager.ConfigCache. The cache will rebuild the next time you launch KSP.
  7. Why don't you ask the makers of Wanderer's Planet pack why their mod isn't working?
  8. I still don't know where the 5130 m/s number comes from, but looking at the KSRSS delta-v maps I see that they give 3400 m/s for stock size, and 5375 m/s for 2.5x. I think where the 5375 number comes from is, 3400*SQRT(2.5) = 5375 m/s. While it is true that delta-v goes up by the square root of the rescale factor, this is really only true for transfer trajectories between bodies, such as going from Earth to Mars. For a launch from the surface of a body to low orbit, this method tends to overestimate the delta-v required. This is because, although the planet is 2.5 times larger, we're typically not launching into an orbit 2.5x higher. For instance, say we typically launch into an 80 km orbit at stock scale. At 2.5x we might increase this to 100 km to get above the higher atmosphere, but we don't start launching into a 200 km orbit just because the planet got 2.5x bigger. Also, drag losses do not get appreciably greater just because the planet got bigger. So while multiplying by SQRT(Rescale) is a quick and easy way to convert delta-v, in this case it yields a very conservative result.
  9. Axial tilt is not possible in KSP. But while the axes can't be tilted, the orbits can. So what RSS does to give Earth's axis a ~23.5-degree tilt relative to its orbit is to incline the entire ecliptic. This gives Earth the correct tilt, but it also gives all the other planets approximately the same tilt as Earth. This is just a limitation of KSP and there is nothing that can be done about it. It's possible to give any one planet the correct tilt, but then all the others are wrong. In RSS, Earth is the correct one, which obviously makes the most sense.
  10. In addition to the fix on the Kopernicus GitHub, it is also posted in this thread three posts above yours.
  11. I've been able to manage 4800 m/s in JNSQ as well, though not every one of my rockets can do it. 4900 m/s is a more reasonably attainable number, thus it's what's on the delta-v map. It's been awhile since I last played, but I seem to recall budgeting about 5100-5200 m/s for early career rockets.
  12. We commonly say JNSQ is 2.7x stock, but it was actually made to 1/4 real scale. That is, the JNSQ solar system was designed at real scale and then scaled down to 1/4 size. I place stock at about 1/10.6 to 1/11 real scale depending on what dimension or property we're looking at. If we call it 1/10.8, then that makes JNSQ about 10.8/4 = 2.7 times stock. So that's where the 2.7x comes from, but it's only approximate. In reality, none of the body radii are scaled directly from stock. I scaled the celestial bodies based on mass, not size. I then selected what I thought were realistic densities and computed new radii from mass and density. Where does the 5130 m/s number come from? Is that RSS at 1/4 scale? The 4900 m/s number for JNSQ was determined in game through repeated launches. I find it to be pretty close for rockets made from 2.5-m parts and larger. The 1.25-m parts tend to be less efficient. This is likely because the small parts have a lower ballistic coefficient and, therefore, more drag loss. For these smaller parts, >5000 m/s is pretty common. 5130 m/s sounds reasonable in that case. As far as rotation speed goes, the faster rotating the body, the less delta-v the rocket takes to get to orbit (assuming we are launching in the direction of the rotation, i.e. east for most bodies). So if Kerbin in JNSQ is rotating faster, then that too could account for some or all of the difference.
  13. JNSQ dosen't do anything to parts but for a couple small exceptions. The LV-TX87 and LV-T91 engines have their thrust, mass, and cost increased slightly (25% for the 87 and 20% for the 91). This is because these engines are intended to power a Titan II analog rocket to lift the Mk2 command pod + service module to orbit. At JNSQ scale, we believed these engines where a little unpowered for that task, so we gave them a buff. We also changed the AtmosphereCurve for a couple Karbonite Plus engines from Umbra Space Industries. I'm not sure what that's all about, I'm not the one who did it.
×
×
  • Create New...