Hotel26
-
Posts
2,283 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Hotel26
-
-
High Command insisted on this.
Nobody here in the SPH was 'onboard'...
Capt. Jerfry "Lucky" Kerman ("unlucky in love and unlucky at work") drew the short straw to fly the maiden flight.
If that 'asymmetric' thrust thingy in the brochure is that little vent near the tip of the RACL ("Rocket-Assisted Carrier Landing"), Jerfry better have cinched his straps extra tight coz he's in for a helluva ride on this bronco...! It's on wrong.
[Flight's paused right here as we enter this into the Ops log. We're about to find out... Brace yourselves.]
FIRE TRUCKS! Assume your stations!!
SpoilerIt is true what the recruiters say: " you only get to git this much fun in the military, son!"
-
On 9/3/2023 at 8:32 AM, Duke MelTdoWn said:
it is possible to fly to space on 2 Wheesleys and a Swivel
Would love to see your rendition of this (coz I want to avoid taking it on as a challenge myself).
Any chance you would post something to KerbalX...? T'would be of interest to many, methinks.
UPDATE: we just crossed paths. So you might like this Whiplash-plus-NERV combination: Geist. Ah, yes, and Poltergeist, which simply switched the Whiplash to the centerline thrust position.
-
4 hours ago, camacju said:
Latitude -25, longitude -158.5
Yeah, wiki: "The highest peak on Eve since version 0.21.1 is 7540 m high, found near (25° S, 158.5° W)".
I just sent a Tardis 2 exploration vehicle there (7506m, dubbed "Eve Max") and am waiting for sun-up to find the exact top.
25S is a long way from the equator. Is that much of a handicap for ascent?
I have a base (so far unused) on top of Mauve Mountain, located at -0.52 +167.51 6415m, which I had selected for equatorial launch...
Spoilername = Eve Max Tardis
lat = -24.9934
lon = -158.4754
alt = 7541.2 [CoM of Tardis] -
This is the Platypus Dive Research Vehicle. I will give an overview of what is inside and how it works.
Pilot Control Overview
- fast-flood main ballast tank
- fast-vent main ballast tank
- fine-flood main ballast tank
- find-vent main ballast tank
- trim for'ard (moves mass from the aft tank to the for'ard tank)
- trim aft (moves mass from the for'ard tank to the aft tank)
Craft-File Editing: Resources
The distinctive monoprop tanks are actually, from fore to aft: XenonGas, Oxidizer and MonoPropellant. The first of those two tanks was edited to include a new Resource section for the desired contents and with capacity expanded as desired. I retained the original MonoPropellant section but zeroed amount and maxAmount and inverted all the booleans (True to False and False to True) to nullify them. It's possible to simply remove them but for some kind of stock tanks, KSP defaults the 'known' resource back into existence if it does not appear at all.
The for'ard trim tank is 24,000 units of XenonGas and the aft trim tank is 600 liters of MP. Respective densities are 0.1 kg/liter and 4, giving a 1-to-40 ratio in terms of mass.
The 'standard' C7 Brand Adapter LFO tanks have been modified to contain a pure 800 liters of LF each. They power the Wheesley for conventional propulsion. I did just remove the Oxidizer section in these tanks and expand the capacity in liters of LF to be the sum (360 + 440), such that the total did not expand.
Worth making a distinction here that this Adapter is a standard tank in the machine used for a conventional purpose, so I never 'cheat' when 'monkeying' (research term; look it up) with the contents of such 'for convenience'. The ballast system tanks are 'open season' because they are part of the 'magic'[TM] side here. There are mods for this kind of thing, but I generally find it desirable to avoid e.g. config files that others might then have to download.
Craft-File Editing: Engines for resource production
Apart from the conventional propulsive Wheesley, the following engines can be identified: two Twitches, a Puff and a Dawn. Their ModuleEnginesFX sections have been modified to set independentThrottle True and independentThrottlePercentage to a calculated (hugely) negative amount. The Twitch supplying OX for fast-flood of main ballast is geared to -40404.0391%, for example. The fine-flood Twitch uses -12121.212%. The OX is pushed to the central main ballast (yellow) tank. (The catch is that LF is also produced by this technique!)
A worked example is worthwhile. I wanted to produce 250 liters of OX per second. The Twitch is rated at 1.125 liters/sec (LF + OX) fuel consumption. We want a percentage thrust. Hence:
-250*20/11*100/1.125 = -40404.04.04
and you will realize that the multiplication by 20/11 (LF:OX being in a consumption ratio of 9:11) is intended to scale the OX component up to the total fuel production of the Twitch.
The Dawn produces XenonGas for the for'ard trim tank and the Puff produces MP for the aft trim tank.
Main ballast buoyancy control is relatively uncomplicated. Two Twitches producing LF/OX at different rates are employed for flooding and the OX goes directly to the single main ballast tank. Venting simply opens one of two drain valves on the OX tank, selecting the appropriate rate. The wrinkle, however, is that, while flooding the OX tank, LF is being pushed into the twin fuel (LF) tanks. Two opposed LF drain valves on one of the LF tanks, set in Vessel-draining mode, are opened to exactly vent the same amount of unwanted LF as is being produced by the running Twitch as a by-product. There are two sets of these LF valves, matching the two flood rates.
Trim adjustment uses a similar technique for different reasons. Trim For'Ard produces XenonGas for the for'ard trim tank, adding mass. An equivalent mass has to be removed from the aft tank, so this is done by venting MP via a drain valve. Trim Aft works in reverse.
So a note about the initial priming of the trim ballast subsystem. When those tanks (Xe and MP) are empty, Either of the Trim modes will fill one tank while venting an already-empty tank: a no-op. Thus, you can prep for ocean-going by filling one trim tank, while loitering on the surface. Filling the tank takes a while, but the advantage of completely filling it is that that total mass in the trim tanks is now exactly half of their total carrying capacity. That gives a) a known quantity consistent across every dive, and b)the greatest 'leverage' on trim balance via the greatest trim range. After priming, the opposite Trim command can be employed to balance fore and aft equally or, better yet, when the sub has been tuned to known quantities, that known balance can be dialed in, ready for dive operations.
Submersible parameter tuning
A trim ballast subsystem is possibly not so necessary on small, simple craft but ought to alleviate a lot of work at design time for large and/or complex submarines. Furthermore, dynamic trimming for differing fuel loads or to compensate at speed for unbalanced 'aerodynamic' drag may become important.
A primitive guide to trim while in motion and with SAS engaged is to observe the plane angle and trim until is it neutral.
The overall best and easiest way to tune is to take a submersible in its initial sea trials to the seabed (as an easy way to arrest/reset motion and attitude. Vent main ballast until the craft slowly rises. Patiently true out the vertical speed to zero. Release SAS and then observe attitude drift: bow (nose) up or down. Be patient but it is quite easy to find settings in which the sub hangs motionless in the water, with zero degrees attitude. Note the numbers, main and trim quantities.
Planning and Design
I ran a spreadsheet on everything to make it easier to adjust settings when anything unexpected forced a change. I'll expand on this in the near future...
Issues and Future Work
KSP truncates drainRate values into the range 1-20%. This is the annoying kind of 'fact-checking' that modern programmers must do to comply with corporate standards for making bland, boring, unimaginative, creativity-suppressing products.
Where would we (I) be without the imaginative lack of concern displayed by Squad programmers when they wrote the code that trusted the human-editable craft file when it specified a vastly negative throttle setting, hey??
OK, so this forced me to have a faster fine-control vent rate than I wanted. Particularly as this was ultimately determined also by the LF fuel capacity for LF/OX production reasons.
Adding valves (doubling up) can conceivably lift the 20% limit (although not very relevant to subs unless you wanted emergency evacuation in less than 5 secs).
I noticed that the drain rate on one of multiple tanks, when set in Vessel-drain mode, appears to take the percentage on the tank (part) it is connected to, and disregards the total capacity of that kind of tank across the vessel. This suggests that a small, auxiliary tank can be added in some circumstances, with a vessel drain and a rate set, calibrated on the size of the small tank, such that an effective drain rate significantly less than 1% can be achieved. (I have assigned an underling on my staff to look into this, but he is known for laziness; well it will be his last chance!) This will work when like tanks are being filled/emptied uniformly.
Another item to note relates to why trim ballast on Platypus is this strange platyputtian mix of Xenon and MP.
The original intention had been to use MP uniformly across the two trim tanks and in the main ballast. Filling the for'ard trim tank would require producing MP for it, and the aft and the main, in the desired amount scaled across the total capacity of the three tanks. The main would simultaneously drain what it received and the aft trim would drain twice what it received. Unfortunately, fuel produced is not stored in the ratio of the individual tank's total capacity, but in the ratio of the tank's remaining capacity (i.e. emptiness). (A desirable way to do things, really, and exactly what my mod, Telemagic, does: to each according to its need and from each according to its ability.)
Platypus unintentionally flies. Badly. With its puny wingspan (staying that way), its approach speed for a conventional landing would resemble a ballistic projectile. It can currently be flown to a dive site and enter the water, nose-first, under chutes at about 9 m/sec. Chutes repacked, and after a submerged vertical speed run, it can get airborne again and could be flown to KSC and ditched offshore and then taxied onto land. It is probably not hard at all to change the chute arrangement for it to perform a vertical gear-down landing on land (easy). The superable challenge would then be to effect the belly landing on water without breakage. I think a v3 update will add this capability shortly.
Acknowledgements
The first time I heard of the engine negative-gearing for resource production idea was from Dr @swjr-swis. (See the furtively beautiful Anion.)
When I ran into the first set of issues with the original objectives (listed in Pilot Control Overview), I ruminated on what would be necessary to overcome them (and would eventually find an additional issue (unwanted production of LF)) but decided to publish Platypus in a slightly-restricted form ("publish or perish" re grant schedules, you know). Gratitude again to Dr @swjr-swis for the "push" to go the whole mile.
-
Just some progress news from the Platypus Dive Research Vehicle team.
The initial objectives of attaining independent control of main and trim ballast have been achieved (fully stock). This means no fiddling.
- keys [1] & [2] provide fast flooding and venting of the main ballast tank.
- keys [3] & [4] provide fine flooding and venting of main ballast
- keys [5] & [6] provide trim ballast transfer fore and aft
This the link to the current state of the Platypus DRV .
(You'll notice some round-off errors causing miniscule cross-chatter into the conventional LF supply. Lots of panels open inside with wires hanging down. And all that paraphernalia cluttering the deck: what is that? Yeah, hey, it's research. Take a bus if you want 'conventional'...
)
More seriously, this IS a research effort: so feedback is welcome. Probably here is a good place for any discussion.
-
9 hours ago, Hotel26 said:
Shell is on the right.
Well this latest foolery has brought up the mystery to me of why and when Kerbals swimming in the deeps, ascending, will either 1) take off at speed like the old days, or b) crawl up at 0.123 m/s...
So there seems to be a mode when the Kerbal is in the proximity of a craft (that it might be attempting to board) that prevents the sudden, speedy ascent. I've experimented briefly but have not yet cracked the code of how to reliably get away and commence toward the surface at good speed.
I've opened Kerbals in proximity to sunken craft in case this causes any lengthy dissertation.
-
No doubt, the rules on this have changed over game versions, but I'm particularly interested in 1.12 (which is near enough to 1.11, which I play).
This mechanism is important when trying to swim from one craft to another one, very close by, in order to board it.
Kerbals seem to have a loiter-in-a-very-slow-climb mode that is quite annoying if they escape and begin crawling to the surface. Call that 'crawl' mode.
Then they have a 'shoot' mode in which they rise rather rapidly.
SpoilerTo rescue them early, it is quite a good game to maneuver a rescue craft into their path overhead (either mode/speed) with a deck chair to 'save them from certain death' (from e.g. air supply exhaustion?
).
I have built underwater base experiments with e.g. 'verandas' or overhead arches to provide a 'safe zone', but don't really know what I am doing without knowledge of the 'rules'...
Ideas?
-
Spoiler
I mentioned a recent opus, Deep, recently:
And had mused about using this underwater mining base as a way to shuttle fuel to the surface for use as a sea lane fuel depot.
Toyed this evening with a prototype, one of my uglier efforts:
Deep is on the left. Shell is on the right. It can't do much except go up & down and then a little fiddly maneuvering on the seabed to dock.
Looking at this, I have to say I am not too proud of this. I should wear a paper bag over my head.
Hmm, I think I will just bury this whole post in a spoiler.
-
10 hours ago, Robin Patenall said:
I have a standardised nuclear pusher stage
I found this very interesting by comparison. It's similar to my Mule, which is based around the Mk3 Liquid Fuel Fuselage and is powered by 4 NERV.
It lifts off with some unnecessary drag incurred by its format and with a light load of LF (3000) because it only lifts off once. ("No one hears your finger nails drag across the black board in space.")
Mule carries only a small amount of OX (for RCS and to supply limited amounts to other craft.
Once the decision to tolerate atmospheric drag was initially made[1], no service bay was required and the only part that might have really benefited from one would be the RTG (80kg) which is an adequate, reliable, lightweight power supply. (And no need to worry about its radiation levels under the circumstances!!)
The particular detail I liked about your tug is the 180-degree alignment doppel-ganging with three engines providing an anti-collision phase shift!
There is a subtle advantage in keeping three similar axis dimensions in terms of rotational inertia (Mule) but I doubt it really provides significant advantage in rotation-for-docking maneuvers.
Here's another detail I do really like about your design: A Jumbo filled with 6400 LF exceeds the capacity of the Mk3 Liquid Fuselage. That's a tie-breaker, I think!! You win.
You didn't say what your tug is named so, unless you tell the name, my rev'eng will be called Patenall...
[1] done again, I'd put a fairing around the whole thing for launch.
-
11 hours ago, kerbiloid said:
It's a plane tail brake. Use it to land on a roof.
("Or on a carrier...")
"Egad! By the holy chilblains of Jove's kerbiloid arthritis!!" That's it!
It's an e.g. P3 Orion carrier-landing RACL (Rocket-Assisted Carrier Landing)!?
.jpg/300px-P-3c_03l_(modified).jpg)
I used 4x Sepatrons on my 2021 Martin 'Top Deck' with a solid fuel supply on a carrier to recharge those retros for Navy 'catch and release' training programs.
The Navy canceled the program when Admiral Chad Gaskerman @chadgaskerman torpedoed it -- reason: Seps have puny thrust (18 kN) and a long burn (5s).
Whereas, a baby like this, eh, 'Launch Escape System'[1] delivers 750 kN for 0.5 seconds and that burn could be down-rated, tailored individually to suit most kinds of carrier craft.
Fly approximately down the deck, 2m above it, and punch the STOP! button to drop the Lamborghini into the 'park' like a valet at a 4-star restaurant. Yowser, I like it.
Spoiler[1] Why the funny name, though: 'Launch Escape System'? And not with the other 'solid fuel boosters'? I hadn't paid much attention to that...
Methinks I should shower more often.
-
This is Platypus...
It's wired up now with main ballast flood/vent at two rates: 500 liters/sec and 50 liters/sec.
Next step is to add keys for Toggle Fore/Aft Trim that will pump 'seawater' (MP) between the front and back trim tanks.
This will be a little trickier than first evident, because a pump will fill all three tanks at some rate, while two of the tanks vent at rates such that the main ballast tank does not change contents and one of the trim tanks will empty at the same rate that the other trim tank is filling. Fiddly but conceptually feasible with a little arithmetic.
Sea trials so far have already been fun. This is a research project for technology for use in much larger submersibles.
SpoilerTo help imagine this, the following controls will be on Action Set 1:
- Fast Flood Main
- Fast Vent Main
- Fine Flood Main
- Fine Vent Main
- Trim For'ard
- Trim Aft
Not too hard to use.
-
Does this look like a missile to you?
It looks like a missile to me.
So, I am thinking, "why haven't I used a brace of these mounted under wing?" OK, so I know they fire with asymmetric thrust. In kerbalthink: "even better!!".
(Kerbals underline everything when they get excited. Have you noticed that?)
Four of these:
So I do a search in the forum. (Here). Surely somebody? No...?
Hmm. Maybe I'll solve this conundrum during my next shower, whenever that might be.
Huh. Or maybe, "I'll just do it!".
-
6 minutes ago, Jack Joseph Kerman said:
have to constantly switchback
SpoilerVoice: "Use the 'falling leaf' maneuver I taught you, Luke!"
-
2 hours ago, chadgaskerman said:
Unfortunatley I have neither the patience nor the time to tune the ballast so it either ends up sinking regardless or remaining on the surface. I'd be more than willing to furnish someone with the craft file if they would like to work on it.
I'm up for it as long as you are happy with a KERS[tm] stock solution which entails on-demand production of sea water (a.k.a. MP) as ballast and standard drain valves for venting tanks.
For this craft, trim tanks might be required as well as main ballast.
-
1 hour ago, Krazy1 said:
each cargo part has to be entirely inside a single cargo bay part to shield drag. KSP does not consider multiple bay parts as a single big bay when occluding drag.
Thank you, @Duke MelTdoWn and @Krazy1: I've learned something from your interchange.
-
16 minutes ago, Duke MelTdoWn said:
a fugly cargo SSTO that can put 2 orange Rockomax tanks into orbit
Fugly is also in the eye of the beholder, and to my eye, that isn't anywhere near my own standard for fugly; but I will not quibble with obvious talent.
Orange tanks are fugly, always; I will grant you that. And I see, your orange tanks look like "Intellitanks" to me. (You're pulled up at the red light and this 'thing' screeches up next to you and revs its engines awaiting the green and you look across and it's a double-fuel-tank. What the...?)
That's well done, I say.
-
Trident ATV (will be an exploration companion for the new Deep and Deep-R underwater bases):
Not yet confirmed but I am hoping the weight & balance will work out such that Trident ATV can be equally useful on land and ocean bed.
It will do 39.7 m/s on land (as you'd expect from those rear F1 tires) and uses a kind of KERS[tm] MP drainage system for extra bursts of speed under water (or indeed propulsion on the surface).
It has full buoyancy control (incremental flood & blow), fuel cell charging (not shown) and a Claude[tm] pit stop system. Looks like it can sustain 6.5 m/s across the ocean bed once KERS has broken the Kerbal ocean viscosity barrier.
SpoilerThe KERS system operates while the ballast tank is simultaneously being flooded and blown. (Currently, flooding at 30 units/sec and blowing at 48, causing a deficit. If I balance those, continuous KERS operation (while the marshalls aren't looking) should be feasible.) At the moment, I maintain a minimum 500 MP ballast and run it back up to 900 before using KERS again...
Uh, you did sign the NDA when you walked into the conference room, didn't you? Oh dear! Security! Code 99!
Here comes the critical test! Getting inside...
-
Text file editor: persistent.sfs. Make a backup first. Change *all* of multiple occurrences.
On Linux, e.g.: sed -i 's/Jebediah Kerman/Jimmy Kerman/g' persistent.sfs
-
News of Deep-R has left my SPH design team quite crestfallen, I have to say.
I have never seen so many of my engineers quite so distressingly crestfallen. Very, very crestfallen.
As Chief of Engineering & Design, I had to give them a pep talk. Here's how it went.
SpoilerAhem. [Can you hear me in the back there?] Ahem!
Now, folks, while it is true that we have never yet invested effort in our Break-A-Part[tm] technology initiative and enjoyed even the slightest return on the effort; and I know you are disheartened... (and/or crestfallen)
...whenever we build some airplane, like our Bett, if you recall -- someone [and you might surmise whom I mean] always builds something "Bett-R" [flying quotes].
And it is true that Deep-R goes further underwater than our Deep and generally outclasses our puny effort in every humiliating way.
But I say to you now: is this not then the time for us to pull out all the stops!! Flood the tanks, kerbals; and by all means, add moah bloody tanks, too!!
We will simply respond with Deep-S! Ha haaa [triumphant].
[...cat calls...]
Once we have unveiled Deep-S, it will be clear -- from nomenclature alone -- that we have produced the world's best sub!
Of course, disheartened as they were, they responded [with several heaped soupçonnes of fiery-spiced sarcasm]: "OK then, Chief: how?? We have no more ideas!"
Simple, I said; if necessary we will just add a couple more mickey-mouse chutes, beef up the brakes, monkey with the spring settings, fix the anti-roll flaps, sling a slew of marketing epithets and, of course! -- the piece of resistance -- change the name!!
Did I tell you it will be called Deep-S? [most proudly]
"Oooh, ugh", they groaned. [Here we go again.]
No, wait!! There can be no pesky rejoinder to Deep-S! Nothing can possibly go farther underwater than Deep-S.
And I can prove that fact to you all via rigorous alphabetical induction[tm]!!
I began to rap (head bobbing side-to-side):
Heep-T Deep-T dove too far[tm]...
Heep-T Deep-T Broke-A-Part[tm],
All the Navy's subs and men,
couldn't raise Deep-T up again.Last thing I saw (before Security evacuated me) was an egg hurled in my direction by someone near the back; and then the meeting erupted in a security code-86: "projectile pandemonium".
(Which is pretty much par for dismayed (and crestfallen!) rocket scientists, in my experience.)
SpoilerMuttering overheard as the crowd dispersed:
"He's finally gone completely around the bend, hasn't he".
"Yeah, stark raving. And if you want my opinion, I think '-R' just means 'reusable'!!"
"Ya think." -
Some unrelated ocean-going malarkey today[1] lead me to get my old Sea Spray out, change out the Panthers for Wheesleys and then attempt a long-distance sea trial.
KSC to Cape Town (42W) in 67 minutes (of my life gone).
(Well, most KSP operations can be interleaved with other activities in another screen, anyway, I suppose.)
It's actually quite good fun, navigating at sea, especially with a craft that has to be brought almost to a standstill in order to turn it. Quite reminiscent of "bad putting"...
Spoiler[1] the other malarkey, out near Kerman Atoll:
-
So, this is Deep.
SpoilerI know. You are thinking, "what's the use case?". Clearly, it can refuel and support other, mobile underwater explorers. But I could also imagine it fueling submersible tankers that descend, dock, fill with fuel and then resurface to provide a nav point for ocean-going ships to dock to refuel en route.
Fin.
-
So this worked quite well:
227 m/s @ 3.5km with a range over 1,000 km. Easy to fly and to land, so it can make a multi-leg journey to its final destination.
I think two Wheesleys would work better -- and since it is likely never going to fly very high -- dialing the wing incidence back from 5 degrees should make it cruise faster & further.
Now, for the magic sauce:
Spoiler- a craft-file edit to add 10,000 MP Resource to the fuel tank of the dive module
- a buried (clipped) Puff MP engine with independentThrottlePercentage = -3000, effectively producing MP when flooding tanks
- 4 drain valves for MP with drainRate = 1%, for blowing tanks
Will give credit to @swjr-swis for this idea, because he showed the technique to me when we were experimenting with submersibles.
-
Something like this could work well. (Code-name: Deep (imaginative, yeah!))
There is a certain number (2) of magic components in it to defeat the KSP buoyancy issues -- but well inline with the realistic mass of sea water and metal, and the consideration of plenty of electrical power to pump tanks.
No mods but it has keys to flood and blow tanks. Q.E.D.
The next task will be to see what I need to do to get it into a Mk3 cargo bay; but failing that, a fairing will do the trick.
I will report back here when I have anything more to report.
-
A friend of mine asked me: "have you tried using any of the LLM tools like GPT or Bard for programming?".
Nope. No interest. But rather than be a curmudgeon, I was willing to give it a try...
Coincidentally, I've been wrestling with an unscrupulous/scurrilous insurance company (indeed, RACketeers they are!) for the last 15 months after being side-swiped (mirror collision) by a joker who resented sharing the road with me when he claimed I was 'overtaking'. Five parked cars. It's been very Kafkaesque, as I had expected the insurers to set him straight. But a reminder to me that insurance companies are MINO: money-in/nothing-out.
SpoilerMe: Can the term overtaking be used in reference to passing parked cars?
ChatGPT:
The term "overtaking" is typically used to describe the action of passing a moving vehicle that is
traveling in the same direction as you on a road. It involves moving past another vehicle that is ahead
of you and is slower than your vehicle.In the context of passing parked cars, the term "overtaking" might not be the most accurate choice. When
cars are parked along the side of the road, they are stationary and not in motion, so you are not
"overtaking" them in the traditional sense. Instead, you are "passing" or "driving past" the parked
cars.So, while the term "overtaking" might not be the most precise word to use when referring to passing
parked cars, the context and clarity of your communication are important. Using terms like "passing,"
"driving past," or "navigating around" would better describe the action of moving past parked cars.Wikipedia, Wiktionary, and the SA Driving Handbook all said the same, but I'm happy to add GPT's opinion now to my formal complaint heading to arbitration.
People respect AI. We should do what it tells us. And I do like how polite it is... We are heading in to a better world.
Where would we (I) be without the imaginative lack of concern displayed by Squad programmers when they wrote the code that trusted the human-editable craft file when it specified a vastly negative throttle setting, hey??
RCS not working for attitude control
in KSP1 Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
Posted
Welcome to the forum!
I would suspect the mass/inertia.
I would Mod-F12 two of them into orbit/rendez-vous, one full fuel and the other with no LFO, but just MP for the RCS. For comparison and also as a translation reference (though you said that's working).
See if the lighter vehicle rotates at all and any better than the heavy one.
For a vehicle like that, you might consider using the LFO-powered Vernor RCS, which is more powerful. I would also almost certainly be using some number of the large size RW for that size ship.