DA299

Hey guys, I asked this a while ago, but now with all the updates, thought I'll ask this again: How is the RealFuels-Stock compatibility of this mod? (I'm talking about the latest version from github.)

With Principia and the latest version of KSRSS(from gitlab) it should be fairly easy to replicate this in KSP. In RSS, people have already done this(see the "Reach" YT channel for some amazing examples). Principia models all the relevant n-body perturbations as well as axial tilt, so you can try it out and see if it works for you. It isn't easy though, there's quite a steep learning curve, as there are no assist planners in Principia; everything has to be done manually.

So, I haven't bought the EA yet, but here's my question to the people who have already played it for a while: what changes do you see in the aero-model? I'm a huge plane/spaceplane guy, so naturally I would be interested in knowing the state of things. Do parts still have drag-cubes, or does KSP2 finally use a holistic voxel approach to calculating drag, like in FAR? How do airplanes stall? and is ground effect being modelled? Anything other that is remarkable in the new aero model, please do enlighten us all.

How much dV do you need to reach orbit? Also, the current KSRSS is 2.7X stock scale, maybe that's messing with your ascent in some way? I personally have never followed any specific ascent profile(s), I just do what 'feels' ok to me. Mostly that involves pointing the ship vector at the lowest point of the prograde 'circle' , waiting for it to drop down, and then repeating the process.

Damn that's actually reasonable performance. Means my 1650 laptop will probably run this at at least 30 fps, which is playable.

Yes, I've installed B9partswitch and I'm playing on KSP 1.12

I installed this mod, and none of the parts except curvy tail 18-06 show up.

Hey does NeistAir support FAR?

Its much better than last time, but it still looks somewhat off. Is it because the clouds have no shadows(yet?)

Yes, the latest release(KSRSS reborn) is 2.7X

Hey so I have another issue, I got no snow near Earth's poles, just water. Is this an issue with my install, or just how its supposed to be?

The native is 2.7X stock scale, I believe there's a patch for 1/9th scale. There's no dV map that I know of for 1/9th scale, but you can use the 1/4th scale(2.7X stock) dV map and multiply all values by roughly (4/9)^2 = 0.64 to get a reasonably accurate number for the dV.

Anyone?

What FAR does is more realistic. Planes IRL don't have as much drag as in KSP, but they also don't produce the same amount of lift. Any normal looking airplane loses speed extremely fast in stock aero, which is not the case in FAR(and IRL).

Yeah, I'll be daydreaming about a rig that could run all of that. Probably need a 4090 LOL.

Does Kerbal Konstructs work with KSRSS reborn?

I don't understand why so many people here consider FAR to be so hard? I've been playing with it since I was 16, and I've never had an issue making anything fly. In fact, in some aspects its much easier than stock KSP. Making airplanes fly and go fast with low TWR is way, way easier in FAR than in stock. If you're proficient, you can even make very high performing spaceplanes. There's a learning curve to FAR just like there's a learning curve to everything in stock KSP. But just like in stock, you can make a plane 'look' like a plane, and balance the COM ahead of the COL, and it will always fly. No need to look at the stability derivatives, the AOA curves, etc etc. I didn't know those for almost 2 years and I built perfectly functional airplanes and even spaceplanes in FAR. And if I was able to do it, then anyone advocating for the notion that FAR is 'too hard' for new players has never played with it for more than an hour or two. If you find the GUI confusing, just don't bring it up(I know I didn't). Just design something that looks like a plane, balance COM, COL; and you will generally be good to go. Granted, one thing about FAR that makes it a bit more difficult is that it doesn't model ground effect, which makes airplane landing/ takeoff speeds a bit high(10-20 m/s higher than IRL.) If someone were to make an effective ground effect model in FAR, then you'll have so many more benefits over stock KSP: Easy landings/takeoffs, along with low drag, and better L/D than stock at high speeds. That's a win-win for me, and generally for gameplay as well(both spaceplanes and rockets experience less dV loss due to drag). If KSP 2 were to implement a realistic aero model, then it would also open the door for so many more interesting gameplay options, like aerogravity assists. I'm personally all for it.

What are the hardware requirements to run this mod? I have a laptop with a 1650, will it be able to run this at ~30 fps?

@G'th do the 8k textures have better performance than the 16k native textures of KSRSS-reborn? I'm asking because I can't really run those textures, they tank my framerate; however I was able to run old KSRSS at 8k textures.

Is there any way to have FAR's aerodynamics with stock KSP's water physics?

64K textures I presume?

@G'th a question for you: Does the 'truesight' pack mirror what is visible from actual Earth orbit? Because it does look realistic.

@tony48 any update on the 8k textures?

You can disagree, but accurate aero is not really hard to simulate. Nobody is asking for a full-fledged CFD simulation. You can play with FAR if you want to know what I'm talking about. It has no performance penalty whatsoever that I can notice, and actually even runs better for large part count crafts, due to its voxel based calculations. And it is actually a reasonably accurate model of real life aero(~85%) and most importantly, is not hacky. I have no issue with KSP aero not being realistic, but it should not be hacky. Rest, you can agree to disagree.

Yes, but you need to download the latest version from the Gitlab repository.