brooklyn666

Members
  • Content Count

    302
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by brooklyn666


  1. Hey MedievalNerd,

    I'm working on an new Realism Overhaul cfg for Remote Tech 2, and I want it to fit in with your tech tree. Can you show me the order in which antennas unlock, or which nodes they unlock at?

    I want to have a realistic progression (low power VHF, UFH antennas first, then the first C and S Band dishes, then large, high power, high bitrate X and Ku/Ka Band dishes).

    I want to makes sure they unlock in a way that makes sense with the rest of the tree.


  2. They had to keep doing course corrections the whole way because they had put the mass of the moon rocks that they would've gathered into their calculations.

    They only did 2 small course correction burns after the PC+2 burn, and it had nothing to do with moon rocks. It was because the LM's cooling system was evaporating water into space, which created a very small amount of thrust that added up over the 3 days the LM was powered up. The astronauts and mission control overlooked this, because the LM was never designed to be powered up for so long in cis-lunar space.


  3. There is so much info out there, I don't think any of us could tell you anything you can't easily find out already. Check out the report from the Apollo 13 Accident Review Board, the post-flight press-conference, and if you can find it, the entire mission control FDI and CAPCOM loops.


  4. That's quite strange... what specific type(s) of engines are you using? If it's from Bobcat's soviet engine pack, most engines in that pack should use HypergolicFluid and is self-ignite-able, with one exception that requires a bunch of ElectricCharge and another exception that requires external ignitor.

    It's all of the engines from Bobcat's soviet pack, but the one I use most often is the RD-180. I'm using RF and Nathan's RftSEngines. There's nothing in the cfgs that should be causing a conflict, but I'll test it without them just to be sure.


  5. Hey Nathan, I looked at your calc spreadsheet for RT2 and I think I'm gonna go with something more simple. For now, I'm just going to rescale the masses, ranges, energy consumption, and beamwidths. Before I do any of that, I want to figure out how you reworked electricity. The stock system has the antennas using "energy" in some mysterious units called "charges" but I don't know if this means actual energy, or power, since there are no time units. I'm assuming you defined the battery capacity as amp-hours, but are the solar panels and rtgs in watts, or kwh? I just want to keep everything consistent across the board. Also, I'm thinking I'm going to make the antennas require very little energy/power when on but not actively transmitting science, because science costs power/energy to tramsit? The RT antenna cfgs all have

    TRANSMITTER
    {
    PacketInterval = 0.3
    PacketSize = 2
    PacketResourceCost = 15.0
    }

    but I don't know what those 3 things define. Is that related to something we can call bit rate? Or the in-game unit of "mits"?


  6. I'm working on a new config to modify this for the RSS/RO mod bundle, but I have a few questions.

    I looked through the antenna configs, and they all have

    TRANSMITTER
    {
    PacketInterval = 0.3
    PacketSize = 2
    PacketResourceCost = 15.0
    }

    which I guess overrides the stock

    {
    name = ModuleDataTransmitter

    packetInterval = x
    packetSize = x

    packetResourceCost = x
    requiredResource = ElectricCharge

    DeployFxModules = 0
    }

    So what do those 3 things translate to in the game, and are the related to the in-game trasmission unit of "Mits"?


  7. Hey Nathan, if it's ok with you, I was thinking about overhauling the RO cfgs for antennas and RT2. I did some research, and a lot of the numbers in the game seem way off.

    The info is hard to come by, but I did manage to find out that the 1.5m medium-gain dish on Magellan had a mass of 16.7kg, so I can't imagine that its 3.7m high gain antenna could be an entire order of magnitude more, yet most of the interplanetary dishes from RT2 and AIES come in at a minimum of 500kg, which seems a bit crazy.

    Also, most of the dish antennas have extremely tiny cone angles, on the order of 0.0X degrees, but the Voyager probes had 0.6 degrees in the X band, and 2.3 in the S band (I realize RT2 doesn't make any accommodation for gain or frequency.)

    I'd only do this if you're ok with it, and if you'd add it to RO, so let me know what you think.


  8. On the other hand, I've seen an Ariane 5 launch video, which clearly showed burning pilot flames (not exactly like the Shuttle sparkers, but similar) igniting a Vulcain engine. I guess this differs from engine to engine.

    The Vulcain does use an external blowtorch as its ignition source. I didn't mean to say that the sparker couldn't be used in the game as an ignition source, only that it wasn't it's real world fuction.

    And on another note, I'm having some serious difficulty with Bobcat's Soviet Engines; namely, they won't ignite. Ive got adequate power supply from the launch clamps, as well as hypergolic fluid (those are the only two ignition resources for non-nuclear engines, yes?), but when I launch, my rocket just flops over on the tower. Right clicking shows that I've used up my ignition, but my engine isn't burning. Also, there are a bunch of buttons that say jettison(?) so I'm a bit stumped.


  9. Could you add some way to make Dtobi's sparkers work as external ignitors for non-hypergolic engines? Preferably as a separate integration config. If installed, instead of only having to stick a launch clamp near the engine, you'd actually have to place a sparker under each of them so that they could ignite. A very neat feature IMO, though probably should be optional.

    But those aren't actually used to ignite anything. They just burn off the excess hydrogen before ignition. The ignitors themselves on the SSMEs are located inside the engine housing - you can't see them at all.


  10. I've done test flights with the converter constantly recycling the CO2. Maybe the plugin is calculating things incorrectly but even with the converter I'm only getting a few days in the plugin dialogue box. I'd like to send 6 Kerbals on a 5-6 month science/scansat mission. I need 6 Kerbal to have a RemoteTech control center for probes, and I need a lot of time to collect as much science and ScanSat scans as possible. I'm building a large research vessel with probes, landers and satellites, but if I run out of air then it's all for nothing.

    Editing configs has occurred to me but that's cheating IMO.

    Well.. I'm against modding mods to make things easier, but if it's more realistic *and* gives me more air then that's fine. Thanks.

    Here's why editing the cfg might be ok for you: If you look back a ways, somewhere around page 45 would be my guess, you'll see a bunch of us had a discussion where we tried to decide, amongst other things, the volume of the tanks, whether they stored O2 as a gas or a liquid and at what pressure, and how much O2 Kerbals actually use. I don't know that we ever came to a consensus, and I know there are a few different cfgs out there that change this stuff, so you should feel free to set it what you think makes sense. I think the current values now reflect an O2 consumption rate of Humans, but who is to say that Kerbals need the same amount? Especially since they're half our size.


  11. Eureka! It worked flawlessly!! dates, phase angle, ejection angle everything! Now, there must be a way to change that. But I don't really mind playing in specific dates so I will stick to Epoch = 0 for now

    Weird. So technically the game starts at noon TT 2000 instead of 1950, but I don't really care. Maybe at some point Nathan can figure out the discrepancy. For now, I'm content to just have some functional porkchop plots!

    Just out of curiosity, how did you test it, exactly?


  12. I'm pretty sure it has to do with the Epoch, I had thought about setting it to 0 in the cfg and check if it becomes accurate. Will try it out in a few mins

    Let me know what happens. That's what I thought at first, but I opened up Celestia and set the time to 12:00 TT on 1/1/1950 and 2000 and checked that against the start date in a new game, (should also be 12:00 TT on 1/1/1950) and the planets are in the same place at both times.


  13. Has anyone ever tried sending several Kerbals to other planets with this mod? It looks to me like I'll have to send huge stacks of oxygen. Am I missing something? Any ideas that don't involve cheating/modding?

    You can use the CO2 -> O2 converter. Also, this might be considered "cheating" in your book, but you can edit the amount of O2 stored in the tanks, or the consumption rate of O2 to your liking.


  14. I know this isn't a priority, but can someone, maybe Nathan or AbeS give me a hand with trying to figure out why AbeS' launch window calculator is off?

    I cross referenced all of the orbital elements with Celestia, (I don't have Orbiter on this comp, but someone who does can give it a shot) and everything matches up, particularly the planets are where they are supposed to be, when they are supposed to be there. I'm out of ideas.


  15. As a workaround, in the past I've scaled the height down about 0.25. Makes it pretty thin for really small rockets but about right for larger ones.

    Not sure I still have that config but as I recall I had to change the position of the attachment nodes.... manually scaled the top/bottom ones.

    If you find it, could you send it my way?

    And I'm not criticizing here, I love PF, but maybe this is something to consider for a future update? I myself have no idea how to mod anything, so I'll leave that to those who do, but I think a good system of procedural interstages is the one thing this mod lacks.


  16. I remember someone posting a few months ago it takes 1 minute for signals to reach the Moon, which isn't true IRL but RT2 seems to have slower speed of light to adjust for the shorter distances though it's weird since speed of light is 3E8..

    1 minute with RSS or stock? Either way, I've sent probes to the moon with signal delay on and it took 1.2 seconds, exactly as long as is should take. So if you set it to 3E+9, your speed of light will be waaaay too fast.