[1.6.1] RealPlume - Stock [v1.3.1 - 1/14/19] - Better Late than Never Update

[Svm420]

@SkyKaptn

uhh If it is using a kerolox config. The changes to the base plume removed smoke from that fuel type plume. That is to say it is intended. It was changed with the last update to the base RealPlume mod.

Edited April 24, 2016 by Svm420

[Temeter]

Yep, that's a kerosene driven rocket:

Only a very small, hardly visible smoke trail! The 'smoke' on ground is only vapor from the launchpads water supply.

Edited April 24, 2016 by Temeter

[VenomousRequiem]

Hey, I don't mean to undermind your work, but I noticed a lot of the RSB engines were set using the wrong plume types. (RL10 using Kerolox, etc...) And call me picky, but that bothered me a little bit. So I took the liberty of changing all of the engines to use the correct plumes! Enjoy.

[visivante]

I'm seeing the same issue reported by @SkyKaptn 

 

[SkyKaptn]

34 minutes ago, Svm420 said:

@SkyKaptn

uhh If it is using a kerolox config. The changes to the base plume removed smoke from that fuel type plume. That is to say it is intended. It was changed with the last update to the base RealPlume mod.

Ok, I guess it is by design then and no bug.

[visivante]

1 hour ago, SkyKaptn said:

Ok, I guess it is by design then and no bug.

Strange... I preferred it the old way... How do I set it back?

[lajoswinkler]

I've noticed the mod has way better plume response at high altitudes. Well done. It's a really nice mod and should be stock.

[NoMrBond]

7 hours ago, Nhawks17 said:

Could you link the mods in question for me? I'm only finding old locked threads 

 

[Tricky14]

I do not mean to sound ungrateful, but how can I remove the "Plume configured by RealPlume." line at the end of every engine description? I know the plumes are configured by realplume: I'm the one who installed it.

[Red Iron Crown]

3 hours ago, Tricky14 said:

I do not mean to sound ungrateful, but how can I remove the "Plume configured by RealPlume." line at the end of every engine description? I know the plumes are configured by realplume: I'm the one who installed it.

Edit the module manager scripts, those are what adds those.

[Tricky14]

9 minutes ago, Red Iron Crown said:

Edit the module manager scripts, those are what adds those.

Where do I find these?

[Red Iron Crown]

Er, it doesn't seem to work like I thought. I assumed the MM cfgs were appending that to the descriptions of the parts but I don't see it in any of them. Sorry for the misinformation.

[Phineas Freak]

@Tricky14open the "000_zRealPlume.cfg" file (under the GameData/RealPlume/000_Generic_Plumes path) and remove the following line:

@description ^= :$: Plume configured by RealPlume.:

That will take care of your issue.

[Tricky14]

12 minutes ago, Red Iron Crown said:

Er, it doesn't seem to work like I thought. I assumed the MM cfgs were appending that to the descriptions of the parts but I don't see it in any of them. Sorry for the misinformation.

Not a problem, thanks for trying to help.

5 minutes ago, Phineas Freak said:

@Tricky14open the "000_zRealPlume.cfg" file (under the GameData/RealPlume/000_Generic_Plumes path) and remove the following line:

@description ^= :$: Plume configured by RealPlume.:

That will take care of your issue.

Appreciated. Thanks for the help.

[jpinard]

NHawk - Seeing as what's happened with CKAN messing up Stock Visual Enhancements.  Do you think CKAN will be or is handling your Realplumes properly?

[Nhawks17]

2 hours ago, jpinard said:

NHawk - Seeing as what's happened with CKAN messing up Stock Visual Enhancements.  Do you think CKAN will be or is handling your Realplumes properly?

Realplume is fine on CKAN  

[Galileo]

@Nhawks17 I haven't been playing much the last few days but I just noticed with this mod a big drop in FPS at about 25-28k when the plume begins to spread. I go from 80fps to roughly 40. its definitely still playable just a big hit. I don't remember such a big hit before the update. Once in orbit the FPS return to the norm for me. I'm going to try an older version to see if I'm just losing my mind 

[Nhawks17]

8 minutes ago, Berlin said:

@Nhawks17 I haven't been playing much the last few days but I just noticed with this mod a big drop in FPS at about 25-28k when the plume begins to spread. I go from 80fps to roughly 40. its definitely still playable just a big hit. I don't remember such a big hit before the update. Once in orbit the FPS return to the norm for me. I'm going to try an older version to see if I'm just losing my mind 

Make sure you read the performance section in the OP and see if that helps

[tenvelden]

So in KW the LFO service engine doesn't have a stock config so I just copied the monopropellent config and named it "KW2mengineSPSB.cfg" the monopropellent engine's name is KW2mengineSPS so yea quick fix. This didn't work going to keep at it.

Ok so to get it to work I had to copy and rename the config and rename the engine inside the new config. Cheers.

I'm just letting ya know that the LFO service engine in KW doesn't have a config as of right now (b/c it comes from KW community fixes). Maybe this will change with the new "redux" version of KW but so far no changes have been made AFAIK. Maybe I should have brought this up on github? idk how I would go about doing that so here it is.

Edited April 27, 2016 by tenvelden

[MisterFister]

On ‎2016‎-‎04‎-‎25 at 2:15 PM, jpinard said:

NHawk - Seeing as what's happened with CKAN messing up Stock Visual Enhancements.  Do you think CKAN will be or is handling your Realplumes properly?

 

On ‎2016‎-‎04‎-‎25 at 4:56 PM, Nhawks17 said:

Realplume is fine on CKAN  

Sir,  I offer the following CKAN-error report.  It seems there is a config selection available on CKAN but no base mod.  Please note that I am currently running KSP v1.1.1 via Steam on Windows 7 64-bit.

Edited April 29, 2016 by MisterFister

[Nhawks17]

7 hours ago, MisterFister said:

 

Sir,  I offer the following CKAN-error report.  It seems there is a config selection available on CKAN but no base mod.  Please note that I am currently running KSP v1.1.1 via Steam on Windows 7 64-bit.

Ohhh, errrr... I think I might be able to fix that..... hang on

Edit:

Nevermind it's already been done.... RealPlume is marked as 1.1 compatible make sure you get an updated version of CKAN and refresh it.... I don't use CKAN so there might be other things you can do. But there is always the option to install it manually  

Edited April 29, 2016 by Nhawks17

[MisterFister]

7 hours ago, Nhawks17 said:

Ohhh, errrr... I think I might be able to fix that..... hang on

Edit:

Nevermind it's already been done.... RealPlume is marked as 1.1 compatible make sure you get an updated version of CKAN and refresh it.... I don't use CKAN so there might be other things you can do. But there is always the option to install it manually  

Well, something is off within the metadata somewhere.  I speculate it might be a single-digit typo in whatever file it looks to.  I know that I am running an otherwise-sterile v1.1.1, and I note in my screensnip above, and verified anew just now before I type this reply, that the "Max" KSP version is 1.1.99.  I wonder where the "Min" might be listed, perhaps that's an issue.

As for installing it manually, I'm perfectly willing to do that, but there are vast and very numerous advantages to not mixing CKAN-installed and manual-installed mods on the same KSP folder, as discussed with dozens of individual issues throughout the CKAN release thread.  Those advantages go beyond simple convenience for management of this one mod in isolation; CKAN tracks folders that it does and doesn't "own," and putting in a lot of folders that it doesn't recall placing there can create issues down the line, especially for heavily-modded installs, which is where CKAN benefits really come into play anyway.  I just checked, and I am already using the current version of CKAN, v1.16.1-g2e91715, and this version of CKAN has been out for a while with no recent updates to it.

While I highly recommend you consider tinkering with it as an enduser, because it really does streamline and resolve a LOT of error checking and update management (it scales with mod usage, though -- for a small handful of mods, it's a rather even trade, I think -- in terms of dozens or, in my own case, hundreds of mods installed, it's a godsend)... since you indicate that you don't have familiarity with it as a user, I can note for your benefit here that there are separate "secondary version mismatch" errors that have cropped up on other mods.  "Secondary version mismatch" is a term I'm coining here and doesn't come from CKAN itself, but it's an error that occurs when a current-updated mod has a dependency-mod which has not yet updated, and it reports THAT secondary version-mismatch separately from what I'm seeing here.  The error for RealPlume here is specifically telling me that, regardless of what's listed on my repository selection list that I show in my screensnip above, something that the mod looks to for versioning info is telling CKAN that my installed KSP v1.1.1 is not "listed" as compatible (it never knows what "is" or "isn't" compatible, it just refers to listings, listings that I'm led to understand are the exclusive purview of the person submitting the mod for repository listing.)

Note on the new snip below (error message omitted for redundancy) that CKAN is properly detecting that I'm running KSP v1.1.1 (top left).

[Vegemeister]

On 4/24/2016 at 0:54 PM, Temeter said:

Yep, that's a kerosene driven rocket:

Only a very small, hardly visible smoke trail! The 'smoke' on ground is only vapor from the launchpads water supply.

But see around 2:50, when the oxygen concentration is too low to burn the exhaust, it does make a substantial soot trail, which evolves into a soot cone in vacuum.

[Jacke]

4 hours ago, Vegemeister said:

But see around 2:50, when the oxygen concentration is too low to burn the exhaust, it does make a substantial soot trail, which evolves into a soot cone in vacuum.

That's way cool, @Vegemeister

I wanted to better understand why the rocket exhaust looks like it did.  I did a quick reread of some of Ignition!, a great history of the research and development of rocket propellants (and its twists and turns) by one of the chemists who was a part of it all, John D. Clark.  Introduction by Isaac Asimov, with his great comment on the slightly Kerbal nature of rocket fuel research.

Quote

Now it is clear that anyone working with rocket fuels is outstandingly mad. I don't mean garden-variety crazy or a merely raving lunatic. I mean a record-shattering exponent of far-out insanity.

There are, after all, some chemicals that explode shatteringly, some that flame ravenously, some that corrode hellishly, some that poison sneakily, and some that stink stenchily. As far as I know, though, only liquid rocket fuels have all these delightful properties combined into one delectable whole.

But not a lot on rocket exhaust colour and appearance.  Had to think.

Almost all rocket engines run with a fuel-rich mixture to improve performance and reduce temperature extremes and engine wall erosion at critical points.  This should lead to very little soot in the exhaust, I thought.  Thought about it, but that exhaust does get dark and that can only be soot.  So I searched and I found these posts from the USENET group sci.space.history from 1999 that helped.

Quote

The bright yellow flame of a LOX/kerosene rocket is definitely from carbon
particles in the exhaust.  Current opinion is that they form when fuel is
cooked while still in the form of droplets; the glow is largely absent
when the fuel is introduced into the chamber as vapor.

Okay, back on track.  The main colour of the rocket exhaust is due to heated soot glowing, with the soot coming from the burning of large kerosene/RP-1 droplets from the injectors.  The exhaust is hot enough to make the soot glow yellow to yellow-orange.

The excess fuel fraction, burnt to soot particles, CO and H₂, will burn with the oxygen in the air at the edges of the exhaust.  What I think is most important here is the soot gets burned up just before it can cool enough to show dark.

As the rocket gains altitude, the air pressure and density drops and the exhaust plume will expand more and be seen as dimmer.  The expanded exhaust is also cooler and thus drops the brightness further.  The lower temperature, lower density, and lower partial pressure of oxygen in the surrounding air means the soot in the exhaust is burnt less efficiently.  Eventually it will get cool enough and will also start to clump, with both making it appear dark.  Greater darkness against a less bright background and you've got the soot trail and later cone.

Edited April 30, 2016 by Jacke

[Gryphorim]

How would I go about making a suitable looking plume effect for a mk2 engine that's wider than it is tall? The engine I'm trying to config also only has one thrust transform for effects to attach to. 

Right now, it looks like only the middle third of the horizontal length of the engine is producing a plume.