tomek.piotrowski

[1.7, 1.3.1] RemoteTech v1.9.2 [2019-04-14]

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Hermann0000 said:

It's the one with 60Gm but i have only one and it's targeted at active vessel so it will never aim at these satellites unless i mark it. The issue is not the strength because i got that secured well the issue is that whether do i have to have both of the said satellites target each other or i can have let's say the Mun one to target my main and they will be connected. its seems like its not the case so im kinda liquided. And it would mean that i have remake my whole network.

Here is the issue I think bud: your Kerbin network needs to be much more basic at the start. Just grab a simple omni antenna and 2 HG-5. Target the Mun with the first HG-5. The second one needs to target active vessel. To have full coverage of Kerbin you need 3 satellites with exactly the same orbital period (aim for about 825k km altitude). That way you’ll always have connection and you won’t have to touch them ever again.

Your network around the Mun needs the same basic configuration, with 1 HG-5 targetting Kerbin and 1 active vessel. 2 satellites will do for a start. Orbit should be around 250k km.

You can also right away upgrade your Kerbin network with more antennas, say to use this first network to cover Kerbin SOI. You should only use the 60GM for interplannetary communication. Again the cone is very narrow on this baby. 

I always start with a Kerbin SOI network first. Just to get things in position. It will help later when you launch a much more complex satellite network to cover all of Kerbol SOI.

@jamqdlaty I understand from Taxi Service’s comment that he is currently working on integrating the new dlc with RT. Just hope it comes soon as I do!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/7/2019 at 5:24 PM, TaxiService said:

No, it is not. The design choice of deployable science parts is strange and doesn't conform to a typical vessel design we modder are familiar with. Its power is just 0 or 1 and parts are not physically linked.

I am trying to get RemoteTech to work with the science stations but I am not optimal.

Thanks for keeping this Mod up to date. It is much appreciated.

I really hope you'll find a way to work around it. I really like RT and i also like the idea of the new surface science. It would be sad if i have to choose between the two. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, IceCube said:

 

@jamqdlaty I understand from Taxi Service’s comment that he is currently working on integrating the new dlc with RT. Just hope it comes soon as I do!

I do hope. Yesterday I planned to start a new game wit the expansion pack, was a bit hyped. :P Downloaded few mods and then I noticed RT is not working with the new parts.  Here's accurate events reenactment of what happened to my hype:

Spoiler

 

 

Edited by jamqdlaty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what are peoples feelings on the Antenna Multiplier setting.  I am trying to use fairly realistic settings and if folks use the antenna multiplier setting and if so what do they use.  Right now I have if set to .5.   1 seemed a little aggressive and 0 didn't feel right either since there would be no point in adding a seconded omni antenna.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's basically what I've done.  Not sure myself either.

Random question  re: development of RemoteTech2, how do you figure you're going to deal with signal strength?   I was talking to my wife about this mod earlier and realized halfway through that digital and analog transmission systems react differently to poor signal.  It seems to me the "It lowers the amount of science you can get" bit works well for analog, but with digital transmission that doesn't really hold up.  Simulating packet loss might be an option, ie. longer transmission times instead of lower science yields...

 How exactly you'd handle this, I'm not sure other than to include a property on each receiver for analog transmission and a researchable upgrade somewhere in the middle of the tree that patches them all over to digital?  Anyway, was something interesting to think about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, storm6436 said:

That's basically what I've done.  Not sure myself either.

Random question  re: development of RemoteTech2, how do you figure you're going to deal with signal strength?   I was talking to my wife about this mod earlier and realized halfway through that digital and analog transmission systems react differently to poor signal.  It seems to me the "It lowers the amount of science you can get" bit works well for analog, but with digital transmission that doesn't really hold up.  Simulating packet loss might be an option, ie. longer transmission times instead of lower science yields...

 How exactly you'd handle this, I'm not sure other than to include a property on each receiver for analog transmission and a researchable upgrade somewhere in the middle of the tree that patches them all over to digital?  Anyway, was something interesting to think about.

Signal strength is not very good indicator on radio signal quality, especially if you want to planning a timed transmission of big science dataset.

Shannon–Hartley theorem will be the end-result formula to calculate the data rate at the receiving end. I will quote this from the example section of RT2 thesis.

Quote

For KSP players to be comfortable with the new realistic communication model, the end result observable to the players will be the one they are familiar with in their daily lives - internet/mobile connection measured in Mbps. They will know they can’t watch Netflix streaming if the data rate is too low. Similarly, this data rate of an uplink or downlink is intuitive to know if the actions they want to execute are fast enough or achievable.

Basically, major inputs for the theorem are (1) signal power received, (2) noisy space conditions the signal propagated through and (3) frequencies. With these (most of?) factors known, you can budget for downlink rates on science transmissions in opportunistic windows. 

I am not sure if the analog and digital types are related to the following planned overhaul. All the antenna parts in the tech tree are to given additional attributes required for RT2 comm model: (1) surface area, (2) antenna efficiency and (3) frequency restrictions (not exhaustive list). The earliest antenna would be primitive with lousy attributes, and higher-tier antennas would be better in attributes and additional abilities (phased array?).

Folks in RSS domain say RT2 comm model is more realistic than their current reworking (CommNet-based RealAntennas).

 

On 6/14/2019 at 3:36 PM, Columbo said:

Thanks for keeping this Mod up to date. It is much appreciated.

I really hope you'll find a way to work around it. I really like RT and i also like the idea of the new surface science. It would be sad if i have to choose between the two. 

 

23 hours ago, jamqdlaty said:

I do hope. Yesterday I planned to start a new game wit the expansion pack, was a bit hyped. :P Downloaded few mods and then I noticed RT is not working with the new parts.  Here's accurate events reenactment of what happened to my hype:

I managed to provide limited support to the deployable science parts:

  1. 400km Omni range to control station
  2. Connection will be lost if the science cluster has insufficient or no power
  3. Unable to support the dish part as it is not physically linked to the control station (unlike a LEGO-style vessel)
  4. Much of the science part codes are unmoddable to control the background deployed science transmissions (it will transmit in background regardless of RT connection).

Right now, it requires too much work for little results from this.

Edited by TaxiService

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TaxiService said:

Basically, major inputs for the theorem are (1) signal power received, (2) noisy space conditions the signal propagated through and (3) frequencies. With these (most of?) factors known, you can budget for downlink rates on science transmissions in opportunistic windows.  

I am not sure if the analog and digital types are related to the following planned overhaul. All the antenna parts in the tech tree are to given additional attributes required for RT2 comm model: (1) surface area, (2) antenna efficiency and (3) frequency restrictions (not exhaustive list). The earliest antenna would be primitive with lousy attributes, and higher-tier antennas would be better in attributes and additional abilities (phased array?).

Folks in RSS domain say RT2 comm model is more realistic than their current reworking (CommNet-based RealAntennas).

In RL, beside mentioned, major factor is also signal modulation. It is quite diferent if you use AM, FM or FSK modulation, for example. Low frequency signals, often use in military and still restricted to military usage can prograde to very long ranges, but data transmition rate is quite low. Some are restricted to still use morse codes because frequency bandwith is too low for voice transmission (300 Hz up to 3400Hz for phone usage, for example). Those are mostly only analog signals used today. Forgot to mention that low frequency signals bounce off from top of atmosphere and are not quite useful for space.

So, if you plan to simulate analog signals and antenna, my recommendation, for game usage is to restrict those for ability to control craft but to exclude ability to transmit science data.
Digital signals, on the other hand, use mostly higher frequency with some iteration of FSK modulation. FM and FSK have much better signal to noise ratios over AM modulation. Meaning if you have a lot of useless background noise in received signal, it is much easier to exclude those and still reproduce only wanted data.

And it is not all yet. With additional message coding of analog signal itno binary digital signal, you can add FEC bits into message. Forward error correction allows you not to only detect errors in received message, but also ability to correct received message, so you don't need to send request for re-transmission of bad packet data. Downside of FEC is that less useful data is transmitted, so overall transmit takes much longer (slower speed). That is one of reasons why it takes weeks and even moths for deep space probes to transmit pictures and other data back to earth.

So, there is a lot of room to have different antenna types in game, but still have to keep in mind that this is still only a game and some of real life things might not be suitable to simulate for game usage. Have to think to be "lightweight" on CPU usage, for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, TaxiService said:

I managed to provide limited support to the deployable science parts:

  1. 400km Omni range to control station
  2. Connection will be lost if the science cluster has insufficient or no power
  3. Unable to support the dish part as it is not physically linked to the control station (unlike a LEGO-style vessel)
  4. Much of the science part codes are unmoddable to control the background deployed science transmissions (it will transmit in background regardless of RT connection).

Right now, it requires too much work for little results from this.

I was counting on KAS and KIS to trick the game by connecting the science experiments to a power and communication module but unfortunately those parts can’t be connected in any way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/15/2019 at 2:29 AM, TaxiService said:

Signal strength is not very good indicator on radio signal quality, especially if you want to planning a timed transmission of big science dataset.

Shannon–Hartley theorem will be the end-result formula to calculate the data rate at the receiving end. I will quote this from the example section of RT2 thesis.

Basically, major inputs for the theorem are (1) signal power received, (2) noisy space conditions the signal propagated through and (3) frequencies. With these (most of?) factors known, you can budget for downlink rates on science transmissions in opportunistic windows. 

I am not sure if the analog and digital types are related to the following planned overhaul. All the antenna parts in the tech tree are to given additional attributes required for RT2 comm model: (1) surface area, (2) antenna efficiency and (3) frequency restrictions (not exhaustive list). The earliest antenna would be primitive with lousy attributes, and higher-tier antennas would be better in attributes and additional abilities (phased array?).

Folks in RSS domain say RT2 comm model is more realistic than their current reworking (CommNet-based RealAntennas).

 Having read over the thesis bit for the first time, I'm actually pretty impressed. If you need any help, I'm in the last year(-ish) of a physics undergrad and have a background in electronics from prior service in the Navy as a communications Electronics Tech whose training focused on UHF/VHF communications. 

 

 Only caveats I have on my time is that classes take precedence and I'm trying to write my fourth book. :p

Edited by storm6436

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/15/2019 at 5:37 PM, kcs123 said:

In RL, beside mentioned, major factor is also signal modulation. It is quite diferent if you use AM, FM or FSK modulation, for example. Low frequency signals, often use in military and still restricted to military usage can prograde to very long ranges, but data transmition rate is quite low. Some are restricted to still use morse codes because frequency bandwith is too low for voice transmission (300 Hz up to 3400Hz for phone usage, for example). Those are mostly only analog signals used today. Forgot to mention that low frequency signals bounce off from top of atmosphere and are not quite useful for space.

So, if you plan to simulate analog signals and antenna, my recommendation, for game usage is to restrict those for ability to control craft but to exclude ability to transmit science data.
Digital signals, on the other hand, use mostly higher frequency with some iteration of FSK modulation. FM and FSK have much better signal to noise ratios over AM modulation. Meaning if you have a lot of useless background noise in received signal, it is much easier to exclude those and still reproduce only wanted data.

And it is not all yet. With additional message coding of analog signal itno binary digital signal, you can add FEC bits into message. Forward error correction allows you not to only detect errors in received message, but also ability to correct received message, so you don't need to send request for re-transmission of bad packet data. Downside of FEC is that less useful data is transmitted, so overall transmit takes much longer (slower speed). That is one of reasons why it takes weeks and even moths for deep space probes to transmit pictures and other data back to earth.

So, there is a lot of room to have different antenna types in game, but still have to keep in mind that this is still only a game and some of real life things might not be suitable to simulate for game usage. Have to think to be "lightweight" on CPU usage, for example.

So this is what the signal modulation is utilized for. I had trouble of understanding the modulation uses, other than increasing the bit rate per wave.

Analog/digital signals seem to be boiled down to the frequencies (1 to 100 Ghz) used, which strongly influence the desired properties of signal, isn't it?

 

19 hours ago, storm6436 said:

 Having read over the thesis bit for the first time, I'm actually pretty impressed. If you need any help, I'm in the last year(-ish) of a physics undergrad and have a background in electronics from prior service in the Navy as a communications Electronics Tech whose training focused on UHF/VHF communications. 

 

 Only caveats I have on my time is that classes take precedence and I'm trying to write my fourth book. :p

You could try out the comm model implementation once it is implemented sufficiently to be public for feedback. The realism of the RT2 comm model has to be verified in actual gameplay before further enhancement could be made. All I have is a theoretical paper with zero experiment results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, TaxiService said:

So this is what the signal modulation is utilized for. I had trouble of understanding the modulation uses, other than increasing the bit rate per wave.

Analog/digital signals seem to be boiled down to the frequencies (1 to 100 Ghz) used, which strongly influence the desired properties of signal, isn't it?

Slightly more complex topic other than that. Generaly speeking, modulation of signals is used for adjusting input signal for transfer over media that is used for transmission. Does not always need to be vacuum, although for RT and in game usage it is your main focus of interest. Media for transmiison can also be copper wire pair, coaxial cable, air(atmosphere), water (submarine comms), fiberglass, etc. For example, coaxial cable have much better properties than twisted copper pair wire when comes to influence of external noise. While it can be used for much higher frequency signals than twisted copper pair cable, at certain frequency threshold you get way too much energy loss due to inductance and capacitance (impedance) of cable itself.

Necessary bandwith that is used for transfer strongly depends of what kind of input signlal you want to transmit. For example, for human speech it is enough mentioned 300 to 3400 Hz to be undersandable and distinctive transfered voice. For music bandwith is up to 20 kHz, (edge of human hearing frequency) and for television you need to add more, for monochrome and color picture (can't recall exact data from top of my head).

Digital signal can be used on much lower frequency, not necessary starting with 1Ghz. For example, frequency for regular analog TV signal is 30 MHz to 300 MHz for VHF bandwith or 300 MHz up to 3GHz for UHF bandwith. In the past, UHF bandwith for TV was also analog signals. But, novadays it is converted to digital MPEG2 or MPEG4 digital signal first allowing to have much more broadcasting TV stations for the same bandwith usage.

Main issue what kind of bandwith you will need for transmission of digital signal is original imput signal. For example, for proper sampling of analog music signal , you need at least double frequency of sampling rate of maximum frequency of input signal to be recognizable after AD conversion. On top of that you also need certain exact discret levels of amplitude for loudness of analog signal. You can find more on that topic on AD converters page. So, necessary "evil" of digital signal is that is never "smooth" as analog signal, but with enough discret levels and sampling rate it can be recognizable enough.

This is not over yet. On top of that you also have compression of digital signals with acceptable loss. MP3, MPEG2, MPEG4, jpeg ... That might be more familiar things to you :).

But that might be way too broad topic for in game usage for RT. Your main focus should be frequency bandwith from 1Ghz and above. Should also assume FM or FSK modulation. Those are somehow minimal frequency that is good to "penetrate" atmosphere without significant signal loss and prograde to space trough vacuum. Next thing to emulate is S/N ratio in regards to traveled distance of signal. With more range it is more likely that some background noise from space would interefere transmited signal. For example solar flares from sun, or distant signals from pulsar stars etc. To overcome issue with noise, mentioned FEC is used. With more distance, more "protective" bits you need to detect and recover from errors in transmission.

For example, let's say that in low orbit you don't need any FEC at all. You are capable to recognise all 8 bits of transmited data over some bandwith. You can transmit that for simplicity in example within 1 sec. Now, as distance become bigger and bigger, you start to picking up more and more noise, so you no longer can transmit whole 8 bits of data in one seconds. You may be able to transmit only 2 bits of useful data and additional 6 bits of FEC "protective" data. Therefore, while transmitter still send 8 bits per second, only 2 bits are useful, so your data rate become only 2bits per second.

So, pretty much distance and S/N ratio dictate what transmission speed would be, rather than bandwith used. Bandwith width is useful only up to certain point, again, input signal dictate waht kind of bandwith you need and do you need it in realtime for retransmission (live picture) or you can wait and put everything together later on. Too wide bandwith may add too much in complicated hardware for transmiter and receiver than it is worh for.

I hope that I have provided more useful data to you than adding more complicated noise into topic :).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a quick question regarding a technical aspect of this mod: from where does it calculate LoS? Is it from the CoM of the craft or the position of the antenna?

 

I was thinking of erecting an antenna on a pole of Kerbin such that it would always be in line of sight to the Mun, however this would require a tower of at least 330m height, which is fairly plausible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although it is somehow detected by kerbalism, it seems that remote tech is the origin of the problem here.

Spoiler

[LOG 23:16:18.794] [Kerbalism]  -> verbose: CommInfo.Init - Kerbalism: CommInfo handler threw exception Exception has been thrown by the target of an invocation.
System.Reflection.TargetInvocationException: Exception has been thrown by the target of an invocation. ---> System.Reflection.TargetInvocationException: Exception has been thrown by the target of an invocation. ---> System.ArgumentOutOfRangeException: Argument is out of range.
Parameter name: index
  at System.Collections.Generic.List`1[RemoteTech.ISignalProcessor].get_Item (Int32 index) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at RemoteTech.VesselSatellite.get_SignalProcessor () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at RemoteTech.VesselSatellite.get_Guid () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at RemoteTech.API.API+<>c.<HasDirectGroundStation>b__9_1 (RemoteTech.SimpleTypes.NetworkRoute`1 r) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at System.Linq.Enumerable.Any[NetworkRoute`1] (IEnumerable`1 source, System.Func`2 predicate) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at RemoteTech.API.API.HasDirectGroundStation (Guid id) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at (wrapper managed-to-native) System.Reflection.MonoMethod:InternalInvoke (object,object[],System.Exception&)
  at System.Reflection.MonoMethod.Invoke (System.Object obj, BindingFlags invokeAttr, System.Reflection.Binder binder, System.Object[] parameters, System.Globalization.CultureInfo culture) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  --- End of inner exception stack trace ---
  at System.Reflection.MonoMethod.Invoke (System.Object obj, BindingFlags invokeAttr, System.Reflection.Binder binder, System.Object[] parameters, System.Globalization.CultureInfo culture) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at System.Reflection.MethodBase.Invoke (System.Object obj, System.Object[] parameters) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at KERBALISM.RemoteTech.TargetsKSC (Guid id) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at KERBALISM.AntennaInfoRT.Init (.Vessel v, Boolean powered, Boolean storm) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at KERBALISM.AntennaInfoRT..ctor (.Vessel v, Boolean powered, Boolean storm) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at KERBALISM.RemoteTech.RTCommInfoHandler (KERBALISM.AntennaInfo antennaInfo, .Vessel v) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at (wrapper managed-to-native) System.Reflection.MonoMethod:InternalInvoke (object,object[],System.Exception&)
  at System.Reflection.MonoMethod.Invoke (System.Object obj, BindingFlags invokeAttr, System.Reflection.Binder binder, System.Object[] parameters, System.Globalization.CultureInfo culture) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  --- End of inner exception stack trace ---
  at System.Reflection.MonoMethod.Invoke (System.Object obj, BindingFlags invokeAttr, System.Reflection.Binder binder, System.Object[] parameters, System.Globalization.CultureInfo culture) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at System.Reflection.MethodBase.Invoke (System.Object obj, System.Object[] parameters) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at KERBALISM.API+CommInfo.Init (KERBALISM.AntennaInfo antennaInfo, .Vessel pv) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@kcs123 Wow, you are right. This signal modulation is too complicated and not something I or non-technical players can understand in short time. But I agree on the distance and signal-to-noise ratio being good factors of signal quality, in which this is why I use the theorem for clear understanding (I think?).

10 hours ago, weekendgamer said:

Just a quick question regarding a technical aspect of this mod: from where does it calculate LoS? Is it from the CoM of the craft or the position of the antenna?

It is the global position of the craft (x,y and z) so you better come up with a way to float your radio station above surface (maybe a balloon?)

7 hours ago, Tacombel said:

Although it is somehow detected by kerbalism, it seems that remote tech is the origin of the problem here.

Sorry, you need to check with Kerbalism team and provide the save to replicate the error. It looks like unexpected result is generated when calling RT's API (HasDirectGroundStation) on a given craft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TaxiService said:

But I agree on the distance and signal-to-noise ratio being good factors of signal quality, in which this is why I use the theorem for clear understanding (I think?).

Yep, I think that you are on right track. However, Shannon-Hartley theorem describe theoretical (in ideal case) limits. In practice it is hardly achievable.For game usage, you may want to calculate theoretical limit and lower it down to aproximate ~70% of ideal best scenario. For game usage, you might want to use some aproximation, some kind of your own function to increase noise over distance (or decrease S/N ratio with distance). Maybe to use something like A * (1/X) to calculate S/N ratio for in game usage.

Where X is distance and "A" is some factor that would make final S/N suitable for in game usage. With low S/N ratio, overall transmition will take longer with same electricity usage per second, but you can safely assume that FEC is provided enough protective bits, so at the end of transmission you will always get proper data. Once such data is received it is reasonable to assume that relay could pass such data at higher rate if next antena pair in row is at closer distance and overall S/N ratio is higher for next antenna pair. So, next "leg" in transmission can be quicker. On the other hand, if next pair of antenna is at even higher distance than S/N can be even lower and overall transmission can take much longer time.

My proposal for in game usage is to calculate MBit/sec from craft to first antenna in row, considering S/N between two, so you can take that for energy consuption for transmission to the first hop. But overall transmission does not end here. For each next antenna pairs down to Kerbin you need to also calculate S/N based on distance between two antenna and based on that only calculate additional time for transsmission. When some antenna pair have lower S/N, transmission time can be longer than it was on first hop. Oposite is valid too.
That you can take as base for calculating overall signal delay. Because it is not only delayed due to limit of signal velocity in vacuum, but also how much of actual useful data you are able to transmit.

I think that is reasonable start points that is for sure more realistic than stock system, but at the same time is not too complicated to calculate and should not take too much CPU time for in game usage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

on discord someone reported using flight computer spacecraft point away from maneuver node slightly midburn. Maybe not apparent enough in the video

Spoiler

 

 

 

Edited by ssd21345

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love this mod and thanks for keeping it up to date!

Quick question: I have just Frankensteined a working RP-1 install for 1.61, using the master for RemoteTech.

In order to do this I had to delete community tech tree as apparently it causes problems.

New for me to not be able to have comms right off the bat - not sure if this is what RP-1 is going for but that's another story.

For now, is it still the "basic science" node that will unlock the groundstations?

Right now I have no groundstations and the comms interface looks very stock to me, though I never played 1.61 or indeed non-RP-0 for years.

The only other thing I can think of is that I may have to turn off the comms network in settings for RemoteTech to work. But I'm not sure. So some advice would be great!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/19/2019 at 2:35 PM, ssd21345 said:

on discord someone reported using flight computer spacecraft point away from maneuver node slightly midburn. Maybe not apparent enough in the video

It is not really bug. Both NODE and EXEC commands are separate operations. Once EXEC command starts, preceding NODE command will be removed. THis EXEC command has own NODE tracking rather than depending on external NODE command.

 

4 hours ago, Antstar said:

I love this mod and thanks for keeping it up to date!

Quick question: I have just Frankensteined a working RP-1 install for 1.61, using the master for RemoteTech.

In order to do this I had to delete community tech tree as apparently it causes problems.

New for me to not be able to have comms right off the bat - not sure if this is what RP-1 is going for but that's another story.

For now, is it still the "basic science" node that will unlock the groundstations?

Right now I have no groundstations and the comms interface looks very stock to me, though I never played 1.61 or indeed non-RP-0 for years.

The only other thing I can think of is that I may have to turn off the comms network in settings for RemoteTech to work. But I'm not sure. So some advice would be great!

Sorry, I am not familiar with RP-1 to advise on the ground station unlocking.

But I thought all ground stations are supposed to be shown immediately at the beginning? Like something "dsn.cfg" in RemoteTech or RP folder in GameData?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, TaxiService said:

But I thought all ground stations are supposed to be shown immediately at the beginning? Like something "dsn.cfg" in RemoteTech or RP folder in GameData?

You may be on the right track. There is no file with that name but some similiar ones in the RO folder. But they are the same in the working 1.31 version.

I'll just see what happens when I get basic science unlocked

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stock game use option in difficulty settings menu, to set additional ground stations or not. I can't tell anything about RO, if theys have removed this from stock game menu or something else is involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK. FYI for anyone interested:

Do not use 1.7 master for 1.6.1

Use the 1.6 version. Haven't confirmed it works properly yet, but at least I now have ground stations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Ok, I know this might sound like a stupid question and ... stuff, but I haven't been able to find the answer I was looking for anywhere else (including the mod's wiki and the great flatlands of Google). Here goes:

What does the "hailer" do, when is it useful and how do you use it exactly?

EDIT: Found out my many questions were raised because it's literally not part of Remote Tech, but of ESLD Jump Beacons.

Edited by Nuterrone
Correction

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello,
Already sorry for my English not always clear.
I searched a lot for an answer to my question before posting and could not find anything.

I really do not understand the use of satellite control by kerbal in a direct link ship.

Let me explain :

In the first case it works well.
I take the RC-L01 Remote Guidance Unit, I put it on a ship with 6 kerbal and I have an omnidirectional antenna on the ship and the satellite (with the range between the two) with this configuration I can actually control the satellite without problem.

In the second case impossible to make it work
I have a pod with 3 kerbal pilots, the RC-001S Remote Guidance Unit and omnidirectional antennas, I'm in the same case before but it never works! Even by putting relay-type directional antennas.
For relay antennas I even try to point them towards each other but nothing helps. On the satellite antenna I have the option "remote tech" target but on the antenna of the ship I do not see the satellite.
I do not understand anything anymore I'm lost, I try a lot of different configurations, I read as much as I could tutorials in English.
 
Besides, when I watch the tutorials, it says that pods with the right mention can drive the satellites but it never works for me. I specify that in any case I am in direct connection, the signal should not rebound. And I have several kerbal pilots in pods.
I am really lost if anyone could help me I would be really grateful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Lunairs said:

RC-L01

There are two sorts of antennas. Omni and dish. You can not target an omni because it contact automatically every Sat in Range. It`s only for short/very short ranges. Dishes must be pointed to a target (planet, vessel or active vessel).

Also:
- on a manned ship you don`t need a remoteguidance unit.
- bigger antennas don`t work on short ranges. They are only for very long ranges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think that I must have a bug, with an omnidirectional antenna on my pod and my satellite, several pilots on the pod, control is impossible.
I am well tutorials that I find however, I even tried many different types of antennas, it never works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.