[0.20] RemoteTech: Relay Network – V 0.5.0.1

[somnambulist]

A quick check of the files doesn't show an obvious way to change that, Moon Goddess. Just think of it as encouragement to set up your own network. You can, of course, build a rover with a strong antenna (and maybe some satellite dishes) and park it somewhere nice.

Before .21's save-breaking was announced, I started on an ambitious design plan of building my own version of the Deep Space Network with three ground tracking stations spaced at roughly 120° intervals around Kerbin. Works OK but you still need a local satellite relay network to bounce signals down to the tracking stations. Apparently Kerbin has neither an ionosphere or wired communication.

[Kimberly]

After getting a bit annoyed with some of the spelling errors, I decided go through all of the part descriptions and fix them! A few of the part descriptions have also been changed to read better. I've dubbed this minor update version 0.5.0.2K, with the "K" indicating it is Kimberly's fork of the main version.

Download: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B-90GQp7TMiRUXI5MHBGTWtsMGc/edit?usp=sharing

Formal changelog:

V 0.5.0.2K

• Spelling and capitalization errors in part manufacturers/descriptions corrected.

• Some part descriptions slightly altered.

Source: Only the part.cfg files have been edited, so JDP's source link is also valid for this distribution.

License (for my own contributions): All rights reserved, but integration into the main development branch is allowed. Forking my fork would make things too complicated.

Edited July 21, 2013 by Kimberly

[Actzoltan]

JDP I have a suggestion for Remote Tech:

When taking control of multiple ships at once have the option to group them into one command box as to make landing 3 landers at the same time easier.

Also add the option to remotely stage.

Thanks I'm having fun with Remote Tech!

Edit: Also the retro grade computer doesn't know where the retrograde is when landing. Luckily there is a surface function.

Edit: Also Mechjeb control doesn't seem to work for other ships even if they are right next to you while under remote control. Would be nice if there is anyway to make this work.

Edit: For MechJeb control it only works IF you engage the auto pilot while controlling a ship before you switch off it. Mechjeb will continue to run on the previous ship but no remote updates can be given to update the Mechjeb on the other ship. Which isn't anything Remote Tech contributes to but i think its possible for remote tech to talk to Mechjeb on the other ships.

Edited July 21, 2013 by Actzoltan

[Kimberly]

Edit: Also the retro grade computer doesn't know where the retrograde is when landing.

At the moment, I think the flight computer can only calculate orbit-relative retrograde, not surface-relative or target-relative.

[JDP]

@Cliph: How does the new target system works? I lost a probe, because it antenna was located at “sun†and when it got into a solar orbit it didn't connected to the other probes in the solar orbit. I know this is the default behaviour of 0.5.0.1 but it's kind of strange that within Kerbin's SoI I got a connection and suddenly it left the SoI and the connection terminates. This is even weirder when you are between Mun and Kerbin: A relay satellite points at Mun with the 50 Mm dish, but a satellite between Mun and Kerbin outside Mun's SoI got no connection.

Since the game mechanic of targeting celestial bodies was a collaborative effort between myself and Cilph, I'll take the liberty of answering this question.

In RemoteTech 2, the existing mechanic will be changed to something a lot more realistic. Dishes will now have different coverage angles that are used to check for connections with satellites orbiting a body. Imagine a cone projected from the dish towards the body. Any satellite within that cone is in potential connection, providing they have the needed antennae and antenna setup.

This makes for a very different mechanic, thats takes a little more thought to take account for. However it is a lot more realistic, and coupled with the new visual representation of the network that Cilph has implemented, it should be workable in-game.

5 Mm for the ground based system seems rather short, that's a huge dish there at KSC, is this changeable anywhere in the config?

Nope, it's hard coded. I wanted to only provide only the most basic antenna. The main idea being that your networks will be entirely your accomplishment.

[Kimberly]

Since the game mechanic of targeting celestial bodies was a collaborative effort between myself and Cilph, I'll take the liberty of answering this question.

In RemoteTech 2, the existing mechanic will be changed to something a lot more realistic. Dishes will now have different coverage angles that are used to check for connections with satellites orbiting a body. Imagine a cone projected from the dish towards the body. Any satellite within that cone is in potential connection, providing they have the needed antennae and antenna setup.

That sounds awesome! I can't wait for RemoteTech 2. Does this mean that only senders will need satellite dishes, but receivers can pick up the signal with an antenna?

[Moon Goddess]

Nope, it's hard coded. I wanted to only provide only the most basic antenna. The main idea being that your networks will be entirely your accomplishment.

Any chance in RemoteTech 2 you could include at least the option for something, well what I view as more realistic. In my opinion that dish at KSC should be the most powerful one in the game, you still have to build a network cuz of line of sight, but ground comm should be powerful

[Cilph]

Any chance in RemoteTech 2 you could include at least the option for something, well what I view as more realistic. In my opinion that dish at KSC should be the most powerful one in the game, you still have to build a network cuz of line of sight, but ground comm should be powerful

Same opinion here, but I like to stick to code and leave the game mechanics to JDP.

That sounds awesome! I can't wait for RemoteTech 2. Does this mean that only senders will need satellite dishes, but receivers can pick up the signal with an antenna?

All communication links must be bidirectional. Ranges might become additive, but you gotta ask JDP for that. He hasn't been in contact with me over three days, so I'd like to kindly request he gets his ass online.

Edited July 22, 2013 by Cilph

[JDP]

Any chance in RemoteTech 2 you could include at least the option for something, well what I view as more realistic. In my opinion that dish at KSC should be the most powerful one in the game, you still have to build a network cuz of line of sight, but ground comm should be powerful

Sure there's a chance. But then I'd want to do it completely, handling the antenna as a dish and not an omni (the current 5Mm omni will be left in even if this happens though). If I didn't do this, there'd suddenly be a beacon of insta-connection throughout the entire Kerbol system, and that makes things a little too easy.

Handling KSC as a dish would require a bit of work though. We'd need to save it's target persistently with the game save and tweak the GUI to allow for setting up the dish target. I'd also like to implement target tracking, which would require a look into the new model for the tracking station and a bit of hacking, if at all possible. So even if this is implemented, it won't be in the initial release of RemoteTech 2.

[Handfoot]

Could someone tell me why I can't get a connection to my main craft from my satellite?

[expert_vision]

Be aware: that you can point a dish at an omnidirectional antenna. It will boost the range of the antenna by x2 (a standard antenna would have a range of 10.000 km with any vessel that points a dish at it).

How does this work out? As far as I know the gain of an antenna is bidirectional. So if I point a dish antenna with a distance of 50Mm to an isotropic antenna, the cover range would be 50Mm, but if I would point a 50Mm dish antenna to another 50Mm dish antenna, the cover range would be 100Mm.

So where is that "X2" coming from for a link between a 5Mm dipole antenna and a 50Mm dish antenna? Shouldn't the range be 55Mm ?

[Crater]

How does this work out? As far as I know the gain of an antenna is bidirectional. So if I point a dish antenna with a distance of 50Mm to an isotropic antenna, the cover range would be 50Mm, but if I would point a 50Mm dish antenna to another 50Mm dish antenna, the cover range would be 100Mm.

So where is that "X2" coming from for a link between a 5Mm dipole antenna and a 50Mm dish antenna? Shouldn't the range be 55Mm ?

As I understand it, the range between two antennae is the LOWER of the two, not the sum of the two ranges.

So if you point a 5Mm omni at a 5Mm omni, you get 5Mm range

So if you point a 50Mm dish at a 50Mm dish, you get 50Mm range

If you point a 5Mm dish at a 5Mm omni, you get 5Mm doubled as the other end is a dish to 10Mm range

Basically, you need bidirectional comms. Think of the range as their transmitter ranges, not reception ranges. Since a dish is more efficient at receiving, it can pick up signals from an omnidirectional antenna that are fainter, hence effectively doubling their transmission range.

[expert_vision]

I understand how the mod works, is just that I would like it even more, if it would reflect reality.

In reality, the gain of an antenna is bidirectional, thus both the transmitted and the received signal get the same gain.

So if I have two 15 dBi dipoles linked to each other, the total link gain would be 30 dBi. And if I replace one dipole with a 50 dBi dish antenna, the total link gain would be 50+15=65 dBi. The gain is additive. The only purpose for the antenna gain is to compensate for the signal attenuation during propagation through medium.

So in other words, no matter which way you go, the signal gets buffed at the transmitting antenna and then it get's buffed again at the receiving antenna. The only way to get no gain with an antenna is if you use an isotropic antenna, which is a pure theoretical one.

[rhoark]

With the nice SAS in .21, RemoteTech's flight computer will really need to stop intercepting the SAS button for its own killrot routine.

[Cilph]

With the nice SAS in .21, RemoteTech's flight computer will really need to stop intercepting the SAS button for its own killrot routine.

Planning to replace the integrated mini-mechjeb with the new ASAS if it allows me to.

[ebaydan777]

so I was just sent here to report a bug. Apparently my probe's signal path (not depending at what altitude unless it reaches the dish or antennae's max distance from KSC). It does not try and connect to other probes when not visible to KSC, it just keeps dragging the blue line through kerbin into KSC....I was wondering why none of my satellites were connecting, but then I realized they all go through the planet.

Im using mechjeb 2.0.8

remotetech newest

kethane newest

and my probe was based off http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/interplanetary-mapping-satellite-v1-1/ and changed a few things on the probe itself

I just added the RemoteControl part to it and 4 of the dishes that are white and open up like a flower (forget the name)...I also had the rF antennae, one that looks like a long silver rod thats bent in many directions at the top.

Anywho, it sucks because I wanted to get a great relay going, but I cant.

I only placed the RemoteTech folder and the compatability folder in the GameData folder, thats

[SirJodelstein]

Hey, great plugin! Is there a way to cancel/overwrite a command sent to the flight computer? My interplanetary probe has just received an suicide burn command sheduled in about 10 minutes.

Looking forward to the next big update, i totally support your decision to break compatibility with older versions.

[Itsdavyjones]

did a quick test on the launch pad with a RT probe core, antenna and a battery. It still works, and the config edits are simple enough, and not needed, since the pre 21 magic torque still works

[sidfu]

the remote/command control parts will disable the new sas function if used on updated stock commmand modules

this is eh new config part to add it from the squad parts. this is for the 1.25 mass command module

MODULE

{

name = ModuleCommand

minimumCrew = 1

}

RESOURCE

{

name = ElectricCharge

amount = 150

maxAmount = 150

}

MODULE

{

name = ModuleSAS

}

MODULE

{

name = ModuleReactionWheel

PitchTorque = 10.5

YawTorque = 10.5

RollTorque = 10.5

RESOURCE

{

name = ElectricCharge

rate = 1.05

}

}

}

Edited July 24, 2013 by sidfu

[ebaydan777]

ok so my relay still doesnt work. as my previous most, the new 0.5.0.1 shows a blue path THROUGH kerbin doesn't matter where its located even opposite sides of KSC, meaning it doesn't need to communicate with any other probe because it's getting a direct feed to KSC everytime. Def a gitch, and is no different in 0.21

[Cilph]

ok so my relay still doesnt work. as my previous most, the new 0.5.0.1 shows a blue path THROUGH kerbin doesn't matter where its located even opposite sides of KSC, meaning it doesn't need to communicate with any other probe because it's getting a direct feed to KSC everytime. Def a gitch, and is no different in 0.21

Turn off Infinite EVA Fuel cheat.

Anyhow, With 0.21 comes RemoteTech 2.0. Release should be in a week after evaluating all the new 0.21 changes. Consider RT 0.5 unsupported on 0.21.

[Itsdavyjones]

i know that 0.5 is unsupported, but when i modified the SPUs to have the torque, during testing, the cores would still be able to move around due to magic torque even when normal torque is turned off. I believe this is due to the remote tech command over being modulecommand, because when i did this to a pod that wasn't remote tech command, torque works fine. But i have an idea, so i will return to tell you if it works.

edit: my idea did work removing the lines

rotPower = 5
linPower = 5

Kp = 1.0
Kd = 1.0

allows it to work without magic torque.

Edited July 25, 2013 by Itsdavyjones

[Panaphobe]

Planning to replace the integrated mini-mechjeb with the new ASAS if it allows me to.

When you say you're going to replace that, do you mean totally or partially? I hope you don't totally scrap it - the ability to have the computer point me normal and antinormal is the only quick and easy way to do an inclination change without otherwise altering my orbit. Unfortunately with maneuver nodes as they are now it's impossible to rotate your plane without also changing your apo- or periapsis, unless you want to tinker for 20 minutes with incrementally replacing small amounts of normal ÃŽâ€v with retrograde ÃŽâ€v. I'm personally trying to avoid having to use too many mods and I'll definitely need something to hold me normal/antinormal, so I know I for one would appreciate if you kept the flight computer component of your mod intact!

[sidfu]

i know that 0.5 is unsupported, but when i modified the SPUs to have the torque, during testing, the cores would still be able to move around due to magic torque even when normal torque is turned off. I believe this is due to the remote tech command over being modulecommand, because when i did this to a pod that wasn't remote tech command, torque works fine. But i have an idea, so i will return to tell you if it works.

edit: my idea did work removing the lines

rotPower = 5
linPower = 5

Kp = 1.0
Kd = 1.0

allows it to work without magic torque.

so does that allow the new sas system to work then?

[Kimberly]

When you say you're going to replace that, do you mean totally or partially? I hope you don't totally scrap it - the ability to have the computer point me normal and antinormal is the only quick and easy way to do an inclination change without otherwise altering my orbit. Unfortunately with maneuver nodes as they are now it's impossible to rotate your plane without also changing your apo- or periapsis, unless you want to tinker for 20 minutes with incrementally replacing small amounts of normal ÃŽâ€v with retrograde ÃŽâ€v. I'm personally trying to avoid having to use too many mods and I'll definitely need something to hold me normal/antinormal, so I know I for one would appreciate if you kept the flight computer component of your mod intact!

Considering the new SAS doesn't seem to function as a heading lock at all anymore, I think the flight computer should be expanded, rather than reduced.