Jump to content

[1.1] RemoteTech v1.6.10 [2016-04-12]


Peppie23
 Share

Recommended Posts

As the RT-XF maintainer, I just wanted to mention there's no ethics/personality conflict going on. Personality-wise, we don't know each other. Ethically, RT-XF is a licence-compliant fork of RT, and I offered my code as a pull request back to the main RT project (with the XF-style behavior turned off by default in the configs), but they didn't want it.

Basically, the RT mods feel that a cardinal rule of RT is "you can't do anything without a connection." The ability to control an antenna and re-establish connection violates that rule. So I think they're working on a more "hands free" mode, where the probe can go into an autotargeting mode.

In other words, no drama or anything is going on. They just didn't want the RT-XF options.

I think he meant that RemoteTech staff may have considered those features "cheats" and thus refused to implement them.

Not that there were issues between modders

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like RT the way it is personally. I have sent way to many probes up and lost contact with them, but that's part of it. I've got into the habit of using smart parts to deploy/activate my antennas. Been losing a lot less satellites since I've been doing that. I also run KCT so I can run simulations prior to launch to see of there are any problems. The worst one I really watch for is a min/mun shot that ends up completely in the shadow of kerbin. Just slammed one into mun last night for that one. I also try to keep one battery shut off just for this situation but forgot to do so. Batteries will activate even without a connection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a question.

I'm noticing some difficulties with the stock SAS in conjunction with RT. My satellites and probe controlled spacecrafts have become more unstable the further they are away from Kerbin, wobbling around it's own axis. It completely spins out of control when far far away from Kerbin, like Eve for instance.

I haven't really been outside Minmus before, but I very much noticed it has become increasingly harder to dock ships to eachother around Minmus where one of them is probecontrolled, largely due to the probecontrolled ship simply won't stay stable.

After alot of testing I did discover one thing:

I've never used the Flightcontrol feature that comes with RT, but using it I was able to stabilize any craft that was connected to KSC.

Did something change in RT?

Or did KSP change which is why I notice this alot easier than in .90? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a question.

I'm noticing some difficulties with the stock SAS in conjunction with RT. My satellites and probe controlled spacecrafts have become more unstable the further they are away from Kerbin, wobbling around it's own axis. It completely spins out of control when far far away from Kerbin, like Eve for instance.

I haven't really been outside Minmus before, but I very much noticed it has become increasingly harder to dock ships to eachother around Minmus where one of them is probecontrolled, largely due to the probecontrolled ship simply won't stay stable.

After alot of testing I did discover one thing:

I've never used the Flightcontrol feature that comes with RT, but using it I was able to stabilize any craft that was connected to KSC.

Did something change in RT?

Or did KSP change which is why I notice this alot easier than in .90? :)

I've noticed that the stock sas appears to be much more aggressive in 1.0.x. My lighter ships tend to wobble(some even go to the point of basically a vibration) a lot when I'm maneuvering. Try disabling the gimble on the the engine and see if that helps. This is one of the reason's I have mechjeb installed right now as well, its sas control is pretty solid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Silly question, but is it possible to change rt settings values via module manager?

Hi, you don't need to override the values via MM, just make a copy of our generated Settings and change the values you want. We've a build in mechanism to replace the values without MM.

Edit: https://github.com/RemoteTechnologiesGroup/RemoteTech/pull/265

except the MapFilter and ActiveVesselGuid values.

- - - Updated - - -

Will this release version break any previous 'pre-release' build?

It should be compatible

Edited by Peppie23
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a good way to accurately build a sequence? Like for a landing without a connection? I know you can set signal delay but it is from when you click the button. While this is doable, its pretty annoying building a long sequence.

Using an autopilot like KOS you can write a "landing" program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like RT the way it is personally. I have sent way to many probes up and lost contact with them, but that's part of it. I've got into the habit of using smart parts to deploy/activate my antennas. Been losing a lot less satellites since I've been doing that. I also run KCT so I can run simulations prior to launch to see of there are any problems. The worst one I really watch for is a min/mun shot that ends up completely in the shadow of kerbin. Just slammed one into mun last night for that one. I also try to keep one battery shut off just for this situation but forgot to do so. Batteries will activate even without a connection.

Well, everyone is aware there's an issue here. Let's not fetishize hardness over playability and realism. In real life - real life! - this is not a problem. A probe can recover from loss of contact. In fact, it could wake up from a completely unexpected power-down event, deploy it's antenna(s), and point them at Earth and look for signal. This is something that's literally harder in RemoteTech than for real life probes. :)

I totally get why the RT devs didn't want my solution - but they know it's an issue, they're just addressing it in a different way.

Edited by Pharylon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh... Just a heads up.

Just noticed a tiny incompatibility with CactEye 2 mod. The mod introduces a slim probe core as a part, Smobodobodyne Probe core...

I guess it's possible to copy the strings from any compatibility cfg file and adapt it to the part. But I don't feel it's an essential part anyway - so I'm reluctant to mess & play with what I don't know...

Just giving a heads up for fellow users / authorities.. Will post the same thing on their board.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/105660-1-0-CactEye-2-Orbital-Telescope-BETA-5-2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Silly question, but is it possible to change rt settings values via module manager?
Hi, you don't need to override the values via MM, just make a copy of our generated Settings and change the values you want. We've a build in mechanism to replace the values without MM.

I'm not sure I understood: so, you make a copy of the file named whatever, stored wherever inside GameData, and it will override the one inside the RT folder?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I understood: so, you make a copy of the file named whatever, stored wherever inside GameData, and it will override the one inside the RT folder?

yep ;-)

Edit: "of the file" = RemoteTech Settings file

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've noticed that the stock sas appears to be much more aggressive in 1.0.x. My lighter ships tend to wobble(some even go to the point of basically a vibration) a lot when I'm maneuvering. Try disabling the gimble on the the engine and see if that helps. This is one of the reason's I have mechjeb installed right now as well, its sas control is pretty solid.

Engines arn't even being used. Only Stability Assist is active. Activating the RCS system aswell makes it even worse. There's no problem when I remove the RemoteTech folder.

Having it point towards a marker though (Prograde, Retrograde, Radial, etc ...) makes everything stable. It's just when I select the Stability Assist that it goes haywire.

It's like a joker down at the spacecenter is sending it commands. :sticktongue:

Edited by Jan Gaarni
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So reporting back on integrated antenna issue:

I'm not getting range from the launchpad for any probe. The technology perk appeared in the start of the tech tree and not in the unmanned tech. (btw, isn't a little too far to render it useless?)

screenshot_2015_05_12_02_04_12.png screenshot_2015_05_12_02_04_18.png

Anything else I can do to help with?

On another note, please switch off the F12 key, its a nono since its used for so many things (display aero forces, stock debug menu).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gfurst, you have sounding rockets installed. Remove file RemoteTech_SoundingRockets_Probes.cfg as fix in it is not working properly anyway. And use something like this instead:


@PART[SR_Nosecone*]:HAS[!MODULE[ModuleRTAntennaPassive]]:NEEDS[RemoteTech,UmbraSpaceIndustries]:AFTER[UmbraSpaceIndustries]:FINAL
{
//antenna for nosecone
%MODULE[ModuleRTAntennaPassive] {
%TechRequired = start
%OmniRange = 100000

%TRANSMITTER {
%PacketInterval = 0.3
%PacketSize = 2
%PacketResourceCost = 15.0
}
}
}
@PART[SR_ProbeCore]:HAS[!MODULE[ModuleSPU]]:NEEDS[RemoteTech,UmbraSpaceIndustries]:AFTER[UmbraSpaceIndustries]:FINAL
{
//control for probe core
%MODULE[ModuleSPU] {}
}

P.S. I explained you a few pages back why and how this happens but who cares.

Edited by prog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gfurst, you have sounding rockets installed. Remove file RemoteTech_SoundingRockets_Probes.cfg as fix in it is not working properly anyway. And use something like this instead:

P.S. I explained you a few pages back why and how this happens but who cares.

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention, I have Sounding rockets, but I don't regularly use it anymore.

I did see your comment (I think, gonna check again), but it said that RT has a patch for SR to move the technology perk way back into the game start, but that doesn't explain why it isn't working.

- - - Updated - - -

ohh I see, checked your thread back there, it doesn't that it shows in the first node, still the technology perk is only given when reaching the unmanned tech...

Thanks I'll try out the quick fix.

- - - Updated - - -


@PART[SR_Nosecone*]:HAS[!MODULE[ModuleRTAntennaPassive]]:NEEDS[RemoteTech,UmbraSpaceIndustries]:AFTER[UmbraSpaceIndustries]:FINAL
{
//antenna for nosecone
%MODULE[ModuleRTAntennaPassive] {
%TechRequired = start
%OmniRange = 100000

%TRANSMITTER {
%PacketInterval = 0.3
%PacketSize = 2
%PacketResourceCost = 15.0
}
}
}
@PART[SR_ProbeCore]:HAS[!MODULE[ModuleSPU]]:NEEDS[RemoteTech,UmbraSpaceIndustries]:AFTER[UmbraSpaceIndustries]:FINAL
{
//control for probe core
%MODULE[ModuleSPU] {}
}

Plus, shouldn't the antenna be in the probe core afterall? And doesn't having an AFTER and then FINAL, make it redundant?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gfurst, well, it's easier to repeat with more config examples this time.

There is "perk" - a mere graphical button to inform you that you'll get bonus there. And there are multiple configs in antenna parts depending on node in techtree where perk should be.

Just look at this antenna declaration from RemoteTech_Squad_Probes.cfg


@PART[probeCoreSphere]:FOR[RemoteTech]
{
%MODULE[ModuleSPU] {
}

%MODULE[ModuleRTAntennaPassive] {
%TechRequired = unmannedTech
%OmniRange = 3000

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

See that "%TechRequired = unmannedTech" line? It's where real unlock happens disregarding perk position in techtree. So you need to do something like this to really change perk position:

First: what SR fix does - move perk to node of choice

@PART[RTPassiveAntennaTech]:NEEDS[RemoteTech,UmbraSpaceIndustries]:AFTER[RemoteTech]:FINAL
{
@TechRequired = start //or whatever node you choose
}

Second: what SR does not - change all pointers to technode in all parts (note that it's just example and not real MM patch - it may need some changes to work)


@PART
[*]:HAS[MODULE[ModuleRTAntennaPassive]]
{
@ModuleRTAntennaPassive:HAS[#TechRequired[unmannedTech]]
{
%TechRequired = start //or whatever node you choose
}
}

- - - Updated - - -

Plus, shouldn't the antenna be in the probe core afterall? And doesn't having an AFTER and then FINAL, make it redundant?

I'm not expert in MM yet so I just tweaked a bit what got from other RT compatibility configs.

Regarding antenna in cone - it's mainly to prevent abuse of cheap SR core as it will have free 100km antenna then. While cones will be a bit harder to abuse due to form and attachment rules.

Edited by prog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why the Reflectron DP-10 is now placed in a tech tree node different from Stayputnik's?

I have Stayputnik researched but I cannot use it because I don't have an antennae that won't break in atmosphere. What's the point in this? Or may be there's a secret that I don't know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, you don't need to override the values via MM, just make a copy of our generated Settings and change the values you want. We've a build in mechanism to replace the values without MM.

Cool, so anything that not the default setting file is considered an override/change! How does the system handle multiple sets of changes?

EDIT: I also assume you don't need to override everything. So if I just wanted to add another ground station, the file I would create could just contain a RemoteTechSettings and GroundStations/STATION node? Would this kill the default KSC station?

Edited by INSULINt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why the Reflectron DP-10 is now placed in a tech tree node different from Stayputnik's?

I have Stayputnik researched but I cannot use it because I don't have an antennae that won't break in atmosphere. What's the point in this? Or may be there's a secret that I don't know?

you could try to set the antenna to open after X seconds, launch the rocket and wait to get signal when you are outside the atmosphere

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also assume you don't need to override everything. So if I just wanted to add another ground station, the file I would create could just contain a RemoteTechSettings and GroundStations/STATION node? Would this kill the default KSC station?
Thats right. Just add the properties you want to override and if you add one Groundstation to your own settings file this will kill the default ksc.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How are people using RT performing landings on distant planets? The transmission delay means you can't land by hand, but the RT flight computer doesn't have a sophisticated landing guidance system like MechJeb. The best way I've thought of is to set up a node at periapsis that leaves the probe falling straight down, and program in that node followed by a downward burn to keep descent steady -- but that's extremely wasteful of fuel, and there's a lot of room for error in "straight down", since the orbit prediction doesn't take into account the planet's rotation.

How are other people doing it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...