[1.1.0] ORIGAMI foldable antenna dishes for RemoteTech v0.9

[Mecripp]

Is it possible to make them scalable? I'll like to have short, medium, and long range versions of these. I really like the look and having three size/ranges would be great. I am guessing all one would have to do is scale the model and adjust the ranges and power for remotetech in the .cfg's but I don't know enough about how they work to do it myself.

If, I give you a example you think you can get it ?

EDIT- And how picky you want to get on the changes like mass and packet cost all up to you.

EDIT-

+PART[NAU_ORI69Gm]
{
  @name = NAU_ORI69Gm_Smaller1

  @scale = 1
  %rescaleFactor = 0.5

  @title = NAU ORI69GM_Smaller1
  @mass = 0.05 
}

+PART[NAU_ORI350Gm]
{
  @name = NAU_ORI350Gm_Smaller1

  @scale = 1
  %rescaleFactor = 0.5

  @title = NAU ORI350GM_Smaller1
  @mass = 0.3
}

This will copy the part so you have one more of each just smaller and you can play around with the numbers and names.

Edited March 17, 2015 by Mecripp2

[Kesselya]

I've been using the AntennaRange mod for my comms network now instead of Remote Tech, but I wanted to keep using these dishes. I did some tweaking and posted some more info at: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/56440-1-0-AntennaRange-1-8-Enforce-and-Encourage-Antenna-Diversity?p=1891103&viewfull=1#post1891103

-Kess

[bileniv]

anyone know if these work in 1.0? they look cool and I've never seen them before.

[Kesselya]

anyone know if these work in 1.0? they look cool and I've never seen them before.

This is strictly a part mod, so they don't break very often with updates. These are working just fine with my 1.0.2 install, using AntennaRange as my communications mod. I can't confirm if they work with RemoteTech, but for just regular stock usage and for AntennaRange, they work just fine!

Kess

[Kitefr]

Oh ! I wanted to use those. Thanks Kesselya.

[SmashBrown]

Any word on how these are doing in rt2 yet?

[Mecripp]

Any word on how these are doing in rt2 yet?

Uh front page

RemoteTech 2 is a dependency:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/83305

Place the RT2 .cfg files in RemoteTech folder with the other.

[SmashBrown]

No i mean do they work now, what with rt2 being updated for 1.02 and this not.

[Mecripp]

This are just parts so 99 % yep the dish will work don't know about RT.

[tmbomber]

I've been hoping for an update to this for some time. I just tried it and ran into some trouble. I'm running the current version of remote tech and also have fusebox installed to help plan battery usage. When I put on one of these my power drain shoot up through the roof. I need something like 18 charge per second for the 350. That's multiple times what's needed for the comparable rt2 350.

Also, I'm running OPM. Any chance we could get a longer range version???

(need to reach out to Neidon)

[Felbourn]

That's a Fusebox problem that I got with ALL antennae. It was summing the data transmitter along with the static drain. In the settings menu between Lights and Reaction Wheels is Antenna that you can check OFF to fix it, but of course that means the static portion may not be tracked either. But at least it gets closer to the real value than it is with that on.

[FreeThinker]

Instead of using them for communication, they seem much more usefore for Microwave Power receiving

[IGNOBIL]

I've been hoping for an update to this for some time. I just tried it and ran into some trouble. I'm running the current version of remote tech and also have fusebox installed to help plan battery usage. When I put on one of these my power drain shoot up through the roof. I need something like 18 charge per second for the 350. That's multiple times what's needed for the comparable rt2 350.

Also, I'm running OPM. Any chance we could get a longer range version???

(need to reach out to Neidon)

Sorry, I'm not getting that, not sure whats causing it, I'm playing with them fine. Is in in career mode?? haven't tried it there yet.

[Felbourn]

It's not really a power drain when it happens to me. It's a problem where Fusebox reports that the power drain will be the combined drain of statically deploying an antenna PLUS the cost of transmitting with it. In practice, Fusebox is wrong and the cost is not the reported cost, in orbit. I was thinking of reprogramming Fusebox to account for this, but I have not bothered yet because the workaround is to not "check" that box in the Fusebox UI.

[Daveroski]

I Put them on my Duna and Jool Coms Mission to scan the surface (Scansat) scan for ore and to be a stable initial part of my network.

But these twigs twitch and keep wanting to send data. They 'work' with RT but the twitchiness and 'send data' bit puts me off.

They are pretty, but I won't be using them again until they are fixed.

If they are not fixed before I can get replacement com sats in place at Duna and Jool then I will have to uninstall the mod.

[Felbourn]

I Put them on my Duna and Jool Coms Mission to scan the surface (Scansat) scan for ore and to be a stable initial part of my network.

But these twigs twitch and keep wanting to send data. They 'work' with RT but the twitchiness and 'send data' bit puts me off.

They are pretty, but I won't be using them again until they are fixed.

If they are not fixed before I can get replacement com sats in place at Duna and Jool then I will have to uninstall the mod.

You should also request better texture management. These dishes are pretty awesome, but they use something like 7x 1k textures. I lowered the res on mine to improve memory usage, but really they could have all been done with a single texture.

Here's one of the dishes as an example:

- - -

[Daveroski]

You should also request better texture management. These dishes are pretty awesome, but they use something like 7x 1k textures. I lowered the res on mine to improve memory usage, but really they could have all been done with a single texture.

Here's one of the dishes as an example:

I've got loads of memory and I run KSP on 64 bit so memory for me isn't an issue.

If I don't like a texture for something, I'll make one.

But these, as I said, look very pretty.

I's a shame they feel and behave so clunky.

[ola]

I've got loads of memory and I run KSP on 64 bit so memory for me isn't an issue.

If I don't like a texture for something, I'll make one.

But these, as I said, look very pretty.

I's a shame they feel and behave so clunky.

I too run 64 bit KSP, but memory starts to be an issue when the KSP process starts getting over, say, 10 GB memory or so. All of a sudden all those huge tracts of memory starts taking quite a long time to traverse, and the game slows down considerably.

[Felbourn]

Agreeing with Ola... 64b is not the magic answer. The game still has internal data structures to manage, and the average machine probably has 10-15 gig available, so there is still a ceiling.

[Daveroski]

Agreeing with Ola... 64b is not the magic answer. The game still has internal data structures to manage, and the average machine probably has 10-15 gig available, so there is still a ceiling.

And improving the texture will make the ceiling go away?

Of course there are limits! There will always be limits.

I don't choke my game with mods. I use just enough to make it interesting enough.

I am not using enough mods to make memory a problem. Texture management is not a problem for me

Why would I make a problem of something that isn't a problem for me?

This was about the parts physically twitching as I look at them and having the 'send data' option in the control menu. How did it get to be about something else?

[Felbourn]

How did it get to be about something else?

Right after you missed the point. Right after you denied that others might have concerns that could also be addressed if a refactor was about to be done. Right when you got on a high horse about your method of playing being better* than other people's methods, and denying that others might have valid concerns just like you.

* For example, "I don't choke my game with mods. I use just enough to make it interesting enough."

[Daveroski]

Right after you missed the point. Right after you denied that others might have concerns that could also be addressed if a refactor was about to be done. Right when you got on a high horse about your method of playing being better* than other people's methods, and denying that others might have valid concerns just like you.

* For example, "I don't choke my game with mods. I use just enough to make it interesting enough."

There really are some proper knobs on these forums.

1. I didn't miss any point. I made a point and my point got hi-jacked.

2. I never denied anyone else’s needs. Please provide a quote for this, I'm having trouble finding it.

3. I never at any time said or implied that my way was better than anyone else's. I pointed out the way I play in an effort to explain why the hi-jack subject was of no interest to me.

4. Did anyone confirm or remark positively on the point I made? Did anyone say, "Oh yes, they do tend to twich a bit don't they? and what is that 'send data' all about?" No.

5. On yer' bike.

[Felbourn]

We've both hijacked the whole thread at this point. If I have more to say, I'll PM you.

[IGNOBIL]

Sorry I've been a bit absent, this was my first go and since I've learned a lot about the modelling and textures, I'll release the full refurb on this with maybe two more antennas (a tiny inline 90Mm and a huge TDRS, just like NASA's) once 1.1 and the new stock deep space comes out! With optimised textures and models!

[Alewx]

On ‎22‎.‎09‎.‎2015‎ ‎19‎:‎04‎:‎04, IGNOBIL said:

Sorry I've been a bit absent, this was my first go and since I've learned a lot about the modelling and textures, I'll release the full refurb on this with maybe two more antennas (a tiny inline 90Mm and a huge TDRS, just like NASA's) once 1.1 and the new stock deep space comes out! With optimised textures and models!

Nice to hear you are not lost