[1.1.2] Realism Overhaul v11.0.0 May 8

[NathanKell]

v8.2.0

* Fix typo where Titan I upper stage had same name as another part (and could not be saved).

* Tweak Juno I nosecone: draws much more EC and has lower tank volume.

* stratochief66: FASA Mercury changes (cap will now pop off correctly, however new attach nodes are needed. LAND AND RECOVER ANY MERCURY PODS BEFORE UPDATING.) RCS Fixed. LES now stages like Apollo LES.

* awang: fixed typo in Mercury retro pack name.

* pjf: balance reaction wheel/CMG torque costs.

* stratochief66: FASA Apollo tweaks: rebalanced SM RCS around center of mass, welded RCS to CM, welded docking cone to LEM ascent stage, moved attach point in LMA.

* pjf: fix TACLS scrubbers and purifiers.

* Agathorn: fixes to XLR11 and XLR99 (Isp was *far* too high on XLR11, for example).

* regex: add RD-270 and RD-270M configs.

* Probe changes! WARNING the "Octo" probe core has changed shape to better differentiate it; it now acts as the probe core from the Surveyor probes. All stock probes' antennas should work at career start. Ranger Mk III renamed to Ranger Block III. Wattage changes to various probes' consumptions. Made the Cube a generic modern satellite bus with quite the built-in antenna.

* Add cost and techRequired to RCS configs.

* Add configs for SXT RCS.

* Add config for SXT 3.75m probe (early 3.9m Saturn Instrument Unit, as flown on some Saturn I launches).

* Turned ullage back on for 1kN thruster.

* Cost and nodes for CECE configs for RL-10.

* pjf: set generic RCS to use preset configs.

* Fixed LMA base to no longer crossfeed.

* stratochief66: more FASA fixes: Gemini now has mass corrected. Gemini Retro/SM no longer draw fuel from capsule.

* Fix M55 to have correct thrust and thrust curve.

* Add SXT Bonanza parts as Beechcraft Bonanza

* Backport SXT X-405 / AJ10 configs from RP-0

* Add scaling of SXT Buzzard cockpit.

[Sampa]

Ok, can't wait to play around with this again with these new changes.

[Jovus]

New RO user here, I just got RO set up today and it works like a dream. (I did a manual install, since CKAN is throwing terrible errors and hanging on Arch Linux.) There's just one thing I've noticed that's probably my fault, but I figured I'd ask: KER seems to be unable to detect when I set a thrust limiter in the VAB. Specifically, the TWR readout and range remains exactly the same regardless of whether I set the engine to have 100%, 40%, or any other percentage thrust.

Has anyone else seen this issue? Is there something simple that I most likely overlooked and now look like an idiot on the forums? (I did a fairly extensive search for KER in this thread, but no luck.) Is this even the right place to post, or should I move it over to the KER thread?

Thanks muchly for any help.

[jandcando]

New RO user here, I just got RO set up today and it works like a dream. (I did a manual install, since CKAN is throwing terrible errors and hanging on Arch Linux.) There's just one thing I've noticed that's probably my fault, but I figured I'd ask: KER seems to be unable to detect when I set a thrust limiter in the VAB. Specifically, the TWR readout and range remains exactly the same regardless of whether I set the engine to have 100%, 40%, or any other percentage thrust.

Has anyone else seen this issue? Is there something simple that I most likely overlooked and now look like an idiot on the forums? (I did a fairly extensive search for KER in this thread, but no luck.) Is this even the right place to post, or should I move it over to the KER thread?

Thanks muchly for any help.

Most liquid engines in RO don't throttle in the first place. The solid ones should be able to, though. And I do find it odd that KER isn't changing the calculations, usually it will change the display despite the engine it is referring to never actually changing thrust.

[Jovus]

Most liquid engines in RO don't throttle in the first place. The solid ones should be able to, though. And I do find it odd that KER isn't changing the calculations, usually it will change the display despite the engine it is referring to never actually changing thrust.

Sorry, it seems I wasn't clear.

I'm not talking about changing the throttle in flight. I'm talking about setting the thrust limiter in the VAB. When I do that, KER doesn't seem to change the TWR readouts.

Or did you mean to tell me that setting the thrust limiters doesn't work on most liquid engines?

[jandcando]

Sorry, it seems I wasn't clear.

I'm not talking about changing the throttle in flight. I'm talking about setting the thrust limiter in the VAB. When I do that, KER doesn't seem to change the TWR readouts.

Or did you mean to tell me that setting the thrust limiters doesn't work on most liquid engines?

Last time I checked, setting the thrust limiter on liquid engines has never had an effect if the engine wasn't normally able to throttle to that level.

[Agathorn]

Sorry, it seems I wasn't clear.

I'm not talking about changing the throttle in flight. I'm talking about setting the thrust limiter in the VAB. When I do that, KER doesn't seem to change the TWR readouts.

Or did you mean to tell me that setting the thrust limiters doesn't work on most liquid engines?

Setting the limiter would just be a way of getting around the throttle limits so, yes, it is disabled as well. If the engine can't throttle then it runs at full power regardless of it you try to cheat or not

[undercoveryankee]

Setting the limiter would just be a way of getting around the throttle limits so, yes, it is disabled as well. If the engine can't throttle then it runs at full power regardless of it you try to cheat or not

It feels like it should be possible to build a derated variant of a non-throttling engine if there were some way to make the limiter tweakable in the VAB but not in flight.

On the other hand, if we get around to modeling the variation in Isp as you run the same engine at different chamber pressures, you wouldn't want to. Derating would mean carrying a heavier engine than strictly necessary for the thrust level, and running it at a lower Isp than it would give at its rated pressure. If the thrust you need is between the engines you have available, the most likely real-world approach is to use a suitable number of smaller engines.

[SirKeplan]

Hi there, I've been uising RO for a little while nowand been enjoying it so far

One question, on the J-2t-200 / 250k Aerospike; part name: toroidalAerospike, Why does it have no gimbal? surely the real thing would have had a gimbal or diff throttling. The lack of gimbal seems to cripple this engine.

[NathanKell]

SirKerplan: Cool! Regarding the question, the problem that altitude-compensating nozzles often have is lack of thrust vector control. If you have data showing that the J-2T had switched to multiple thrust chambers (allowing differential throttling) let us know; I certainly can't imagine SASSTO would work without TVC, but I haven't seen anything on how J-2T was supposed to have TVC...

[plasmeus]

Simple question: how is the scaling determined for part sizes in the RO config files?

Also, what unit is used for the mass of parts as seen from the VAB?

[Friedrich Nietzsche]

Hi

I've updated Realism Overhaul from 8.11 to 8.2 and also updated Kerbal Engineer. Now I cant control my rockets anymore. What still works is steering them with the flight computer. But from the moment of lauching, the control by Keyboard is impossible. Any ideas to fix this?

Thanks!

[Carlo]

Hi

I've updated Realism Overhaul from 8.11 to 8.2 and also updated Kerbal Engineer. Now I cant control my rockets anymore. What still works is steering them with the flight computer. But from the moment of lauching, the control by Keyboard is impossible. Any ideas to fix this?

Thanks!

it's not a bug. Now there are parts called "avionics control" (in the pods page). They allow you to control a certain weight, and they cumulate their power with each other. So if u have a 900 tons craft, you will need 3 big(early) avionics controllers to be able to control it. If u don't put them in your craft (or if their cumulative power is under the actual weight of your craft) your ship will not be controllable. Sorry for my english, I hope you understood.

[NathanKell]

Nothing to do with RO. Everything to do with RP-0 (see the RP-0 OP, which describes how the new Avionics functionality works).

plasmeus: we model KSP parts on real analogues. So, the Mk1 Capsule is modeled on that which it looks like (and masses like), Mercury. Mercury is 1.9m in diameter, so we rescale the pod. Some parts don't have obvious real world analogues; the Hitchhiker cabin for example. That we just scale up so it has the right volume for four humans, not four kerbals, and the mass it realistically 'should' have.

[undercoveryankee]

Also, what unit is used for the mass of parts as seen from the VAB?

All "mass" figures in KSP are taken to be metric tons. That gives most parts plausible densities, and it seems to be what the developers intended.

[plasmeus]

@NathanKell

Thanks

[Norcalplanner]

So I'm having a blast with RO, which is also my first real experience with FAR. I'm finally getting the hang of things (first unmanned lander will be on the Moon shortly) but I find myself needing more info on fairings, specifically when they should be jettisoned. Is there a quick rule of thumb that people use? Or is there a data point on MJ or KER that indicates when it's safe to jettison them? Thanks in advance.

[NathanKell]

Norcalplanner: Probably anywhere under 1,000Pa of dynamic pressure is fine. If you want to be more careful, wait until 100. That should be around 60km I would think, maybe more depending on how shallow your ascent.

[MarkusA380]

What about adding my plugin? It adds alot realism to KSP.

Sorry, just doing a bit of publicity for it.

[Friedrich Nietzsche]

it's not a bug. Now there are parts called "avionics control" (in the pods page). They allow you to control a certain weight, and they cumulate their power with each other. So if u have a 900 tons craft, you will need 3 big(early) avionics controllers to be able to control it. If u don't put them in your craft (or if their cumulative power is under the actual weight of your craft) your ship will not be controllable. Sorry for my english, I hope you understood.

Nothing to do with RO. Everything to do with RP-0 (see the RP-0 OP, which describes how the new Avionics functionality works).

Thanks for your help, this solved the problem.

Are these avionic controls already balanced? I took the smallest one for my com network satellite without noticing, that it sucks such a large amount of energy. The smallest one consumes 60 EC/min, while the bigger small ones "only" take 15 charges per minute. Nevertheless this is still quite alot of energy that it takes, just to keep a small 2 ton satellite floating steerable in space.

[Norcalplanner]

Norcalplanner: Probably anywhere under 1,000Pa of dynamic pressure is fine. If you want to be more careful, wait until 100. That should be around 60km I would think, maybe more depending on how shallow your ascent.

Thank you kindly.

[draeath]

Atomic Age doesn't seem to be in CKAN. The forum page has two download versions... which would be more appropriate to use with RO? The single-fuel mode of the full package sounds right, but the tank switcher mod seems redundant (and might actually interfere with RealFuels?)

EDIT: also, the link for atomic age is bad in the OP. drop the SSL, and slap on the forum subdomain

So, uh, would anyone be able to weigh in on this? Also, the atomic age link is still broken.

[NathanKell]

drnaeth: Fixed OP. As for which to use, I haven't actually played with them yet; ferram made the config and would know better; he suggests going for the engine only version.

Friedrich Nietzsche: Cool. For the next bit: They're meant for RP-0, so they're balanced by when you can unlock them and by cost, as well as between comparably-teched units regarding mass and wattage. They generally sort into two classes, however, guidance rings for LVs (large, support lots of mass, heavy (but light compared to supported mass), draw lots of power) and probe avionics (lighter, smaller, don't support much mass but don't draw much power). The octo2 that you presumably used is 1960-equivalent technology, so it'll be very bad compared to pretty much anything else. 15 charge/min is 250 watts--not a ton, but not nothing either. However, you just gave me an excellent idea.

[Zander]

Hey guys, I don't know if i should be asking the RO people or the TAC author about this. In CKAN it says Nathan Kell is responsible for the TAC realism overhaul config so I'll ask here.

I have a stock 1 man pod in with realism overhaul and all its recommendations installed. When i launch it with no oxygen tanks (just the oxygen already in the pod) my Kerbal dies of "Oxygen Deprivation" after about 4 minutes. This is way off.

From my calculations a person sealed in that pod would be able to survive for hours, probably 12-24 hours before dying of CO2 poisoning NOT oxygen deprivation. If CO2 was taken out then it would probably be several days.

Also the consumption rates for stuff should not be modifiable in game. I can't think of think of any reason one would use that that isn't making the game unrealistic to cheat.

Edited March 22, 2015 by Zander

[Oksbad]

What part packs do you guys recommend for a newly started RO player?

Well, not exactly new; but it's been sufficiently long I can't remember the parts/packs I used last time.