[1.1.2] Realism Overhaul v11.0.0 May 8

[Agathorn]

Do you know what the most recent version is that does work with RF is?

Well the hotfix 0.6 should, but if not i'm using the previous 0.5.5

[Acemcbean]

Well, does anyone know if Modular Fuel Tanks works with this? I would assume it is, but over the past two I hours I have learned NEVER to assume anything with RO.

[NathanKell]

Read the Modular Fuels OP, where it says "use this or Real Fuels". Then notice Real Fuels is a required mod for RO.

(Basically, MFT is the 'lite' version of Real Fuels--both mods have modular fuel tanks, but RF also does things to engines, and adds a lot of real propellants.)

[Acemcbean]

Thanks, Nathan. Friendly neighborhood Moderator, to the rescue!

[Felger]

Well, does anyone know if Modular Fuel Tanks works with this? I would assume it is, but over the past two I hours I have learned NEVER to assume anything with RO.

To answer in a more general fashion, if it's not listed in the compatibility list on the OP - it may or may not actually work well with Realism Overhaul. Some mods work great (like Infernal Robotics), others don't work at all (like Modular Fuel Tanks) because they conflict with other things Realism Overhaul absolutely has to have.

[Raptor831]

So, quick question: is it possible to use the RealPlume configs without RO? And if so, how much of a pain is it going to be?

I like HotRockets, but it bugs me that they don't react to ambient pressure/vacuum (especially because SmokeScreen can do that). I think I could probably just pull the appropriate folders out of the RO install and run those, but I wanted to see if I was forgetting anything.

[Felger]

So, quick question: is it possible to use the RealPlume configs without RO? And if so, how much of a pain is it going to be?

I like HotRockets, but it bugs me that they don't react to ambient pressure/vacuum (especially because SmokeScreen can do that). I think I could probably just pull the appropriate folders out of the RO install and run those, but I wanted to see if I was forgetting anything.

Not really. It'll configure the plumes, that's true, but it'll be for the engines as resized by Realism Overhaul to match real life engines. However, sometime soon, I think I'm going to put together a tutorial video on how to make an expanding plume config, it's really quite easy. You should be able to do it with relatively little work to the HotRockets configs.

[jandcando]

I have a question about how we are going to handle duplicate engines. The Advanced Engine from the NASA expansion is designated as a Rocketdyne F-1 engine. That's fine, but what if I install FASA? It has its own excellent model of an F-1 engine, and I no longer have a use for the stock one. So I think the stock engine should be repurposed as another engine, but only if FASA or some other mod that adds an F-1 engine is installed. Can MM do that kind of conditional work? There are also lots of other similar clashes. I usually delete the stock ones in these cases, but I think we could do better.

[Felger]

I have a question about how we are going to handle duplicate engines. The Advanced Engine from the NASA expansion is designated as a Rocketdyne F-1 engine. That's fine, but what if I install FASA? It has its own excellent model of an F-1 engine, and I no longer have a use for the stock one. So I think the stock engine should be repurposed as another engine, but only if FASA or some other mod that adds an F-1 engine is installed. Can MM do that kind of conditional work? There are also lots of other similar clashes. I usually delete the stock ones in these cases, but I think we could do better.

Yeah, I would definitely not complain if you wanted to create alternate configs. It'd look something like this:

@PART[mainsail]:FOR[RealismOverhaul]:NEEDS[!FASA]
{
  //Configs go here
}
@PART[mainsail]:FOR[RealismOverhaul]:NEEDS[FASA]
{
  //Configs go here
}

And now the mainsail has a config for either case.

[jandcando]

Yeah, I would definitely not complain if you wanted to create alternate configs. It'd look something like this:

@PART[mainsail]:FOR[RealismOverhaul]:NEEDS[!FASA]
{
  //Configs go here
}
@PART[mainsail]:FOR[RealismOverhaul]:NEEDS[FASA]
{
  //Configs go here
}

And now the mainsail has a config for either case.

Thanks for the help, I might do some things there. I've only just started to get my feet wet with modifying engine configs, though. I might not be able to be as accurate as I want to be with all the engine parameters.

[NathanKell]

That is somewhat dangerous, because it means craft files can't be shared.

BasharMilesTeg, however, had IMO a far more brilliant idea: don't use *any* existing engine parts--hide them all, and create all our own. So you'd have the part RO-F1-Engine, which takes the FASA model if available, else has a fallback. Then craft are perfectly shareable, and the part list doesn't have duplicate engines.

In essence we decouple the model from the final part, so no matter what part packs you have, you have the same RO-supported parts, they just might look different.

[Wobulator]

I've been stuck with monopropellent- I can't find the procedural monopropellent or xenon tank. I don't have any sort of part catalog, so it's possible that I've somehow missed it in the clutter of parts, but I've searched for it for at least an hour (Specifically, it's not under manufacturer->procedural parts). I can't tell if it just doesn't exist, or for some reason it's not showing up.

I will happily post any files, but this has happened before on different computers with different versions of RO, and right now I have a clean CKAN installed RO.

Thanks for the great mod!

[Hattivat]

You don't need a special tank for monopropellant, just use the regular procedural tank at the "service module" setting, and yes, it can also be the exact same tank that you use for your main engine, just manually add the desired amount of monopropellant first (right click on the tank and select "tank GUI"), and then fill the rest of it with whatever it is your main engine uses using the default method. Other kinds of procedural tanks ("default", "balloon", "cryogenic", etc.) can also hold at least some of the monoprops, although I can't remember if it's all of them, so when in doubt, use the "service module" kind.

[Felger]

I've been stuck with monopropellent- I can't find the procedural monopropellent or xenon tank. I don't have any sort of part catalog, so it's possible that I've somehow missed it in the clutter of parts, but I've searched for it for at least an hour (Specifically, it's not under manufacturer->procedural parts). I can't tell if it just doesn't exist, or for some reason it's not showing up.

I will happily post any files, but this has happened before on different computers with different versions of RO, and right now I have a clean CKAN installed RO.

Thanks for the great mod!

Also, it should be noted that 'monopropellant' as you're used to it from the stock game doesn't really exist. There are a great many monoprop fuels that you can use, and you can even use bipropellant fuels for your RCS, should you so desire.

[jandcando]

That is somewhat dangerous, because it means craft files can't be shared.

BasharMilesTeg, however, had IMO a far more brilliant idea: don't use *any* existing engine parts--hide them all, and create all our own. So you'd have the part RO-F1-Engine, which takes the FASA model if available, else has a fallback. Then craft are perfectly shareable, and the part list doesn't have duplicate engines.

In essence we decouple the model from the final part, so no matter what part packs you have, you have the same RO-supported parts, they just might look different.

Do we know if this works? I think it is a very promising idea if we implement it.

[NathanKell]

Downside is it's not pruning-aware. MM has no way of knowing if a given engine is installed, only if the Part Pack is. So if you install FASA but delete the Apollo folder, the MM patch will still try to use those (deleted) models for the RL10, and no engine will appear ingame.

[stratochief66]

I honestly figured this is a problem with the part but one of the nice folks over in the FASA board suggested that I should post this here.

I'm trying to build the Mercury-Atlas in RO but I'm running into a problem. I've gove one of the Atlas fuel tanks and engines. I've actually launched this same basic Atlas a couple times without issue. Instead of an explorer probe core, though, this time I have the Mercury/Atlas decoupler, then above that I have the Mercury command module (complete with Re-entry module and retro straps). Less then 30 seconds into the launch there's a small explosion and suddenly my command module slides off the Atlas rocket. When I hit F3 I get the following:

[00:00:43] Join between Mercury Retro Strap / Decoupler and Mercury Re-entry Module failed due to aerodynamic stresses.

I've launched the Mercury/Redstone (which has the same exact command module setup, just a different engine, fuel tank and decoupler) twice without incident. Is there some glitch with the "Mercury - Atlas Spacecraft Adapter"?

Are you pitching over when this happens, or heading straight up?

That is a mighty strange failure, given that the mercury retro strap is under the capsule during ascent, so it shouldn't face any aerodynamic stresses.

[Draugr]

I'm having problems constructing the RO version of the Saturn V / Apollo mission rocket. In normal FASA I know there's a .craft file that comes with the assembly all completed, but obviously that's not importable into RO FASA. I can get *close* between Wikipedia and various fragmented explanations on the forums, but is there any good, start-to-finish assembly tutorials online for this?

ETA: The FASA-supplied heat shield also seems to be missing the AblativeShielding resource from Deadly Re-entry. DR-supplied heatshields have the resource, but this doesn't. Is this intended - are we supposed to be using only shields from that pack?

Edited February 16, 2015 by Draugr

[NathanKell]

FASA changes frequently; RO isn't yet up to date with the latest changes in release (though I believe all is fixed in git).

chrisl: I launched an Atlas-Agena (using SLV-3 Atlas) and found that, yes, you do need to loft rather high early on to avoid steering losses later, so maybe hit 1200m/s when 45 degrees. My guess on GEO payload (with a third stage for GTO->GEO kick) is about 150kg.

[jandcando]

The procedural fairing bases say "decouplers sold separately", but they seem to have decouplers built in. Personally, I think that built-in decouplers reduces flexibility of design, but do what you want.

[Hattivat]

You can always attach things to the lower of the upper nodes, only the upper upper node has a decoupler.

[chrisl]

Are you pitching over when this happens, or heading straight up?

That is a mighty strange failure, given that the mercury retro strap is under the capsule during ascent, so it shouldn't face any aerodynamic stresses.

I was pitching over when it happened. I worked around the issue by flying straight up for much longer then normal before pitching over. I end up with more of a stock-like "gravity turn" but the rocket doesn't fall apart.

[Citizen247]

I've just switched back to Linux as Windows was getting annoying, and my probes are burning up on ascent. I have to pack my satellite into a second set of internal interstage fairings with a heat-shield at the front.

I thought maybe my ascent profile was too shallow, I'm hitting 1000m/s at about 30-40k, is this the case or is something funky going on?

[Hattivat]

Your ascent profile sounds OK. DRE is not entirely realistic, and in particular is known for giving much too high ascent heating, so it's probably just DRE being too harsh on ascents. Make sure you have the latest version and if so, try fiddling with its settings (alt + d + r to open its console IIRC).

[Dermeister]

SO I'm calling out to RO users and pro's ... I don't think it's a bug but it could be..... but in all honesty I think it's user related I'm quite new to this RO. Whne I put a Custom fairing base under a unmanned core then I put a stretchy tank underneath and save the craft all is good. But then if I add any engine under and save it then try to load it I see Liquid squirt out of the tank and engine and my Custom tank is In another shape and I can't edit the craft anymore. Fresh Instal of ksp Used CKAN to download and install the mods.It auto downloaded what it needed I would assume? SO is it a bug or have I done something wrong?