[1.2.2] Realistic Progression Zero (RP-0) - Lightweight RealismOverhaul career v0.53 June 12

[przybysz86]

On 9/5/2016 at 5:41 AM, nightingale said:

Okay, everyone go grab Contract Configurator 1.19.0, as that fixes the problems with garbage generation:

• Fixed an incorrect boolean condition that was causing it to do an expensive check every frame for every contract instead of once per game.  This is the major source of 99% of the garbage that was being generated.  Huge thanks to @xEvilReeperx for pointing this one out.
• Fixed the biggest area that was overusing LINQ to not generate any garbage

Between those two fixes, should be a much better RP-0 experience now.

I confirm - helped a lot in case of my instal. I've played some yesterday and  "hiccup" now appears once ever 20-30s rather than every 5s. GJ and Thank you!

[jarraya]

2 hours ago, przybysz86 said:

I confirm - helped a lot in case of my instal. I've played some yesterday and  "hiccup" now appears once ever 20-30s rather than every 5s. GJ and Thank you!

@przybysz86 can you tell me what mods you play with?

[przybysz86]

15 hours ago, jarraya said:

@przybysz86 can you tell me what mods you play with?

https://app.box.com/s/evfytyc27l0yqa3c9lddbmvp4pffh2id

+ some betas like FASA not installed via CKAN

[Friedrich Nietzsche]

Hi,

I wanted to use following mod in my RP-0 campaign. Doesn anyone know, where I can find the part?

 

[harlikwin]

Soo, I was playing this a long while back (1.05 era), since then it looks like alot has changed. So what is the current status of this mod? Is Ckan still the best way to install stuff? Hopefully the changes to Unity mean that it works better on my rather limited system.

 

 

 

[Trolllception]

Is there a way to disable Avionics in RP-0?  I was playing around with RaiderNick's US Rockets and there are no avionics modules that would fit in the fairing with high enough mass limits.  I understand this isn't a supported by RP-0 but wanted to see if there was a method.

Edit:  If there is no method of removing Avionics it's easy enough to add it in a MM patch.

Edited September 15, 2016 by Trolllception

[Friedrich Nietzsche]

13 hours ago, Trolllception said:

Is there a way to disable Avionics in RP-0?  I was playing around with RaiderNick's US Rockets and there are no avionics modules that would fit in the fairing with high enough mass limits.  I understand this isn't a supported by RP-0 but wanted to see if there was a method.

Edit:  If there is no method of removing Avionics it's easy enough to add it in a MM patch.

You can put several smaller avionics units in one rocket, each providing enough avionics to support the weight of its stage.

[Phineas Freak]

@Trolllception a quick MM patch to remove the avionics module from the parts that include it:

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleAvionics]]:FINAL
{
	!MODULE[ModuleAvionics],*{}
}

Or increase the avionics mass limit (if you want to keep the guidance units on the launch vehicle):

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleAvionics]]:FINAL
{
    @MODULE[ModuleAvionics]
    {
        @massLimit = 10000.0
    }
}

 

[Trolllception]

Phineas Freak I like the idea of simply increasing the avionics on certain parts.  The US rockets pack doesn't fit up with many of the existing Avionics modules and while I like the mechanic certain rocket types and sizes are limited by the diameter of the existing Avionics module.  I wonder how well it would work to make Avionics a procedural part to account for specific diameter rockets.

[Phineas Freak]

@Trolllception there is an open RO/RP-0 "issue" for adding procedural avionics to the game but the current system probably covers 95% of the user needs so work is slow on that end. We could use a procedural probe core (really easy to create) but then someone has to write the back-end for that system, including the necessary GUIs...

BTW adding avionics to a part that does not have any is not difficult, you can find what parts should have them and then add the appropriate mass limits:

@PART[MyPartName]:NEEDS[RP-0]:FINAL
{
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleAvionics
        massLimit = <FLOAT>
    }
}

Replace the "MyPartName" with a correct part name and change the "massLimit" value to a valid value. A good "rule of thumb" is to use enough avionics to cover a specific stage only. Example: for a Thor - Able for you could use a 45t limit for the Thor booster and a 5t limit for the Able upper stage (to be also compatible with RP-0). A Scout should have far less than that (around 20t for the overall vehicle). Add them as custom MM patches and you should be good!

[Trolllception]

Is there a way I can use solid kick motors and still accomplish satellite contracts which require a specific orbit?  I am still early in my new RP-0 Career (1958) but most of the contracts I receive now require the Satellite to be in a very specific orbit.  This is very difficult to accomplish using a solid motor final stage.  Or is there a way to relax the orbital requirements on the contracts?  Or maybe there is a way to add additional relaxed orbital missions like simple polar orbits with a minimum periapse with no maximum apoapsis?  It feels like the difficulty ramps up after the first mission or two to the point where solid rocket stages become difficult to use for anything other than TLI/Interplanetary missions.

If anyone else has any suggestions on completing these types of contracts early on let me know!

[leudaimon]

@Trolllception If you have a controllable core, you can use the kick motor to do the heavy job (raise the periapsis for a geostationary orbit for example) and then use RCS to fine-tune the orbit. Also, the current implementation of satellite contracts uses the stock system and really is not ideal, but that's what we have for now... AFAIK writing these more realistic early contracts is in the roadmap for future updates, but not done yet.

[przybysz86]

14 hours ago, leudaimon said:

@Trolllception If you have a controllable core, you can use the kick motor to do the heavy job (raise the periapsis for a geostationary orbit for example) and then use RCS to fine-tune the orbit. Also, the current implementation of satellite contracts uses the stock system and really is not ideal, but that's what we have for now... AFAIK writing these more realistic early contracts is in the roadmap for future updates, but not done yet.

another, harder, option is to fine tune before the kick motor engages. For example if you use 2nd stage RCS ullage motors just take some spare fuel for them and us them to fine-tune. I find this method much harder as I need to be very precise in engaging kick motor (no rotation, precise timing, etc) but if you manage to do it you can do without controllable probe core. I recommend spinning solid stage before decoupling
Oh an use decoupler that have force set to 0 + separation motors on previous stage to pull it away* to decouple solid stage or it will add dV and screw your calculations
This method obviously require some simulation to calculate dV you need form kick motor to circularize after fine tuning.

*sep. motors not required as you do have kick motor and if it have high thrust to mass it will extend away fast enough to not make previous stage explode.

Edited September 21, 2016 by przybysz86

[Trolllception]

Thanks for the tips/ideas!

[deleted]

Beginner question here.  I am struggling with the use of avionics.  I don't think I am using my stages properly.  How do i get a third stage avionics unit to last until I need to use it to kick me to the moon or wherever else I may be travelling.  I only seem to get about 30 mins out of the unit, which is not enough to travel to the desired node or even to apogee.  Do i just need to overload on battery capacity? then use a probe core with solar panels to my final destination?

[przybysz86]

3 minutes ago, deleted said:

Beginner question here.  I am struggling with the use of avionics.  I don't think I am using my stages properly.  How do i get a third stage avionics unit to last until I need to use it to kick me to the moon or wherever else I may be travelling.  I only seem to get about 30 mins out of the unit, which is not enough to travel to the desired node or even to apogee.  Do i just need to overload on battery capacity? then use a probe core with solar panels to my final destination?

you can lock battery on last stage but keep in mind that each stage uses it's own electric charge so just add some battery to last stage. BTW - check this:

 

Edited September 21, 2016 by przybysz86

[deleted]

@przybysz86  I have been watching them.  There is literally hours of video and I am on episode 30ish, it's just hard to search for specific information.  And most of the time he grabs launch vehicles from subassemblies so its hard to put together.  But the videos are fantastic and I've gotten this far, just seem to be stuck in a rut with putting probes into specific orientations or getting to the moon.  

@przybysz86  Another quick question, could you point me to a tutorial or explain the different tank types and how utilization works?  

Edited September 21, 2016 by deleted

[Fenisse]

56 minutes ago, deleted said:

@przybysz86  Another quick question, could you point me to a tutorial or explain the different tank types and how utilization works?  

For tank types: 

Quote

TANK TYPES

(Note: All tanks are pressurized, but some tanks are highly pressurized; you need the latter for pressure-fed engines.)

* Default: Your regular tank type, roughly equivalent to the tanks used for Titan or Saturn I/V. Note that in order to match Titan tanks, it's lighter than it should be for other cases. Features minimal insulation for cryogenic resources (equivalent to the insulation on Saturn V's S-IVB).

* Structural: A heavier version of Default, used for aircraft/spaceplanes (or to simulate old, massive tanks). Example: A jet plane's tank, or the R-7's.

* ServiceModule: Used for service modules and other pressure-fed tanks. You need this for pressure-fed engines (RCS are pressure-fed engines). Due to supporting up to 200atm of pressure rather for resources than just the 1.8 or so that non-highly-pressurized tanks do, it's much heavier. Also can store electricity and life support resources. Features more insulation for the cryogenic resources. Examples: Able/Delta upper stage, Apollo Service Module.

* Fuselage: A heavier version of ServiceModule, used for aircraft/spaceplanes (or to simulate old, massive tanks). Examples: the electronics and life support section of a spaceplane, the WAC Corporal sustainer.

* Cryogenic: Highly insulated tank. Has the level of insulation (and low boiloff) of a modern cryogenic tank. Slightly heavier than Default due to the increased insulation. Example: Delta IV Common Core Booster.

* Balloon: Light, fragile tank. In real life the tanks must be kept pressurized at all times (even when empty of propellants) or they will collapse, and if left unmonitored they can collapse. In addition they are much less strong than other tank types, and one cannot attach heavy things to their sides or place heavy masses above them under high acceleartion. Ingame, however, their only major disadvantage is that they cost more. Example: Atlas sustainer (pre-Atlas III).

* BalloonCryo: Same as Balloon, but with more insulation (to the level of type Cryogenic). Example: Centaur upper stage. The Shuttle ET falls in between this and type Cryogenic.

And for utilization, it basically means how much of the tank is used for fuel (e.g. a standard tank will have about 80% utilization, which means that 20% of the space is used for structure or other things, whereas a balloon tank will have 100% utilization, since it hasn't got structure but uses the fuel to not make it fall apart). That's mostly it, if something's wrong please correct me!

[C3nturionsparta]

Just updated my RO and ven stock on CKAN when prompted - when i loaded my save the HighGaneAntena is missing from the tech and my ships will not load

[MarvinCZ]

On 21. 9. 2016 at 9:50 PM, deleted said:

Beginner question here.  I am struggling with the use of avionics.  I don't think I am using my stages properly.  How do i get a third stage avionics unit to last until I need to use it to kick me to the moon or wherever else I may be travelling.  I only seem to get about 30 mins out of the unit, which is not enough to travel to the desired node or even to apogee.  Do i just need to overload on battery capacity? then use a probe core with solar panels to my final destination?

Many of the small cores - namely Agena and the probe cores - can have avionics shut down. That reduces power drain to very little. If you activate avionics only for maneuvers, they will probably last to the Moon on battery power alone. If you want to make sure, even basic solar panels should be able to recharge your power in that state.

[MarvinCZ]

So, I have an issue of my own. I built my first Space station, with a Station Science Module (early). I crewed the station (including a scientist) and tried performing experiments. I got a message "Cannot perform experiment when part is shielded".

Is that a bug of the "Cannot deploy while stowed" sort? Can I do something to make the module work? I don't really care if it takes a man with a screwdriver fixing this station or launching a new station.

Spoiler

 

Edited October 2, 2016 by MarvinCZ

[hargn]

On 01/09/2016 at 4:07 AM, Maxsimal said:

Couple of bugs with missions in RP0

For both the weather satellite contract missions, which ask you to put up 3 satellites each, they are satisfied as soon as you put up the first.

For the 1/LLO mission, which asks you to put a kerbal into low lunar orbit, I will get the ship to the proper orbit, check the mission and see that it's counting down for the 20 hour orbit, set a kerbal alarm clock for the 20 hours - and come back to find the timer reset. 

The weather satellite contract missions should be fixed in the next RP-0 release.

For the second issue, I've found a bug with the duration parameter in contract configurator, and there is an issue for that.
It is linked to the HasResource parameter but maybe this bug is coming from the same error.
But I think that the fix should not be released before the KSP 1.2's release.

[Luciano]

Hello everyone, I have a bit of a problem, when using the F1 engine my rocket start spining a lot, really a lot, and also it doesn't have a configuration for it to fail (don't recall the mod that adds that). Can someone confirm that it doesn't have that configuration. Algo anyone had the same problem with the F1??

Thanks a lot to all of you

[Nolys_]

Hello there !,

I'm playing with RO/RP-0 and a bunch of mods. I've Real Scale Boosters installed and it's not compatible with RP-0.

So, there's my question : Do you have tips to make a patch, or someone have already made it ?

A good day for everyone !

(Sorry if my english is bad, i'm french)

On 10/6/2016 at 10:29 PM, Luciano said:

Hello everyone, I have a bit of a problem, when using the F1 engine my rocket start spining a lot, really a lot, and also it doesn't have a configuration for it to fail (don't recall the mod that adds that). Can someone confirm that it doesn't have that configuration. Algo anyone had the same problem with the F1??

Thanks a lot to all of you

Hi !, Personally i don't have this problem. But what kind of F-1 are you using ?, It's from FASA, stock, SSTU,... ?

[Luciano]

5 hours ago, Nolys_ said:

Hello there !,

I'm playing with RO/RP-0 and a bunch of mods. I've Real Scale Boosters installed and it's not compatible with RP-0.

So, there's my question : Do you have tips to make a patch, or someone have already made it ?

A good day for everyone !

(Sorry if my english is bad, i'm french)

Hi !, Personally i don't have this problem. But what kind of F-1 are you using ?, It's from FASA, stock, SSTU,... ?

Stock F1.