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

[Lilienthal]

I still question the thrust curve on the UA-1205 SRMs. I just launched my MOL on a Titan IIIC. As Rabada suggested, this time I paid attention to my burn time, though I did watch the thrust percent and actual thrust. Anyway, from what I read on various Wiki's, the UA-1205 should burn for 115s. Presumably that means the two UA-1205 on the Titan IIIC should produce at least greater then 1.0twr for 115 seconds. However, at t+1:48 (108s), I'm reduced to 0.99twr with the SRMs burning at only 23.625% of rated thrust. If there's a page out there that says the UA-1205 burns for less then 115s before jettison, please point me to that page. Otherwise, could we please look at the thrust curve on these SRMs so they have the thrust they should have during their burn time?

chrisl: do the 0.99 TWR refer to the whole vessel or just the solids? 115s IMHO means that the booster _alone_ produce for that time more than 1.0 TWR.

[chrisl]

In the 0.9 update for kerbal, Squad added some additional SAS capabilities (hold retrograde, hold prograde, etc) and for Kerbal pilots, these SAS abilities become available as they gain experience. When I turn SAS on, I can see these options, but they don't appear to do anything. Is this something RO or RP0 intentionally did or am I looking at a bug in my setup?

[NathanKell]

chrisl: thrust curves right from NASA (or BellComm, as I recall).

As for SAS, sounds like the PIDs are messed. Known issue with stock SAS.

[Silpion]

I have an issue to report and a question.

Issue: the HECS and Octo-based probe cores seem to change size between what they are in the VAB and when I load a save out in space. The HECS shrinks and the Octo grows.

Question: I'm trying to land a probe on Duna but my parachute never deploys. I get a warning that the altitude is too high. Do you know which mod is doing this and how I can fix it? I tried looking into whether it was FAR, DRE, Real Chutes, or RP-0, but can't find anything conclusive.

Edit: I was able to get the parachute to deploy by manually editing the part's deployment paramters in the save file. I guess the broader question is why I'm unable to edit the deployment parameters in the VAB like I can in stock KSP.

Edited April 18, 2015 by Silpion

[Lilienthal]

I have an issue to report and a question.

Question: I'm trying to land a probe on Duna but my parachute never deploys. I get a warning that the altitude is too high. Do you know which mod is doing this and how I can fix it? I tried looking into whether it was FAR, DRE, Real Chutes, or RP-0, but can't find anything conclusive.

Edit: I was able to get the parachute to deploy by manually editing the part's deployment paramters in the save file. I guess the broader question is why I'm unable to edit the deployment parameters in the VAB like I can in stock KSP.

Did you click on the real chutes part in the action menu (i.e., where you can set abort etc.) ? Surprisingly you can (or should be able to) access those settings there.

[Silpion]

Did you click on the real chutes part in the action menu (i.e., where you can set abort etc.) ? Surprisingly you can (or should be able to) access those settings there.

That's it, thanks. I had to add so many mods to make this work it was hard to tell what is doing what and what has changed since I last used some of these!

[Friedrich Nietzsche]

Hi,

I've noticed, that RP-0 also changes contracts: Would it be possible to get rover missons, where a rover has to do surface science on several spots at a specific location? That would be awesome, since rovers aren't good for much at the moment.

[NathanKell]

Fine Print has just those contracts, and RP-0 leaves them enabled.

[chrisl]

chrisl: do the 0.99 TWR refer to the whole vessel or just the solids? 115s IMHO means that the booster _alone_ produce for that time more than 1.0 TWR.

chrisl: thrust curves right from NASA (or BellComm, as I recall).

As for SAS, sounds like the PIDs are messed. Known issue with stock SAS.

Just as an example, I have a 12.5t satellite on top of a Titan IIIC (should be able to put 13.1t into LEO according to various Wikis). Because of the thrust curve for the SRMs, my titan launches with 1.79twr (1.62SLT). It slowly builds up to 2.56TWR by around t+1:41, then it starts to rapidly fall. By t+1:49 it's down to 0.96TWR with SRMs burning at only 22.838% of rated thrust. And by t+1:55, which is right about when the SRMs are supposed to be jettisoned, I'm down to 0.03TWR with the SRMs burning at 0.795% of rated thrust. At that low of a TWR, I've actually been losing speed for the last 4-5 seconds of the burn. Considering the Titan IIIC burns it's SRMs for 115s, jettisons them at around 116s and doesn't ignite it's main engine until around 118s, that means there's about 8 seconds where I'm losing speed which, I think, is why I am having trouble getting this 12.5t payload into LEO.

Nathan, according to the graph you linked, at around 115s the UA-1205 should be producing around 800kN and shouldn't drop below 500kN until around 118s. According to the stats I see when I right click on the SRMs, I'm at 800kN at 111s, 500kN at 113s and reach minimum 29.2kN at 115s. So it still seems like it's losing thrust at least 4 seconds early. Plus, that graph makes it appears as through the UA-1205 should completely burn out at around 120s but UA-1205 we have in the game continue to burn at 29.2kN until t+2:09 which is 9 seconds longer then it probably should be burning.

Thank you for the graph, however. I am going to see if I can build a new, alternate thrust curve if for no other reason then to try and figure out if modifying the curve will fix the issue or if it's the amount of fuel that's the issue.

As for SAS.... strange. I've never had an issue with the SAS in the default game. It's only in RO that they don't appear to work. Normally in my stock and non-RO games, when I switch from "Stability Assist" to one of the other options (like point retrograde), my RCS usage nearly doubles because of all the constant tiny corrections the system is trying to make. But when I do that same thing in RO, I see no change in the RCS usage. That's why I figured something had been turned off in RO.

EDIT: I do want to say, I realize that creating the thrust curve for the game was likely not an easy thing to do. The NASA graph shows the approx thrust at specific points in time, while the game adjusts thrust based on the amount of fuel still remaining. So coming up with the thrust curve we have now must not have been easy. And I know I'm only complaining about a few seconds of burn time. Maybe the simpliest answer is just to add a bit more fuel. I know that will mess up the mass a little, but even a 3% increase in fuel results in SRMs on my test flight still producing 780kN (0.59TWR) at t+1:55 which seems to be pretty close to what the NASA graph shows.

EDIT2: I found a similar issue with the UA-1207 but adding 2% more fuel resolved it. Though 1%-1.5% additional fuel might be better.

Edited April 21, 2015 by chrisl

[chrisl]

Seperate questions. Do we have the RD-180 engines (single nozzle and/or double nozzle versions) used on the Atlas III and Atlas V? I can find an RD170 but that has more thrust the what I'm finding for the RD180.

Also the RS-68 used on the Delta IV?

And are we going to be getting 4m and 5m avionics packages for the larger, modern rockets?

Edited April 21, 2015 by chrisl

[Fenisse]

Seperate questions. Do we have the RD-180 engines (single nozzle and/or double nozzle versions) used on the Atlas III and Atlas V? I can find an RD170 but that has more thrust the what I'm finding for the RD180.

Also the RS-68 used on the Delta IV?

And are we going to be getting 4m and 5m avionics packages for the larger, modern rockets?

I can answer the engine part of the question.

As far as I know, the only RD-180 available for KSP is included in SovietEngines from Bobcat, for the RS-68, instead, you need to install AIES Aerospace. If you only need the engine, unfortunately I don't use that mod so I don't know the part names. Could someone help me? I don't have my PC now and won't have it for quite a while.

As for the avionics, I'm not a developer of RP-0 or RO (Not that I really mod anything). Wait for response by one of them.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Fenisse

[chrisl]

I can answer the engine part of the question.

As far as I know, the only RD-180 available for KSP is included in SovietEngines from Bobcat, for the RS-68, instead, you need to install AIES Aerospace. If you only need the engine, unfortunately I don't use that mod so I don't know the part names. Could someone help me? I don't have my PC now and won't have it for quite a while.

As for the avionics, I'm not a developer of RP-0 or RO (Not that I really mod anything). Wait for response by one of them.

Thank you. I'll take a look at those mods and see if I can find the engines I'm looking for.

[Fenisse]

You're welcome

[255]

Hello, I'm trying RP-0.

How am I supposed to unlock the first tech node if I want to do a rocket-oriented gameplay?

Am I probably missing some mod? I installed only the dependecies and the most recommended mods, and there are no engines other than the (useless?) Tiny Tim Booster.

So I had to cheat 25 science points to unlock "Early Orbital Rocketry".

Also, using ATM, the icon of "Engine Groups Controller" is blank. I created a config file for it but with no success.

Thanks for any help.

P.S. = SmokeScreen should be written in OP as a dependency, otherwise some engines doesn't show the flames. Or Realism Overhaul should, I don't know who's "fault".

Edited April 23, 2015 by 255

[NathanKell]

A wild tutorial has appeared!

If there are no engines but the Tiny Tim in the start node, you don't have a correct install. How did you install RP-0?

We'll check about Smokescreen, it shouldn't be required, the configs should adapt...

[255]

Yep I checked the tut, I just don't have engines in the first tech node. I did the manual installation, but I thought I included everything essential.

I guess some recommended mods are actually mandatory.

Which pack includes the Aerobee Sustainer engine that the tutorial speaks of?

[NathanKell]

It's a stock part.

Looks like you just downloaded the repository, rather than following the instructions in the OP and downloading a release. Please follow the instructions and download the release; some files are only in releases, because they're autogenerated by our build script.

[255]

I did read the OP, following the instruction for the manual install, and I downloaded this (linked in OP as a release package). Inside the zip you can see there are no "Parts".

I installed all the dependencies, but if RP-0 contains some parts itself, well they are not in that zip.

Edited April 23, 2015 by 255

[Shurikeeen]

I did read the OP, following the instruction for the manual install, and I downloaded this (linked in OP as a release package). Inside the zip you can see there are no "Parts".

I installed all the dependencies, but if RP-0 contains some parts itself, well they are not in that zip.

The parts are in the .cfg's

[255]

EDIT

Oh, my bad, I've found that engine. Was mistaking it for a RCS thruster.

Edited April 23, 2015 by 255

[NathanKell]

Apologies for that assumption; usually what happens when someone says they have "no parts" is that they didn't download a release, and thus parts don't have their correct tech nodes set (and they thus don't appear in the start node).

[255]

NP. Everything works now, I'm enjoying the first phase of career. I have 22 science points, almost there to get the early rocketry tech

This is what I wanted KSP to be, very very great mod.

[ThorBeorn]

A wild tutorial has appeared!.

Much appreciated, well written! We players are so spoiled in here

[255]

I unlocked the Early Orbital Rocketry node, the tutorial really helped. I see that DMagic's Orbital Science and Universal Storage are set as "in progress". Does that mean that costs and position in the tech tree is currently not balanced? Should I avoid using it for now? I would like to have Universal Storage's Goo for example, it's way cooler than the Marvelous Miniture's one.

BTW, I still have this problem:

Also, using ATM, the icon of "Engine Groups Controller" is blank. I created a config file for it but with no success.

Should I post this on the ATM thread?

Edited April 24, 2015 by 255

[chrisl]

Maybe I'm just not noticing it, but I seem to have alot of trouble controlling the CSM and LM when burning their specific engines and I'm thinking it may be a gimbaling issue. All three engines (AJ-10-137 SM engine, LM descent and LM ascent) should have gimbaling but all three "ships" torque really badly. So much so that I end up using a significant amount of RCS fuel. When getting into the parking orbit around Mun, I do have the LM's RCS system turned off to conserve LM fuel. So that might explain the torquing I'm getting with the AJ-10-137. But landing and launching the LM is using so much fuel (because of how much correcting the RCS thrusters have to make) that I find it extremely difficult to land and take off. One of my landings only succeeded because the LM's landing gear can apparently handle an extreme vertical impact (I was going better then -60m/s at impact) but even then I'd used so much fuel from the ascent stage (where the rcs thrusters draw their fuel) that getting back to the CM wasn't possible.

The main reason I'm concerned that it could be a gimballing problem is that normally with an engine that gimbals, you can actually see it turning. But with all three of the engines on the CSM/LM, they don't appear to move when trying to turn. Is there any way to make sure that the gimballing is actually happening as expected?