Phredward

Presenting the mobile app KSP Simple VAB Ever been out-and-about and gotten a good idea for a new mission and payload? Start building it on-the-go with KSP Simple VAB. Available now in the Apple App Store and Google Play Store! Choose a capsule add payload parts pick a destination customize your stages Then send the file to your computer via any of your mobile device's native sharing features. Plop it into your KSP save directory and go on your mission! V1.0 includes A limited part selection and my favorite 6 engines. One way and round trip options for all stock KSP bodies. Edit, and combine stages (no merging of aero and non-aero stages right now). Automatic engine selection, and rocket sizing (it'll build the whole rocket for you!). Some issues you might notice: If you navigate away from the rocket without saving, it's gone. No warning. No part or rocket images. You might find rocket parts floating near your rocket in-game if they're on a stage that goes from 1.25m to 2.5m No stage-and-a-half support. No launch clamps, so don't forget those before launch! Android: buttons don't have good feedback Anyways, v1.0 is definitely a little rough around the edges. This has been an idea I've had for probably 2 years or so, and I finally found a little time to make it a reality. There's plenty of more work to do in the future. If you have any issues, definitely let me know. If you have any feature suggestions, I'll write them down, but no promises (what with a new job and all). Enjoy! --Phredward

Fantastic work. I think I speak for a lot of us when I say I've been waiting for this for roughly forever. Just tried it out, and launching into the plane of the moon definitely required a rethink. Awesome!

Congrats on the release.

Can someone please explain the difference betwen @ and % and no prefix?

I just copied what I saw for the RO versions of the stock RCS thrusters. Having "standard, 1/2, 1/4" sizes for RCS thrusters sounds fine to me, if tweakscale will do it right. I also turned on physics for some of those parts. I'm not sure what implications that'll have, but it seems appropriate for them to have mass.

Hey Felger, I wanted the 5 way thruster in a craft I was making. Hopefully https://github.com/KSP-RO/RealismOverhaul/pull/36 and https://github.com/KSP-RO/RealismOverhaul/pull/37 can be useful to you.

Oh, totally. Before I found out about the radiators, but still wanted to use Hydrolox, I counted it as the only way.

The method I've used for now is to attach radiator fins to the tank you want to keep cool. One or two have done a good job at keeping all but the largest tanks at 0 boiloff, even for hydrogen. They will use a log of electricity. If you want to go forward with an existing mission, the thing that worked for me was spending most of the mission time not focused on the vehicle with cryogenic fuels, as boiloff doesn't happen when you're not flying that craft.

In recent versions of Realism Overhaul, any part that is not supported by RO will have " - non RO" appended to the title. This is your clue that this part will behave like stock KSP, and has not been modified by RO. If you see this on parts that are definitely supported in the latest version, then your installation has gone awry, and you should re-install again from scratch. Note that some part packs that were in previous versions but are not yet supported in the current version. These untested configs may or may not work and may or may not be realistic. These parts will still be marked " - non RO" (see the REWORK directory if you'd like to help clean these up).

I'm not an expert, but it seems like different solid rockets have amounts of gimbal. .25degrees seems quite low. Is it possible to make that be a tweakable in future procedural parts updates?

Thanks! Finally found it under all releases on github.

Sorry, I'm not quite sure what you mean. Is there something that's included in RO that makes it so I shouldn't be using EVE at all?

Thanks NathanKell. I think I just didn't think of using the one that looked like the old one since it didn't have "procedural" in the name. It works great. I figured out the thrust plates, I think. They're hard to attach to procedural tanks (they end up "inside" the bottom). From an ease of use perspective, they make it difficult to experiment, since you have to detach engines to change count.

EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements-7-4-LR The files are: detail.tga and main.tga (formerly main.png)

Thanks for the info.

Can someone tell me what to do with main.png to get lights on Earth at night? I put it in BoulderCo/CityLights/Textures first as main.png and then as main.tga but no luck. I'm using the low-res textures for RSS on mac, if that matters.

I finally installed the latest RealismOverhaul. Looks great, even with the short list of currently supported parts! Here's a few things I noticed: The stock rl10b-2 is highly throttleable, but http://www.astronautix.com/engines/rl10b2.htm and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RL10 don't show it having any throttleability (also the kw version of the part has min throttle = max throttle). On a semi-related note: does it seem like a good idea to add the CECE to the list of alternate configs to that engine? Now that it's got so many, it seems like the right place to me. The procedural decoupler seems to have a hard time locking into the very bottom node of the mk1-2 pod heat shield (when attached to a mk1-2 pod). If it locks in higher up it won't separate (which then causes the reentry to have a very low drag coefficient, besides probably other badness). In addition when it's attached in what I believe is the correct location, there's a noticeable gap in the rocket (although everything handles fine). See this album. The built in mk1-2 pod has no thrusters capable of firing in the prograde direction. I assume that's intended (due to the shape of the pod) but wanted to double check. Also, from a UI perspective, I couldn't figure out a way to fill up the pod with more fuel without attaching a separate rcs block, configing it to mmh+nto and then clicking fill tank. I think you mentioned earlier how to attach multiple engines under one tank, but I couldn't figure it out. I ended up using editor extensions to enable surface attachment, and then placing 3x nk-33 under a procedure tank. Everything worked, although the engines sink far into the tank. If you can explain what I'm supposed to be doing, that would be great. There doesn't seem to be any lights in the utility menu. Not sure if you're giving them a re-work for realism, or if they just got dropped somehow. That's everything! It was fun. procedural interstages seemed not-crazy-heavy which is great (and a pleasant change from .23). Keep up the good work!

I just installed the latest RealChutes as part of a RealismOverhaul install. It pops up a warning saying it's incompatible with the version of unity (at the loading screen). This is on mac. If this isn't known, I'm happy to grab any logs or whatever's helpful for debugging.

I'm fine using launch clamps, I just thought it was more realistic (and looked better )to let the vehicle sit on the pad. I'm pretty sure the shuttle's weight rested on the boosters, for instance.

I just noticed in stock KSP that the launch pad will collapse if you try to load very heavy craft (iirc ~1200t) that sit on the pad without launch clamps. I usually do not use launch clamps for my RO crafts, and instead rely on Kerbal Joint Reinforcement to keep the craft resting on the engine bells. After a brief look around the KSP directory, I couldn't find the config files for how strong a building is, but if it's possible to increase it, I suspect that will work best for RO.

Looking forward to playing on .25! Thanks for keeping up all the good work!

I'm super excited for a future with max g for parts other than the pilots themselves. If anyone has a quick and dirty approximation for what features might fail, or why the shuttled was limited to 3 g's, I'm curious.

Woooo! I was having a lot of difficulty controlling the final stage of crafts with the offset COM, and couldn't figure out how to just slightly offset the final engine. This'll make it a lot easier.

Is there a new spreadsheet of engine thrust, weight, isp, etc? SFJackBauer's RealEngine spreadsheet was really useful to me, and I feel like it was great to be able to check values there for realism. I could probably whip up a script to make one filled in from config values, if you feel like that would be useful RedAV8R.

Yeah. Before, I just made another standalone file, and that worked with SFJBengines. I'll mess around and see if I can just make another engine that also points to the same model. Or if you have another model in mind that's also a good RL-10A look-alike, I have no particular preference. I've also got a copy of the old RealEngines 0.6.1 spreadsheet, with a few bonuses (highlighted throttleable vs unthrottleable, separate tabs for launch, upper stage, non-cryogenic, etc). If you want me to share a copy let me know. I found that spreadsheet suuuper useful in the past, and it would be great to keep a copy uptodate (not sure if you've tweaked any values since the last RealEngines release).