TiktaalikDreaming

"Landed"! Updated RO Config https://www.dropbox.com/s/5a6v121dcgysa7o/RealismConfigs.cfg?dl=0 That was chutes (drogue ripped off in less than 1sec, Ballute lasted well) and upgraded to spec descent engine. I suspect you can switch the chutes for the airbrakes with no great loss. And as you can deploy the airbrakes much higher up, they may actually be better. I was struggling a bit for time at the end, and forgot to switch SAS from retro to upwards. But there was spare fuel and enough time to slow down. I'm going to change the material for the drogue, and try that. And retry using Airbrakes and no chutes. But not right now, 'cos I need a break.

Checking the Atomic Rockets page, that looks a lot like the newtons I worked out incorrectly tagged as kg. Which would be a hell of a ride.

I tried using a liquid deorbit stage and messed up the ullage. Gotta remember the RCS for the descent stage can't thrust forward. Also, the more I mess with this, the more it seems the key failing is the TWR of the descent stage/engine. That rocket slows you down way too slowly. I'm going to make sure I have my numbers right, in case it really should have more thrust. And, well, there we go. Should be 140,000 lb Thrust, which I make to be around the 621kN. Not 256. So, I'll be fixin that and seeing how it behaves next.

I've made a 1.2 edition. I really can't test how it behaves with real fuel yet, I suspect "broken" is a good estimate. And, I can't flag things as 1.2 yet on Spacedock, so I'm not going to update there, but I've chucked it on my dropbox here https://www.dropbox.com/s/cxqpags6pkpuz21/RCS.zip?dl=0 Basically I just converted the ModuleRCS to ModuleRCSFX as per the 1.2 RCS. Exhaust visual and audio effects are all scaled by the size of the RCS units.

The proportional steering was there in 1.1. Very noticeable on 6 wheeled craft.

I made a shell airbrake thing. I managed to get velocity down to 50m/s before hitting the ground, but on a really gentle angle of attack. Used RCS instead of the de-orbit engines to drop the orbit from 130km. And waited. A lot. Unfortunately, that sort of reentry has a lot of variance in where you're going to come down, and my landing site was a good 18km above reference. I think it might have safely landed if it'd been a low point. I still had fuel left. I've also got chutes kinda working, and they helped a fair bit for that. The answer to landing on Mars does seem to be; everything you can find. And then some. Aerobraking, chutes, ballutes, rockets, and an anti-gravity super science would be nice too. So, new part: Aerobraking shell piece (there's room for twelve, so two sets of 6x symmetry), https://www.dropbox.com/s/2gx57zp0qdrbnaa/AltShell.zip?dl=0 And, an updated config for RO that includes niceties like restartable engines and almost functioning parachutes; https://www.dropbox.com/s/5a6v121dcgysa7o/RealismConfigs.cfg?dl=0 (Overwrite the same file in the NAR_MEM/Config folder). I can't update the mod just yet with these because I've started working on some 1.2 adjustments, like RCS noises and effects. So my dev stuff is a mess at the moment. :-)

I'm going to add to this. Even if all this work doesn't result in a new wheel module, it's been a learning experience for everyone watching the thread, on wheels, and Unity physics, and a bunch of things. Even if this was just experimental poking at KSP/Unity/PhysX and how they misbehave, it'd be worth it for anyone interested in either using the existing modules in odd ways, or building any type of module for physically interacting parts. And, I'm still hanging out for tracks and wheels that drive nicely. But the path to get there has been a brilliant journey (and I'm sure occasionally frustrating as hell journey) as well.

I changed the config to NEEDS[RealismOverhaul]:AFTER[RealChute] and made it all @-based, like the FASA configs in RO. Now the chute vaguely behaves, but is reporting the wrong materials and so on. I think I'll just mess around some more and see if I can get it to behave.

Actually they treat them as "don't allow surface attach" due to the zero in the forth spot of the line attachRules = 1,0,1,0,0 Change that to a 1, and you're good to go. eg; attachRules = 1,0,1,1,0 I'm also wondering if there's a set of air brakes in some mod that could be used to replace that shell. EG like this, but actually covering where the shell would otherwise be;

Yeah, that. Couldn't see it for looking. Thanks.

Doesn't look like it (yet)

Thanks. I'll have to relook at what I added to that zip. I could have sworn it was from the right KSP, but maybe I've added the really old copied over pre-64-bit one. I'll check, and add the MM cache. I didn't think to look at that. Which is pretty daft. Updated the zip. This time I checked the file before copying, and after by opening the zip. It contains the line; Non platform assembly: G:\KSP1.1.2RO\Kerbal Space Program\GameData\RealChute\Plugins\RealChute.dll (this message is harmless) Which I take as a good sign. And this sign it's loading my config; Config(@PART[MEMBallute]:NEEDS[RealismOverhaul]) NAR_MEM/Config/RealismConfigs/@PART[MEMBallute]:NEEDS[RealismOverhaul] and now that I'm removing the parachute module AND the RealChuteFAR module, it's working nicely. :-/

I drop it to 9-10% and pulse it. Hopefully in 1.2 there won't be such a need to pulse, but it may be a while before RO etc is updated for 1.2. On ascent, I have RCS on very briefly to start, but then reserve it for docking, the gimbal on the ascent motor should do most of the flight control. Well,, it's not useless, it's just no-where near sufficient. You'd usually still be going at around 1km/s when you hit the ground, and there's not 1000m/s of delta V to spare. As to whether that's wrong, I doubt it. A brief read on the various mars rover landings suggests that Mars is a particularly nasty mix of atmosphere enough to be an issue, but not enough to be useful. And the current procedure seems to be enormous drag chutes followed by some sort of rocket assist for the final landing. Or giant bouncy ball. But you can't really put astronauts in one of those bouncy ball things. Or an ascent stage for that matter. The fact that getting a Mars landing in RO+RSS is really hard, seems accurate rather than troubling. I should mention I haven't read whatever book is being discussed, and so this MEM is not based on that, but the NAR studies. So, the engines, the fuel supply, all that is working on the assumption of those chutes helping. So, to use these parts, without chutes, you need to find at least a few hundred m/s in delta V of deceleration. Based on http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/realdesigns2.php#rockwellmem, you'd need to find about 660m/s (dif between MACH 3.5 and 1.5). That said, that descent plan does seem to assume more aero deceleration before the chutes than what is experienced, and much higher up too. (I'm assuming an Earth surface level MACH reference, rather than local speed of sound)

The landing leg modules are working exceptionally well. I haven't tested the stock ones yet, but some mod legs of mine that always used to make the launch pad explode, now work perfectly.

The RCS is overpowered, so eats propellant faster than needed. I have been shunting the thrust limiter to around 10%. It then lasts heaps longer, and doesn't tend to do the vibrating over-correction thing. The chutes don't yet have working RO+RSS config. So, they just act like standard chutes, meaning they won't do much to stop you from pancaking. They might help a teeny bit though. The issue with trying it using just blunt body aero plus rockets is there's not enough rocket in that descent stage, because the aero braking is next to useless. You've added a chunk of fuel, but a TWR of 1.0 won't do a lot of slowing you down. So, you'll end up needing more of it. You might be better off with a set of retro solid boosters with higher thrust, to do an initial deltaV. Maybe attached to the disposable side walls. Or hack a higher thrust into the descent engine. Or find some other way of increasing the drag. Can't see too many options without either chutes or some kind of aerobrake

I've only had a very brief look so far at the prerelease of 1.2, but I thought it could be handy to have changes that need modder action in one place. (if this already exists elsewhere, like it did for the 1.1 prerelease, I can't find it) Obviously modules need recompiling, possibly with edits. RCS: The main change (for parts) is that the module is now MODULERCSFX, which has the added "runningEffectName =" which refers to effects defined the usual way. Audio and particle. Dragon RCS here we come. The old ModuleRCS still seems to work fine, but with the old visuals and no noise. I haven't looked at the cfg for wheels, as they seem to work fine without any editing. The only obvious issue I've found so far is all my engines explode when staged. I can use a stock decoupler, or a custom one and it doesn't matter, the engines explode as if collided with. Stock updated engines don't. Nothing appears to have changed in the configs, so I'll take a peek at the mu files later. It may simply be a case of recompiling into Unity 5.Whatever. Or, maybe my engines always should have exploded, but the old KSP never realized. I just haven't looked into this enough yet to know.

Dammit. Twenty minutes into my hour long bus ride to work. I wonder if I can still call in sick....

Well, yes. A lot of malware does use IRC

I have to do the waking up thing at 6am, .... but I'm at UTC+10, so I already should be on that bus. :-(

Opt-In to the latest version of KSP [1.2]. (Warning: Mods will not work unless updated for this version) Build 1333804 15 minutes ago Looks ready to roll out, just still locked for now

Well, just started messing with this mod for making another mod RO compatible. Why do I keep stumbling on mods when the devs are backing away? So... I guess this question goes to "the community" or @stupid_chris if he happens to have time. I've been trying to add MM config for RealChutes for two chutes for my MEM project. I've done both fairly similar for testing, and one works, and the other is plain old broken. I've gone over the config a bunch of times. The animation names match, the parachuteName matches the chute's mesh, exactly the same as the stock config's canopyName. Similarly the capName matches. Material is set to Kevlar (I also experimented with adding materials, which seems to work fine, but for debug purposes, removed). The thing is, it's broken before use. The UI for showing chute properties doesn't even come up right. So, the non-functioning chute (a ballute) has a shrunk UI that can't be dragged around the screen; While the functioning drogue chute seems to work fine (apart from needing tweaking so it can open *before* smashing into the ground); The RealChuteModule component of the MM for the ballute; The output_log.txt seems to suggest I have names of objects wrong. But I can't see where. & & But, it also doesn't *seem* to throw any errors when configuring; So I guess the question is, are there any obvious requirements I might not be meeting to use RealChuteModule? This is a Ballute that isn't functioning, so if there's expectations on the look of the mesh (seems unlikely) or if the values are somehow capped. Zip of the full configs, the parts, and the output_log.txt > https://www.dropbox.com/s/m2gze0ezplfs32y/BalluteIssue.zip?dl=0 Halp! Although I have to go to work now. And I'm not sure how much time I'll have to look at this when I get home. and... ... 1.2 pre-release could drop any moment, where-upon I'll run around checking stuff out there like everyone else. But, if someone's come across this sort of thing before and has an answer I'd be very happy to hear about it. :-)

https://imgur.com/gallery/nppbNtf

Yeah, been testing just recently in RSS+RO. Reentry is scary as hell. You take a LONG time to slow down The chutes (both drogue and ballute) need RealChute config. RealChute overwrites the custom values I set making them behave like normal chutes, and that'll result in craters again. I almost have a working kevlar drogue, but for some reason, even with identical config, I can't get the ballute to work. Probably a missing bracket or something, cos it manages to stuff up the RealChute UI For a chute free descent, you could try adding airbrakes. I've seen some examples of concepts for that for martian descent. Not too sure how it'd compare to a 30m ballute for slowing down though. But it should be much more solid.

You CAN. But since 1.1 and the IVA Overlay, I prefer to match IVAs to the part. Otherwise it'll end up breaking someone's experience. And, for airlock anyway, the IVAs are pretty simple. No controls or instruments, just a cylinder an placing a kerbal. Oh, and new pic of proto part, medium sized AirDock.

Yeah, I noticed that too. I need to work more on the RO+RSS config.