etheoma

@hypervelocity So where would I find that, I did a search on a new install of KSP and Realism overhall with a new ckan and a searched the term licquefaction and array and it's not showing up, you said it is a separate file right, it's not in a config file, but file in and of it's self, well if so either Ckan is bugged, it's been removed from RO or I am the most unlucky person on earth to get two corrupted installs with the exact same problem. Have either of you installed a new KSP 1.3.1 in the last 3 months and seen if it is actually still there?

On my installation it's not there If you could stop assuming I am an idiot that would be great secondly. Like I already explained how hard I looked, not only did I look manually, but I searched the for the items, I looked for the manufacturer which there is also no Various category... I don't know how else I can convince you that they are not there for me, and yes I used ckan to install Realism Overhaul.

Well it would likely help to say that there isn't even a ISRU tab in the manufacturer filter, second there is nothing in there that even looks like a fuel sell as the actual fuel sells are under electrical, thirdly I searched the names and even the individual words so it would have show up if it was there. Just to make sure we are talking about the 1.3.1 version of RO right? It's pretty old at this point so it seems silly to ask but they REALLY are not there. I think I vaguely remember there being some named like ISRU in the 1.2.1 version of RO

Nope sandbox, I am testing out craft and stuff now so I am doing Sandbox first.

Errr do you have to mod parts in to get them to work because I have RO installed and I don't have anything called a liquefier or Licquefaction Array the only Sabatler Reactor is the one in Universal Storage and it makes Liquid Fuel, there is no Water Electrolyser, Fischer-Tropsch unit...

As long as I can mine and make LqdHydrogen most planets and moons I wouldn't have many complaints, because I usually use Nuclear thermal rockets so Hydrogen is all I need. Well apart from some form of mono prop.

Actually the Skylon is estimated to need a at a bare minimum a 5km long runway so no "realistic" SSTO's would need a very long runway, although I admit some of that is encase the takeoff has to be aborted, and as I personally use realism overhual neither can I use the land next to the runway because it is bumpy, and neither do I have the option of removing fuel because it will mean I will not be going to space today, neither do I have the option of adding more lifting surface as that would increase my dry mass and there for cut my delta/V significantly. btw the craft weighs 288.13 tons which the actual proposed Skylon is said to weigh 325 tons loaded, so I really have optimized it as much as possible, although I have not tried a polar orbit yet... although I have 700m/s left over so I should be able to get into a polar orbit. Although part of that may be that I have had to result to having external tanks which I drop full of LOX to get the acceleration I need to get off the ground. So it isn't even a real SSTO, but given that you could easily recover tanks 1km or 2km away from the runway I don't feel so bad. Although it is completely unrealistic because you would melt the runway by using rocket on it, but considering I am dealing with a runway that is half the length I am supposed to have I don't feel too terrible.

I have my doubts that I will even get a reply, but I see some work was done on this mod this year at least and I was wondering what state it was in as I am very much missing ISRU from realism overhaul... It would be the only thing I think that is really missing, even cyro fuels have been fixed.

Is there Resource harvesting mod that is compatible* with realism overhual? Given what the next 10 years apparently have in stall in seems somewhat of a serious omission. Although honestly give SpaceX time I would assume the BFR missions to Mars would be more like in the early 2030's rather than the early to mid 2020's But ISRU is real, if not dubious in it's utility for single missions at least, with a nuclear reactor and many missions it would be very useful though. Something else that I think would be nice if there was an ISRU package would be a nuclear reactor, but even I if I put my mind to it could mock that up without too much trouble so I suppose I would just be looking for the ability to mine resources and turn them into what I need with sufficient electric charge and a large mass penalty.

Sorry for the late reply, but thank you. Thats going to really help, when I come to think about it I was also missing the fuel priority so that make sense. I simply hadn't really needed it yet however as default generally works out. tbh that should be on by defualt as it's super handy.

along with I assume the mods that came with Realism overhual was a mod that allowed you to change what the RCS would respond to; Pitch, Yaw, Roll, for attitude and thrust for Starboard Aft etc, does anyone know what that mod was because my RCS usage is WAY WAY up since abandoning my old 1.2.2 install.

Is there any chance now that we have the wings mapped that negative pressure ontop of the wing due to wing shape could be modelled?

I don't suppose "ISRU" has been fixed for RO yet has it? Until that is done I have kind of lost interest in KSP because I only want to use SSTO's and bringing the fuel up would take many many trips so it's not really feasible until ISRU is fixed, also cryogenic fuels not working properly with cooling during time warp. Even if you could just use the current mining and just be able to have a model to turn that into Liquid Fuel, Oxidiser and monoprop into various fuel types, or even just 1 say Liquid Hydrogen for Liquid Fuel, Liquid Oxygen for Oxidiser and HTP for Monoprop, it would limit your engine choice, but it would give you the broadest choice of engines.

Everying that comes with RO + all suggested mods apart for a few pure parts mods that wouldn't effect this + Hyper Edit for fast testing, but as I said rads are having no effect so I don't think the temperature is being factored or the rads are broken plus I don't know how to get logs. Ok this is REALLY wired I start to boil off more LH2 when I am behind the planet, what is that about? Edit; When I reload the craft it seems to actually do what it's supposed to do and evaporate more when it's in the sunlight. Seems like I am having the problem mentioned in heatpumps mod page moving greater than 100x seems to **** up the heating model because if I only move at 100x I lose 0.6 to 1.6 every 100 game seconds which 10x that would be 6 - 16 instead it goes 80 - 110 so I go from storing it for months to 7 days

Err so I just sent out a mission to make a mining facility on the moon so then I could easily get to the rest of the solar system and I come to realize there is no way to get any kind of propellant for attitude RCS that works with RO, doesn't that seem like a gap, I can understand some of it but Helium should be somewhat available on the moon and with some cemetery it should be possible to make some of the others although Nitrogen would likely be out, is this just an oversight or done on propose? Reason why I want RCS is so that my miner and tank can get around on fuel that doesn't evaporate also so I don't have to send them care packages of RCS prop for attitude control, the idea was to have probe controlled miners that could mine the required materials for there flight without kerbal intervention and refuel a space station with a lot of cooling for the LOX fuel, although it doesn't seem to be as effective to cool tanks as it used to be to stop leakage. Edit: Actually I was just looking at it and the procedual tanks cryo balloons and Cryo tanks leak more than the regular balloons's tank by 3x 600 vs 200 leakage in the same sized tank at the same time acceleration lasting 3 weeks vs 1 week... this seems wrong... Edit 2; did a fresh install a Cryo and Cryro balloon Tank only performs a day better than a balloon tank not worth the mass is that's your only improvement and this tank is performing worse than the last one. Got an imprvment from using a highly pressurised tank which I suppose would higher it's boiling point but cooling with radiators seem to have no effect like it used to.

I don't suppose it's possible that in the next version we could get something simmlar to how you can control unmaned space craft with manned craft closer than KSC sometime, even if it requires a pretty heavy module in return it would be beneficial outside of the kerbal system so for example I can land my supply ship to Mars with only a probe controlling it with kerbals in orbit etc, or if you are not playing real scale solar system Duna.

Optimal? I don't understand why, there is always an optimal angle of attack for reentry just knowing what it is is the hard part and it will change with altitude and speed but generally you can just get away with pitching as hard as you can before you lose control for the early part while your high up and at basically orbital speeds. or did you mean. A optimal AOA for reentry would be one that slows you down as fast as possible while also avoiding getting burned up and not pulling excessive G's, although you might also want to extend your range so a lower angle of attack might be called so I suppose you could mean that there is no optimal AOA for every circumstance because it depends on the circumstance?

For reentry there is an optimal AOA which can hold for a certain altitude because at the start you are just trying to create enough drag and lift to keep you high enough while you slow down so you don't burn up so keeping say a 30 degree pitch from the surface pro-grade vector for example could give you the drag you need, not that I am demanding you change anything or something like that I am simply explaining that there is a use case to being able to maintain a specific attitude, it is edge case though as not a lot of people use flying SSTO's often enough to be bothered because it's more difficult and takes longer than even a rocket SSTO as you have to as I said keep up high for as long as possible, because unlike a rocket SSTO you cannot cover the top with a heat shield and go with a ballistic trajectory which is faster so decent is a lot faster and a lot less involved, and launches are also easier. I was thinking of maybe making a kOS script but it's too much effort to be bothered, considering I would literally be designing a auto pilot which would need to change even the AOA of the wings etc, it would be a lot of work and I don't even have a foundation in coding to begin with.

I have noticed that performance on my 1700X is worse than my 3570k are there any plans to optimise the game for the Ryzen architecture.

Is there any chance of getting this working well with realscale solarsystem and SSTO's which use wings to land so the projections are long and it comes up against a limit, if Trajectories can to it's work outside of the nomral thread limitations of KSP it would be nice to have the option to enable longer predictions, although if it works within the KSP physics engine I know that isn't possible.

I know this is a feature that other mods have but given the smootheness of this mod I would like to see it done here is it possible that you could make it so that Atmospheric Autopilot allows you to fold specific angels of attack or particular pitches against the horizon, for winged SSTO's the process of deobiting is long and you usually have to hold an angle of attack for a long time especially with real scaled solar system and having a much smoother controller to be able to do it would be lovely curren't use mech jeb but it's kinda doddgy in comparison to AA. Edit; re-reading this I realize I wasn't particularly clear, basically what I mean is that it would be fantastic to have a box where I could type in 30 and it would hold a 30 degree pitch against my prograde marker or against the horizon.

Errr doesn't realism overhual come with real scale solar system anymore? Or did it ever?

@ferram4 For a couple of pages ago when I saw some other people taking about rejiggering the mod I thought you might have went MIA and someone else had taken it over... You cannot guess at my relief to see your post as aggressive as it may or may not have been Oh and the vast majority understand it will be done when it will be done and bugging you with posts asking when it will be done is likely just to pee you off and if anything make you not want to work on the mod out of frustration. Obviously I anticipate 1.2.2 capability no less than most, but I'm not dense enough to think asking when it will be ready will make it arrive any sooner, I literally cannot bear to use KSP any longer without at least FAR and Kerbal Joint Reinforcement, so thanks for being awesome and creating such awesome mods. Edit; and I'm not trying to indirectly poke you into updating I'm really am just trying to show gratitude, I'm happy enough just to continue playing 1.1.3 for now.

Yes but the air is cooled before the compressor. Ah my bad that was Oxyhydorgen, it's 3200 but the point still stands that with air it's going to be 2210C if for example if the air is coming out of the precooler is 926.85C your trust is going to be terrible because the expansion due to heating is going to be low, now heating from -150 C to 2210 C that will give you some thrust. Edit, the number used an air temperature of 20C so it would be higher but I don't know the math to work out exactly how much higher, but you can't just add the 2.

Sorry I took a long time to get back to you but that would be because the maximum burning temp of hydrogen is 2800 C which can only be achieved with a perfect hydrogen oxygen mix, with air it's only 20 odd percent so your burning temp is going to be significantly lower than that in air going through the engine even after being cooled through the pre-cooler at 1750 m/s is going to be a significant percentage of that. So thrust is caused by gas expansion if you cannot heat up the incoming air significantly you get little or no thrust, also due to dragging the air through the intake and pre-cooler you would actually get net negative thrust. That's basic rocket science. I'm not saying that the engine would never overheat because Precoolers but under the power of the engines it should never overheat as hard as you tried short of take a drive to pick up more speed or opening up the Intakes while in re-entry. But in normal use it should never happen because the engine would become so inefficient and the thrust so low that it shouldn't happen, and the point of faluire would not be the compressor it would be the precooler if you took such drastic measures as going into a dive or opening up the intakes while in re-entry. Because the pre-cooler is first in the engine... well the Intake could melt but the tolerances for the Intake are much higher than the pre cooler and yes the compressor tolarance for heat would be lower than the compressor, but the compressor is quite delicate it's self given how small and light it is and how much surface area you need. And the SR71 shows you that compressors are not as delicate as you might think as it can reach mach 3.5 which is only 30% slower, and the Saber engines have the Precooler, which is there mostly for fuel efficiency and maintaining a good thrust to weight ratio as there is unmanned SR72 which can reach Mach 6 without a pre-cooler, which can reach those speeds because it's lighter, the engine technology hasn't been revolutionized that much since the SR71. It's just with an UAV the weight for keeping people alive is removed which is a not insignificant, obviously part of it is engines getting better, but not by that much.