RedAV8R

Specifically for Kosmos? Or anything in general? Your Dragon could use some updating. Perhaps some good Mir or ISS parts to help with that group project.

@teal'c: Thanks. I need to make a pass and check for some consistency between packs. This particular case has been fixed now. @Phylan: Appreciate the words. Hattivat provided some pretty good guidance, better vehicle design, better ascent profile. Both would make a world of difference. There is a reason why most vehicles are 3 stages, either 3 core, or 2 with boosters. Using SRBs will give you a push to get out of the thick part of the atmosphere, while using a smaller main engine that won't push your TWR sky high. Seriously, make some that mimic real vehicles first, see how it's done, then you can tweak as necessary, or don't tweak and just use them as is. Building your own rockets is fun, but with as many vehicles as there are out there, I find using real ones meet most, if not all goals. The fun for me is doing things IN space, not getting those things TO space. To each their own. @Hattivat: Thanks. @kitspace: Are you talking IRL or in game? IRL, verniers are used in different ways on different engines. While some single engine stages have gimbaled exhaust giving roll control or RCS for roll control, others have another small engine to provide roll. Like the LR-101 found on the Atlas series. Some stages have a single main engine and 2-4 vernier engines providing all 3 axis of control. The point is generally all vehicles have 3 axis of control in some way, shape, or form. So what's the problem?

@NathanKell: From what I see. #1: The TweakScale installation drops a TweakScale_RealFuels.dll into the plugins folder within the TweakScale folder #2: The RealFuels installation drops a TweakScale_RealFuels.dll into a TweakScaleInteraction folder within the TweakScale folder #3: Tested removing both TweakScale_RealFuels.dll and TweakScale_ModularFuelTanks.dll from original TweakScale installation. No change. #4: Tested removing TweakScale_ModularFuelTanks.dll from TweakScale installation, replacing TweakScale original TweakScale_RealFuels.dll with one from RealFuels. No change. #5: I can confirm post #1446. The volume: Avail and Total do not change at all from original size, regardless of what is done. The mass: Dry and Wet only change in response to fuel load based upon original tank volume. If tank is resized then filled. Only filled to original volume and masses calculated as such. If tank is filled then resized, volumes stays constant. Masses constant. When filled then resized, actual volume of resource does change appropriately. When resized then filled, actual volume of resource is the original volume. LOG. Clean KSP install. TweakScale. RealFuel. RO (for engines). MM 2.3.5.

@NoMrBond: That's fine. You asked for it and I just wanted to send you what I had and my opinions on craft breaking.

@NoMrBond: What I have in a little file for me to remind myself what to do... I honestly don't give a darn if it breaks craft, craft can be rebuilt. Having multiple duplicate part names is just plain bad and needs fixed, regardless of the consequences.

@Phredward: I personally have a spreadsheet with mod/model/name/real manufacter/model, but no performance specs. You make something, I'll post it.

I'm wanting to tackle KOSMOS for RealismOverhaul. Any corrections needed to allow things to work (minus bugged plugins) I'll do my best. The things I know of is multiple parts with the same part name. Big problem. Easily corrected. I haven't dove into the whole thing yet. NK is right. Either let this die and close the thread, update it, or allow others to update it.

That's unfortunate because the stock animation module doesn't allow for viewing the animation in the VAB. Unless of course it's being updated in 0.25 to allow for that. Can't say I've looked at rumors and dev notes for it.

@Ophiuchus: #3. Well had you provided that detail from the start I would have fixed it:wink: Should be much better now. Starting at ~75% or so now. I appreciate it. #4. There are better tanks out there, but I'm assuming stock tanks and parts in general will remain. Should probably make that clear in instructions. Would avoid the silly things like this.

@Ophiuchus: 1. Weight of RS-68A - Thank you, corrected. 2. NASA 4xSSME ISP - Thank you! Had the right Isp in the config but the index was wrong (duplicated). Fixed the index for the curve. Thank you again. 3. GEM-46/60 - YEP. The GEM40/46 take 20secs for full power. The GEM60 take 7.5-10sec for full power. Pull the latest ATK Catalog, thrust curves are in there. 4. Pyrios node. Um...I redid the NASA Pyrios at some point, now uses the NASA tanks and stock big 2.5m tank to increase it's length. If you see nothing the tanks were deleted in your install. Might check that first. If you want, delete current RO folder, reinstall the latest. 5. RS-2200. Going to think about that...what I may do is default that to the XRS-2200 but have the full power RS-2200 as another config. Isn't RealFuels awesome, everybody say thanks to NK. 6. At one time I had an idea for the LE-5 or LE-7. That got shelved in favor of something else. Lovad has a decent HII series stuff and I've got another link for another H-II series that will be done as well. I haven't looked at it, hopefully the engines are separate parts in that pack, unlike Lovad.

@Redhotita1: Yep, the FASA and also OLDD Apollos have not yet been worked on. Originally we were making 3rd party stock like pods analogous to real counterparts. This led to some size issues that I just didn't like. So if replica, then they will be sized appropriately, if stock like, they are simply human sized. Thank you for the words. They are coming soon:) Moving along as fast as I can given work and 34 week pregnant wife. DennyTX is currently working on some fantastic fixes for his Apollo (which is shared by FASA as well), and I'm working with him as best I can. @Spooks: This is an RSS issue. Likely caused by the fact you did not follow directions and install a texture pack with RSS. Further issues can be discussed in the RSS thread. Not this one.

@Redhotita1: The decoupler issue has been resolved along with the decoupler force. That'll be in the next release. The Squad Mk1-2 Command Pod is the Squad Mk1-2 Command Pod. It's not Apollo, if it was, it would have been renamed Apollo. If you want an Apollo there are several replicas to choose from.

@kitspace: Do thrusters provide thrust? Yes. Do thrusters use fuel while providing thrust? Yes. Result. They are functioning. Visually SEEING exhaust (in the game context) are called effects. Per the OP. I am not concerned with that. If you are so concerned with reality you do realize you should be flying within the IVA right. In which case a person may not be able to visually see all thrusters firing. They aren't concerned with that. If attitude changes are correct, and fuel usage is correct. Then there is the concept of faith which is telling them, yes, the thrusters are working. Problem, I don't know, I don't care. For the 2nd time, this effects discussion is closed. Case Dismissed with Prejudice. Unless somebody has a working fix they would like included. Further attempts at discussion will be considered harassment and reported as such. While on the discussion of ModuleRCSFX...Yes, I know of the release. I knew of the release before it was released. If you cared to check, you'd have discovered that the release on it's own thread is the same as that contained within RO. You obviously never looked to realize that NK owns the repo in which RO is located. RemoteTech. Yes, the previous configs with manned pods having RT modules included caused issues. This was reported in what is likely the best bug report this thread has ever seen. It was replicated, a fix tested and then implemented. Which not surprisingly also matches stock functionality. Any future discussion for a feature request needs to be brought up with the people of RemoteTech. When implemented on their end, it can then be implemented within RealismOverhaul. Case Dismissed. LazTek is currently in testing. Configs are basically done. Pending good tests and no RL interruptions, I'll have a release tonight.

Thrusters on Stock. It's not happening. Get over it. If the pod was designed anything realistic I would consider it. It's not. Therefore I did something that does work, and is proven to work. I don't care about your visual pleasure. Especially when it's unrealistic. I care about function. Effects. As I said in the OP. I'm not touching effects and I'm not worried about effects. I don't care about your visual pleasure. I care about function. They function. Discussion over. Remote Tech. Pods do not and will not have RT modules. Test Stock + RemoteTech and prove me wrong. You won't. If you cared to read back a few pages you'll see that when RT modules WERE added it to manned pods it broke the capability of attaching an unmanned probe to the same craft and allowing it to function when all the crew left the station. If anything this is a limitation of RT. If you want better functionality then talk to them. It's not my problem. I actually fixed a bug I created by removing the RT modules from manned pods that I had originally put in. Look at it this way, if you hop into an airplane, you don't need a connection to the ground in order to fly it. You need an antenna to communicate but you don't need one to fly. So how the current implementation of stock function NOT realistic? If you want an attitude computer or task planner then you can use mechjeb or some other autopilot, just like real life. If you install an antenna on a pod. THEN it will say "local control". Still no flight computer. But you can transmit science back, which is disabled in sandbox, which is the only thing supported at this time. So doesn't really matter then does it. Think of RT as a way of controlling objects in space via the ground (or command station also in space). As for the suggestions for a config to add the module to command parts. I don't recall that, links to those suggestions would be appreciated. Hope I get what to work. How much left of what?

SpacePlane+, and B9, and stock Mk1, 2, 3 plane parts are on hold for the moment until 0.25 comes out which integrates SP+...so that alone will require a revamp, once "stock" is done, then B9 will be made to match.

@Kitspace: No logs needed. KerbX. I have no idea why it was removed. The fact is that it was, and no new legal upload has been made. Respect the authors wishes. I don't give a darn about textures and placement of thrusters based on that. Seriously look at the textures. If I actually put thrusters there, the pod for sure would not be controllable. What I have done, I assure you they do respond. I have noticed VISUALLY sometimes it doesn't seem they are firing, but they are in fact firing, fuel decreases and the pod moves. That's effects, and per the OP, I'm not doing squat with effects. The Mk1-2 has 12 thrusters, placed in similar fashion to that of Apollo. Offers plenty of control in all dimensions. The Mk1 has 6 placed similar to Mercury. Under stock conditions manned pods and cockpits don't have RT modules either. Keeping things consistent. Decoupler power, I'll admit, I knew about it and it didn't make my to-do list for this release. I've almost got LazTek worked up again, once that's done I'll post another release with the decoupler fix, the fuel tank fix mentioned above and anything else that comes along between now and then.

@teal'c: Good to hear. WOW. Remnant of when those tanks were part of the Pyrios. I'll get that fixed pronto. THANK YOU! @Kitspace: Who says it was never released? Well it was, just not available for download now.

@TNM: Maybe it was too early for Starwaster, or late...who knows. You could have taken the high road and just ignored his comment, instead you decided to insert your quite lengthy sarcasm in response. I'll fully admit I can get cranky too, but your post isn't helping things either. That said, yes there is some incongruity with DRE parts. I've fixed them within RO, giving more options and using TweakScale to allow different sizes of decouplers without part bloat. If NK wants me to I can integrate some of that into DRE itself, of course soon RealHeat will be coming so changes will probably wait for that release.

Boy it'd be nice for people to read even one page back. That is a RealChute problem, not FASA. You'll want to delete the MM file for FASA in RealChutes.

Dev quit KSP for a while. He's back now working on another project, but it's got one of the highest quality Merlin's made to date, that I've seen.

@Paul Kingtiger: Sure thing. Daishi has been added:) Thank you very much, last thing I want is to not give credit where credit is do.

AH, yes RLA was also updated. You'll want to do that as well. Ah, yeah, I thought I modified files so that Aerojet wasn't required for the Taurus, guess I'll go back and rework that.

Let me get home and see what's going on. You do have the latest version of AerojetKerbodyne right...AJKD had some MAJOR changes with their latest version...if in fact it was working for you in the last version of RO, and not now, then most likely AJKD needs updating too.

Ah ha. Thanks for the input!

Increased load distance???