Agathorn

Is that real?

None of the configs in real_engines_rescale.cfg use :final. Unless I somehow have an old version.

Yep i've fixed it. I don't understand why the attachment points were changed from the original part, but setting the bottom point back to the same value as the original part fixes it. @PART[galaxvr2] { %title = Aestus %manufacturer = EADS Astrium description = Upper stage engine of the Ariane 5ES vehicle that launches the ATV to ISS. Burns hypergolic propellants. !MODEL {} !MODEL {} MODEL { model = AIES_Aerospace/Engine/AIESenginegalaxvr2/model scale = 0.307, 0.307, 0.307 } %rescaleFactor = 3.25 %node_stack_top = 0.0, 6.38, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2 %node_attach = 0.0, 6.38, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2 %node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -48, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2 %attachRules = 1,1,1,0,0 } I only fixed node_stack_bottom. I left the others alone, even though they were changed from the base part, since only the bottom was broken.

Hold off wasting your time Nathan, I think i've fixed it. Gimme one minute.

You sure? I swear I tried that twice, and each time I reloaded I ended up back at stock configs. I have 1.5.6 This one: @PART[galaxvr2] { %title = Aestus %manufacturer = EADS Astrium EDIT: I've been trying to google up information on properly resizing part in KSP to understand how to fix this myself, but I havent' had much luck. Unless this engine is just way off. Most of the RE configs specify a rescaleFactor and then the attachment points remain the same as the original engine. But on this one, not only is there a rescaleFactor but the attachments were changed as well. So I got all confused.

Does SFJackBauer have a thread for his RealEngine configs, or is that something you maintain separately for RO? I can confirm that the values for this one engine are definitely wrong, the node_stack_bottom value is way too small. However trying to figure out the right value through trial and error, and having to reload the game each time, is really painful! Don't know if maybe someone more familiar with it could determine the proper value easier? Or is there maybe some trick to get ModuleManager to reload the configs without having to restart?

I'm wondering how you derived the numbers for solar panel density? If my math is right, the solar wings on the ISS have a density of around 269W per square meter. http://www.kepu.dicp.ac.cn/photo/07sl02/Handbook%20of%20Photovoltaic%20Science%20and%20Engineering/10.%20Space%20Solar%20Cells%20and%20Arrays.pdf - Page 4 34m x 12m = 408m^2. 110 / 408 = 0.2695 Watts per square meter. EDIT: For some more data http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/neep602/SPRING00/lecture2.pdf Has some more fun numbers, which also seem to contradict the previous numbers. Page 8 indicates the the US arrays generate 76 kW, not 110. It also indicates a size of 34m x 73m which is a HUGE difference. So not i'm not sure what to think. Need to do more digging I guess. EDIT: Found this here: http://imgur.com/IM9BSGS Which is marketing material from Lockheed Martin about the ISS Solar Arrays. It confirms the wing size of 34mx12m, but indicates a maximum output per wing of only 32.8 kW, giving a value of around 80W/m^2. So I guess the final answer is, who the heck knows One last edit: I've found other sources that seem to backup the 32.8kW value, so I guess at the end of the day you can basically ignore this entire post as the numbers fall inside your ranges. Unless you just want to use the links for some interesting reading. Or just to laugh at me. That's fun too.

Thanks Nathan. I won't promise anything, but i'm going to take a look see if I can help get things more complete.

Are there any specific guidelines I can use for the batteries/panels? Or is it just a matter of try to determine what is real and go from there. Mass/charge are all based on real units right? Have solar panels from AIES been done? They seemed to be a bit strong to me, but I might be wrong on that.

I'm having a problem with this engine: I'm using the RealEngine configs, but not sure how best to identify the engine. The problem i'm having is it seems the attachment points are off. First, the engine goes "into" the fuel tank above a little bit. This is weird but not a big problem. What IS a big problem though is the attachment point at the end of the engine, for the decoupler, is in the middle of the engine!

@NathanKell I noticed that none of the AIES Pods have SPUs to allow them to work with Remote Tech. At least they didn't for me, unless I missed something? Anyway not sure what the proper scope is for making one mod compatible with another but since RO encourages the use of both, I thought i'd post it here. My reason for posting, is I went and made a patch .cfg to provide SPUs to all the AIES unmanned pods. Then I noticed in the OP that support for AIES pods is "partial". What else needs to be done? Maybe I can help out there?

Thanks for this. I just looked at the SpaceX pack and it looks amazing.

I think you need to install the RftS engine configs from RO if you are not going to use the RealEngines configs.

Ok so there is no actual parts pack for RealEngines, it just uses the others. That was where my misunderstanding occured. Thanks!

I Want to give these a try but what part packs do I need? I can't seem to Google up any RealEngine pack. I currently have KW, NovaPunch, and AIES installed. Do I need any other parts packs to work with RealEngines?

The ranges are correct if you use the tweaks provided by this mod. Follow the instructions though as you have to move a file. Just be aware that some antennas don't have the RT config, so look in the right click tooltip to make sure it does.

So I have been having a recurring problem. I'm going to post it here but forgive me if its a known issue, as others must have run into this by now. The problem is that quite often the first launch using CLONED tanks, results in some tanks being without fuel. Not empty, but literally not configured for any fuel whatsoever. Even though in the VAB they are fine. If I revert to VAB, then immediately go back to Launch, then the tanks are fine.

I'm using all three, and Real Fuels seems to work fine with them.

Yeah, this. Plus the Omni antennas I have right now are a tad short for good coverage in GEO. I was trying to figure out how to do relays using the more powerful directional antenna. Took a few tries but I managed to get a couple in highly eccentric orbits that cap out around 40Mm. That combine with timing just a few minutes ago allowed me to have an active signal to a probe as it passed 35Mm and I got my data . Unfortunately it was only worth 100 science, so now I need to manage to get one up there and return it for another 250. Thing is though the next tech level of engines is 500 science so i'm still falling way short.

Yeah I figured that out, but i'm having trouble figuring out how to use other craft to relay the signal.

Deleting the cfg files for EngineIgnitor seems to have corrected the issues I was having. At least for the engines I am currently using anyway. Thanks!

You might just not recognize it. Its called "RSP_V18" in TreeLoader.

For completion, here is the launch vehicle that is capable of doing it for me. I'm sure I could make it better, and this is a bit unstable, but it works. Ironically I still haven't managed my science yet though lol. I need to do some reading on RemoteTech because apparently it doesn't work the way I thought, and I keep losing connection to my probe's when they go beyond line of sight of KSC

Heh well the excitement was short lived as apparently I didn't bring along a powerful enough antenna. But at least I know I have a launch vehicle capable of doing it now, even if it is a little .. um.. shaky lol.

Yay I did it! At first it didn't seem to be working as around 300k, I was getting closer to my own Apogee at around 350km which made no sense me as I was still accelerating, then all of a sudden something change and my Apogee started moving away around the planet then it accelerated REALLY fast and next thing I knew, my apogee is now shown at over 50,000 km!