[KSP 1.12.1+] Galileo's Planet Pack [v1.6.6] [23 Sept 2021]

[Poodmund]

5 hours ago, MaxL_1023 said:

Well - I am never putting anything in a low polar orbit of Lili again. SOMEONE (Kepler maybe? Brache? Halley? One of those telescope guys...) decided to give it a 20km+ high equatorial bulge in combination with super-rotation and (if it was possible) the whole dang thing likely disintegrating when hit by DMagics seismic impact hammer.

Muhahaha. *maniacal cackling*

[astroheiko]

@JadeOfMaar. I can not do anything about it, I have to go there. I can not resist it, it is too tempting - I want to see it. Who of you had the idea to put a hot Jupiter there? Thank God, he has not (yet?) a moon that would give me sleepless nights. With the relatively low dV requirements to return, however, it would maybe be possible to land on a moon if the orbit would not be too low and the orbit retrograde. In addition, the moon should not be too big. Then it might maybe possible to land there.

@MaxL_1023 and @Urses. The whole mods I save for later. I want to have fun for a long time. To date, I have no idea how they all work - BDB-TAC-USI and how they all are called. Also, my 9 year old PC can not perform more. But the plans for a new one are already in work. (Was not there something of higher resolutions for the planets too?)

@CatastrophicFailure. This is an excellent suggestion, thank you.

Edited April 22, 2017 by astroheiko

[MaxL_1023]

8 hours ago, CatastrophicFailure said:

This is all in 10.flarpthatscat right? Dang.

Yes - it takes roughly 9 km/s for a very low orbit (Gaels 18 hour day gives you a bit of help from the high rotation speed), then another 4-4.5 to get to Tellumo (depending on relative inclinations and where exactly the planets are in their orbits when the transfer window comes up), then at least ~6.5 to get into Tellumo orbit and be able to encounter and orbit Lili. I packed some extra in the Tellumo insertion stage because I had no idea what angle I would end up encountering Tellumo at and was not actually sure how much energy it would take to capture - orbital speed is about 16 km/s.

Thankfully, I researched the first ion engine after that, so I could send a probe with enough delta-V to explore Otho's moons without needing a booster large enough to push Gael out of the way. It also helps that I decided not to use those huge DMagic science parts which themselves weigh more than a command pod. 

[Poodmund]

For those wondering, here are the re-scale factors for each resize config for Celestial Body Size, Orbital Characteristics, Terrain Altitude and Atmospheric Height when compared to the stock sized system:

1x Scale:

• Celestial Body Size: 1
• Orbital Characteristics: 1
• Terrain Altitude: 1
• Atmospheric Height: 1

2.5x Scale:

• Celestial Body Size: 2.5
• Orbital Characteristics: 2.5
• Terrain Altitude: 1.9
• Atmospheric Height: 1.3

3.2x Scale:

• Celestial Body Size: 3.2
• Orbital Characteristics: 3.2
• Terrain Altitude: 2.24
• Atmospheric Height: 1.4

6.4x Scale:

• Celestial Body Size: 6.4
• Orbital Characteristics: 6.4
• Terrain Altitude: 3.648
• Atmospheric Height: 1.6

10x Scale:

• Celestial Body Size: 10
• Orbital Characteristics: 10
• Terrain Altitude: 5
• Atmospheric Height: 1.8

I saw that on @RoverDude's stream he was pondering the Atmosphere Height of Otho as there was a potential unwanted aerobrake situation but it wasn't easily apparent what height the atmosphere started in an upscaled system... so here's all the info in case anyone was wondering.

The values are calculated by the following Sigma Dimensions variables:

• Celestial Body Size = Resize
• Orbital Characteristics = Rescale
• Terrain Altitude = Resize * landscape
• Atmospheric Height = Atmosphere * atmoTopLayer

The landscape variable values are determined by the following: Resize^(Log10(0.5)) or verbally, the Resize value to the power of (roughly) -0.301.

Edited April 22, 2017 by Poodmund

[OhioBob]

1 hour ago, Poodmund said:

The landscape variable values are determined by the following: Resize^(Log₁₀(0.5)) or verbally, the Resize value to the power of (roughly) -0.301.

The atmosphere factor uses a similar formula, where Atmosphere = Resize^(Log₁₀(1.25)), or Resize^0.0969.

The product Atmosphere * atmoTopLayer also uses a similar formula, though the end result is rounded off.  Atmosphere*atmoTopLayer ≈ Resize^(Log₁₀(1.8)), or Resize^0.255.

From the above we get, atmoTopLayer = Atmosphere*atmoTopLayer / Atmosphere.

I've found that this type of function gives a better result than scaling linearly by the resize factor.
 

Edited April 22, 2017 by OhioBob

[Friend0rags]

So I have polar sats over Gael & Iota with resource scanners, but the overlay isn't coming up at all.... am I missing something?....

 

*Edit: after reading the KSPedia it seems that resources aren't as abundant....I am playing on the hard difficulty, I just didn't expect Gael or Iota to be completely depleted of ore...

Edited April 22, 2017 by Friend0rags

[CatastrophicFailure]

@Galileo I'm playing with Mission Controller Extended, and as expected, some of the contracts are buggered up. It's confused about what body to send me to on some specialized ones. I understand why this is. Question is, is there anything I can edit (like in the save file) to change the destination body contract by contract?

[Galileo]

Just now, CatastrophicFailure said:

@Galileo I'm playing with Mission Controller Extended, and as expected, some of the contracts are buggered up. It's confused about what body to send me to on some specialized ones. I understand why this is. Question is, is there anything I can edit (like in the save file) to change the destination body contract by contract?

I don't know. I will have to take a look at it

[CatastrophicFailure]

1 minute ago, Galileo said:

I don't know. I will have to take a look at it

Whoah. 

That was quick!

[Galileo]

Just now, CatastrophicFailure said:

Whoah. 

That was quick!

That's how I roll

[JadeOfMaar]

3 hours ago, Friend0rags said:

So I have polar sats over Gael & Iota with resource scanners, but the overlay isn't coming up at all.... am I missing something?....

 

*Edit: after reading the KSPedia it seems that resources aren't as abundant....I am playing on the hard difficulty, I just didn't expect Gael or Iota to be completely depleted of ore...

Gael's ice caps purposely don't have Ore... But if you're saying the entirety of these bodies have no Ore then that is a serious bug. You should be able to set resource abundance levels separately so I suppose raising it to 1000% (or back to 100% if the separate slider fell to 10% or so on) should be an effective fix.

[Tynrael]

I sent 4 Kerbals to land on Niven in a 1.25m lander. Parachutes didn't work out like I thought they would and I did test my lander on the launch pad and knew the gravity was lower, but my drill didn't reach the ground from my craft in the low gravity due to the full extension of the landing legs. Used Antenna Sleep to safely stow my antennas through the plasma and then they didn't pop out until more than a minute later than I set them to! The relay satellite from OctoSat detects my craft connected to it when I control the satellite but my craft doesn't route through it so it isn't helpful. Oh glorious mods haha.

 

I saw some posts about exploding flags in scaled versions... I had 2 pieces of Science Experiment Pack tech that I placed on Niven that exploded. Possibly the same kind of issue? I am using stock scale though. And they aren't flags.

[Rocketology]

Jade Science Station is now operational!

[MaxL_1023]

Welp - I'm going full Kerbal. GPP, 10.6257x, and Kerbalism life support. I'll call up NASA, see if they have any old Saturn V's lying around - I need strap-on boosters by the megaton. 

[MaxL_1023]

I just barely managed to get Valentina on a free-return Iota flyby - ran into that 140 ton, 36m launchpad limit. Without cryoengines I doubt I could have made it. Those radiation belts though...surprised she didn't glow in the dark. 

[slubman]

In my GPP career, I finally finished (I hope so), the assembly of my first Iota outpost habitation and workshop space.

This is the first time, I do so much docking on the ground in any of my KSP career.

There is a lone nuclear reactor not to far away (~300m) to power the whole thing throughout the long Iota night. The resources are shared via Simple Logistics.

The next step is to extand this to a real nuclear power plant and electricity storage facility

[JadeOfMaar]

@slubman you've officially built the little house on the prairie. It's too awesome for a small thing.  And I find it nostalgic too.

[FlexGunship]

Hey all,

 

After updating from GPP version 1.1 to 1.2.2 (using the "save career" config file, if that matters), I now see that KSP takes up 13GB of RAM (compared to 5.6GB before the change) and makes the game entirely unplayable. When I updated the GPP version, I also updated Sigma Dimensions to the latest version. The install uses the 6.4x resize and includes plenty of other mods.

I'm working on debugging it myself via the log file, but right now I'm just wondering if anyone else is having a similar experience.

I have my pre-update game backed-up, so this isn't crippling, just wondering if this is a common experience.

Thanks!

Edited April 23, 2017 by FlexGunship

[Galileo]

11 minutes ago, FlexGunship said:

Hey all,

 

After updating from GPP version 1.1 to 1.2.2 (using the "save career" config file, if that matters), I now see that KSP takes up 13GB of RAM (compared to 5.6GB before the change). When I updated the version, I also updated Sigma Dimensions to the latest version. The install uses the 6.4x resize and includes plenty of other mods.

I'm working on debugging it myself via the log file, but right now I'm just wondering if anyone else is having a similar experience.

I have my pre-update game backed-up, so this isn't crippling, just wondering if this is a common experience.

Thanks!

You may have not noticed in your other game, but when using scatterer,  GPP clouds, and all of the optional mods, ksp will use roughly 10gb and even more on Mac and Linux.. That's without part packs. It has been that way since 1.1 and probably earlier. So when you say "plenty of other mods" 13gb is pretty good. My game, with my 85 other mods installed, hits 16-18gb and has since before 1.1. 

Just for reference: SVE and SVT (much smaller mods) when used together, use about it 5.6gb.

Edited April 23, 2017 by Galileo

[MaxL_1023]

I just end up playing stroboscopically (Hard-Disk Swapping). Even at 5 FPS, GPP is still better than stock!

[Urses]

15 minutes ago, Galileo said:

You may have not noticed in your other game, but when using scatterer,  GPP clouds, and all of the optional mods, ksp will use roughly 10gb and even more on Mac and Linux.. That's without part packs. It has been that way since 1.1 and probably earlier.

If you like it "cute" you have to pay a big toll

I had to install a addition coolvent for my graphikcard... but it is more as worth it!

But if you will be a beauty you have to sorrow (i don't know if english have this phrase the german one is "wer schön sein will muss leiden") 

Funny Kabooms 

Urses 

Edited April 23, 2017 by Urses

[MaxL_1023]

I did have to remove Scatterer and turn down the texture resolution - before that 10x GPP would crash KSP entirely. Last night I had to play a stock install on another computer - it literally looked like a prequel or alpha-release version of the GPP-KSP (Or RSS, that is good as well) I am used to now. Not to mention that a pod, terrier, swivel, 4 thumpers and the associated fuel tanks could put Jeb on the Mun and back - good luck trying that in 10.6257x!

[FlexGunship]

1 hour ago, Galileo said:

You may have not noticed in your other game, but when using scatterer,  GPP clouds, and all of the optional mods, ksp will use roughly 10gb and even more on Mac and Linux.. That's without part packs. It has been that way since 1.1 and probably earlier. So when you say "plenty of other mods" 13gb is pretty good. My game, with my 85 other mods installed, hits 16-18gb and has since before 1.1. 

Just for reference: SVE and SVT (much smaller mods) when used together, use about it 5.6gb.

Well, I'll certainly take your word for it. I opened up my backup game (same mods, same 6.4x GPP, only different SD and GPP versions) and, on the launch pad, with the same rocket, I get 4,076MB (old version) versus 12,968MB (new version).

I will take this as evidence that other folks are NOT having this problem and I will work on it for myself (i.e. fresh install, log file investigation, module manager messages, etc.).

My hunch is that there's a circular reference with the "career saver" config file. I don't have any evidence to support this. Wish me luck! I'll let you know if I sort it out.

 

[MaxL_1023]

Normal Gemini:

 

Kerbal Gemini (Iota Lander Upgrade):

 

 

I can't imagine what I'll need for a Ceti Mission!

[Temporal Wolf]

I'm guessing this is probably not intended, and I suspect it it may not be your doing, but I thought you might find it interesting: