[1.3] RealEnginesPack v1.8 OMS and Apollo engine release. 22/07/2017

[CobaltWolf]

18 minutes ago, Alcentar said:

Because I tried to do it but nothing happened. 

I, uh, see. If you want help with it send me a PM.

[Alcentar]

20 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

I, uh, see. If you want help with it send me a PM.

It would be interesting to know, although I do not see the point in this, at launch it still will not be visible.  

 

[Jamesbowser]

 

6 hours ago, Alcentar said:

It would be interesting to know, although I do not see the point in this, at launch it still will not be visible.  

 

I know most people cant see them move but it just bothers me when I'm looking at your engines up close at launch.

[Grabek]

Hi just quick question - is it possible make compatible with KSP 1.3.1?

 

[Alcentar]

10 hours ago, Grabek said:

Hi just quick question - is it possible make compatible with KSP 1.3.1?

 

This will work forever, until SQUAD changes the operation of the engines.

[Temeter]

As long as it pure parts, AFAIK there is no reason they shouldn't work. Before RealEngines, I was using Bobcats old SovietEngines for a very long time.

[Grabek]

9 hours ago, Alcentar said:

This will work forever, until SQUAD changes the operation of the engines.

I'm usually using CKAN so I've not seen it in Compatible, then I did it manually and it works fine.

Thank You!

 

[WhiskyHotel3]

How do I install the RO engine configs?

please help

[Temeter]

36 minutes ago, WhiskyHotel3 said:

How do I install the RO engine configs?

please help

The configs are part of the RO installation (literally in the "RealismOverhaul" folder).

If you got more questions, you should go to the RO-thread. Alcentar has nothing to do with the RO patches, they are usually written by RO-contributors.

Edited October 29, 2017 by Temeter

[Kerbal01]

surface attached engines aren't getting thrust or prop, I have to run fuel lines to them

 

[Temeter]

2 hours ago, Kerbal01 said:

surface attached engines aren't getting thrust or prop, I have to run fuel lines to them

Maybe the part has fuel crossfeed disabled? Necessary to supply radially attached engines.

[Kerbal01]

2 hours ago, Temeter said:

Maybe the part has fuel crossfeed disabled? Necessary to supply radially attached engines.

that was the problem. Using SSTU tanks, apparently that's not enabled by default.

Edited October 30, 2017 by Kerbal01

[Temeter]

6 hours ago, Kerbal01 said:

that was the problem. Using SSTU tanks, apparently that's not enabled by default.

Jep, that's where I learned that rule too.

[FiiZzioN]

I think the only criticism I have is the lack of a working nozzle extension on the RD-0146. Not only does it look a bit odd(can't put my finger on it), but, in reality, it would fail to meet its true potential in a vacuum without said nozzle extension. Kinda like how the nozzle extension works on the "Chelyabinsk" or the RL-10 in the cryo engines mod pack is what I picture here. Other than that, I can say that this is one of the best engine backs I've seen in quite some time. Keep up the fantastic work!

Example:

Edited November 10, 2017 by FiiZzioN
Image for example

[MOARdV]

1 hour ago, FiiZzioN said:

I think the only criticism I have is the lack of a working nozzle extension on the RD-0146

There seems to be two variants of the RD-0146 that I've seen.  There's the model with the nozzle extension (which the old KOSMOS URM pack modeled), and a variant that does not have the extension, which this pack and Bobcat's old soviet engines pack model.  I'm not sure if that's really two different variants, or if many of the photos on line are of models of the engine with the extension removed.

[FiiZzioN]

On 11/10/2017 at 12:31 PM, MOARdV said:

There seems to be two variants of the RD-0146 that I've seen.  There's the model with the nozzle extension (which the old KOSMOS URM pack modeled), and a variant that does not have the extension, which this pack and Bobcat's old soviet engines pack model.  I'm not sure if that's really two different variants, or if many of the photos on line are of models of the engine with the extension removed.

I think it's just many photos without the extension. If you look at pictures of the stage that it's meant to be used on, almost all, if not all of them have the extension. The stage I'm referring to is the KVTK, shown here.

Edited November 14, 2017 by FiiZzioN

[Kobymaru]

Hey guys, I'm having problems with RealEngines v1.5, Realism Overhaul v11.5.1 on KSP 1.2.2.

I built a ship with the RD-58 engine, then did *something* to my install, and now KSP claims RD-58 is missing. Why? It shows a model loading error in the log file:

File error:
(null)
  at (wrapper managed-to-native) UnityEngine.AnimationClip:SetCurve (string,System.Type,string,UnityEngine.AnimationCurve)
  at PartReader.ReadAnimation (System.IO.BinaryReader br, UnityEngine.GameObject o) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at PartReader.ReadChild (System.IO.BinaryReader br, UnityEngine.Transform parent) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at PartReader.ReadChild (System.IO.BinaryReader br, UnityEngine.Transform parent) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at PartReader.ReadChild (System.IO.BinaryReader br, UnityEngine.Transform parent) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at PartReader.ReadChild (System.IO.BinaryReader br, UnityEngine.Transform parent) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at PartReader.Read (.UrlFile file) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/UnityEngineDebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 42)

Model load error in 'D:\Program Files\KSP-1.2.2-rss\GameData\RealEngines\RD58.mu'

 

Any Idea what could be the problem here? I would not only like to get my ship back, I also like the engine and the model. All the files seem to be present:

Edited January 21, 2018 by Kobymaru

[Alcentar]

On 22.01.2018 at 2:35 AM, Kobymaru said:

Hey guys, I'm having problems with RealEngines v1.5, Realism Overhaul v11.5.1 on KSP 1.2.2.

I built a ship with the RD-58 engine, then did *something* to my install, and now KSP claims RD-58 is missing. Why? It shows a model loading error in the log file:

File error:
(null)
  at (wrapper managed-to-native) UnityEngine.AnimationClip:SetCurve (string,System.Type,string,UnityEngine.AnimationCurve)
  at PartReader.ReadAnimation (System.IO.BinaryReader br, UnityEngine.GameObject o) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at PartReader.ReadChild (System.IO.BinaryReader br, UnityEngine.Transform parent) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at PartReader.ReadChild (System.IO.BinaryReader br, UnityEngine.Transform parent) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at PartReader.ReadChild (System.IO.BinaryReader br, UnityEngine.Transform parent) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at PartReader.ReadChild (System.IO.BinaryReader br, UnityEngine.Transform parent) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at PartReader.Read (.UrlFile file) [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
 
(Filename: C:/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/generated/common/runtime/UnityEngineDebugBindings.gen.cpp Line: 42)

Model load error in 'D:\Program Files\KSP-1.2.2-rss\GameData\RealEngines\RD58.mu'

 

Any Idea what could be the problem here? I would not only like to get my ship back, I also like the engine and the model. All the files seem to be present:

You tried to just reinstall the REP???

[Kobymaru]

On 24.1.2018 at 8:12 PM, Alcentar said:

You tried to just reinstall the REP???

I had version 1.5, because I thought that's the last version compatible with KSP 1.2.2. This one still had the error regardless of reinstalling.

Version 1.8 seems to work for me, and looks like it's also 1.2.2 compatible although it's marked as 1.3.0.

[MOARdV]

For anyone who has this mod and also the B9PartSwitch mod, @Alcentar included two textures for the RD-0120 engine - the all-gray engine that you see now, and a variant with red on it.  This MM Patch will let you change the texture in the VAB using B9PartSwitch.

[Alcentar]

I no found a normal confirmation that the NK-33/43 has a gimbal, but found evidence that the N1 used small control motors in the three stages of the rocket.

I also do not see where gimbal is placed at all.

Who in the subject ,show me it. 

[MOARdV]

2 hours ago, Alcentar said:

I no found a normal confirmation that the NK-33/43 has a gimbal, but found evidence that the N1 used small control motors in the three stages of the rocket.

I also do not see where gimbal is placed at all.

Who in the subject ,show me it. 

Everything I read says NK-33 / NK-43 has no gimbal.  N-1 used differential steering and roll control motors.  Soyuz-2-1v uses steering motors with NK-33.  Orbital Sciences Antares used modified NK-33 (Aerojet AJ-26) that added gimbals, but I do not have pictures.

[Alcentar]

6 hours ago, MOARdV said:

Everything I read says NK-33 / NK-43 has no gimbal.  N-1 used differential steering and roll control motors.  Soyuz-2-1v uses steering motors with NK-33.  Orbital Sciences Antares used modified NK-33 (Aerojet AJ-26) that added gimbals, but I do not have pictures.

So it is, but in REP they have gimbal... 

[Pappystein]

On 2/7/2018 at 2:41 PM, Alcentar said:

So it is, but in REP they have gimbal... 

By looking at the Aerojet pictures. the Gimbal is ABOVE the engine hardware for the NK-33.   IE not part of the model you created Alcentar.  

https://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1012/19aj26test/

http://www.rocket.com/loxhydrocarbon-booster-engines

The last photo on the 2nd link shows an Antares with the bottom skirt removed.    You can clearly see new hardware above the thrust structure of the NK-33 engine.  This hardware is not something that would be seen on any rocket due to how it integrates with the structure of the tank.  So I personally see no reason to create this extra detail.  By looking at this admitedly low detail picture it appears that the Gimbal setup is for 2 engines...   As in the Gimbal hardware is separate from the engines that mount to it.  

And here is a Youtube video of an AJ-26 burn test from the top of the Rocket engine itself.   Note you only see the engine bell and plumbing but you can clearly see the gimbal is ABOVE the point of view

 

 

 

 

Edited February 9, 2018 by Pappystein

[Phineas Freak]

The NK engine family does not have gimballing capability since, as other users mentioned, the N-1 LV used differential throttle for steering. As @Pappystein also mentions, OATK had to create a custom engine mount for Antares that includes gimbal actuators, moving the entire engine structure. Now, under stock KSP there is absolutely no way to manage either of these things. So, you cannot blame @Alcentar for his decision of adding gimbal transforms to the engine. Hell, even under RO we configure them to have gimballing, even though in reality they did not have such capability!

(I could also make a case of the wrong S5.92 engine gimballing. The Fregat US, similarly to Antares, moves the entire engine and does so in the X-Y plane, not by changing the thrust vector angle. Something that is also impossible in stock KSP and difficult to achieve with IR.)