[0.20] RemoteTech: Relay Network – V 0.5.0.1

[Sparker]

Hi!

I've got a question: what will be the resulting connection range if I point a long range dish at a low range dish? For example If I'm using 50Gm and 50Mm dishes pointed at each other.

Thank you for the mod. It's very interesting to use it.

[xZise]

[…]The one functioning solid-fueled design I came up with has a payload fraction of just 1.6%, though it looks elegant:

[…]

Indeed this looks elegant, I like it!

[…]Why are my pictures not showing?

Don't use quotes, and fix your link (add an i. and the file extension):

[IMG][B]http://i.imgur.com/1BPs2Id.jpg[/B][/IMG[B][/B]]

Because they don't have the time to sort out RT2 stuff with all the RT1 stuff. RT2 is still in development, the play testing is to help them find and fix bugs. Any RT2 issues should be reported on the bug tracker to help them zero in on them in a much more efficient manner. :-)

But when you have a question about RT2, then the bug tracker isn't really helpful. Also I can't find any search function on the bug tracker, or I'm blind. And RT1 isn't really helpful at the moment. I'm only waiting for the official release of RT2 to start playing KSP again.

Fabian

Edited August 19, 2013 by xZise
fix code

[DoubleOSeven1]

Repost:

I just love the Line of sight indicators on all the CommSats

Makes it so easy to lose a Planet!

[Kimberly]

Hi!

I've got a question: what will be the resulting connection range if I point a long range dish at a low range dish? For example If I'm using 50Gm and 50Mm dishes pointed at each other.

Thank you for the mod. It's very interesting to use it.

In RemoteTech 1, the minimum range is what counts, so those two satellites would only be in contact if they were within 50 Mm. In RemoteTech 2, the average of the two ranges is used, which is more realistic--after all, a weak antenna can still detect a very strong signal, or a strong antenna a very weak signal.

On a different note, this is my preliminary design for the main launcher:

I've confirmed it can be launched into the required polar orbit. However, I'm not happy with it--its payload fraction is only 3.1% (counting only the satellites) and it has 257 parts (of which 160 are the satellites), making it quite laggy. Anyone have suggestions for improving it? The middle fairings hide the payload rack, and the top fuselage hides a probe core and two RTGs. The two boosters have Mainsails, the middle engine is a Skipper.

Edited August 19, 2013 by Kimberly

[DoubleOSeven1]

In RemoteTech 1, the minimum range is what counts, so those two satellites would only be in contact if they were within 50 Mm. In RemoteTech 2, the average of the two ranges is used, which is more realistic--after all, a weak antenna can still detect a very strong signal, or a strong antenna a very weak signal.

On a different note, this is my preliminary design for the main launcher:

I've confirmed it can be launched into the required polar orbit. However, I'm not happy with it--its payload fraction is only 3.1% (counting only the satellites) and it has 257 parts (of which 160 are the satellites), making it quite laggy. Anyone have suggestions for improving it? The middle fairings hide the payload rack, and the top fuselage hides a probe core and two RTGs. The two boosters have Mainsails, the middle engine is a Skipper.

KWRocketry?

[Kimberly]

KWRocketry?

Is that a question or a suggestion? If the former, I'm not using KWRocketry. If the latter, I'd rather not use engines from mods; it takes away from some of the fun in designing.

[DoubleOSeven1]

Think I'm going to lose coverage?

The inside 55 degree orbit is my GPS

The outside 6 Geos which are the normal setup

And then the outside is a 36 constellation for interplantery.

The orbit period are 3, 6, and 12 hours respectivly

All the antenna Lines

[sirkut]

Think I'm going to lose coverage?

The inside 55 degree orbit is my GPS

The outside 6 Geos which are the normal setup

And then the outside is a 36 constellation for interplantery.

The orbit period are 3, 6, and 12 hours respectivly

All the antenna Lines

Wow. I'm speechless.

[DoubleOSeven1]

Wow. I'm speechless.

Thats with a ancient computer, I was setting it up with Hyperedit so that when RT2 is actually released I would have the numbers needed. I wanted to replicate the Iridium Sat Phone network, but after this I'm left with very little frames

[Kimberly]

Thats with a ancient computer, I was setting it up with Hyperedit so that when RT2 is actually released I would have the numbers needed. I wanted to replicate the Iridium Sat Phone network, but after this I'm left with very little frames

Maybe it would help if you gave them smaller antennae? I don't know if that would help with RemoteTech's calculations, but one of the reasons I decided to make a system with the 250 km antennae is that my Kerbin communication network won't be talking to ships halfway to the Mun...

[DoubleOSeven1]

Maybe it would help if you gave them smaller antennae? I don't know if that would help with RemoteTech's calculations, but one of the reasons I decided to make a system with the 250 km antennae is that my Kerbin communication network won't be talking to ships halfway to the Mun...

This was just a test, each sat actually included two antennas and a long range dish, the gps had the two antennas and a long range dish, the interplantery had an interplanet dish and the two antennas. One was the stock antenna and the other was the 8Mm one. For the final version I will most likely redesign the sat I used.

[johnsonwax]

And then the outside is a 36 constellation for interplantery.

I'm missing the point of that interplanetary design. If you intend to have each satellite able to point to each body, even if just planets, that's a huge number of dishes. If you task certain satellites with certain bodies, then you're going to lose coverage periodically.

I've always used two highly elliptical polar satellites, configured identically, with enough dishes to point to each body. Their periapsis is around 80km and their apoapsis just shy of SOI, usually at 80,000 km, and they're 180 deg out of phase, so when one is at apo, the other is at peri. That means that one or the other is visible to every body in the system not blocked by a local body (Laythe blocked by Jool), but one is usually so high above the ecliptic that they may not even be blocked in that case. And because they're polar orbits, they have 100% coverage of the 3 geosync satellites that provide ground coverage. It's not the fastest hop, but you get almost complete coverage anywhere facing Kerbin for only 5 sats. It does look decidedly less cool, though.

[DoubleOSeven1]

I'm missing the point of that interplanetary design. If you intend to have each satellite able to point to each body, even if just planets, that's a huge number of dishes. If you task certain satellites with certain bodies, then you're going to lose coverage periodically.

I've always used two highly elliptical polar satellites, configured identically, with enough dishes to point to each body. Their periapsis is around 80km and their apoapsis just shy of SOI, usually at 80,000 km, and they're 180 deg out of phase, so when one is at apo, the other is at peri. That means that one or the other is visible to every body in the system not blocked by a local body (Laythe blocked by Jool), but one is usually so high above the ecliptic that they may not even be blocked in that case. And because they're polar orbits, they have 100% coverage of the 3 geosync satellites that provide ground coverage. It's not the fastest hop, but you get almost complete coverage anywhere facing Kerbin for only 5 sats. It does look decidedly less cool, though.

It was mainly just a proof of concept, I sent a probe out to Eeloo with two relays (one on each side) and I didn't get any lost signal. I was trying to figure out how many sats would be required. I think in the future it is just going to be two sats out in the 12 hour orbit with 36 dishes each.

[Kimberly]

I'm missing the point of that interplanetary design. If you intend to have each satellite able to point to each body, even if just planets, that's a huge number of dishes. If you task certain satellites with certain bodies, then you're going to lose coverage periodically.

If you have two relays in opposite points of the same orbit, you will never lose coverage due to being behind Kerbin. You can use two relays with many dishes or many relays with few dishes, so long as each planet is assigned two dishes on different crafts.

[DoubleOSeven1]

If you have two relays in opposite points of the same orbit, you will never lose coverage due to being behind Kerbin. You can use two relays with many dishes or many relays with few dishes, so long as each planet is assigned two dishes on different crafts.

And what i did is one sat dedicated to one thing. and requiring two for each

[xZise]

If you have two relays in opposite points of the same orbit, you will never lose coverage due to being behind Kerbin. You can use two relays with many dishes or many relays with few dishes, so long as each planet is assigned two dishes on different crafts.

I'm wondering if there is still connection when Kerbol is in between?

Fabian

[Kimberly]

I'm wondering if there is still connection when Kerbol is in between?

Fabian

I'm not sure. In RemoteTech 1, I don't think so...In RemoteTech 2, maybe! In the real world, the sun causes too much interference for communication even if the planet is only close to the sun's position in the sky. In any case, if such a block does occur, you can have a "detour" relay orbiting Kerbol 1/4th of Kerbin's orbit away. It will act as a permanent bridge between Kerbin and any planet behind the sun from Kerbin's perspective.

[weekendgamer]

I've scoured the internet looking for this question, but Google has returned no results. So, wouldn't having a radio tower at the poles with the biggest dish cover the entire solar system? (except for a blind "area" near Kerbin, starting just slightly beyond Minmus' orbit, assuming a tower that's 20m high) A taller "tower" (airships anyone?) can reach 20,000m; having a blind spot that's 2.3 million meters high, close enough that geostationary orbits are covered.

[xZise]

Okay I checked the values: As Kerbol has already a diameter of 261.6 Mm (aka 261 600 km or 261 600 000 m) and Kerbin's SoI is only about 84 Mm in radius this isn't really possible. So without relays you can't communicate with another celestial body, when Kerbol is in between.

To communicate with a craft on the other side of Kerbin's orbit you need twice of Kerbol's radius (aka diameter) as the altitude from Kerbin's center. But as soon as your altitude is lower than Kerbol's radius (which it is everytime) you can't communicate “around†Kerbol.

And it should be independent of the inclination (a polar orbit also doesn't help) and the RT version you are using. It is basically the intercept theorem: S is the other craft, C is the center of Kerbol and D the center of Kerbin. A is on Kerbol's surface (|AC| = 130.8 Mm) and B is the satellite around Kerbin. And because |AC| is larger than |BD| there is no point S where A is in between S and B.

Fabian

[Kimberly]

I've scoured the internet looking for this question, but Google has returned no results. So, wouldn't having a radio tower at the poles with the biggest dish cover the entire solar system? (except for a blind "area" near Kerbin, starting just slightly beyond Minmus' orbit, assuming a tower that's 20m high) A taller "tower" (airships anyone?) can reach 20,000m; having a blind spot that's 2.3 million meters high, close enough that geostationary orbits are covered.

What's the point of landing dishes on both poles, where they're not guaranteed to have a clear view, when you can just put the same amount in orbit?

[JDP]

A quick dev update:

I've been thinking a bit about removing the old MI class dish from RT1. Currently it's the last remnant of the old RT1 parts in RT2. With the change in design of both the UI and parts bundled with RemoteTech, the old dish kind of looks out-of-place. There's also the issue of the massive amounts of armatures and materials used in the making of it, that makes it a somewhat CPU and GPU intensive part.

Not wanting to scrap it in favor of a plain ol' boring static dish, I set forth on creating something new in stead.

When making giant dishes, there's always a challenge in how to pack the damn thing during launch. It's very hard to do without rigging up the model with massive amounts of armatures, or doing a scale animation that almost always looks cheap and breaks immersion.

For this dish, I've experimented with a clamshell mechanic in lieu of going overboard with complex armatures yet again.

The novel thing to this dish is the fairing that protects it during ascent. The fairing is an actual component of the dish model itself, much like the fairings found on stock engines.

You can have an early look of both the new dish, and the fairing functionality in this little dev video:

[DoubleOSeven1]

A quick dev update:

I've been thinking a bit about removing the old MI class dish from RT1. Currently it's the last remnant of the old RT1 parts in RT2. With the change in design of both the UI and parts bundled with RemoteTech, the old dish kind of looks out-of-place. There's also the issue of the massive amounts of armatures and materials used in the making of it, that makes it a somewhat CPU and GPU intensive part.

Not wanting to scrap it in favor of a plain ol' boring static dish, I set forth on creating something new in stead.

When making giant dishes, there's always a challenge in how to pack the damn thing during launch. It's very hard to do without rigging up the model with massive amounts of armatures, or doing a scale animation that almost always looks cheap and breaks immersion.

For this dish, I've experimented with a clamshell mechanic in lieu of going overboard with complex armatures yet again.

The novel thing to this dish is the fairing that protects it during ascent. The fairing is an actual component of the dish model itself, much like the fairings found on stock engines.

You can have an early look of both the new dish, and the fairing functionality in this little dev video:

Very nice! Will these functional like parachutes as the old ones did?

[JDP]

Very nice! Will these function like parachutes as the old ones did?

not a chance . this one will blow apart in a million pieces if you even try to deorbit it (or opening it while traveling at speed within an atmosphere).

[DoubleOSeven1]

not a chance . this one will blow apart in a million pieces if you even try to deorbit it (or opening it while traveling at speed within an atmosphere).

Well anyways, I'm still looking forward till the release of RT2 looks a million times better.

[Kimberly]

Do you mean you're getting rid of the golden dish, JDP? I'm actually quite fond of that one.

I've been play-testing RT2, and I've had some issues using the flight computer. It's much less intuitive than the old one, probably due to its expanded features. It doesn't always turn off things when you'd expect it to--for example, if th craft is holding prograde and I click on the X in the queue, it doesn't cancel prograde mode. Similarly, if I click on the button in the main window again, it doesn't disable prograde mode either. Is that by design? I have to fidget with it a lot.