[1.3.0] Kerbal Engineer Redux 1.1.3.0 (2017-05-28)

[Padishar]

A quick return to the mass and part numbers

http://i58.tinypic.com/dzw7sw.jpg

As seen, there is no RCS fuel. All liq fuel tanks full. Still mass is reported to be 15/10,743. You can also see parts count reported to be 2/20.

Mods installed (1.0.2): Alarm clock, proc. fairings, sounding rockets, KOS and KER, all latest versions.

EDIT: Removed the decoupler and now parts count is 0/19, mass is 0/10,738.

Click the "All Stages" button to make it display the figures for the stages that don't provide any deltaV. It is possible that some of the numbers are being displayed wrong but the intent with the figures displayed as <number>/<number> is that the first number is the value for this stage only and the other number is for all stages up to an including this stage.

[LN400]

Click the "All Stages" button to make it display the figures for the stages that don't provide any deltaV. It is possible that some of the numbers are being displayed wrong but the intent with the figures displayed as <number>/<number> is that the first number is the value for this stage only and the other number is for all stages up to an including this stage.

Aah thanks a lot for explaining! Ok, show all stages it is then.

[ManuxKerb]

Hi

Just a small bug.When i start KSP and launch a rocket for the first time, my customized KER stuff (deltav-total) is not showing only the normal HUD1 stuff. After revert to VAB and a second launch it shows. Also all folwing launches it shows correctly. Just not the first one.....

Thanks for a great mod!

[ManuxKerb]

Also i just realized, it would be very good (for me at least) if i could see my Monopropellant units on the Hud. Cause i run out of it very qickly and need to manually balance it.

[Mister Spock]

Thank you for a wonderful mod, always the first one I install. I'm returning to the game after a hiatus, using the most recent version of KER, and I have a couple questions.

1. Sometimes the delta-V figures I see in Flight Engineer at the launchpad seem different from those I see in the VAB. I know I can adjust the figures in the VAB to reflect either atmosphere or vacuum conditions. Is the launchpad/Flight Engineer using a combination of both atmosphere and vacuum? Searching this thread, I found one post indicating that KER is smart enough to know that lower-stage delta-V should be calculated with "atmosphere" by default, and upper-stage should use "vacuum" by default. Maybe Flight Engineer does this (but the VAB KER doesn't)?

2. Related to the first question, people now say I need about 3500 m/s delta-V to reach LKO. But in practice I seem to need more, at least judging by the numbers I see in KER in the VAB. Is this "3500" actually "2200 lower stages in atmosphere plus 1300 upper stage in vacuum"?

3. I love the left HUD, but the right HUD overlaps with my (stock) toolbar, which extends to the left thanks to mods. Is there a way to move the HUDs around? (I know, we users are always asking for moar moar moar features, sorry!)

Thanks again for a great mod!

[Red Iron Crown]

Thank you for a wonderful mod, always the first one I install. I'm returning to the game after a hiatus, using the most recent version of KER, and I have a couple questions.

1. Sometimes the delta-V figures I see in Flight Engineer at the launchpad seem different from those I see in the VAB. I know I can adjust the figures in the VAB to reflect either atmosphere or vacuum conditions. Is the launchpad/Flight Engineer using a combination of both atmosphere and vacuum? Searching this thread, I found one post indicating that KER is smart enough to know that lower-stage delta-V should be calculated with "atmosphere" by default, and upper-stage should use "vacuum" by default. Maybe Flight Engineer does this (but the VAB KER doesn't)?

2. Related to the first question, people now say I need about 3500 m/s delta-V to reach LKO. But in practice I seem to need more, at least judging by the numbers I see in KER in the VAB. Is this "3500" actually "2200 lower stages in atmosphere plus 1300 upper stage in vacuum"?

3. I love the left HUD, but the right HUD overlaps with my (stock) toolbar, which extends to the left thanks to mods. Is there a way to move the HUDs around? (I know, we users are always asking for moar moar moar features, sorry!)

Thanks again for a great mod!

1. The pad is slightly above sea level, so ther will be slightly more dV available on the pad compared to the VAB calculated amount. The dV displayed in the VAB is either atmospheric or vacuum, not both, and for the flight engineer it is for the current atmospheric conditions.

2. It's highly dependent on TWR and ascent profile, 3500m/s is for a pretty efficient ascent.

3. Yes. Press the toolbar icon and edit the HUD, it will turn into a solid window that can be moved.

[ManuxKerb]

Hi

Please see my bugreport here, this is maybe caused by KER: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/119437-RCS-Wheel-Large-%28stock%29-no-Node-attach?p=1905379#post1905379

Thanks!

[Mister Spock]

Red Iron Crown, thank you for those very helpful responses. Off to play with the HUD now! I'm really impressed with KER. As I said, it's the mod I install first.

[Padishar]

Hi

Please see my bugreport here, this is maybe caused by KER: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/119437-RCS-Wheel-Large-%28stock%29-no-Node-attach?p=1905379#post1905379

Thanks!

I think TweakScale (or even, possibly, a stock bug) is much more likely to be the culprit there...

[smunisto]

I have a question...I've been using KER ever since it came out, but only in 1.0 it occurred to me that I may have been living in a lie.

So, while building a rocket, inside the VAB, I noticed that now(read - in 1.0) I need to actually use the "Atmospheric" button in order to get reliable atmosphere dV and thrust information about my rocket.

The problem is, I don't remember ever having to use that button before, and the calculations were correct even without it.

Now this is making me wonder about the correct usage of KER as a whole. I can't just build a rocket by looking solely at default or atmospheric stats.

How is KER utilized in an ideal way?

[Superfluous J]

I have a question...I've been using KER ever since it came out, but only in 1.0 it occurred to me that I may have been living in a lie.

So, while building a rocket, inside the VAB, I noticed that now(read - in 1.0) I need to actually use the "Atmospheric" button in order to get reliable atmosphere dV and thrust information about my rocket.

The problem is, I don't remember ever having to use that button before, and the calculations were correct even without it.

Now this is making me wonder about the correct usage of KER as a whole. I can't just build a rocket by looking solely at default or atmospheric stats.

How is KER utilized in an ideal way?

The numbers were NOT correct before. They were less different, but the numbers in the VAB, in Atmospheric mode, did NOT match the numbers sitting on the pad. I suspect what you are thinking is the old "4500m/s to LKO" adage. That number is vacuum dV of the rocket. You actually end up spending less "dV" because in the lower atmosphere you spend more fuel to get that dV, but in the end you spend enough fuel to equal about 4500m/s of vacuum dV.

Nowadays, we spend 3500 or so (The numbers are still in flux, and they could change at any time with a new update) vacuum dV, but total dV put into the rocket is a bit less simply because the rockets - more than before - are burning more fuel to get that dV when in the lower atmosphere.

[Mister Spock]

So when we're "budgeting" for that 3500 m/s or so in the VAB, should we use the "atmosphere" button or the "vacuum" button?

[MacroNova]

Use the vacuum button, but go to atmosphere mode to check your TWRs at various altitudes (less than 1.0, especially at the first stage, will mean your rocket struggles to gain altitude). Also, you need a really good launch profile to make it at 3500m/s.

[smunisto]

The numbers were NOT correct before. They were less different, but the numbers in the VAB, in Atmospheric mode, did NOT match the numbers sitting on the pad. I suspect what you are thinking is the old "4500m/s to LKO" adage. That number is vacuum dV of the rocket. You actually end up spending less "dV" because in the lower atmosphere you spend more fuel to get that dV, but in the end you spend enough fuel to equal about 4500m/s of vacuum dV.

Nowadays, we spend 3500 or so (The numbers are still in flux, and they could change at any time with a new update) vacuum dV, but total dV put into the rocket is a bit less simply because the rockets - more than before - are burning more fuel to get that dV when in the lower atmosphere.

Yeah, I got that, but my question was actually what Mister Spock below you asked. I've always used FAR(even now, using the pre-release version of nuFAR), so I never aimed for 4500 m/s and I am used to not-soup atmo and proper ascent paths in compliance with FAR.

I guess that nowadays building a rocket with an appropriate amount of dV in the atmo stages is more of a try-and-error process and heavy use of Chris's NRAP(at least that is how I see it).

The above may be not true, but it seems logical to me, because now I need to "eyeball" a rocket for a certain payload(let's say 10t to 100x100km), since now KER's dV values in the VAB for atmo and vacuum differ too much from one another. And when you actually launch the rocket, the values start increasing and shifting per stage, according to the engines' ISP.

I understand it is more accurate and this is the way to go and I fully support everything that brings KSP closer to realistic sim, I am just wondering how to properly use KER as dV build aid in its current iteration.

[undercoveryankee]

Yeah, I got that, but my question was actually what Mister Spock below you asked. I've always used FAR(even now, using the pre-release version of nuFAR), so I never aimed for 4500 m/s and I am used to not-soup atmo and proper ascent paths in compliance with FAR.

I guess that nowadays building a rocket with an appropriate amount of dV in the atmo stages is more of a try-and-error process and heavy use of Chris's NRAP(at least that is how I see it).

The above may be not true, but it seems logical to me, because now I need to "eyeball" a rocket for a certain payload(let's say 10t to 100x100km), since now KER's dV values in the VAB for atmo and vacuum differ too much from one another. And when you actually launch the rocket, the values start increasing and shifting per stage, according to the engines' ISP.

I understand it is more accurate and this is the way to go and I fully support everything that brings KSP closer to realistic sim, I am just wondering how to properly use KER as dV build aid in its current iteration.

With FAR and pre-1.0 engines, I basically ignored the atmospheric number and looked for about 3500 vacuum. Stock aero in 1.0.0 was coming in a little lower; 1.0.1 makes it closer to 4000.

If you watch the Isp of an engine during a launch, you'll see that it gets pretty close to the vacuum end of the curve during what still feels like the early parts of the launch. So the vacuum figure is still more representative than the sea level figure.

With practice, you'll be able to settle on a rule-of-thumb vacuum delta-v that works in each aerodynamic tuning (1.0.0, FAR, 1.0.1+) as long as you choose engines with relatively flat Isp curves for your liftoff stages. (For instance, the LV-T30 Reliant has better sea-level performance than the T45 Swivel, even though the Swivel passes the Reliant in vacuum Isp).

If for some reason you have to light a dedicated vacuum engine like a Rhino or Terrier at sea level, you'll probably be using SRBs alongside it to get a decent sea-level TWR. With practice, you'll develop a sense of how much to add to your normal rule of thumb for those oddball configurations. 500 m/s extra will probably cover most cases with a sane initial TWR.

[cen5]

hello first of all thank you for making this mod.

so not to my question i remember using it some time ago when kerbal stilll was in beta and i had access to kerbal engineer without using a ker module on my ship. what this effectively meant was that i could use kerbal engineer while my kerbals were on eva. (something that is invaluable since it shows which biome your in your speed etc while using the jetpack)

Thus i would like it to see this once again. can anyone help me making the necessary adjustments to the mod i can not seem to find the right option.

[Wintersdark]

hello first of all thank you for making this mod.

so not to my question i remember using it some time ago when kerbal stilll was in beta and i had access to kerbal engineer without using a ker module on my ship. what this effectively meant was that i could use kerbal engineer while my kerbals were on eva. (something that is invaluable since it shows which biome your in your speed etc while using the jetpack)

Thus i would like it to see this once again. can anyone help me making the necessary adjustments to the mod i can not seem to find the right option.

I would love this too; I like to think Jeb has a HUD with said information on it while jetpacking about More directly, it's frustrating because sometimes it's difficult to judge speed and direction from the view - particularly at night and at weird angles. And our Kerbals totally lack the ability to try and dig into the dirt while sliding(or restart their jetpacks), so a botched landing while jetpacking can end in kilometers of sliding.

[Padishar]

In the VAB or SPH click the "Settings" button at the top of the KER window and change the "Flight Engineer activation mode:" option to "Partless".

[cybutek]

^^^ ninjad by less than a minute *face palm*

so not to my question i remember using it some time ago when kerbal stilll was in beta and i had access to kerbal engineer without using a ker module on my ship.

In the VAB, on the Engineer window you will see a "Settings" button. Click it and you'll then gain access to some settings including how Kerbal Engineer runs in flight. Toggle it from "Career" to "Partless".

[MacroNova]

There's a suggestion forum thread discussing fairings and apparently someone believes KER is not reporting fairing mass correctly, potentially throwing off dV calculation: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/119106-Are-fairings-useless?p=1911126&viewfull=1#post1911126

Can anyone confirm?

[Red Iron Crown]

Have you considered adding any displays for thermal management? In particular I've been thinking about vessel total thermal energy and vessel net thermal energy flux.

[cen5]

ahh i found it. thank you Wintersdark and Padishar. now the jetpack is useful again

[diegzumillo]

Delta-v calculations seem wrong here too, and I'm not using fairings. Funny, I downloaded KER because mechjeb was giving me weird dv values for my nuclear engine powered space plane. I suspect it has something to do with the dramatic change the nuclear engines went through. I have no oxidizer on my ship, by the way.

[EmperorZelos]

I can't get it to show up during flights

I just get that stuff and when I click on the button it doesn't show =/

[GilyVrys]

First off, I've never posted on these forums, but thank you for making an amazing mod. I've turned about 8 people on to the game and I've always said "Go screw around with rockets for a while. Then download Kerbal Engineer and we'll talk." So I've noticed the KER dV calculations are off in the in-flight HUD. By a factor of 2 as far as I can tell. I've tested this three times in the same manner: 1st- rocket to achieve orbit around kerbal, running about 90/80 on the orbit. Then I've tried to hit the mun using the in game system. Generally, with the rocket I built, it says about 30-40 seconds burn. KER says it will take 18-20 seconds(and yes, reading from the right heading, not the 1/2 time). Then I go to burn at half time and end up having to burn the whole 30-40 seconds(basically the stock calculations are correct).

Is anyone else having this problem with KER?

The rocket I'm using is pretty much stock parts with a science jr. in the center and a three fold symmetric mk1 command pod/5 tanks and LV-T45 engines around it. The only non stock is the kerbal engineer part thrown on there. No other mods are installed at the moment. No fairings, none of the new parts.

TL:DR some problems with the in flight KER. Calculations from in game non-atmospheric trajectory do no agree with the in game calculations. In game calculations are correct.

Delta-v calculations seem wrong here too, and I'm not using fairings. Funny, I downloaded KER because mechjeb was giving me weird dv values for my nuclear engine powered space plane. I suspect it has something to do with the dramatic change the nuclear engines went through. I have no oxidizer on my ship, by the way.