[1.2] Real Solar System v12.0 Dec 8

[Starman4308]

Maybe I should ask my question in the RO thread ?

Nein. It should be asked in the RealFuels thread, because it is a RealFuels question.

So I should use only these kind of fuel for long-duration mission ?

There are probably other storable fuels out there. You might just barely be able to get away with kerosene/LOX (LOX boils at -183, ambient temperature in space is about -200C from what I've seen), kerosene/HTP should work, and liquid methane and ammonia have high boiling points. There are also cooling fins, although I haven't used them and am not sure how they work.

I personally use MMH/NTO and Aerozine 50/NTO mixes for anything expected to be restarted after more than a week in space, though I might dabble in liquid methane/ammonia once I get to nuclear thermal rockets (the LV-N and similar).

[ToyToy]

Yeah, I not familiar with all of these fuel type yet, but it will come ^^

I there any indication in the VAB when selecting a fuel / engine / tank which could tell me more about the kind of informations you gave me (i.e "leak rate").

Thanks a lot !

[Starman4308]

Yeah, I not familiar with all of these fuel type yet, but it will come ^^

I there any indication in the VAB when selecting a fuel / engine / tank which could tell me more about the kind of informations you gave me (i.e "leak rate").

Thanks a lot !

As to leak rate: you can always look at RealFuels/Resources/RealTankTypes.cfg, and look for loss_rate. If a fuel is cryogenic, boiloff will be determined by a function involving loss_rate and the difference between the tank's current temperature and the listed "temperature" variable. Nathan might additionally be changing it so that loss rate is proportional to the 4/9'th power of volume: big tanks boil off proportionally less because there is less surface area for heat exchange.

Aerozine 50/NTO and MMH/NTO mixes are hypergolic: they ignite on contact with each other, and are generally fed to the engine by a pressurized fuel tank*. Kerolox and hydrolox (kerosene/liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen) tend to be turbopump-fed.

*I think liquid helium is pumped into the tanks to fill up the void left when fuel is consumed, which pushes the propellant to the engine.

In any event, I tend to use a combination of kerolox and solid-fuel boosters on my first stage (where thrust is king and efficiency not terribly important), that wonderfully efficient hydrolox mix on my second stage and interplanetary/lunar transfer stages, and whichever hypergolic mix is available for anything which is supposed to be ignited after more than a week in space.

EDIT: Also, do look at the engine codes (as described in the first couple posts of the RF thread). L engines tend to be high-thrust but a bit inefficient, U engines more efficient and lighter-weight, but with a tad less thrust, while O engines tend to have very low thrust, but good efficiency and low mass. It also strongly affects sea-level thrust performance: L engines are designed to minimize thrust loss at sea-level, while U and O are designed for vacuum or near-vacuum conditions, and lose a lot of thrust (and therefore Isp) at sea level.

Edited November 16, 2014 by Starman4308

[ToyToy]

Thank you very much, I got plenty help and information here and on the RO thread, I understood almost everything about fuels types, that's great !

I'll test everything again on tomorrow (it's 1 am here in France !), hopping to put a probe on the Moon surface !

[Starwaster]

As to leak rate: you can always look at RealFuels/Resources/RealTankTypes.cfg, and look for loss_rate. If a fuel is cryogenic, boiloff will be determined by a function involving loss_rate and the difference between the tank's current temperature and the listed "temperature" variable. Nathan might additionally be changing it so that loss rate is proportional to the 4/9'th power of volume: big tanks boil off proportionally less because there is less surface area for heat exchange.

Yeah, thing about that is that the tank's surface isn't the only place it gets heat in from. With enough insulation it might not even be the major source. There's also plumbing and other hardware which have to penetrate any insulation present.

[Starwaster]

Who else would love to have career mode adjusted for this? (Im using realism overhaul and I really would like to try it in career, however I can't because the contracts are still based around the vanilla SS.)

I still do career mode / contracts when I play with RSS on. It can be done. It's not hard.

[Starman4308]

I still do career mode / contracts when I play with RSS on. It can be done. It's not hard.

To some extent, RO makes it whacky (start with no reaction wheels or RCS, etc), and any RSS config will have distorted fund rewards (atmospheric contracts easy as ever, with very non-linear increases in difficulty for everything in LKO and beyond), but yes: it's quite possible to play career using RSS, particularly if you avoid installing RO.

The idea of an RSS adjuster for contract payouts has been percolating in my head for a while, but that's not a project I want to tackle myself for a while.

[NathanKell]

You might want to check this out, sounds quite apropos. (And we can always use new contributors, even idea-contributors!)

[Starwaster]

To some extent, RO makes it whacky (start with no reaction wheels or RCS, etc), and any RSS config will have distorted fund rewards (atmospheric contracts easy as ever, with very non-linear increases in difficulty for everything in LKO and beyond), but yes: it's quite possible to play career using RSS, particularly if you avoid installing RO.

The idea of an RSS adjuster for contract payouts has been percolating in my head for a while, but that's not a project I want to tackle myself for a while.

Ah ok, I understand then. I haven't played using RO in quite awhile.

[White Owl]

I think I just realized what I really want out of RSS, and I'll have to splice together a new config to get it.

I want to play in the Kerbol system, with the original KSP planets. I want getting off Kerbin to be more difficult than stock, but not as difficult as getting off Earth. I want interplanetary distances to be close to real Solar system distances. I want the terrain on the planets and moons to be interestingly varied, not smooth as a bowling ball.

Looks like I need the 6.4x Kerbin in a 10x overall system, with all the other planets and moons at 3.2x scale! Probably keep the sun and Jool at either 6.4x or 10x scale. This way, getting off Kerbin remains interestingly dV-expensive and closer to an Earth launch, long trips still take months or years, and everything besides Kerbin has enough hills to challenge the landings. Maybe I can give Kerbin a 365 day year while I'm at it.

The only real problem that springs to mind, is an Eve that's so much smaller than Kerbin loses some of its relative difficulty. Maybe crank up it's gravity even more to compensate...

I'm excited about this idea!

Edit: Thinking about this some more, probably the best option would be to keep Jool, Eve and Laythe all at the same 6.4x scale as Kerbin. The gravity and atmosphere of those bodies are the main attractions, not the terrain. All the small, rocky bodies can be smaller and rockier.

Edit #2: A whole lot of copy-pasting later, it looks like it works! The distances are far, most bodies are small, unless they have lots of atmosphere, in which case they're big. It's a day and a half trip from LKO to Munar SOI. In a 6.4x save, I left a small Mun lander probe parked on a nearly featureless plain; just a slight incline. I loaded that save up in the new config, and the little landerBot immediately fell over and rolled down the hill. I call that mission success! I'll put some thought into how to share it; who exactly to ask permission from.

One nagging visual glitch (which I anticipated) is the Mun appears much smaller when viewed from Kerbin. But I can live with that.

Edited November 18, 2014 by White Owl

[aBlueCouch]

I'm working on those on and off between putting Realism Overhaul Updates together.

It's not a very complicated process, if you'd like to help out, I can easily show you the ropes. I've got all the inner planets and Jupiter (none of Jupiter's moons yet) done. Feel like giving it a shot?

Send me a PM and I will see what we can do!

[Shurikeeen]

I cannot land on Kerbin anywhere else then on the KSC. If i walk/land/drive on land, I go trough it few meters and explode.

[Felger]

I cannot land on Kerbin anywhere else then on the KSC. If i walk/land/drive on land, I go trough it few meters and explode.

This is a known issue, NathanKell is working on figuring it out.

[Tyrador]

I've put all RSS files (main+textures) in GameData, but mod does not load. I have x32. What could be a problem? Thanks!

[JethroReading]

Sorry to be a bother:

I was trying to install this today, but when I start up KSP and it tries to sort itself out, it always crashes when it gets to the "Applying Mesh" stage. Does anyone know why this happens?

Thanks!

[Hattivat]

Guys, you need to report your issues properly if you expect support. That is, attach your output logs and a list of mods you have installed, as detailed here: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/92229-How-To-Get-Support-%28READ-FIRST%29

[goldfang35]

anyone know how i can get the rings on saturn as show by the showcase images they dont seem to appear for me.

[Felger]

The Rings are provided by a now defunct mod called Planet Factory. They may return at some point in the future, depending on mod support.

[^^artin]

Currently I tested RSS v8.2.1 the first time. I'm a bit surprised about how huge a rocket needed to be to get me anywhere.

By now I managed to get to the mun and back...to mun orbit, so far. The Rocket in use seems somewhat largish, even somewhat offscale compared to a real moon rocket, and I dont think I've builded it in a rather unefficient manner.

Am I wrong or is the usual engine power and efficiency don't fit the RSS Mod conditions somehow ?

Greetings Martin

Edited November 22, 2014 by ^^artin

[braininator]

That is because "normal" ksp rockets have pitiful performance compared to real rockets. What you need is Realism Overhaul: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/99966

This will make all rockets more realistic.

[^^artin]

Hello braininator

Thanks for this hint. I'm about to give it a try.

By the way, I'm not sure what those list of dependences mean.

Does it mean I have to have installed all of those addons to get the Realism Overhaul addon to work, or do I have to have installed at least one of this list ?

[smartdummies]

Currently I tested RSS v8.2.1 the a first time. I'm a bit surprised about how huge a rocket needed to be to get me anywhere.

By now I managed to get to the mun and back...to mun orbit, so far. The Rocket in use seems somewhat largish, even somewhat offscale compared to a real moon rocket, and I dont think I build it in a rather unefficient manner.

Am I wrong or is the usual engine power and efficiency don't fit the RSS Mod conditions somehow ?

Greetings Martin

What other mods are you using? The stock weights and performance for most mods are balanced for a Kerbin sized system and not RSS. You can look at Real Fuels with the Stockalike configs, or go with the full RO setup. Also make sure you have FAR installed, that will correct the stock aerodynamics and reduce the amount of delta v needed.

[Felger]

@^^artin - They have descriptions, but in general Depends is pretty much required. Recommends is good, but not required. Supported are mainly part packs that add parts to make it easier to build rockets.

Edited November 22, 2014 by Felger
quoted wrong post

[^^artin]

What other mods are you using? The stock weights and performance for most mods are balanced for a Kerbin sized system and not RSS. You can look at Real Fuels with the Stockalike configs, or go with the full RO setup. Also make sure you have FAR installed, that will correct the stock aerodynamics and reduce the amount of delta v needed.

Since this is the first time I use RSS at all, I do it on a game folder without further addons installed.

First I thought all aspects, the changes of the planetary system physics come along with, may be taken in account by RSS itself. But apparently it does not.

Sometimes I'm using FAR and MechJeb, so not all of them depends list is completely new to me. (and of course the Module Manager)

To make sure all work well I'm going to install all of the addons in the depends list now I guess, even if a "Deadly Reentry" is not what I'm aiming for.

Edited November 22, 2014 by ^^artin

[Felger]

Since this is the first time I use RSS at all, I do it on a game folder without further addons installed.

Sometimes I'm using FAR and MechJeb, so not all of them depends list is completely new to me. (and of course the Module Manager)

To make sure all work well I'm going to install all of the addons in the depends list now I guess, even if a "Deadly Reentry" is not what I'm aiming for.

I should probably look at re-arranging that list, seeing as Deadly Re-entry isn't really required. Actually, it's the only one in the Depends list that doesn't have an enormous impact on the functionality of Realism Overhaul as far as its ability to make your rockets the right size. Will look at moving it to the appropriate spot.