[1.2] Real Solar System v12.0 Dec 8

[Starwaster]

Thanks for the update, but this doesn't seem to work either. I still get solar panel drain at 87.8 Gm, and the other places don't seem to have changed either. (I am assuming that power curve information is not stored in quicksaves, which is what I've been using to test this; I haven't been able to find it in the quicksave file).

Additionally, from what NathanKell posted about the bug, it sounds like the cause is not fixable just in the .cfg. It is curious that your fix worked for you and not for me though.

^

Thanks. I'll try setting it back to 25. Avoiding burn-up is half the fun.

Yes, that is weird. I was just at Pluto last night with those changes and they worked fine.

Sorry I couldn't be of help.

No, it's not stored in the saves. How each of you tried to implement your fixes (i.e. direct editing or MM, etc) might be why you're getting different results.

One thing I found was that the old powerCurve data was not being deleted from the parts.

The bad news however is that fixing that did not alter the outcome that I can tell.... still poking around at this.

[NathanKell]

powerCurve shouldn't be persistent. So clearing and fixing all the APs should fix things.

if you do sp.powerCurve = new FloatCurve() before loading, it should clear out the old one.

Oh. Try using exponential notation just in case it gets read as an int first. That should force float.

[Starwaster]

Ok, I think I have this working using *.cfg fix only. I've done 3/4th of an orbit with a periapsis of about 20 million meters from the sun and an ap going out past our 'Pluto'

I put in exp notation as suggested (though I'm not sure Nathan meant to try this in a cfg but I know from past experience that most module code seems to recognize it just fine)

More importantly, this deletes the existing powerCurve.

This is a ModuleManager fix which I think is not a problem for most of us here. It also requires Sarbian's MM Extensions OR that you be using ModuleManager 1.5

RSS.Solar.Fixer.cfg

@PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleDeployableSolarPanel]:HAS[#resourceName[ElectricCharge]]]
{
	@MODULE[ModuleDeployableSolarPanel]
	{
		!powerCurve{}
		powerCurve
		{
			key = 0E0 223.8 0 0//0 -0.5
			key = 5.79091E10 6.6736  0 0//-0.5 -0.5
			key = 1.08208E11 1.9113  0 0//-0.5 -0.5
			key = 1.49598261E11 1.0  0 0//-0.1 -0.1
			key = 2.279391E11 0.431  0 0//-.03 -.03
			key = 7.785472E11 0.037  0 0//-.01 -.001
			key = 5.874E12 0 0 0//-0.001 0
		}
	}
}

[Istas]

Starwaster: Thanks for the fix! But I'm not always the best at searching for things and I'm not finding something that is exactly called ModuleManager that's v1.5, or the other one. Do you have a link to one or the other?

Also, where should I put this new .cfg?

[Zander]

hey Nathan I just came back with an idea. The moon in this mod is the correct size. But lacks the reflective glow of the real moon. It looks like the moon in a lunar eclipse permanently. Do you think you could add a reflecting effect to the moon in game? and possibly to the other planets so you can see them from farther away as starlike objects like in real life

Edited November 17, 2013 by Zander

[SFJackBauer]

Shock multiplier (and shock _exponent_, for which the 1.17 value was bandied about) is ONLY for using NON-rescaled Kerbin.

If you're using that NKReal archive, you already have correct heat shield for the Mk1 Pod (built in) and the Mk1-2 Pod (the 4m heatshield).

Can you do the same you did with MFS to DRE? I mean, releasing a CFG inside the DRE zip rebalancing the heat-shields for RSS, like there is the RealFuels cfgs in MFS?

Also, the electrical rebalance and solar panels fixes could go inside the RealSolarSystem zip as an optional folder, since there is no reason to consider it a stand-alone package. It would be one less file for us to track down.

Starwaster: Thanks for the fix! But I'm not always the best at searching for things and I'm not finding something that is exactly called ModuleManager that's v1.5, or the other one. Do you have a link to one or the other?

Also, where should I put this new .cfg?

Istas, ModuleManager.dll 1.5 can be downloaded here. Put it inside GameData folder. To check your version, right-click file, Properties, Details.

The cfg can be put anywhere inside GameData and, as long ModuleManager is also there, it will be recognized. But for the sake of organization, you could put it inside the RealSolarSystem folder.

Edited November 17, 2013 by SFJackBauer

[Istas]

The bad news is that Mission Control now has lost communications due to spilling champagne on the control circuits.

The good news is the burn instructions were already sent to the probe, whose solar panels are back online.

Thank you very very much for your help, NathanKell, Starwaster, and SFJackBauer. I know this isn't really that big a deal but, you know how it is when you've got a mission going. It means a lot.

[Starwaster]

Starwaster: Thanks for the fix! But I'm not always the best at searching for things and I'm not finding something that is exactly called ModuleManager that's v1.5, or the other one. Do you have a link to one or the other?

Also, where should I put this new .cfg?

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/55219-Module-Manager-1-5-%28Nov-11%29

Put the dll in Gamedata (top level)

The cfg that you're going to create can go anywhere in Gamedata or any of its subfolders.

I tend to put things like that in a 'MyTweaks' folder.

You could also put it in the RealSolarSystem folder on the reasoning that you would want the cfg gone if you ever uninstall the mod.

D'oh, already answered! Sorry to hear about the champagn accident

hey Nathan I just came back with an idea. The moon in this mod is the correct size. But lacks the reflective glow of the real moon. It looks like the moon in a lunar eclipse permanently. Do you think you could add a reflecting effect to the moon in game? and possibly to the other planets so you can see them from farther away as starlike objects like in real life

I'm thinking the moon could stand to be larger; it looks way too small.

About reflectivity.... I don't suppose we could get at the actual shader files? I assume they're in those asset files but now that I think about it, nobody ever talks about those... at all...

Edited November 17, 2013 by Starwaster

[Starwaster]

ok what is the REAL safe minimum orbit for Vall? I had a stable orbit at 15km and later 35km and both times when switching to other ships or space center, my vall probe 'crashed' into terrain.

WHAT.THE.HELL.

Edit: And again at 160km.

Edited November 17, 2013 by Starwaster

[Doctadeth]

I've been a user of this mod, lots of fun, but do you have plans to add Olympus Mons, Cyberia and so forth to the Mars Analogue? Perhaps even replacing the spoilers with the new spoilers (Cyberia face and so forth?)

[Starwaster]

hey Nathan I just came back with an idea. The moon in this mod is the correct size. But lacks the reflective glow of the real moon. It looks like the moon in a lunar eclipse permanently. Do you think you could add a reflecting effect to the moon in game? and possibly to the other planets so you can see them from farther away as starlike objects like in real life

I've been a user of this mod, lots of fun, but do you have plans to add Olympus Mons, Cyberia and so forth to the Mars Analogue? Perhaps even replacing the spoilers with the new spoilers (Cyberia face and so forth?)

It's Cydonia. Not Cyberia

[King Jareth]

Seeing as no-one mentions it any more I'm getting confused. I've been running RSS with Ferrams ISP difficulty scaler* in Thrust correction mode only...is this "wrong" i.e. should I not be using it at all?

* + DRE, KJR, FAS etc.

[Starwaster]

Seeing as no-one mentions it any more I'm getting confused. I've been running RSS with Ferrams ISP difficulty scaler* in Thrust correction mode only...is this "wrong" i.e. should I not be using it at all?

* + DRE, KJR, FAS etc.

Depends on if you use anything else that does thrust correction?

Such as Modular Fuels?

[King Jareth]

I do use MFS, I'd missed the fact it does thrust correction.

Oops.

[KhaosCorp]

Have you considered doing a 'lite' version of this mod?? One that changes the planet locations but not size or distance between. I enjoy the realistic placement of the planets...but the size change kinda kills it for me. Most the planets look horrible (I run on 1/2 res so I can use more mods), your forced to use MFS, and then its (to me at least) the same game...you just have to time warp more than before.

Would like to play with your orientation of planets, but to me it seems pointless to me to have to use an extra mod to build the same craft i was before...but having to wait longer to get em where they going.

Keep in mind this is just my personal opinion....the mod is great, you have done great work here...just not for me as is.

[iVG]

It's far from the same game. Burns are longer because you need much more delta-v for anything. But you also need much larger spacecrafts. MFS only changes masses slightly to make it as close to realistic as possible. It doesn't eliminate the fact that you need to use your stock Jool launcher just to orbit the Moon (or even less). Design plays much larger role now, and the views are awesome (I hate seeing the curvature of Kerbin from 3 kilometres up...).

[Starwaster]

Have you considered doing a 'lite' version of this mod?? One that changes the planet locations but not size or distance between. I enjoy the realistic placement of the planets...but the size change kinda kills it for me. Most the planets look horrible (I run on 1/2 res so I can use more mods), your forced to use MFS, and then its (to me at least) the same game...you just have to time warp more than before.

Would like to play with your orientation of planets, but to me it seems pointless to me to have to use an extra mod to build the same craft i was before...but having to wait longer to get em where they going.

Keep in mind this is just my personal opinion....the mod is great, you have done great work here...just not for me as is.

Changing their location was kind of secondary to the purpose of increasing their distance (and size). As was mentioned before, you can change all that in the config files however.

Well i uploaded a couple output_logs if you'd like to take a look at them.

Here

I looked over the logs a bit, didn't see any smoking guns as far as errors.

You do seem to alt-tab away from the game quite a bit. What do you have going on in the background and how much memory do you have to do it with?

(you'll read where people say it doesn't matter if you have more than 4gb because the game is only 32 bit but it really does matter; if you only have 4gb then your game has to share that with your system and anything else going on in the background, like a web browser with 69,105 tabs open)

One last thought to leave you with; have you tried starting a new game? (sandbox or career) Especially after adding any mods that weren't there before your current save game was started?

Edited November 17, 2013 by Starwaster

[KhaosCorp]

It's far from the same game. Burns are longer because you need much more delta-v for anything. But you also need much larger spacecrafts. MFS only changes masses slightly to make it as close to realistic as possible. It doesn't eliminate the fact that you need to use your stock Jool launcher just to orbit the Moon (or even less). Design plays much larger role now, and the views are awesome (I hate seeing the curvature of Kerbin from 3 kilometres up...).

Well, this is not at all what I saw with my testing yesterday.....

Here is my test craft:

Took this to the Mun....the regular version was showing about 400Dv more than the RSS mission all said and done.

And MFS does more than change masses.

Also, should be noted that the curvature of Earth can be seen from as little as 500ft alt....

Guess Ill have a look in the config......I feel a reinstall coming on lol.

[iVG]

Well, this is not at all what I saw with my testing yesterday.....

Here is my test craft:

Took this to the Mun....the regular version was showing about 400Dv more than the RSS mission all said and done.

And MFS does more than change masses.

Also, should be noted that the curvature of Earth can be seen from as little as 500ft alt....

Guess Ill have a look in the config......I feel a reinstall coming on lol.

I don't get it. 400 more dV than RSS mission?

500 metres you mean, it's metric system.

[KhaosCorp]

I don't get it. 400 more dV than RSS mission?

500 metres you mean, it's metric system.

No...I mean 500foot(what the military refers to as 'hard deck' altitude)...you do realize the metric system is not the only form of measurement. That would be 166.6(ish) meters...much less than 3km.

[iVG]

Well, metric is not the ONLY form but is what all sciences work with.

I don't get the point with the curvature. Of course you can see it with instruments. I meant that I hate seeing Kerbin beneath me like a giant balloon only from 300 metres. Nitpicking, are we?

[KhaosCorp]

Well, metric is not the ONLY form but is what all sciences work with.

I don't get the point with the curvature. Of course you can see it with instruments. I meant that I hate seeing Kerbin beneath me like a giant balloon only from 300 metres. Nitpicking, are we?

Yes, you kinda are =P

300meters is not 3km btw....and I was not talking with cameras or sensors, I was talking about with the naked eye.

Now, back to the rocket. I thought I explained it well, but guess not....

The craft in the above pics....First I used RSS+MFS and flew to the Mun and made orbit. Then I used the same craft with no RSS and no MFS, flew to the moon and made orbit. Comparing the 2 afterwords the non-RSS mission had about 400 more Dv left over than the RSS mission did.

Hope that clears it up.

[iVG]

Do you also use realistic masses?

[KhaosCorp]

I think so...according to the MFS install instructions I am...

[iVG]

I think so...according to the MFS install instructions I am...

The 'realfuels' folder, there is a cfg file, you open it and change 'use real masses' to TRUE. Mainsail is around 1.8t with it enabled. No harm in checking again.