Jump to content

Now-defunct-thread-that-should-not-appear-in-google-search.

Cilph

By Cilph
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

Redstar

Redstar

Posted
Posted
Did you watch for the correct ranges of the antennas and dishes? Maybe you show screenshot of the sattelite?

yes the ranges are correct and its showing the connection as linked to the other omnidirects but only locally thew dishes on the mun-com's are pointed to kerbin with sats on kerbin pointing back the network works around the mun and around kerbin but some where along the like there no connection between the two starting ksp now for screen shot

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alewx

Alewx

Posted
Posted

Strange, my current Network is based on commutron 32 antennas and works quite well.

Also I didn't encounter any Problems like yours with relays that work with antennas and dishes.

Someone from the Devteam has to answer that.

EDIT: Cool what was the root of the trouble?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starstrider42

Starstrider42

Posted
Posted
I tried to find some information on this thread but I didn't managed to.

So here a few questions.

1. (With the community fix installed) Are there any (more/new) problems on 23.5?

2. Any new patches available?

1. There are a few. The RT2 overlays won't show up in the tracking station, though map view works just fine. The new NASA engines also don't work with the flight computer. Both issues will be fixed in the next version.

2. There are no new patches available, but we're polishing up a new, 23.5-compatible release. I'll let somebody with more authority than me comment on the release date. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bizz Keryear

Bizz Keryear

Posted
Posted
1. There are a few. The RT2 overlays won't show up in the tracking station, though map view works just fine. The new NASA engines also don't work with the flight computer. Both issues will be fixed in the next version.

2. There are no new patches available, but we're polishing up a new, 23.5-compatible release. I'll let somebody with more authority than me comment on the release date. :wink:

Ah, cool, thanks.

1. For now I can live with that... to be honest never looked at the network in the tracking station anyway. Also didn't used the flight computer much (sometimes for alignments, though)

2. That good to hear... Keep up the good work. (and well anytime before 0.24 is good... [cause after is kinda pointless {for an 0.23.5 release}])

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hodo

Hodo

Posted
Posted
As for the pink squares, I had that too at first, you need to install the version 1.3.3 from the new repository first and then overwrite the dll with the one from the download here. If you only install that last update you only get the dll and the resulting pink squares... ;-)

Greets,

Jan

Thanks I will try that when I am at home, I am sure that is what I did. +1 rep!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starstrider42

Starstrider42

Posted
Posted
Is there a way to change the location of the transmitter from the KSC because I am using the KSC mover mod which can move KSC to a different location.

Yes. Open GameData/RemoteTech2/RemoteTech_Settings.cfg in a text editor and change the latitude/longitude values therein.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starstrider42

Starstrider42

Posted
Posted

Wow, lots of questions. I'll try to answer them.

1) What is "large probe stack"? Is it that fat flat 500kg pancake? I understand it's required to use manned ship with at least 6 Kerbals to act as command center.

Yes. To be as precise as the original description should have been, it's the RC-L01 Remote Guidance Unit. However, remote command centers are a fairly advanced feature; that's one of the reasons the crew requirement is so high. If you're just starting out with RemoteTech, I suggest you ignore this option for now.

2) Do lab occupants count? What if 1 Kerbal go EVA? Network breaks immediately?

Yes, crew can be anywhere on the ship, but EVAs do not count.

The only situation I can think of where going below crew count would break the network is if you had no connections whatsoever back to Kerbin, i.e. your command ship is the core of a completely independent network. Otherwise, all that should happen is you get longer lag.

The command center option was really intended to let big missions or colonies use remote-controlled drones in real time. It's not a substitute for the "real" mission control.

3) Is it possible to switch from "command center" mode to "probe mode" or "relay mode", for example before all Kerbals go EVA, or it's happens automatically?

There are no separate modes. Any ship with the appropriate antenna(s) can relay transmissions, regardless of whether it has a probe core and/or is a command station.

3) I have several probes, some of them are as far as Jool. They are (most of them) powered, have 2 "Communotron 16" and 1-2 "Communotron 88-88" extended. Do I going to lose control over them anyway? Because they will lost before I can setup high gain antennas connections?

Probably. If you want to, you can edit your save file to replace the Communotron 88-88 with a more appropriate antenna like the CommTech-1 (back it up first). I had to do that when I first installed RemoteTech, since all my interplanetary probes had the Communotron 16.

4) Stock antennas will be automatically modified to work with RT2 and some new added?

Correct. All three stock antennas have RT2 capabilities, and the final tally is 4 omnidirectional antennas, 2 short-range (Kerbin SoI) dishes, two medium-range (inner system) dishes, and two long-range dishes.

5) Is there automatic routing with directional antennas? Like probe would start to point high gain antenna at all known relay station locations? If it was under control and if it wasn't? Like trying to find shortest route on it's own, or you need to reconfigure every probe manually as they go.

There is no automatic switching, because that would amount to RemoteTech basically playing the game for you. However, you have a couple of options that should minimize the amount of reconfiguring you need to do:

  • If you're far enough away from the target planet (e.g. Kerbin), you can have your satellite point at the planet and it will connect to any relay that's both in the planet's sphere of influence and in a cone (which will be displayed if you go to the map view and click the second button from the left on the RemoteTech toolbar).
  • If a relay has a large enough antenna to contact your probe directly, you can set it to target "active vessel", and it will always try to contact your current ship, even when you jump between missions. However, you still need to get your current ship to try to contact the antenna (e.g. using a cone), and the satellite with active vessel enabled will only try direct connections, ignoring any nearby relays. Seriously, this is the most common mistake new players make. If you're sending lots of probes to a particular planet, you're probably better off having your relays point at the planet. That way, you get the benefit of cone mode's multiple connections, and ships other than the one you're controlling can act as relays.

6) Is it 1 directional antenna per connection, or 1 big dish can communicate with every target withing it's range and radiation pattern?

Both. If you point a dish at a planet or moon, then you get simultaneous contact with anything in that cone. Otherwise, it's 1 dish per target.

By side note, I find strict 2 way comms requirement a bit unrealistic. IRL, it could be situation, when probe have only low gain antennas deployed, and control center on Earth can still use huge radio-telescope dish to transmit one way commands, like:

- Confirmation mode off

- Activate sun and earth trackers.

- Rotate to A,B,C

- Deploy high gain antenna

and probe would be recovered.

Well, this is a game, so some simplification is necessary to keep things fun. It sounds like you might be interested in the additive range model, which has the range for communications depend on the power of both antennas instead of just taking the worse one. I'm not familiar with the rules for it myself, but search this thread for "RangeModelType" and you should find the relevant posts.

Hope this helps!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zephrylia

zephrylia

Posted
Posted
2. There are no new patches available, but we're polishing up a new, 23.5-compatible release. I'll let somebody with more authority than me comment on the release date. :wink:

You tease! Are we talking days, weeks, months...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dr. Jet

Dr. Jet

Posted
Posted (edited)

Always wondered why RT2 active antennas break at ascent while fully shielded by cargo bay or fairing, making such neat thing as "satellite-controlled jet drones" nearly impossible.

So... the actual code in question is:


                if (MaxQ > 0 && animState == 1 && (vessel.srf_velocity.magnitude * vessel.srf_velocity.magnitude * vessel.atmDensity * 0.5) > MaxQ)
                {
                    part.decouple(0f);
                    explodeMe = 10;
                }

You see? Not a single sign of checking for "is_shielded" parameter or FAR current drag value (which is realistically position dependent). Thus Q is counted independently of actual environmental exposure and shielded antennas break when they shouldn't. That's not good. :mad: We obviously must have a bit of FAR integration here.

Edited by Dr. Jet
Link to comment
Share on other sites
erendrake

erendrake

Posted
Posted
Always wondered why RT2 active antennas break at ascent while fully shielded by cargo bay or fairing, making such neat thing as "satellite-controlled jet drones" nearly impossible.

So... the actual code in question is:


                if (MaxQ > 0 && animState == 1 && (vessel.srf_velocity.magnitude * vessel.srf_velocity.magnitude * vessel.atmDensity * 0.5) > MaxQ)
                {
                    part.decouple(0f);
                    explodeMe = 10;
                }

You see? Not a single sign of checking for "is_shielded" parameter or FAR current drag value (which is realistically position dependent). Thus Q is counted independently of actual environmental exposure and shielded antennas break when they shouldn't. That's not good. :mad: We obviously must have a bit of FAR integration here.

Thank you for volunteering to design code and test that change :) good luck! Im sure we all look forward to your pull request

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...