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

[BigD145]

Not all of us play that way. I try my hardest to keep all my kerbals alive. Gameplay gets drastically more intense when you keep track.

So bring your Kerbals home. Also not that difficult, although replacing the mission would cut down on possible losses.

[J.Random]

Okay, since some people have brought up the issue of failsafes, how do you suggest I handle it?

Simple: you don't. It's OK as it is, and it was like that since RT1. If I don't have two dishes pointed to different satellites (and then to different bodies with relay networks around them), that's my fault. Dish angles and the ability to set automatic targeting of an active vessel is more than enough.

[c0dek33per]

Okay, since some people have brought up the issue of failsafes, how do you suggest I handle it? Bruteforce checking for any possible connection seems rather cheaty. Pointing at Kerbin wouldn't work with the standard range system.

Adding "nearest vessel" to the target options. And make it the only target you can chose from when you've lost signal. After that, you just have to have a vessel with an antenna in range and targetting the ship that lost contact.

I suppose in the real world that a satellite isn't picky when in 'safe mode' and will talk to any satellite that wants to talk to him.

post:1493

Ps: any update about settings.cfg? I'd like to turn of delay time.

[Vrana]

Okay, since some people have brought up the issue of failsafes, how do you suggest I handle it? Bruteforce checking for any possible connection seems rather cheaty. Pointing at Kerbin wouldn't work with the standard range system.

As not very cheaty failsafe i suggest orienting dish(es) to nearest craft in same SOI. Maybe even cycling them.. but only in same SOI.

But in my opinion this is not needed at all. Any opprotunity for an unexpected rescue mission is a game enhancing feature in my eyes.

Maybe add the option to toggle it like signal delay?

[diomedea]

Okay, since some people have brought up the issue of failsafes, how do you suggest I handle it? Bruteforce checking for any possible connection seems rather cheaty. Pointing at Kerbin wouldn't work with the standard range system.

In short, I would suggest to make a check with any Command station or communications relay in low orbit around a designated body, such as Kerbin. No other station allowed to establish a failsafe reconnection than the above. These failsafe checks to be conducted only when required (such as with the probe focused) or, if feasible, a random check may bo done every fixed amount of gametime to better simulate what would happen in reality, and the result of the check more successful the shorter the distance from the base station.

I hope that is feasible and not too heavy in terms of processing power.

Some longer ideas about the above.

IMO, a failsafe program IRL would scan the ether to find any valid signal. Will take time if the signal is faint, almost lost in the spectral background noise from stars and cosmic rays. But such noise changes with time (like e.g. Sun activity) so there's no telling (for a probe) when a signal will be heard again. They keep scanning until there is power. Thinking deepspace probes, as the Pioneer ones. Anyway, such deepspace probes maintain some knowledge of their position IRT planet Earth, so they don't have to re-orient the main dish and scan a larger area. Not having to re-orient, saves power.

Even if the standard range system would be a limit, I believe that having the probes pointing at Kerbin in failsafe mode is key to a realistic approach. However, with Kerbin I would not limit to KSC, but any Command station on the planet and communication relay orbiting in LKO (at least). I reckon that the angle at which a LKO orbit is seen from deepspace is small enough to be considered almost a point, for this purpose, so a dish on a distant probe would be aimed so to have optimal gain with any signal from LKO.

However, somebody may develop a huge communication infrastructure on other planets, then relieving Kerbin from this "central role". One suggestion here: to define a planet/moon as the communications hub in one of the config files (default Kerbin), and let a player change it. Any "lost" probe should always try to connect with the designed hub.

EDIT: given the many who like to play without failsafe mode, the mod may simply consider a "null" value for the communication hub in the config as a failsafe switch off.

Edited December 21, 2013 by diomedea

[Andon]

if you copy the config from the older version over to the new version, you can get rid of the time delay. The antenna thing is a bit annoying, though.

[Ilandria]

As not very cheaty failsafe i suggest orienting dish(es) to nearest craft in same SOI. Maybe even cycling them.. but only in same SOI.

But in my opinion this is not needed at all. Any opprotunity for an unexpected rescue mission is a game enhancing feature in my eyes.

Maybe add the option to toggle it like signal delay?

^ that is my exact train of thought. Do the first option for those that want to have the failsafe and the second option for those of us that want the added gameplay of needing to launch a rescue mission. An option in the config file would work fine! I'd <3 you if you could to that and make everyone happy.

[Rokker]

As not very cheaty failsafe i suggest orienting dish(es) to nearest craft in same SOI. Maybe even cycling them.. but only in same SOI.

But in my opinion this is not needed at all. Any opprotunity for an unexpected rescue mission is a game enhancing feature in my eyes.

Maybe add the option to toggle it like signal delay?

Not that I care on either side of this particular discussion, since I have full confidence in the modder to make the mod well, this suggestion might not always work. For example, a large number of Munar arrays i create typically aren't even in the Mun's SOI I find it much easier for communications with Mun bases if I just put a comsat on the Mun's orbit but just outside of its SOI therefore allowing what is essentially a stationary mun orbit.

[Vrana]

Not that I care on either side of this particular discussion, since I have full confidence in the modder to make the mod well, this suggestion might not always work.

The whole point is that it doesnt always work.

[Rokker]

Okay, since some people have brought up the issue of failsafes, how do you suggest I handle it? Bruteforce checking for any possible connection seems rather cheaty. Pointing at Kerbin wouldn't work with the standard range system.

I think that in the event of satellite communications failure the satellite should go into failsafe mode in which it attempts to regain communications by pointing at the location of a communications device previously set by the user. While in failsafe mode, there should be at least a slight increase in electricity usage (toggleable preferably) and once a connection is reattained, the vehicle will require time to re-establish systems along with a systems check causing a delay of time in which no engines or aiming systems (sas, rcs, etc.) can be used (also preferably toggleable. during this time you can activate dishes or change where they aim.)

Edited December 22, 2013 by Rokker

[Rokker]

The whole point is that it doesnt always work.

allow me to re-phrase, it might not always accomplish the goal you are trying to with the suggestion. it would completely wreck any case where this occurs in which i am travelling to the moon. it also has no logical purpose as radiowaves and satellites dont tend to care about a difference in SOI.

[thecoshman]

Okay, since some people have brought up the issue of failsafes, how do you suggest I handle it? Bruteforce checking for any possible connection seems rather cheaty. Pointing at Kerbin wouldn't work with the standard range system.

Simple really, let us manually choose a target for a dish even if it is not under control. This allows us the player to act as the automatic program that cycles through all possible connections to find a path home. Best of all, this functionality already exists in the mod.

[bunkersem]

after updating to .23 i now have the problem that if my satdish on my vessel (for example my interplanetary science missions) target one of my comsats and i deactivate/"target it at a non functional vessel" i lose contact thats normal but after that. I cant retarget any dish or, activate antenna. it says "no connection to send command on".so if i accidentaly target the wrong vessel my ship is lost forever. i hope someone knows a solution for this. thx

[bunkersem]

after updating to 0.23 i now have the problem that if one of my dishes on my interplanetary science missions or any other vessel tries to deactivate or target an non connected vessel i lose contact which is normal but after that i can reconnect. it just says: "no connection to send command on" so if I accidentally target the wrong vessel it is lost forever which is really irritating. i hope someone has a solution for this. thx

[vardicd]

Not all of us play that way. I try my hardest to keep all my kerbals alive. Gameplay gets drastically more intense when you keep track.

My God, I was laughing so hard at this list, especially:

1. Valkyrie-1 Adlorf Kerman Systems Test Near-death experience for pilot. Abort system for planes needs a lot of work.

2. Valkyrie-2 Chad Kerman Systems Test Near-death experience for pilot. Abort system SRBs not strong enough.

3. Valkyrie-3 Ordous Kerman Systems Test First "successful" abort test. Abort systems look good enough for flight now.

4. * Valkyrie-4 Adlorf Kerman Flight Test Abort system failed to fire upon bad landing. Adlorf was killed.

5. Valkyrie-5 Mitcal Kerman Flight Test Near-landing foiled by plane tipping forward on its front wheel for some reason.

LOVE IT!! I also try to keep my guys alive, I feel guilty when one doesn't make it home.

[Rayder]

Technically, you can't redirect a satellite remotely if you don't have communications with it. If you want to do that you would need to EVA to it and redirect from there. But satellites have prediction software that can tell where it's target should be sometime in the future so that if it loses signal, it knows where to look to regain signal. Extended blackouts will cause drift and the satellites won't be exactly where the prediction thought they would be, but the satellite will usually start looking for a connection again. This is essentially as far as a failsafe goes for real satellites.

Having said all this, RemoteTech for the most part already does this. Only thing I would change is the EVA thing. If you really wanted more realism you could make the satellite take longer to reconnect the longer it goes into blackout. But with the exception of those two things, RT2 is pretty realistic as it is.

[rottielover]

Technically, you can't redirect a satellite remotely if you don't have communications with it. If you want to do that you would need to EVA to it and redirect from there. But satellites have prediction software that can tell where it's target should be sometime in the future so that if it loses signal, it knows where to look to regain signal. Extended blackouts will cause drift and the satellites won't be exactly where the prediction thought they would be, but the satellite will usually start looking for a connection again. This is essentially as far as a failsafe goes for real satellites.

Having said all this, RemoteTech for the most part already does this. Only thing I would change is the EVA thing. If you really wanted more realism you could make the satellite take longer to reconnect the longer it goes into blackout. But with the exception of those two things, RT2 is pretty realistic as it is.

Oh, I love these ideas. EVA able to repoint a dish, and fail safe (if loose connection point at kerbin).

That would be pretty cool.

[Xzabath]

Hello, can someone tell me how to change the delay, I dont want to remove it totally just reduce the delay, I sent a single probe to the Jool system and it had something like 300 second delay, I was getting by with 100 seconds with my probe to Duna, just want to know how to adjust, I looked through some of the cfg's couldnt spot anything about the delay.

Thank you

[Rokker]

Technically, you can't redirect a satellite remotely if you don't have communications with it. If you want to do that you would need to EVA to it and redirect from there. But satellites have prediction software that can tell where it's target should be sometime in the future so that if it loses signal, it knows where to look to regain signal. Extended blackouts will cause drift and the satellites won't be exactly where the prediction thought they would be, but the satellite will usually start looking for a connection again. This is essentially as far as a failsafe goes for real satellites.

Having said all this, RemoteTech for the most part already does this. Only thing I would change is the EVA thing. If you really wanted more realism you could make the satellite take longer to reconnect the longer it goes into blackout. But with the exception of those two things, RT2 is pretty realistic as it is.

Drift wouldn't be a major issue if we assume the satellite is using GPS (which technically would require communication to some extent) or a decently accurate IGS and/or star trackers from which the satellite can track its position and use that data to figure out where a previously selected satellite would be at a specific time from previously programmed information.

[Mecripp]

Hello, can someone tell me how to change the delay, I dont want to remove it totally just reduce the delay, I sent a single probe to the Jool system and it had something like 300 second delay, I was getting by with 100 seconds with my probe to Duna, just want to know how to adjust, I looked through some of the cfg's couldnt spot anything about the delay.

Thank you

U could send a command ship or set 1 on duna or edit the remotetech_settings.cfg file and change the speed of light

[jordanjay29]

Okay, since some people have brought up the issue of failsafes, how do you suggest I handle it? Bruteforce checking for any possible connection seems rather cheaty. Pointing at Kerbin wouldn't work with the standard range system.

I rather like the idea of checking for connections within the same sphere of influence.

If that's not an option, what about a (short) list of connection priorities? Sometimes I have rockets that travel between different regions, hence different satellite networks, and often I seem to lose connection just as I'm starting a burn. Having the ability to set a priorty would let the rocket auto-switch to the next connection that I've set up without making it overpowered and cheaty by looking for every connection possible.

This would be very critical in case of my rocket losing contact with its satellite just as it gets into a ballistic orbit (for landing, transfers, etc). At that point, EVAing is probably not a likely possibility.

[somnambulist]

Fail safe doesn't have to be that hard. Let the player select the fail safe dish in the VAB. If the connection is lost for greater than n-seconds, the fail safe dish drops its current target and cycles through known dish links until it paths back to a mission control. If that's too much of a pain, just have it cycle between KSC and active vessel. Being able to trigger an action group would also be nice.

If you're feeling mischievous, use Rokker's idea of the probe going through a startup/diagnostic sequence. Maybe 10x the roundtrip delay? A 30s one-way delay would require a 10 minute startup/diagnostic.

[Xzabath]

Ok I am trying to edit the signal delay, how exactly do I do this.

THank YOu

[Bizz Keryear]

After updating to 0.23 any antenna (even stock) I add causes the whole ship ...

after building the ship when I start to launch it the engines are running and the ship is somewhere in the system. when reverting to VAB (not always possible) most of the ship is missing and the antenna is suddenly the root. And the parts which are still there aren't placed but look they are.

If I edit the craft file and remove the antenna everything is back to normal.

[NoMrBond]

Cilph posted an experimental build for 0.23 a couple of pages back (page 142 / post 1418)

I kinda mostly works, YMMV.