[0.23.5] Realism Overhaul: ROv5.2 + Modlist for RSS 6/30/14

[jrandom]

I've updated my Procedural Fairings rescale part .cfg, as the previous attempt had the fairing edges sticking out too far. This new version also uses better node attachment sizes for better compatibility with Kerbal Joint Reinforcement.

ProcFairingRings_RealismOverhaul.zip

[NathanKell]

jrandom: cool!

I assume that 4/5 of the external volume of the ST is used, thus the total volume (in KSP units) available via MFS is correct.

Tys: Sure, just delete or edit the appropriate CFGs (like Pods_Squad) in the folder. If you want the rest of the changes, just comment out the rescaleFactor changes.

SFJackBauer: that's awesome! And don't minimize your work!

jrandom: since SFJackBauer isn't using any FASA engines, you're safe to use it instead of RftSEngines. Also, re: Ion resource ElectricCharge, that's the electricity requirement of the ECLSS system etc. Try to match it to the same average draw in kW listed for the pod you're simulating, minus any other components that use electric charge, like atnenae or avionics.

[HoneyFox]

I know, those things are great! I just... was hoping for a single part with no decoupler. I mean, there's a procedural adapter that comes with Procedural Dynamics, but you can't adjust the height. With the fairing bases/rings you have to use two of them (with the top one flipped around backwards), or use the interstage base which has that decoupler that doesn't seem to be deactivatable (unless I missed a key somewhere).

if you use interstage base + fuselage fairings, that decoupler will not actually decouple so that works as an adapter instead. though that staging icon on the stage list is quite annoying when you have many of them.

[Scripto23]

I am having trouble getting the interstage fairing adapter to work as a decoupler. I can see the icon in on the side, but when I stage it nothing happens. I managed to get it to work once, but then moved a part and now I can't get it to work again, I've been trying every combination of attachment.

[HoneyFox]

I am having trouble getting the interstage fairing adapter to work as a decoupler. I can see the icon in on the side, but when I stage it nothing happens. I managed to get it to work once, but then moved a part and now I can't get it to work again, I've been trying every combination of attachment.

interstage base + fuselage fairing = adapter.

interstage base + fairing = decoupler (with additional debris made though...)

[Scripto23]

Alright, thanks for your help, got it to work. However I have another issue. My engines will list something like 1.66 TWR 1.39 SLT in mech jeb, then when I go to the launchpad and hit stage it will drop to .44 TWR .37 SLT and while thrusting it will not even consume any fuel. Possibly related, when I select an engine in the action group tab most of the buttons don't show up but I can still click them. This happens for all engines (stock, NP, KW).

Edit: ignore this post. Figured it out. Accidentally restored the Engines.cfg file from the recycle bin that was supposed to remain deleted

Edited December 9, 2013 by Scripto23

[jrandom]

Solar panel question: the panels seem to be generating only a fraction of their stated power output, even in direct sunlight on Kerbin. Is there some adjustment I should be making that I'm missing so I know how much power I'll actually get out of any given solar panel?

[amo28]

Speaking of solar panels, is there any intent of including Near Future Propulsion's mod with your solar panel tweaks?

[NathanKell]

jrandom: Are you using latest RSS? Are you using any version of KSPI?

amo28: Yep. Also Nertea and I are working on MFS support for NFP, too.

[jrandom]

jrandom: Are you using latest RSS? Are you using any version of KSPI?.

I have that pre-release of RSS 5.3 you sent me. Not using KSPI.

[NathanKell]

Well crap. I'll check.

[amo28]

amo28: Yep. Also Nertea and I are working on MFS support for NFP, too.

Awesome. I wrote up a quick and dirty MM config to nerf those solar panels in the meantime. Maths are mostly by guesstimates and eye-balling, but power generation seems to be more in-line with your Stock and AIES configs.

Looking forward to your official update!

Unofficial NearFuture MM Config: http://pastebin.com/C3b4ZfYd

[jrandom]

Awright, I'm at my wit's end.

if I do this:

@PART[*]:HAS[!MODULE[IonModuleCrewSupport],#CrewCapacity[3]]:Final
{
    RESOURCE[ElectricCharge]
    {
        rate = 1.0 // 0.5 for avionics, 0.1666666... for operation per kerbal
    }

    MODULE
    {
		name = IonModuleCrewSupport

        ION_SUPPORT_RESOURCE
		{
			name = ElectricCharge
			ratePerCapacity = 1.0 // 0.3333333 per kerbal
		}
    }

    RESOURCE
    {
		name = Oxygen
		amount = 60
		maxAmount = 60
    }

    RESOURCE
    {
		name = CarbonDioxide
		amount = 0
		maxAmount = 6
    }
}

... then RO's electricity capacity gets overwritten (sometimes... I think it's dependent on the order the .cfg files are loaded), command module does not use electricity at the rate specified. If I use:

@RESOURCE[ElectricCharge]
    {
        @rate = 1.0 // 0.5 for avionics, 0.1666666... for operation per kerbal
    }

... I still don't get the desired energy usage. And IonCross just refuses to cooperate no matter what I do, instead always using the default 5 EC/hr per kerbal. This is... maddening...

[jrandom]

Found a game-breaking bug in IonCross and will be switching to TAC Life Support. How well is this currently supported by the Realism Overhaul .cfgs, if at all?

Still need a solution to the command module's energy usage rates, too.

[NathanKell]

amo28: cool!

Do you have even rough figures on the square-meterage of the NFP panels?

jrandom: you have that resource block sitting all alone, rather than inside the @MODULE[ModuleCommand] block. Also, the [] syntax is for when modifying, not when adding. That's why it's messing up. You need to follow exactly the form I gave on the MM thread (reposted here):

@PART[*whateverETC]
{
    @MODULE[ModuleCommand]
    {
        RESOURCE
        {
            name = ElectricCharge
            rate = 1.0 // 0.5 for avionics, 0.1666666 for operation per kerbal
        }
    }
}

Regarding TACLS, there's a TAC_LS.cfg floating around the end of the TAC LS thread that I made and someone modified. You will also need to change the consumption rates in the LifeSupport.cfg file (in plugindata, created on first run with TACLS).

Make sure that consumption * density * 86400 matches tons/day use of each resource, and that

BaseElectricityConsumptionRate = consumption_for_pod_in_kW // a constant, no matter the number of kerbals in it

ElectricityConsumptionRate = consumption_for_each_kerbal_in_kW

Also for obvious reasons make sure that the total mass produced by the production rates equals the total mass consumed by the consumption rates

[jrandom]

jrandom: you have that resource block sitting all alone, rather than inside the @MODULE[ModuleCommand] block. Also, the [] syntax is for when modifying, not when adding.

Doh! Okay, I shall revisit that.

Regarding TACLS, there's a TAC_LS.cfg floating around the end of the TAC LS thread that I made and someone modified.

That file completely breaks the parts available in the VAB for me. Only a tiny few show up. If I remove that .cfg, everything works again. Without that config, does that mean MFS will not hold appropriate amounts of TAC_LS materials?

Edited December 11, 2013 by jrandom

[NathanKell]

1. Sorry, that came out a bit harsh. Unintended.

2. Uh, weird. Make sure it's using the right resource names, and no parts being given MFTs already have them. But it's really more so you can see how it's done, or at any rate how I decided to do it when I used TACLS.

Also: confirmed solar panel problem. Dangit, thought I fixed them all. Pfui.

[jrandom]

1. Sorry, that came out a bit harsh. Unintended.

Harsh? Hell no, I missed something incredibly obvious and you pointed it out. For that, I thank you. Also, it worked! Now I just have to get the TAC energy usage/mass/etc... coded in.

2. Uh, weird. Make sure it's using the right resource names, and no parts being given MFTs already have them. But it's really more so you can see how it's done, or at any rate how I decided to do it when I used TACLS.

I noticed a lot of Pod supports in that file as well. I'll clean it out and reduce it to only MFTs and monkey with it from there.

Also: confirmed solar panel problem. Dangit, thought I fixed them all. Pfui.

I shall eagerly await the patch! Then I can get those darned geosats built.

[amo28]

amo28: cool!

Do you have even rough figures on the square-meterage of the NFP panels?

Not at all. I really just threw everything on a craft and eyeballed the size differences. Figured for the 1x3 and 1x4 foldable NFP panels, one panel is 4 times the size of the Squad ST1 panel, which you've marked as 0.2m. I used the ST1 as the basis for all sizing. With the configs I put up, the 1x4 NFP panels give 0.25 EC/s with full solar view, which seemed about in-line with the changes you guys made to the Squad and AIES panels.

I noticed a lot of Pod supports in that file as well. I'll clean it out and reduce it to only MFTs and monkey with it from there.

Be sure to throw it up here when you've done it! I'm in the same boat as you! We really ought to be dumping these collections of odds-and-ends configs on that subreddit.

[jrandom]

Be sure to throw it up here when you've done it! I'm in the same boat as you! We really ought to be dumping these collections of odds-and-ends configs on that subreddit.

It now freezes up the game during loading, so I'm still tinkering with it.

In other news, I have energy usage rates for command pods up 'n running! Yay! The last thing there I have to maybe fix replacing the electric charge capacity -- Anything specifically defined in Realism Overhaul overrides my changes, although pods not specifically called out in RO get my changes. I'm using the @PART[*]:HAS[#CrewCapacity[1]] approach so I can cover all pods and not have to explicitly support each and every new pod that comes out. I'm also using this approach to create a .cfg for adding TAC Life Support to pods that don't already support it (to allow for specific pods to be defined with different values for food/water etc... since that doesn't feel like it should always be the same across the board -- what if someone wants to make a food-engorged rescue module?)

I will definitely post my little collection of .cfgs once I get these last bits hammered out (minus any .cfgs I got from NathanKell that'll be included in the next RO release anyways).

NathanKell: Consider moving the LifeSupportModule additions in the FASA.cfg entries since not everyone uses the same life support mod. I've got a .cfg that'll generically add 1-day-per-kerbal supplies to all crew-carrying parts up to 6-kerbal-capacity, and ones for other life support mods can be quickly made should those arise (like ECLSS, etc...).

Edited December 11, 2013 by jrandom

[jrandom]

Hrm... I'm having some issues trying to add life support in a generalized way. This config file should work, but the results I get instead are that every crew-carrying part, regardless of existing LifeSupportModule status or not, gets a ton of repeated "Equipped with Life Support Systems" entries and all food/water/oxygen amounts are '1'.

Can't quite figure out where I went wrong here.

Edit: It seems these sections are being applied to every part. Can't figure out why -- the conditionals look correct.

Edited December 11, 2013 by jrandom

[NathanKell]

1. Weird. I don't see what's wrong here. Sarbian or someone else may have a better idea.

2. I suggest leaving as is. TACLS auto-adds life support to all crew-carrying modules if it's not present, and then will also add (set?) some default resource amounts. This way you have complete control.

re: further-above post, great @ energy usage! Hurrah.

As I may have mentioned before, I'm loathe to remove LS configs, because then capsule mass will be messed up. As it stands, Gemini is kilogram-perfect; I would have to change part mass as well as life support resources if I had a different life support file. Now, I guess I could just have both the LS resources/modules and @mass in each LS file, and no @mass in the main file?

[jrandom]

I suggest leaving as is. TACLS auto-adds life support to all crew-carrying modules if it's not present, and then will also add (set?) some default resource amounts.

Ah, but I'm not seeing any kind of auto-adding behavior from TACLS, which is why I tried to add it in the first place:

Edit: Turns out, the auto-added life support stuff is there!... but only after you launch. In the VAB it doesn't show.

Edited December 11, 2013 by jrandom

[Zander]

Hey I just got this mod and it is great really really awesome.

Only one question, I haven't had time to read the entire thread so sorry if this has been covered. Why do the pods have any reaction wheel torque at all? No manned spacecraft except for the International space station includes them because the amount of time needed to change orientation is far too much for active space missions. Why include them at all then? Its unrealistic to have reaction wheels present AND it clutters up the craft menu when you right click it.

Edit:

small bug

The B9 Atlas L2 engine has lost all its fuel selection options for modular fuels.

Edited December 11, 2013 by Zander

[NathanKell]

IIRC a number of probes did carry them; thus I kept them, though gave them far, far reduced values. Probably best to remove them from pods though.