[0.25] Realism Overhaul w/ RedAV8R [Terminated]

[RedAV8R]

I was so excited when I saw RF update... I forgot I still needed engines. :v

I did this exact same thing!!

I'm still trying to build rockets, but the sheer number of non-RO-supported parts is... well, it's forcing me to be creative. Also noticed that all the air intakes have some ridiculously-low air intake value so I can't fly around yet either. I will take this as... A CHALLENGE!!

It's coming soon guys(gals). If I'm lucky tomorrow will see a lot more done, and maybe a release.

I'm new to RO (I took a break from playing KSP prior to it being released and I'm just starting again now), so I was wondering -- which parts packs will be supported by the mod? I've got FASA, LazTek (the SpaceX parts mod), KW Rocketry, and AIES. Are any of those mods supported?

And I've been trying to get by with non-RO parts as well -- I just tried to do a lunar landing mission (with RSS) using nothing but stock engines. My rocket ended up looking just like the N1.

http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1130/5157168425_f20c992f72_z.jpg

Are you seriously that special to not be able to read the OP and see exactly what is planned/in the works/being reworked/etc.

[jrandom]

It's coming soon guys(gals). If I'm lucky tomorrow will see a lot more done, and maybe a release.

Take your time, don't be pressured by anybody. I'm finding it really fun trying to work around the restrictions of a not-all-there-yet .25 install, and I know better than to pester you guys. You've all made KSP a game I'm still playing after over 1400 hours of game-time, which is unheard of for me. I don't even have anywhere near that in my stereoscopic 3DTV setup of Skyrim, and I run around in that quite a bit.

[foamyesque]

Take your time, don't be pressured by anybody. I'm finding it really fun trying to work around the restrictions of a not-all-there-yet .25 install, and I know better than to pester you guys. You've all made KSP a game I'm still playing after over 1400 hours of game-time, which is unheard of for me. I don't even have anywhere near that in my stereoscopic 3DTV setup of Skyrim, and I run around in that quite a bit.

I actually do have 1400 Skyrim hours :v. KSP's north of 400 since it went to Steam; god alone knows since I started playing in 0.8.

Right now I'm making do with a Stockalike someone kindly provided, but I'm looking forward to a full install.

[Kitspace]

I would like to ask as I have just noticed that.

What is the centre of mass shifter thing stated in one of the old change logs that is supposed to make it easier?

What is it supposed to do for that? Can the thing be tuned back for maximum realism?

Sorry if I am missing something but that description just says that it makes things simpler and I have never seen any information anywhere.

[Hattivat]

Every pod has a "descent mode" option in the right-button menu. If you activate it, the center of mass is shifted to one allowing for a lifting reentry. I guess you could "tune it back" by simply activating it before you even lift off the pad.

[Phredward]

I just noticed in stock KSP that the launch pad will collapse if you try to load very heavy craft (iirc ~1200t) that sit on the pad without launch clamps. I usually do not use launch clamps for my RO crafts, and instead rely on Kerbal Joint Reinforcement to keep the craft resting on the engine bells. After a brief look around the KSP directory, I couldn't find the config files for how strong a building is, but if it's possible to increase it, I suspect that will work best for RO.

[RedAV8R]

@Phredward: I've seen people saying the launch pad is exploding with heavier loads. However, you WILL use launch clamps for now on instead of relying upon another program and/or unrealistically just letting things sit there unsupported. IF with clamps the launch pad is still having issues, then we may need to find a fix somewhere.

[Kitspace]

Descent mode option? What version do you mean? In my case there is no such thing. The centre of mass is just slightly offset. At least that is how it appears to me.

[RedAV8R]

@Kitspace: Those capsules which have an offset CG in reality and the Mk1-2 have a CoM shifter installed. Right click on the pod when in flight and there is a button to turn it on/off. I believe it's called "descent mode" or something like that. It'll be blatantly obvious if you look. If it's NOT there, then it's not installed on that pod. Not every one has it. NK did a small code change with it, don't remember if it made last release or not. It will be in the 0.25 release when I get that done here. HOPEFULLY later tonight. Awfully close right now.

[jrandom]

I was wondering what that descent mode button was for! Just found it last night.

[Phredward]

@Phredward: I've seen people saying the launch pad is exploding with heavier loads. However, you WILL use launch clamps for now on instead of relying upon another program and/or unrealistically just letting things sit there unsupported. IF with clamps the launch pad is still having issues, then we may need to find a fix somewhere.

I'm fine using launch clamps, I just thought it was more realistic (and looked better )to let the vehicle sit on the pad. I'm pretty sure the shuttle's weight rested on the boosters, for instance.

[Phylan]

Does anyone know of a mod that gives some display, anywhere really, of the orbital ground track of a target? Or alternatively, a quantitative method for launching into the orbital plane of your target? I'm trying to do a moon mission and I'd rather not do a plane change while in orbit. I'd like to to launch right into the plane of the moon, but it's impossible to just guess from the map view when you're under the target orbit. I'd appreciate any suggestions. It's not a big deal when Kerbin is the planet and everything is roughly in the same plane, but launching from Earth obviously changes things quite a bit.

[Guest]

I'm fine using launch clamps, I just thought it was more realistic (and looked better )to let the vehicle sit on the pad. I'm pretty sure the shuttle's weight rested on the boosters, for instance.

It didn't, at least not on the nozzles. V2 and Redstone didn't require sophisticated pads, but anything more advanced than that had clamps, umbilicals, ect. galore (and even those two had a small pad, they didn't sit on their fins).

[Motokid600]

Does anyone know of a mod that gives some display, anywhere really, of the orbital ground track of a target? Or alternatively, a quantitative method for launching into the orbital plane of your target? I'm trying to do a moon mission and I'd rather not do a plane change while in orbit. I'd like to to launch right into the plane of the moon, but it's impossible to just guess from the map view when you're under the target orbit. I'd appreciate any suggestions. It's not a big deal when Kerbin is the planet and everything is roughly in the same plane, but launching from Earth obviously changes things quite a bit.

Mechjeb is the one you want. Bring up ascent guidance. Pick Mun as target. Select "launch into plane of target", then enable autopilot. It'll warp until your under the Mun's orbit and launch at the appropriate heading automatically.

Question... How is everyone landing with engines that can't throttle? And on top of that only have so many restarts.. I was able to land my very first probe on the Mun in RSS last night, but.. it was sloppy. I can't recall the exact name of the engines I was using. ( small, retextured gray radial engines that look like the orange stock ones ) They cannot throttle ( the effects would have you assume otherwise ) so I had to make several strategic burns to lower the lander. Then with my final restart perform a suicide burn. It failed. Burned way to early and killed my speed with a few hundred meters to go. The only thing that saved it was the rcs that maintained an 11m/s descent.

So is there a better way?

Edited October 15, 2014 by Motokid600

[Phylan]

Mechjeb is the one you want. Bring up ascent guidance. Pick Mun as target. Select "launch into plane of target", then enable autopilot. It'll warp until your under the Mun's orbit and launch at the appropriate heading automatically.

Question... How is everyone landing with engines that can't throttle? And on top of that only have so many restarts.. I was able to land my very first probe on the Mun in RSS last night, but.. it was sloppy. I can't recall the exact name of the engines I was using. ( small, retextured gray radial engines that look like the orange stock ones ) They cannot throttle ( the effects would have you assume otherwise ) so I had to make several strategic burns to lower the lander. Then with my final restart perform a suicide burn. It failed. Burned way to early and killed my speed with a few hundred meters to go. The only thing that saved it was the rcs that maintained an 11m/s descent.

So is there a better way?

Thanks, I was thinking ascent guidance would do it. I'd like to perform the actual ascent manually, especially since auto-ascent in RSS can be er, dicey, but I think I can do that by choosing launch into plane and then using the option to display the ascent path on the nav ball. The other issue I was having is that my vessels sitting on the pad will only allow physics warp for some reason in RO, not normal warp. Can't figure that one out for the life of me.

[Motokid600]

Yea mechjeb is no good for most of a launch. I'll only let ascent guidance do the gravity turn ( making sure it hits the right marks ) and the first few stages. But once my vertical speed drops to where I'm about 30seconds to apoapsis I disengage MJ and take the reins so I can pitch up. That being said I wish MJ didn't try to kill the throttle when disengaged. I have to hold shift as I do it..

[NathanKell]

Instead of totally disabling ascent guidance, just play with "final angle" in the "edit ascent path" window to finely control pitch. Not 100% automated, but better than no automation at all.

As for landing, you need to add multiple low-thrust engines and selectively disable them as your TWR climbs. Or you can do what Surveyor did: a large fast-burning solid retro to kill most descent velocity at a km up or so, then some small, limited-fuel verniers to soft-land. Don't plan on only using one (set of) engine(s) if they're not throttable, unless the set is *very* large. :]

[Motokid600]

I'll have to reiterate my design tonight, thanks Nathan. But.. what if I were going for an Apollo replica? How does one remake the LEM? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the LEM's descent engine WAS throttleable to an extent, no? Because I am just about ready to move on to manned Lunar missions..

[Phylan]

I'll have to reiterate my design tonight, thanks Nathan. But.. what if I were going for an Apollo replica? How does one remake the LEM? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the LEM's descent engine WAS throttleable to an extent, no? Because I am just about ready to move on to manned Lunar missions..

The version of the LEM descent engine in RO, if I recall correctly, is deeply throttleable, in fact the most deeply throttleable engine in the game I think.

[cremasterstroke]

Does anyone know of a mod that gives some display, anywhere really, of the orbital ground track of a target? Or alternatively, a quantitative method for launching into the orbital plane of your target? I'm trying to do a moon mission and I'd rather not do a plane change while in orbit. I'd like to to launch right into the plane of the moon, but it's impossible to just guess from the map view when you're under the target orbit. I'd appreciate any suggestions. It's not a big deal when Kerbin is the planet and everything is roughly in the same plane, but launching from Earth obviously changes things quite a bit.

I've done all my launches manually (haven't had the balls to trust MechJeb yet), so I've got a pretty good feel for it. This is the method I use (I think I learned/adapted this from one of metaphor's comments):

• go to the tracking station, and zoom out so that your viewpoint is just outside lunar orbit
  
• pan around until you're at the Northernmost point of lunar orbit - try to be as exact as possible
  
• once you've determined that point, timewarp until KSC is directly at the centre of your view (it should be right under lunar orbit, even slightly below it)
  
• launch directly East, and keep heading East - when high up (>100km), start following the orbit prograde marker (keeping an eye on MechJeb's relative inclination indicator is handy too)
  
• if you get a significant relative inclination, adjust the timing of your launch
  

It might take a little trial-and-error initially (took me 4-5 launches at first to get it right), but now I can launch reliably into orbits that have relative inclination <0.5º within 2 attempts.

Of course this mainly applies to Cape Canaveral (which has a latitude closely matching lunar inclination) - if launching from a higher latitude site (e.g. Baikonur), you cannot avoid having to do a dog-leg and/or in-orbit plane change. If launching from the Southern hemisphere, you'll need to switch to using the Southernmost point of lunar orbit.

[kurja]

Doesn't MJ have time to AN/DN indicators? While on the pad those tell you when your current 'orbit' along the planet's surface intersects the orbit of your target. I've been using that with KER to launch directly to Minmus inclination in stock, it works a treat.

[Phylan]

Doesn't MJ have time to AN/DN indicators? While on the pad those tell you when your current 'orbit' along the planet's surface intersects the orbit of your target. I've been using that with KER to launch directly to Minmus inclination in stock, it works a treat.

It does, but it appears that they stick at 14 minutes and change and remain stuck there as long as you're on the ground, or at least they do for me. Thanks cremasterstroke, I'll give your method a shot as well.

[foamyesque]

Instead of totally disabling ascent guidance, just play with "final angle" in the "edit ascent path" window to finely control pitch. Not 100% automated, but better than no automation at all.

It doesn't take much, either; a degree or two of pitch-up will make a big difference. I've found that a high turn-end altitude coupled with a gentle turn and an early turn start tends to work well for low-TWR launches; my Apollo-esque LV has an ascent path in MJ with a 1km start, 180km finish, and ~55 turn shape to hit a 200km target orbit. MJ flies it to a 160kmx200km orbit before requiring a circularization burn. Different ships require different settings, of course, and I think I've still got optimization room, but it works. I wish MJ wouldn't cut out when you drive your apoapsis past the target orbit altitude, though.

As for landing, you need to add multiple low-thrust engines and selectively disable them as your TWR climbs. Or you can do what Surveyor did: a large fast-burning solid retro to kill most descent velocity at a km up or so, then some small, limited-fuel verniers to soft-land. Don't plan on only using one (set of) engine(s) if they're not throttable, unless the set is *very* large. :]

The Surveyor approach is honestly my favourite, although if you're in atmosphere you can also just trust to math and a single burn solid. Requires nerves of steel, though.

[coldblade2000]

Congrats on release!

Are the unsupported mods not working or just unchecked? (I know I shouldn't come here bitching if they don't work, dont worry)

[RedAV8R]

Congrats on release!

Are the unsupported mods not working or just unchecked? (I know I shouldn't come here bitching if they don't work, dont worry)

Unchecked for the most part, and no guarantees that they do or do not work.