Jump to content

[0.25] Realism Overhaul w/ RedAV8R [Terminated]

RedAV8R

By RedAV8R
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

RedAV8R

RedAV8R

Posted
  • Author
Posted

@Felger & @Kejchal: Awesome guys. Kejchal, your description the first time including you were talking about EVA would have been especially helpful on my end. This is why I ask for details people. Felger, yep, you are right. Thank you. I'll make the changes necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
S1gmoid

S1gmoid

Posted
Posted

Hey :) I'm sort of curious about offset centers of mass and engine gimbaling.

So I've read that a properly gimbaling engine can be used to overcome the problem that results from having offset centers of mass, such as in capsules designed for lifting re-entry. Now what I'm not sure I understand is how this will work with the navball and headings.

So if I have my thrust vector right through the center of mass, that means thrust would NOT be in the direction of what I think KSP considers as "heading", or would it? That would pretty much make precision maneuvering impossible...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RedAV8R

RedAV8R

Posted
  • Author
Posted

@S1gmoid: IRL the Apollo computer constantly calculated CoM and gimballed the engine accordingly to take into account a non-zero CoM. In KSP there is no such thing. So yes, in KSP, ones 'heading' is simply the z axis of the craft, however with offset CoM, with the proper gimbal trim, one's actual direction of travel will be different than where it's pointed. The best analogy I can think of is a crosswind takeoff or landing of a conventional aircraft while crabbed. Aircraft pointed in direction of the wind, while the actual direction of travel is down the runway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
O Nerd

O Nerd

Posted
Posted

Nice. Development continues! :) Haven't been here for a while, I'm thinking about reinstalling the mods...

Yeah, i'll check the updates later.

Nice job, Nathan, RedAV8R and the rest of the crew! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
xmrsmoothx

xmrsmoothx

Posted
Posted

Hi NathanKell and RedAV8R. I recently read about liquid flourine rocket engines, both LF2/LH2 and fluorine/lithium types, and high-performance oxidizers like FLOX. Is there any possibility that RO and realfuels will ever implement exotic fuels such as fluorine?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Felger

Felger

Posted
Posted
Hey :) I'm sort of curious about offset centers of mass and engine gimbaling.

So I've read that a properly gimbaling engine can be used to overcome the problem that results from having offset centers of mass, such as in capsules designed for lifting re-entry. Now what I'm not sure I understand is how this will work with the navball and headings.

So if I have my thrust vector right through the center of mass, that means thrust would NOT be in the direction of what I think KSP considers as "heading", or would it? That would pretty much make precision maneuvering impossible...

This is correct. You could approximate a solution by using a probe core on an Infernal Robotics gimbal, and rotating it to match your engine deflection, but odds are it won't be perfect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NathanKell

NathanKell

Posted
Posted
Hi NathanKell and RedAV8R. I recently read about liquid flourine rocket engines, both LF2/LH2 and fluorine/lithium types, and high-performance oxidizers like FLOX. Is there any possibility that RO and realfuels will ever implement exotic fuels such as fluorine?

Real Fuels already contains all that stuff thanks to regex. No engine configs use it yet, since there are no production engines for RO to model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RedAV8R

RedAV8R

Posted
  • Author
Posted

@O_Nerd: Thanks! FASA is coming, FASA is coming. Very soon!

@xmrsmoothx: While RealFuels includes those resources, there are no real production capable engines around. Flourine and lithium are expensive, toxic, and corrosive. The cost, danger, and engineering of using such compounds doesn't justify their increased efficiency. I wouldn't count on finding it in RO any time soon, if ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
xmrsmoothx

xmrsmoothx

Posted
Posted

Alright, thanks for the prompt reply guys! I had no idea those resources were in realfuels, that's very surprising. I thought since CECE was in RO, testbed/development engines would be acceptable, but I understand how it would be difficult to model the ridiculous requirements of using LF as a fuel. I suppose I can mod it in myself if I really need it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RedAV8R

RedAV8R

Posted
  • Author
Posted

@xmrsmoothx: Some engines have made it in even though not being production engines. M-1, CECE, some J-2s, aerospikes, etc. With increased budgets and time, all those *could* have been built, and realistically worked well. As I mentioned before, I said 'production capable'. What I mean by that is that the actual use of fluorine has way to many negative aspects to it to simply outweigh the efficiency gain of current LH2/LOX engines. It's exotic, and for good reason, nobody *likes* to use it. IMO, while low thrust (for now), electric propulsion has way better efficiency, is in use now, and is the propulsion of the future. That and methane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
@xmrsmoothx: Some engines have made it in even though not being production engines. M-1, CECE, some J-2s, aerospikes, etc. With increased budgets and time, all those *could* have been built, and realistically worked well. As I mentioned before, I said 'production capable'. What I mean by that is that the actual use of fluorine has way to many negative aspects to it to simply outweigh the efficiency gain of current LH2/LOX engines. It's exotic, and for good reason, nobody *likes* to use it. IMO, while low thrust (for now), electric propulsion has way better efficiency, is in use now, and is the propulsion of the future. That and methane.

Well, we could try figuring out the values for RL-10 and all Atlas 1st stage engines. IIRC, those were the ones they wanted to use FLOX with. IMO, FLOX should, in fact, be usable in most LOX-burning engines (much like Syntin in all kerosene-powered ones). Astronautix says it was actually easier to handle than pure LOX, for whatever reason. The main problem with it seems to be that it's very expensive, what with fluorine adding to the cost.

As for pure LF2, there were two fairly interesting concepts (one US and one Russian). Some data for that is on Astronautix, and the Russian one was actually considered for the UR-700. Fun fact: not only would it boost Isp compared to LOX, it'd also boost thrust, being noticeably denser than LOX.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Luscion

Luscion

Posted
Posted

  • Navigate to the "RemoteTech" folder located in Kerbal Space Program\GameData
  • Open the "RemoteTech_settings" cfg file found inside with either notepad or notepad ++
  • go back to the RT2 Settings File - Adds ground stations to launch sites and highlight everything (ctrl + A) and copy it (ctrl + C)
  • Now back to the "RemoteTech_settings" cfg file you just opened. Highlight everything in there (ctrl + A) and paste (Ctrl + V)
  • Save and your done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RedAV8R

RedAV8R

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
Kw rocketry saturn5 and the other big cluster have broken nodes

Um...yeah...THAT'S WHY THEY AREN'T SUPPORTED. Did you even bother to read the OP?

NOT OFFICIALLY SUPPORTED WITH 0.25: Currently a WIP. These will be supported in the future. Just not yet.

6S Service Compartment Tubes by Nothke

Aerojet Kerbodyne (v3.0.2)

AIES by carmics (v1.5.1)

ALCOR by alexustes

Fustek Station Parts by sumghai (vX0.04-4 DEV BUILD - 5 June 2014)

Kerbal Attachment System by KospY (v0.4.8)

KerbX by Borklund

Kethane by Majiir (v0.9)

KW Rocketry by Winston & Kickasskyle (v2.6c)

[NOTE: DO NOT install the "Extra" - "No Shroud" OR "Instant Power"]

LazTek SpaceX by LazurusLuan (Launch v3.1a, Exploration v2.1a, Historic v1.1a)

Near Future Technologies by Nertea (v0.2.*) (Propulsion v0.2.3, Electrical v0.2.2, Solar v0.2.2, Construction v0.2.1, Spacecraft v0.2.1)

[NOTE: Propulsion Pack Engines NOT supported at this time.]

[NOTE: DO NOT Install the "Hydrogen NTRs" folder in Propulsion Pack.]

NovaPunch by Tiberion (v2.06)

PorkWorks Inflatable Habs by Porkjet (v0.4)

RLA by hoojiwana (v11.2)

SCANsat by technogeeky (v7.0RC4)

Space Shuttle Engines & KM_Gimbal by dtobi (v2.1.2)

[NOTE: Not all parts supported at this time.]

Sum Dum Heavy Industries - Service Module System by sumghai (v2.2.1)

[NOTE: Delete MM Configs found in the Parts folder]

Taurus HCV by jnrobinson (v1.2.1)

World Space by Lovad

[NOTE: Apollo CSM and Mercury Spacecraft NOT SUPPORTED due to model incompatibilities.]

Edited by RedAV8R
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Felger

Felger

Posted
Posted
Since realistic progession seems to be dead, I think someone ahould create a new tree using this (http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/93759-ATC-Alternative-Tree-Configurator) since this carrer mode seems to be an important part of the gameplay

Go for it! It's not that hard, just start tinkering away. Copy your game install directory to another folder, install the mod, try to create a tree for Realism Overhaul, and see if you can make it make sense. Maybe start from Better than Starting Manned, since that progression is more like a realistic space program. Perhaps adjust how Procedural Parts scales with tech level, all that stuff.

Modding is fun!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lilienthal

Lilienthal

Posted
Posted
Go for it! It's not that hard, just start tinkering away. Copy your game install directory to another folder, install the mod, try to create a tree for Realism Overhaul, and see if you can make it make sense. Maybe start from Better than Starting Manned, since that progression is more like a realistic space program. Perhaps adjust how Procedural Parts scales with tech level, all that stuff.

Modding is fun!

I second that: I'd love that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RedAV8R

RedAV8R

Posted
  • Author
Posted

@kamik423: Have at it. I'm not doing it. I'm sick and tired of people coming on here and telling what other people should take on. How about people (minus Felger, since he actually is, THANK YOU!) actually step up, do something and help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RedAV8R

RedAV8R

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

EVERYONE:

Feeling pretty confident to issue a new release this evening. FASA, NearFuture, and LazTek will be added to the supported list. Plenty of goodies, support for more parts, more 'new' parts.

There are 3 'spare' engine models I'm opening up to suggestions as to what to make them into.

They are:

#1. The "X-800 Mini Rocket Engine"

#2. The "LR-91 Mini Rocket Engine"

#3. The "Mini Orbital Bertha (1.25m)"

Edited by RedAV8R
Link to comment
Share on other sites
closer

closer

Posted
Posted

Is there a way to save the plugins through mod manager after the initial install instead of having to reinstall every mod on every startup???

Another issue I'm having is the re-entry altitude I'm not picking up drag to slow down until 50,000 meters this is when I get flames, but entry drag should start at 100,000 Meters with flame. It seems like I'm picking up way too much speed, If I launch straight up to 125,000M and come straight back down I continue picking up speed all the way down to 50,000M.

Is this normal or just an error? Have all recommended and required mods installed. Thanks

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