[Stopped] 6.4x Kerbol System v2.0.1 - RSS Config [11/16/14]

[EatVacuum]

http://imgur.com/a/uV71e

I'm finally getting around to learning git and contributing a few tweaks to Raptor's repository.

I'm not sure how well I'll end up maintaining this (git is confusing for a guy like me who uses svn at work), but anyone interested in playing with my terrain should be able to download my latest progress from here:

https://github.com/NonWonderDog/6-4-KerbolSystem/archive/develop.zip

Still a few things left to do, and I haven't found time to check the easter eggs yet. And I really want to see Kerbin with fjords.

I just tried this dev version and I have to say, I'm liking the new mountains. I didn't see the old table top issue on the mountains west of KSC that made everything look like mesas. They're a huge improvement, only thing to do to make them even better is to get snow on the tops of the tallest - I know we're at the equator, so it should be high like Mt. Kilimajaro - 6000m or so I would say. Also, The I think the islands east of KSC better - they may be a little boring as you said, but at least the island airport looks natural there - not hanging off a cliff or parked on a 10m high mound. Good work!

[Renegrade]

By the way, the solar power curve for RSS6.4x seems to be using the full RSS powercurve - Ox-stats are producing 2.0e/sec and the six-panel models are producing 6 e/sec. Running that backwards through the inverse square law (vs normal stock values) implies a distance of about 0.6 AU... which is roughly where 6.4x Kerbin is sitting..

[Sandworm]

FYI - Just installed RSS and 6.4, all seems well. In fact, a little better as the flickering of the KSC at first load seems to have disappeared.

[NathanKell]

Yes, that bug was fixed by Squad in .25 (it had started occurring even for them).

[Sandworm]

One slight compatibility bug.

Remotetech2 has dropped the "2" and is now using a directory called "RemoteTech". The directory RSS/6.4 directory therefore needs to be renamed so that the RemoteTech_Settings.cfg is properly overwritten. As it is now you get two directories with two different files.

Lol, the "flashing" is back, just not in the KSC scene. The start menu now flickers slightly in response to mouse movement. Or maybe I just didn't notice that before.

Edited October 9, 2014 by Sandworm

[Northstar1989]

FYI - Just installed RSS and 6.4, all seems well. In fact, a little better as the flickering of the KSC at first load seems to have disappeared.

How come it works for you???

I just installed RSS 6.4x, and the KSC appeared hovering over the water near the coast instead of at the proper altitude.

What ModuleManager version were you running? Were you running a dev version of the 6.4x config files? (I was running the latest dev build, which might have been part of the problem- but it wasn't working *at all* with the latest release last time I tried...)

Regards,

Northstar

[Starman4308]

How come it works for you???

I just installed RSS 6.4x, and the KSC appeared hovering over the water near the coast instead of at the proper altitude.

What ModuleManager version were you running? Were you running a dev version of the 6.4x config files? (I was running the latest dev build, which might have been part of the problem- but it wasn't working *at all* with the latest release last time I tried...)

Regards,

Northstar

It's also working for me: I'm using ModuleManager 2.5.1, RSS 8.0, various and sundry mods, and just using the old 0.24.2 6.4x config pack.

In any case, I'm getting some futziness with biomes: maybe it's because I didn't have blizz78's toolbar, but last time I launched, even when above the ocean, all I was able to get reports for was grassland. Will post more if problem persists.

EDIT: It persisted. If I had to guess, it's because for some reason my biomes are RSS stock: when I pop open the Custom Biomes map, it shows Earth instead of Kerbin, and it seems what biome I'm over corresponds to the Earth map. If there's anything I can do to help narrow it down, I'd be willing to help.

Edited October 12, 2014 by Starman4308

[Paul Kingtiger]

It's also working for me: I'm using ModuleManager 2.5.1, RSS 8.0, various and sundry mods, and just using the old 0.24.2 6.4x config pack.

In any case, I'm getting some futziness with biomes: maybe it's because I didn't have blizz78's toolbar, but last time I launched, even when above the ocean, all I was able to get reports for was grassland. Will post more if problem persists.

EDIT: It persisted. If I had to guess, it's because for some reason my biomes are RSS stock: when I pop open the Custom Biomes map, it shows Earth instead of Kerbin, and it seems what biome I'm over corresponds to the Earth map. If there's anything I can do to help narrow it down, I'd be willing to help.

Sounds like you included the Custom Biomes folder which is in the RSS download. If you delete that folder, it should fix your issues.

[Starman4308]

Sounds like you included the Custom Biomes folder which is in the RSS download. If you delete that folder, it should fix your issues.

Thanks. Worked like a charm. Unlike the plane I hurriedly built to test it out. That is lying in a thousand little pieces on the ground.

[bs1110101]

What should i set the science multiplier and funding mulitplyer for if i want to play career mode with this?

[Paul Kingtiger]

What should i set the science multiplier and funding mulitplyer for if i want to play career mode with this?

Depends how hard a game you want. If you have FAR or NEAR installed then the deltaV increase isn't massive, from something like 4500 to 7500 to get into orbit. I'd start off with a couple of test launches in Sandbox mode until you've got the hand of launching rockets with better drag mechanics. Then you'll have a better idea of where to set the difficulty.

[Starman4308]

Depends how hard a game you want. If you have FAR or NEAR installed then the deltaV increase isn't massive, from something like 4500 to 7500 to get into orbit. I'd start off with a couple of test launches in Sandbox mode until you've got the hand of launching rockets with better drag mechanics. Then you'll have a better idea of where to set the difficulty.

I was wondering how you got that figure. I required ~9.2 km/s dV to get to orbit. I have discovered step 1 to troubleshooting this process: "Ensure FAR/NEAR installed correctly".

I tested my NEAR installation with a couple rockets in sandbox: both are a Rockmax-16 tank feeding a Skipper, but one had 6 radially arranged, empty Rockomax-8 tanks, while the other had them in-line, with a nose cone to boot. Originally, I got about the same results, and then I re-installed a slightly newer version of NEAR.

Engine burnout:

Aerodynamic rocket: 34.555 km @ 1729.1 m/s

Pancake rocket: 7.617 km @ 192.5 m/s

I also got to orbit with ~1.2 km/s less dV than last time, and part of that was a quite subpar launch profile (didn't start my gravity turn nearly soon enough for NEAR).

[Paul Kingtiger]

I was wondering how you got that figure. I required ~9.2 km/s dV to get to orbit. I have discovered step 1 to troubleshooting this process: "Ensure FAR/NEAR installed correctly".

I tested my NEAR installation with a couple rockets in sandbox: both are a Rockmax-16 tank feeding a Skipper, but one had 6 radially arranged, empty Rockomax-8 tanks, while the other had them in-line, with a nose cone to boot. Originally, I got about the same results, and then I re-installed a slightly newer version of NEAR.

Engine burnout:

Aerodynamic rocket: 34.555 km @ 1729.1 m/s

Pancake rocket: 7.617 km @ 192.5 m/s

I also got to orbit with ~1.2 km/s less dV than last time, and part of that was a quite subpar launch profile (didn't start my gravity turn nearly soon enough for NEAR).

I haven't done a massive amount of testing, but I believe NEAR and FAR will give slightly different results. FAR includes Mach effects which will get you to orbit with less dV than NEAR. The best way to test is to let mechjeb handle the launch, that way you're comparing the craft not the flight profile.

Something else I want to test is the viability of 2 stage Mun landers vs 1 stage. I did some testing in stock and found that the extra weight of the engine and decoupler on a 2 stage wasn't worth the saving ov leaving behind empty tanks and legs. But I'm fairly sure there is a line you cross as the size of the Mun goes up that makes 2 stages more efficient (due to the additional fuel required). When I get some time I'll take another look using the 6.4x values.

[Starman4308]

I haven't done a massive amount of testing, but I believe NEAR and FAR will give slightly different results. FAR includes Mach effects which will get you to orbit with less dV than NEAR. The best way to test is to let mechjeb handle the launch, that way you're comparing the craft not the flight profile.

Something else I want to test is the viability of 2 stage Mun landers vs 1 stage. I did some testing in stock and found that the extra weight of the engine and decoupler on a 2 stage wasn't worth the saving ov leaving behind empty tanks and legs. But I'm fairly sure there is a line you cross as the size of the Mun goes up that makes 2 stages more efficient (due to the additional fuel required). When I get some time I'll take another look using the 6.4x values.

I was playing with a hypothetical 6.4x design where both stages shared the same Rockomax 48-7S engine and only eliminated extra fuel tanks: I think I had four radially-decoupled FL-T200 tanks with fuel lines into the ascent stage. I know I had to change things up a bit because I added a Science Jr. and the additional 200 kg left me short on dV.

And just to be clear: I'm pretty sure my 9.2 km/s value is coming from stock drag, with 8.2 km/s coming out of NEAR with a terrible launch profile (it was exactly the third successful orbital launch I've ever done using NEAR).

[regex]

With FAR you're looking at roughly 7.5km/s to orbit, maybe a little less because I consider LKO to reach out to about 250km under 6.4x. This comes from a lot of general experience playing this config (I'm the original author) but no practical testing because I'm not a filthy cheater who uses MechJeb.

[lewis 101]

hi, just want to say grate mod, but can anyone show me some photos of unmanned mun probes to land on the mun(full rockets)? I cant do it at the moment it would seem

[Sandworm]

Here ya go. This rocket relied on using FAR, HGR, RLA and remotetech (note stock fuels). HGR lift and transfer stages, KW fairings, and a tiny RLA engine for the decent stage. It had 14,000m/s worth of deltaV at launch but I could have gotten away with much less. The probe still has 1800 after landing and I may have ditched the second-last stage early. The plan was to hop around to other biomes but I never bothered.

This took considerably more effort:

And this guy is heading for Ike as soon as I get the time: (nearfuture ion drive, but basically same price as Mun lander shown above.)

Edited October 17, 2014 by Sandworm

[Starman4308]

Here's my 1-way science probe: relied on NEAR, Procedural Fairings, and I used RealChute for stage recovery. Landed this one with 300 m/s remaining, even with an accidental dip into upper atmosphere after ascent and a Munar transfer from a non-circularized orbit.

[TheOrqwithVagrant]

Looks like the 6.4 may need updating with the latest RSS - I upgraded, and some really odd stuff happened - my satellites that were in Minmus orbit ended up in solar orbit, and my Minmus lander showed up ON the sun! Now I'm launching a new probe, and it seems like Kerbin's SOI ends well inside Minmus's orbit, which probably explains at least how the orbiters got punted to solar orbits. Probably (hopefully) an easy fix - I'll see if I can figure it out myself. Just be warned, if you have a bases or elaborate stations/sats around Minmus.

[TheBedla]

I just tried this yesterday, and I must come back to tip my oversized helmet to you.

I've been playing KSP for quite some time now (since .18 - not nearly as long or as much as many others), and I was feeling KSP was becoming a little too easy for me. I went through dozens of career starts (or the equivalents where there was no career yet), and my Kerbin orbit operations were becoming monotonous. So when my newest save decided to go AWOL on me, I said hey, why not try this 6.4x thing to make things more interesting?

And boy, interesting they are. I did manage to put a Kerbal into orbit and back, and to save one from LKO (thanks to FinePrint) and to do some test launches, and I'm now feeling as if at the start again. Suddenly I have only a rough idea how big a lifter I need to get to orbit, what the most efficient ascent profile is, and how the hell to set up a comms network (RemoteTech).

So, I just wanted to say thanks for keeping the game fresh for me. I'm looking forward to the challenges in front of me.

[mike9606]

So I watched GregroxMun's stream, and apparently he is using Astronomer's Visual pack with a config to make it work with this. I wish to try playing in such a setup, but cannot find the config for adapting astronomer's to 6.4x.

EDIT: Nevermind, it appears to be built in to the add-on.

EDIT2: It seems that it only partly works. The clouds you can fly though are gone!

Edited October 27, 2014 by mike9606

[NathanKell]

That integration config appears to be from this fork of 6.4x.

[CatastrophicFailure]

Been playing this & loving it since just after .25 came out, but I seem to have run into a bug that may or may not be related. Whenever I approach Gilly I'm getting that obnoxious "ship-flies-away-from-camera" bug. Seems to hit when I get 40-50 km from the surface. I've (so far) landed on the Mun, Minmus, Eve, & close pass by Moho (<10km at 30kps!) with no issues. Other mods seem to have been behaving too. x86 & all that, here's the log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/gpbt86d35obo611/output_log.txt?dl=0

[Raptor831]

Been playing this & loving it since just after .25 came out, but I seem to have run into a bug that may or may not be related. Whenever I approach Gilly I'm getting that obnoxious "ship-flies-away-from-camera" bug. Seems to hit when I get 40-50 km from the surface. I've (so far) landed on the Mun, Minmus, Eve, & close pass by Moho (<10km at 30kps!) with no issues. Other mods seem to have been behaving too. x86 & all that, here's the log: https://www.dropbox.com/s/gpbt86d35obo611/output_log.txt?dl=0

I can't tell from a quick look at the log. But I can say you probably want to check out Paul Kingtiger's fork of this config. I haven't updated this for the new version of KSP or RSS, so I don't know what could be messed up. Link here. He's gotten everything up-to-date with .25 and the new RSS. You can remove the EVE configs if you don't want that involved.

[Blipser]

Can anyone tell me waht the altitude for Keostationary orbit with 24hour rotation is? I tried 30130.12 like in Nebuchadnezzar's Delta-V map but I found it much to high, and don't know how to work it out for myself.