[1.2.2] 10x Kerbol system development for Kopernicus: Version 6.3.0.1 - Update: April 14 2017

[NathanKell]

Try using RVE, at least for Kerbin. RVE is built for Earth-size planets; 10x Kerbol involves real-size planets, so visual packs built for stock KSP sizes are *not* liable to work very well.

You'll have to swap out its city lights mask for EVE's original though, obviously.

[Retsof]

By the way, A "quick and dirty" method for DV calculation that seems to make sense... though so far I've only made Kerbin orbit. Just double the standard DV values, and add maybe 10% for a margin of error.

EDIT: Nevermind...

Edited January 29, 2015 by Retsof

[NathanKell]

It's rather more like 3+x the values, recalling that FAR means LKO is ~3200m/s total with losses.

Recall from the Cape it's 9.3km/sec, TLI is 3.1-3.3 km/sec, LOI is ~800m/s, lunar landing/ascent is ~2km/sec, etc.

[chrisl]

I'm not sure if this is a Kerbal 10x issue or what. When I first started my game, rockets launching from the KSC launchpad were alligned so that N was at the top of the NavBall. Then I switched to the Inland space center and noticed that the top of the NavBall was aligned to something other then N. I just figured that was how that pad worked so I wasn't concerned by it. However, now I'm back at KSC and the NavBall is defaulting to a heading of 202. It's not a rocket I'd actually built anywhere before, either. Is there a way to get the heading back to what it should be?

[NathanKell]

Compare the the PQSCity node in RealSolarSystem.cfg with the KSC PQSCity node in LaunchSites.cfg -- sounds like they differ, so change the reorientFinalAngle in LaunchSites.cfg to match the one in RSS.cfg.

You can play with reorientFinalAngle to change how the space center is rotated (on the other sites).

[jsimmons]

Back from my business trip and I have my test box back up after it had a melt down. For the KSC rotation problem I have seen that before. For KSC itself I don't change it orientation from the default. The Inland is indeed rotated different so planes can safely take off. For the Inland case no PSQCity exist in RealSolarSystem.cfg

Retsof: The Interstellar pack is quite tricky to use since it has lots of cloud config files. The changes I distribute contain all updated cloud configs so be careful to only install what you have in your game folder.

As for Overhaul. I have been playing with the latest version and I have to say it is much better. Only problem remaining is the z fighting and that has always been there. Would Pete be okay with me using his textures?

[chrisl]

Compare the the PQSCity node in RealSolarSystem.cfg with the KSC PQSCity node in LaunchSites.cfg -- sounds like they differ, so change the reorientFinalAngle in LaunchSites.cfg to match the one in RSS.cfg.

You can play with reorientFinalAngle to change how the space center is rotated (on the other sites).

I'm looking in the LaunchSites.cfg that comes with RealSolarSystem v8.5 (the version I currently have downloaded but not installed) and I only find one instance of "reorientFinalAngle". It's for the "kb_baikonor" site. There isn't that field for the Canaveral site (assuming that "us_cape_canaveral" in RSS replaces KSC in 10x). So I just added the field and tried setting it to 90, 180, 270 & even 0. In all cases, if KSC is the first location I load up, it appears that any new craft I send to the launch pad is oriented to 000 degrees. However, if I switch to the INland center, and then come back to KSC, the HDG indicator will be off. For instance, right now I have "reorientFinalAngle = 270" for my KCS but after going to INland and back my default HDG is 285. And if I try setting "reorientFinalAngle = 180" and doing the same thing, I'll get a default HDG of 195.

[NathanKell]

Apologies, I meant the 10x Kerbol copies of both files. If your orientation is correct on starting the game, but when you click KSC in the Tracking Station (or select some other site then select KSC again) it gets messed up, that means the PQSCity entry in *this* mod's RSS.cfg (or wherever the planet configing is done) does not match the PQSCity entry for KSC in *this* mod's LaunchSites file.

You need to use that command to correct for the offset, so like if you're 15 degrees south of east, you would use -15.

[chrisl]

Apologies, I meant the 10x Kerbol copies of both files. If your orientation is correct on starting the game, but when you click KSC in the Tracking Station (or select some other site then select KSC again) it gets messed up, that means the PQSCity entry in *this* mod's RSS.cfg (or wherever the planet configing is done) does not match the PQSCity entry for KSC in *this* mod's LaunchSites file.

You need to use that command to correct for the offset, so like if you're 15 degrees south of east, you would use -15.

Ok. So in the RSS.cfg for 10x I see one entry for PQSCity. The information there is basically the same as the information for KSC in the LaunchSites.cfg for 10x. The only difference between the two is that in LaunchSites there is a "repositionToSphereSurface = false" line. In both cases, there isn't a "reorientFinalAngle" line. I'll go ahead and try adding the reorientFinalAngle line into RSS.cfg to see if that has an effect, but I notice that line isn't in the RSS.cfg or LaunchSites.cfg files from RealSolarSystems for the cape, either.

[chrisl]

So after much testing I figured out that if I add "reorientFinalAngle = 75" to both the RSS.cfg and LaunchSites.cfg PQSCity, then KSC will always reorient itself back to 090 which I believe is the default for KSC. Both the Inland and Lighthouse centers were already orienting themselves correct (I'm assuming) to 130 and 178 respectively. Precipice is the only other center that wasn't and it, like KSC, didn't have a reorientFinalAngle line in the LaunchSites.cfg file. I added "reorientFinalAngle = 83" which if orienting the Precipice center to 180. I'm not sure if that's the intended orientation or not, but at least they are now using static orientations.

[jsimmons]

Thank chrisl. The launch site orientation problem has been around for a long time. Its nice to solve this problem.

Nathan I was wonder what is the data format of the mesh file. I removed the wrap = true for Gilly and it looks almost normal except for the cone at the "north pole". I like to fix that before the release.

[Starwaster]

Thank chrisl. The launch site orientation problem has been around for a long time. Its nice to solve this problem.

Nathan I was wonder what is the data format of the mesh file. I removed the wrap = true for Gilly and it looks almost normal except for the cone at the "north pole". I like to fix that before the release.

So.... I shouldn't bother sending an expedition there? I thought maybe aliens did it....

[NathanKell]

jsimmons, the OBJ files are in fact OBJ files, although I added a "t" keyword for vertex tangents (both saving and loading). However, if it's there in the scaled space mesh it's probably there in PQS as well--and if it is, you'll need to tweak the top edge of the heightmap.

[jsimmons]

Bop is broken in both realms so I guess I will need to implement a height map.

[jsimmons]

I released a new version with the fix from Chrisl. Updated the planet's atmosphere limits. Lastly merged a lot of the RVE work into the Overhaul version.

[chrisl]

I'm assuming I've got a glitch but I'm not sure what may have caused it. I just completed my first two suborbital flights which launched from KSC. As both of them floated down on their parachutes, I was suprised to find that they landed on what appears to be grass even through crew reports (on the way down and when landed) say I'm in the water biome. I just figured maybe I landed on an island or something so didn't give it much concern. But now I've move to the Inland space center to launch another suborbital flight (trying to get crew reports from other biomes) and noticed that the one deep hole that ISC used to reside it, is now just a minor depression and when I look around, it appears I'm on a very tiny island instead of in the middle of a large continent. Any idea what may have caused this and how I can fix it?

[jsimmons]

That sounds like RSS mod didn't load. Can you check your logs to see if that is the case.

[chrisl]

That sounds like RSS mod didn't load. Can you check your logs to see if that is the case.

I'm looking in the KSP_Data\output_log.txt and it looks like RSS has loaded. Though to be honest, I don't look at these logs very often so I'm not really sure if there is something specific I should be looking for.

[jsimmons]

Which version of 10x are you using and is it the latest version?

- - - Updated - - -

Nathan is it still true that the normal maps need to there RGB channels altered?

[NathanKell]

jsimmons: if you save an image as DXT5_nm, the export utility will do the conversion for you. However, you do still have to invert horizontal (and then invert the X channel to compensate), and offset, like usual.

You should use:

DXT1 for color maps for planets without oceans

DXT5 for color maps for planets with oceans (alpha = specular, usually black for land and white for water)

DXT_L8 (8bit luminance) for heightmaps (which were grayscale PNGs before)

DXT5_nm for normal maps.

[chrisl]

Which version of 10x are you using and is it the latest version?

- - - Updated - - -

Nathan is it still true that the normal maps need to there RGB channels altered?

Yes, as far as I know I'm using the most recent version. I redownloaded the "Eve-7.4-Default.zip" on Friday and reinstalled it just to make sure I didn't have an install issue.

[chrisl]

Having a little issue. I'm trying to launch a satellite from the Lighthouse space center but even sitting on the pad with a tower connected, I have no connection. I'm assuming this means there is some issue with the remoteech config but I'm not sure what to look for. Any ideas?

EDIT: I increased the listed Height for the Lamp station from "36.824" to "136.824" and now I have a connection. I'm guessing the antenna is just too low. Not sure if this might be related to the other bug I reported, though.

Edited February 17, 2015 by chrisl

[ThorBeorn]

jsimmons: Hey. I've been testing the RSS 10x scale and the 6.4x scale configs out a little bit today. One thing that struck me is how much ram the heightmap for Kerbin uses. I tested with/without it in these locations: Startscreen, KSC, SPH and the launchpad.

The ram it needs varies between 220 mb to 370 mb. That is without texture compression (I couldn't convert it with DDS4KSP btw).

Just wanted to let you know that RSS 6.4 has a pretty good scaled space texture + normal map that costs way less ram (~150 mb less as uncompressed DDS, ~300 mb less as compressed DDS). It's a matter of priorities I know, but IMHO this mod really benefits from better resolution/graphics at scaled space. Cheers!

[NathanKell]

The height map *should* take up 8192x4096x8 /8 = 32MB of RAM. It's shocking if it's taking up 220-370MB.

[ThorBeorn]

The height map *should* take up 8192x4096x8 /8 = 32MB of RAM. It's shocking if it's taking up 220-370MB.

It is shocking. These are my test results with a minimal install, 6-7 items in the Gamedata folder. Following locations: Startscreen, KSC scene, SPH, Launchpad.

RSS 10x w. heightmap: 1595mb, 1665mb, 1738mb, 1710mb.

RSS 10x no heightmap: 1964mb, 2027mb, 2094mb, 1930mb.

Like I said, without heightmap, but with high-res scaled space kerbin + kerbin_nrm you're still ~150 mb of ram more left. It's just the better deal