KScale64 v1.2.2 16th April 2017

[Mtshaw113]

Is 6.4x updated for 0.90?

[NonWonderDog]

Kind of.

6.4x itself is version independent, but it depends on RSS. This download includes a version of RSS that isn't compatible with 0.90.

All you need to do is replace RealSolarSystem.dll with the version in the current download of RealSolarSystem.

[regex]

Is 6.4x updated for 0.90?

It's a config file for RealSolarSystem, so the proper question is "Is RSS updated for 0.90?". The answer is yes.

[NathanKell]

Frankly, I found 6.4x with stock parts very fun myself (I played a stock career in it, it's part of what got me to start working on RP-0). FAR, obviously, and I used a slightly edited version of Stock ReBalance tailored for 6.4x. Also KIDS (but for thrust correction, not Isp scaling).

[tater]

I'd be interested in a minimal install for this which works best. I have FAR/DRE/KJR/KIDS in there now. Thinking about IF life support. Anything else I should think about? 5m parts?

[NathanKell]

I used TACLS and liked it but YMMV obvs. You should definitely use EVE + a visual pack...

[tater]

Cool. While I "get" TACLS, I think as long as the abstraction has around the right total consumables per astronaut/day, a simpler system is better if for no other reason than the odd looking parts.

[tater]

What setting would make sense for KIDS?

[NathanKell]

tater: other than turning on thrust correction, leave the multipliers as they are IMO.

[Tellion]

Maybe Kerbol is just emitting neutrinos and nothing else...

All taken with 64k and OPM, no other mods installed.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[tater]

What about RF with stockalike? I was thinking the lighter engines might help a little. I started a career to test, got to orbit, etc, but clearly considerably trickier than stock to push the career forward (I refuse to do kerbin science except from orbit ).

Right now I have 64X, FAR/KJR/DRE/KIDS. Undecided on Snacks (you can make it so they die in the snacks.cfg, which I do) or IFLS. Trying to keep overhead down on machine. I have nothing else on this install.

[Warringer]

I still have the problem that 64k does not work correctly, even with 64k being the only mod installed and the RSS.dll replaced with the latest version.

It gets stuck at resizing the second planet, Tylo IIRC. The log file tells me that its stuck at saving the resized mesh/texture. But space is there, and 32 Jumbo as well as stock RSS work... >_>

[SSR Kermit]

Success story here; I'm running K64x on a heavily modded 0.90 install. I've used CKAN for 70+ mods and then dropped in some 0.25 mods and treated CKAN badly by deleting stuff and overwriting. I installed RSS through CKAN and then just dropped the 6.4 files (the configs, not the plugin folder) in my gamedata.

Works fine! Even locations work, although the land locations tend to be at the bottom of pits.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

EDIT

Just found the locations cfg version in the repo, cool stuff!

Edited January 18, 2015 by SSR Kermit

[Raptor831]

What about RF with stockalike? I was thinking the lighter engines might help a little. I started a career to test, got to orbit, etc, but clearly considerably trickier than stock to push the career forward (I refuse to do kerbin science except from orbit ).

Right now I have 64X, FAR/KJR/DRE/KIDS. Undecided on Snacks (you can make it so they die in the snacks.cfg, which I do) or IFLS. Trying to keep overhead down on machine. I have nothing else on this install.

If you don't use RF/Stockalike, you're going to have a time getting anything to orbit. You need about 7500 m/s dV to make it to orbit in 6.4 scale with FAR, which ends up being a quite large rocket without the mass adjustments that RF gives you. It's possible, but personally I feel that it's just a little too hard.

As for life support, if you get RF and Procedural Parts, you can get a life support tank (I believe) or just use a service module type tank to place your consumables in. No ugly looking random parts. Procedural Parts is a must, in my opinion, for any RSS scaled system. Otherwise your part count starts climbing way to fast.

[Sandworm]

I tried 6.4 with rf/far but it didn't make much sense. With the reduction in drag from far, plus the increase in performance from RF, my rockets weren't much larger than stock. Spacelaunch shouldn't be easy. So I went back to far+stock fuel.

Stock fuels already give you three distinct fuel types (liquid/o2, mono and xenon). Nearfuture give two more (argon, H2). I see no need to expand these choices. RF also comes with lots of compatibility headaches.

[Shad0wCatcher]

7500 DV + 30 ton payload = stock launcher? I think not. 30 tons is a basic Munar orbiter (with life support modules). That doesn't even get you out of Kerbin's system. Hell even SpaceX with a RF config only gets you partially to orbit if you fully fuel the Dragon 2 capsule (25 tons total; just the capsule + orbital module) and that's meant to be reusable. Doing the same in stock and you can get to Jool and back (hyperbole; but you get the idea).

Now sure if you're only launching 2 or 3 ton payloads you can use 1.25 meter rockets to get to orbit. That's useful for probes; but trying anything manned and it's a different story. Also using DRE makes things much more interesting as well (have fun getting that 1.25 meter manned capsule back alive!).

[Raptor831]

Last time I tried it, I needed a true 64%-ish scale Saturn V to get an Apollo-style mission to the Mun. 5m 1st and 2nd stage, 3.75m 3rd stage, and 2.5m service module/pod plus a 2.5m-ish 2-stage lander. I was using FAR/DRE/RF as well. I probably wasn't being the most efficient, but I did try to minimize the rocket as much as possible. Ended up being quite large.

You need something like 15km dV to make it work. 7.5k to orbit (with FAR), about 2km each for munar landing and launch, 2.3km for TMI, .9km for Munar injection, .9km for TKI, and some breathing room. Bare minimum is like 15.6km dV if you reenter directly from the TKI burn, which can be tricky with DRE. I usually try and do a burn for that one, which would be another 2.3km dV if you did the full burn. 18+ km dV with a decent capsule in stock is no picnic.

It's not really hard to get to orbit (especially with mod parts), but it's enough to keep you honest. Heck, a kerballed mission to Duna and back ought to be quite the engineering challenge with 64K/FAR/DRE/RF. Would love to see a Duna Permanent Outpost challenge entry with this mod setup.

[tater]

This is the discussion I'm sort of looking for. So far I managed orbit (manned) with no mod parts---I only have PF, but it's career, and I've not gotten to the point of needing fairings yet. It was tricky enough with 1.25m parts that I'm assuming that any Mun attempt will be a Kerbin orbit rendezvous affair, with at least 2 launches with 2.5m parts unless I make a 2.5m critter that looks like a Delta IV heavy.

[CatastrophicFailure]

I'll second that. My first Mün mission was a real headache early in the game. KOR as well. Even with 3.75m parts the LV for the lander/transfer stage was huge and ugly, and only enough to land a single Kerbal in a very lightweight pod. With the tech tree maxed out, I finally have a super-heavy-lift LV that can put a 3-Kerbal direct-ascent lander on the Mün. It's a beast. 6000+ tons on the pad, 10m lower stages, and still needs 7 huge SRB's to get going. All Procedural Parts at this point. But it's so far been reliable. Switching to something like Real Fuels would probably allow for more compact lifters.

@Raptor 831: +1 on the challenge idea. I'm working on a long-term Mün outpost now as a dry run of exactly that.

[Shania_L]

Real fuels has a compounding effect, I have found that for small sub-orbital or lightweight probe launches it isnt all that different to stock. However that all changes as the mass increases, stock masses just escalate until you get the 1000+tonne monsters that CatastrophicFalure and tater have posted simply to get to the Mun and back. Wheras with RealFuels you can keep the size under control much better as seen in the mission I posted on the previous page with a single Kerbal manned Mun return for 340Tonnes.

Ok that may not be "Real" in comparison to the Saturn V, but then IIRC Neil and Buzz were not small and green either. Ill sacrifice the reality of the 1000tonne lag monster if it allows me more fun and the ability to actually build an interplanetry capable ship that does not reduce my game to a slideshow.

Besides, 340 tonnes still requires you to fully upgrade the launchpad on a career mode game, so I think thats pretty fair.

[CatastrophicFailure]

Interesting. For comparisons sake, my megalifter is similar in size, weight, & thrust to the real unbuilt Saturn C-8. So on a 64% analogue of Earth, the scale is way off.

[tater]

I managed a probe to LMO with 1.25m parts and no maneuver nodes last night. I think I want the latter before I risk Jeb.

I added PP, but it hasn't changed anything as I seem limited to the volumes allowed by career unlocks anyway. I was sort of wondering if I needed parts basically 1/2 to 2/3 as big as real life for a given mission. Note that I don't have MJ or KER installed, so I'm designing seat of the pants

[rkman]

Wheras with RealFuels you can keep the size under control much better as seen in the mission I posted on the previous page with a single Kerbal manned Mun return for 340Tonnes.

I have build a 340 ton 1 man Mun return vehicle (Mk1+small chute) without realfuels. (I do use NEAR). Same overall design as my 2 man return vehicle, but scaled down.

The big difference in launch mass between your and my rocket seems to be caused not by RF but by a factor 3 difference in the mass of the core payload (the parts that are supposed to get back to Kerbin).

edit:

I must revise the above, a custom engine i used with that rocket was slightly cheaty. The new version comes out to 375t, lander&return mass is 6t. So it looks like realfuels is a factor as well.

Edited January 21, 2015 by rkman

[immelman]

What I really like about this is how it makes you start building efficient multistage rockets, while you can still play around with all the wacky mods available. Like others in the thread I've just done an Mun landing, 850 tonnes to get a two kerbal Alcor pod to the surface. An Apollo style rocket came about naturally with the limitations imposed by physics and the parts available.

Loads of fun, I think I will try Duna next

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Edited January 25, 2015 by immelman

[combat squirrel]

So I have just got this scaling installed on my system, the planet size is working but my numbers seem to be off.

I can orbit at 128km at 6040 m/s and the atmosphere height remains 70k , am I missing something here......... ? What is it meant to be ?