Realism Overhaul Discussion Thread

[itsthatguy]

ok, so im making my first 3 man moon landing attempt in ro and I have a design that i'm developing that I need to test, it has many parts because I have tanks that are radially attached, cuz im too lazy to use prodecural parts for tanks (and I think it looks better with separate tanks side by side, it looks more kerbal-y)

However, I cant test it because my laptop is .... so I get no fps, and i'm wondering if using procedural tanks to merge the separate tanks into one big tank would make it run faster due to there being less parts.

By the way im using the f - 1 engines mod, which I just found out is memory intense, so will not using that increase my fps?

Also is active texture management good for increasing fps as well as reducing memory used?

Edited December 21, 2014 by itsthatguy

[coldblade2000]

Memory barely ever affects FPS in a noticeable scale. What does affect it is model and texture quality, also how much stuff is in the screen at the time

[itsthatguy]

Memory barely ever affects FPS in a noticeable scale. What does affect it is model and texture quality, also how much stuff is in the screen at the time

The reason I made the original post in the first place was because I couldn't change my quality settings for some reason, therefore there was no obvious way to reduce lag. Even if I changed the settings, the video quality in game wouldn't change.

[MinimumSky5]

Are struts meant to be as weak as they are? I'm using FASA to do a remake of the Titan IIIC, but the boosters keep impacting the central stage, even with 12 struts on each booster.

[samroberts]

I am wondering how to use a low TWR second stage to orbit. I'm using a Atlas V replica and going for a 160km parking orbit. The first stage takes the payload to about 5km/s. The Centaur upper stage has a TWR of about .43. Usually by the time the payload reaches orbital velocity it has fallen back into the atmosphere. Is there any way to do this better?

[Navy2k]

Have you tried a launch trajectory like this?

A late hard turn downwards so you take lots of vertical speed with you into circularisaion. Then you have to figure out the angle over ground you need to point your Launcher to end at your desired perigee

Greetings

Ben

Edited December 23, 2014 by Navy2k

[NathanKell]

Atlas V and Delta IV are designed to launch things into GTO. You will have to launch to a quite high apogee (probably 3-400km) and then finally finish circularizing well after apogee (when back to 185km or so) Single-Engine-Centaur and DCSS have *abysmal* TWRs. For LEO work you want an LEO-optimized launch vehicle.

[GamingStudioX]

Having a problem while installing with CKAN, anyone else having this problem? It start downloading custom biomes for a while and suddenly gives error that say custom biomes and those procedural mods cannot be downloaded due to being forbidden by server

[darkhlmet]

@gamingStudioX: The error messages in CKAN need to be refined, your getting a 404 because connection is refused but its because of to many connections from ckan over http and the server is protecting itself from possible attack. Just retry again and keep working your way up until everything is "cashed" (downloaded), it will eventually finish. It always chokes on me (on mks, procedural, ect hosted in the same place).

Its not the mods peoples fault, its the server they are paying/freebie using. If it was a private or private virtual server they could make there own rules. No real way around it unless they consolidate everything to one private server with enough bandwidth (never happening) or start filesharing or something.

[camlost]

In \RealismOverhaul\RO_SuggestedMods\Squad\RO_Squad_SPP.cfg

@PART[shockConeIntake]:FOR[RealismOverhaul]
{
	%RSSROConfig = True
	!MODULE[TweakScale]
	{
	}
	!mesh = DELETE
	MODEL
	{
		model = Squad/SPP/ShockConeIntake/model
		scale = 1.722222, 1.722222, 1.722222
	}
	@node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -1.07638875, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2
	@category = Propulsion
	%maxTemp = 2000
}

Why is this inlet resized along with Mk2 parts? If that's to be done, AJEInlet area should be rescaled as well.

[Motokid600]

Whats the farthest real life rockets pitch to fight gravity during the cruise stage of a launch?

[Felger]

In \RealismOverhaul\RO_SuggestedMods\Squad\RO_Squad_SPP.cfg

@PART[shockConeIntake]:FOR[RealismOverhaul]
{
	%RSSROConfig = True
	!MODULE[TweakScale]
	{
	}
	!mesh = DELETE
	MODEL
	{
		model = Squad/SPP/ShockConeIntake/model
		scale = 1.722222, 1.722222, 1.722222
	}
	@node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -1.07638875, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2
	@category = Propulsion
	%maxTemp = 2000
}

Why is this inlet resized along with Mk2 parts? If that's to be done, AJEInlet area should be rescaled as well.

Good catch, it makes a certain amount of sense since it's similar in design, I'll give it some though and either resize it back to match the other engines provided by AJE, or give it a higher intake area.

Whats the farthest real life rockets pitch to fight gravity during the cruise stage of a launch?

I'm not sure I understand the question, farthest from where? From horizontal? That will depend heavily on the launch profile and target orbit.

[Bob Jub]

I would like to see the RP-0 career sharpened up, maybe scriptable messages and achievements like "First Human Made Object in Space!" Or something similar. I've been playing a bit of Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager- and I really like the progression and random failures based on the reliability of capsules, probes, and launch stages. And the reliability can be increased by R&D attention and usage. Just some ideas, but I believe KSP career could be much more in depth with (relatively speaking) little work.

[Motokid600]

I'm not sure I understand the question, farthest from where? From horizontal? That will depend heavily on the launch profile and target orbit.

Yea after a rocket more or less gets horizontal. To what extent do real life rockets pitch back up to keep the apoapsis ahead of them? I'm trying to get an idea of when I'm pitching too much. At which point I'd reevaluate my ascent. The most I've had to fight gravity is a 45 degree pitch away from prograde. I still got to orbit, but I felt like I wasted so much fuel and could've done it much better.

[Felger]

Yea after a rocket more or less gets horizontal. To what extent do real life rockets pitch back up to keep the apoapsis ahead of them? I'm trying to get an idea of when I'm pitching too much. At which point I'd reevaluate my ascent. The most I've had to fight gravity is a 45 degree pitch away from prograde. I still got to orbit, but I felt like I wasted so much fuel and could've done it much better.

Interestingly enough, real rockets don't really try to keep the apoapsis ahead of them. With a low TWR on the upper stage, it's very possible to go quite a lot past the apoapsis before circularizing.

[Paulestrada]

Hello and happy new year!

one question. how do I make the docking ports stronger (magnetic)? I tried almost 5 times to dock with a relative velocity of 0.1m/s and with the help of the smart ASAS of mechjeb and although it looks like a perfect aproach the docking ports just seem to bump each other.

All I want to do is make the ports just a little bit stronger

[BadRocketsCo.]

Hello and happy new year!

one question. how do I make the docking ports stronger (magnetic)? I tried almost 5 times to dock with a relative velocity of 0.1m/s and with the help of the smart ASAS of mechjeb and although it looks like a perfect aproach the docking ports just seem to bump each other.

All I want to do is make the ports just a little bit stronger

I dont know if it works, but try Tweakable Everything, that mod should give you an option to make the docking ports stronger

[Blipser]

Sorry I just realised I posted a bug report in this thread not the main one, Ive moved it now.

Edited January 2, 2015 by Blipser

[Paulestrada]

I dont know if it works, but try Tweakable Everything, that mod should give you an option to make the docking ports stronger

Thanks! indeed, it makes them stronger

[Camacha]

Sorry that this is a bit off-topic, but I am looking to overhaul at least one, and possibly multiple kOS computer unit models. The idea is to model them with realistic engineering in mind and to have them inspired by real life computers. They are not going to be reproductions of specific flight computers, but all the elements should at least make sense.

As RSS is pretty much the authority on realistic parts, I thought I might pop in to see whether people here have any good ideas on part diversity, sources or perhaps wishes for the project. Ideally, it would be a small set of parts that caters to different needs and applications. A more comprehensive description of the intention can be found here.

[PTNLemay]

I installed RSS and FAR manually, and just found out about CKAN. Can install it on top of these two, or is it safer to install CKAN before anything else.

Also, do I treat it like any other mod and just dump in GameData? Or is it more like an installer distinct from KSP? I found the ZIP here: https://github.com/KSP-CKAN/CKAN But I'm not sure what to do with the contents.

[magico13]

Here is the forum page for CKAN. It's a standalone program that you can run from anywhere (I generally do run it from the Desktop). It will automatically install (and update) your mods for you after a couple clicks, and most importantly will handle dependencies automatically.

It won't, however, handle mods that have been installed manually, so it won't keep FAR or RSS up to date if you leave them installed.

Currently it appears that KerbalStuff is down for maintenance, so many mods likely can't be installed through CKAN right now until that comes back up (and Curse isn't supported because their API doesn't make it easy like KerbalStuff and GitHub's do)

[Nhawks17]

Ok this might be a dumb question but I am brand new to the RSS scene, but, I was wondering, for the geosynchronous orbit of Kerbin (Earth) in RSS is the value of that orbit the same as it is in real life or is it different?

[Hattivat]

It should be the same, 35 786 km above the surface. The source of your confusion could be that you have "display Kerbin time" (6hr days) enabled instead of "display Earth time". It's in the stock KSP settings, many people forget to change that setting.

[Nhawks17]

It should be the same, 35 786 km above the surface. The source of your confusion could be that you have "display Kerbin time" (6hr days) enabled instead of "display Earth time". It's in the stock KSP settings, many people forget to change that setting.

Ah ok, I was actually just planning ahead. I haven't even launched a craft yet but needed to know for my RemoteTech satellite. Thanks for your help though