Realism Overhaul Discussion Thread

[NathanKell]

@John FX post to the RF thread, and also tag taniwha.

[John FX]

1 hour ago, NathanKell said:

@John FX post to the RF thread, and also tag taniwha.

will do thx

EDIT : I think it`s a PEBKAC error or possibly a 1d10T issue, my radial tanks had no fuel in them, for about 3 generations of the craft that got me to orbit, then the moon, then venus and finally mars...

No wonder the first stage needed to be big...

Just quartered the size of it, filled the radial tanks and got about 2000 more Dv

Edited March 18, 2016 by John FX

[JohnWittle]

Hey, I have a couple questions about SolverEngine. I don't quite understand what "intake area" means. I assumed it means that the bottom face of the tank had to be at least as big as the listed 'intake area'... but I don't understand why. Pressure is just a matter of height times density, right?

[NathanKell]

Intake area is the area (in square meters) of air intake needed. So a jet with intake area 0.6 needs, say, two intakes of area 0.3 each. Intakes list their area.

[Qwerzar]

I have a question on Realism Overhaul on the carrier mode, the RP-0: why so many nodes are empty?I should have some other mod installed?And if yes, they are supported by RP-0? I have so much nodes on the tech tree, and like 25 of them are empty... i don't even have the lunar rated heatshield, but i think it's not needed by the way. Which mode or something else can fill the nodes but in the right and balanced manner? 

[John FX]

31 minutes ago, Qwerzar said:

I have a question on Realism Overhaul on the carrier mode, the RP-0: why so many nodes are empty?I should have some other mod installed?And if yes, they are supported by RP-0? I have so much nodes on the tech tree, and like 25 of them are empty... i don't even have the lunar rated heatshield, but i think it's not needed by the way. Which mode or something else can fill the nodes but in the right and balanced manner? 

Those are parts that still require work to fit them into the tree, they may become available in future updates.

[officialmugi]

Does anybody have configurations for the OPT spaceplane pack? I would really like to use them for a shuttle.

[NathanKell]

@Qwerzar that sounds like RP-0 was not installed correctly. How did you install it?

[Qwerzar]

On 24/3/2016 at 10:59 PM, NathanKell said:

@Qwerzar that sounds like RP-0 was not installed correctly. How did you install it?

I have installed it by CKAN, but i recognized that the tech tree have nodes like for the interstellar pack, and many other nodes for other nodes that are obviously empty. So i don't know which nodes must be empty and which nodes must be fill, but is really confusing. So the RP-0 don't show empty nodes?D:

[leudaimon]

@Qwerzar Without mods beyond the required by RP-0 there are some empty nodes in the advanced game. In the early nodes (up to late 60s and early 70s) the tech tree is mostly completed, with all nodes with content.

[Dman979]

Hi @NathanKell, we're launching the second (manned) RSP mission, and I had a question about Telemachus working with RO installed. Is it possible to change the map texture to one of Earth, instead of Kerbin? I asked on the Telemachus thread, but IDK if it's still in active use.

[NathanKell]

@Dman979 sorry, no idea, haven't used it myself except during that first mission. Give @Rich a holler?

 

@Qwerzar that sounds like you installed other mods and they are taking precedence. Try a clean KSP install, select RP-0, and then install only the mods that CKAN autochecks for you. Do not install other rando mods.

[Dman979]

Just now, NathanKell said:

@Dman979 sorry, no idea, haven't used it myself except during that first mission. Give @Rich a holler?

Ok, thanks. He hasn't been on in a while so i doubt I'll know until after the launch.

 

[Qwerzar]

9 hours ago, NathanKell said:

@Dman979 sorry, no idea, haven't used it myself except during that first mission. Give @Rich a holler?

 

@Qwerzar that sounds like you installed other mods and they are taking precedence. Try a clean KSP install, select RP-0, and then install only the mods that CKAN autochecks for you. Do not install other rando mods.

It was a clean ksp install, no mods were before installed and i have done all in the right manner. In my CKAN there are 3 kerbal space program folders anyway, that's because when i install some big mods i want to have a clean install, like for the Interstellar or the Realism Overhaul. But if the nodes are simply empty because:

 

9 hours ago, leudaimon said:

@Qwerzar Without mods beyond the required by RP-0 there are some empty nodes in the advanced game. In the early nodes (up to late 60s and early 70s) the tech tree is mostly completed, with all nodes with content.

it' s not a problem, i just wanted to know if these empty nodes are regular or not, for example, which are the last nodes that i must have now?

[Phineas Freak]

@Qwerzardo not worry, it is completely normal. Unfortunately, RP-0 is not as fleshed out as RO is (partially because costing the hardware - especially space hardware - is difficult). Nodes below Tier 5 (1970 - 1980) are OK, it's the newer ones that are not yet set correctly.

Also, more mods may not always translate to more nodes filled, they have to be explicitly supported by RP-0.

[LeuZ]

For which mod or mods are the advanced colonization nodes in the bottom of the tech tree?

And is it supported by RP-0 or RO?

[NathanKell]

Not supported yet.

[HoloYolo]

@NathanKell do you think RO will get updated faster as you work at SQUAD now? Like, will you get a head start on the 1.1 update?

[NathanKell]

No. That means I have to fix 1.1 itself, not my mods.

[winged]

On 25.03.2016 at 2:27 PM, Phineas Freak said:

@Qwerzardo not worry, it is completely normal. Unfortunately, RP-0 is not as fleshed out as RO is (partially because costing the hardware - especially space hardware - is difficult).

There is already more parts supported by RP-0 than what we really need to play, the only problem is tech tree - it contains too many nodes and some of them are really weirdly named/weirdly placed  so you don't know what to put inside.

https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0/issues/224

[regex]

23 hours ago, HoloYolo said:

@NathanKell do you think RO will get updated faster as you work at SQUAD now? Like, will you get a head start on the 1.1 update?

Fortunately the pre-release means the rest of us have a head start.  Also fortunately this update mainly pertains to plugins; although we might have some configs to alter the majority of work is in code, and we seem to have more plugin authors than config editors.

[Maxsimal]

Is there a good way to prune non-RO parts?  I'd even do it manually if there was an easy way to tell which part in the science tree corresponds to someting in a mod  - and which mod it came from, in some cases.  Just seems like there's a lot of non-RO parts that could be cleaned away to declutter and lower memory requirements.

[John FX]

So I`m trying to replicate Apollo in RO using RP-0. I have the F1, J2 and the premade lander parts and the 3 man pod. I have put the authentic amounts of fuel in each stage and it just can`t get to orbit, even before I put on things like solar panels, batteries, life support etc. Even after I fitted moar boosters to stage 1 to get the TWR up to more reasonable levels (was around 1)

So my question is, should I expect to?

I would imagine that putting together all the right historical engines, with the same amounts of fuel as the real one should give you a craft with similar performance to the real one but am I expecting too much realism?

Edited April 5, 2016 by John FX

[Dman979]

41 minutes ago, John FX said:

So I`m trying to replicate Apollo in RO using RP-0. I have the F1, J2 and the premade lander parts and the 3 man pod. I have put the authentic amounts of fuel in each stage and it just can`t get to orbit, even before I put on things like solar panels, batteries, life support etc. Even after I fitted moar boosters to stage 1 to get the TWR up to more reasonable levels (was around 1)

So my question is, should I expect to?

I would imagine that putting together all the right historical engines, with the same amounts of fuel as the real one should give you a craft with similar performance to the real one but am I expecting too much realism?

It might be your launch profile, or it might be you're over mass. See if you can find the mass of Apollo 11 at liftoff, and compare it to yours. Also, what orbit are you launching into?

BTW, the Saturn V had a takeoff TWR of 1.1. It was a BIGGGG rocket.

The third option I see could be the lack of first and second stage inboard engine cutoff.

[John FX]

1 hour ago, Dman979 said:

It might be your launch profile, or it might be you're over mass. See if you can find the mass of Apollo 11 at liftoff, and compare it to yours. Also, what orbit are you launching into?

BTW, the Saturn V had a takeoff TWR of 1.1. It was a BIGGGG rocket.

The third option I see could be the lack of first and second stage inboard engine cutoff.

I`ve been doing the centre engine cutoff for stage 1 but stage 2 seems very under powered so I have not been doing that one but by the time S2 burns out I`m falling back down as it is. I`m tring to get a 250-300km orbit or thereabouts so I get enough time to Ap for stage 2. I`ll have a look at the pad weight for Apollo and see where I`m going wrong. There`s not much to trim though, I have the right fuel amounts for the CM,S-IVb,S2 and S1 and just the three man pod and a lander so basic is does not have legs yet. It might well be the launch profile also. I`ll have a look and see what was done during the real launch.

Didn`t know the actual TWR was 1.1, I always thought it was 1.3. Just had a look at footage from apollo 11 and it seems the 1/2 staging event is at ~57,000m and ~2700m/s so I`ll aim for that. I`m currently about 1KDv short but the height is good.