Realism Overhaul Discussion Thread

[Carraux]

Is there any chance to get the binaries of the pre-release w/o compiling it for oneself? Please?

[Phineas Freak]

1 hour ago, Carraux said:

Is there any chance to get the binaries of the pre-release w/o compiling it for oneself?

Yes, by downloading the KSP 1.2 test release from the RO GitHub repository.

[Carraux]

Found it, thanx!

[Sol Invictus]

Does anyone know if Realism Overhaul has any configs for RCS thrusters in Extravehicular Mobility Units? They are far too powerful in stock game, as they are able to lift Kerbals from the ground on Duna. I suppose that it would be fairly easy to nerf those down to some reasonable values using Module Manager.

[Phineas Freak]

@Sol Invictus Not yet but there is something that i have been working on:

//  ==================================================
//  Modify the parameters of the Kerbals (on EVA).
//  ==================================================

@PART[kerbalEVA*]:FOR[RealismOverhaul]
{
    @crashTolerance = 6
    @maxTemp = 473.15
    @skinMaxTemp = 473.15

    @MODULE[KerbalEVA]
    {
        @propellantResourceName = Nitrogen
        @PropellantConsumption = 0.25
    }

    @RESOURCE[EVA?Propellant]
    {
        @name = Nitrogen
        @amount = 9430
        @maxAmount = 9430
    }
}

I cannot see a way to change the ACS Isp values or the thrust though. These probably need to be accessed via a plugin.

Edited February 10, 2017 by Phineas Freak
Update propellant amount & increase consumption

[Sol Invictus]

@Phineas Freak Have you perhaps tested it with EvaFuel?

[Phineas Freak]

@Sol Invictus No but i assume that it will work if you change the EVA propellant definition in the settings config file.

[Sol Invictus]

4 hours ago, Phineas Freak said:

@Sol Invictus No but i assume that it will work if you change the EVA propellant definition in the settings config file.

My guess is that I should also change "maximum amount of fuel that will be transfered between ship and EVA" in EvaFuel from 5 to 5000.

I just realized that while you changed amount of EVA propellant to 5000, at the same time you multiplied fuel consumption by 10, so effectively there should still be 100x more fuel in EVA pack than originally. Is this based on real life Extravehicular Mobility Units specifications?

Edited February 7, 2017 by Sol Invictus

[Phineas Freak]

@Sol Invictus Because it is not "EVA propellant" anymore:

22 hours ago, Phineas Freak said:

@RESOURCE[EVA?Propellant]
{
    @name = Nitrogen
    @amount = 5000
    @maxAmount = 5000
}

And because this is a testing patch, the amount of the propellant is overkill (approximately 6 Kg!)

[Sol Invictus]

2 minutes ago, Phineas Freak said:

@Sol Invictus Because it is not "EVA propellant" anymore:

And because this is a testing patch, the amount of the propellant is overkill (approximately 6 Kg!)

From what I just read it's not an overkill after all. Supposedly NASA's Manned Maneuvering Unit had two tanks with 5,9 kg of nitrogen each, which makes it 11,8 kg of nitrogen in total.

[Phineas Freak]

2 minutes ago, Sol Invictus said:

Supposedly NASA's Manned Maneuvering Unit had two tanks with 5,9 kg of nitrogen each, which makes it 11,8 kg of nitrogen in total.

Then i should change the mass to almost double of that. Thank you for pointing this out!

[Sol Invictus]

I wonder if Kerbals in Realism Overhaul should have EVA thrusters enabled at all. Couple of reasons against them off the top of my head:

1. In the entire history of space walks, Manned Maneuvering Units were used only three times, and were retired in late 80's after being deemed too risky.
2. Real life Manned Maneuvering Unit is not so much a light jet pack as depicted in KSP, but more of a personal spaceship that you sit into. As such, it's impossible to walk on planetary (or lunar) surface while wearing it.
3. If one wanted to simulate actual Manned Maneuvering Unit in KSP, it would be far more realistic to do so with parts (external command seat, couple of structural elements, two tiny nitrogen tanks and miniature thrusters).
4. it would make space walks much more exciting, as there would be real danger of being lost in the expanse of space. As of now there's not only no real risk to space walks, but maneuvering Kerbals is far too easy and doesn't require any ingenuity out of player.

Edited February 7, 2017 by Sol Invictus

[Temeter]

1 hour ago, Sol Invictus said:

I wonder if Kerbals in Realism Overhaul should have EVA thrusters enabled at all. Couple of reasons against them off the top of my head:

1. In the entire history of space walks, Manned Maneuvering Units were used only three times, and were retired in late 80's after being deemed too risky.
2. Real life Manned Maneuvering Unit is not so much a light jet pack as depicted in KSP, but more of a personal spaceship that you sit into. As such, it's impossible to walk on planetary (or lunar) surface while wearing it.
3. If one wanted to simulate actual Manned Maneuvering Unit in KSP, it would be far more realistic to do so with parts (external command seat, couple of structural elements, two tiny nitrogen tanks and miniature thrusters).
4. it would make space walks much more exciting, as there would be real danger of being lost in the expanse of space. As of now there's not only no real risk to space walks, but maneuvering Kerbals is far too easy and doesn't require any ingenuity out of player.

You could, if you wanted to, which is enough for RO (see 'modern' nuclear enginesm, mars missions)

Currently there is just no way to efficiently maneuver otherwise in KSP, tho. No guard railed, no hand movement, nothing. So you'll have to go with MMU style stuff anyway. Building something with a chair is far too large, too.

Would be nice to have fuel management, and limited storage, but that's all stuff for the future.

Edited February 7, 2017 by Temeter

[Sol Invictus]

18 minutes ago, Temeter said:

Currently there is just no way to efficiently maneuver otherwise in KSP, tho. No guard railed, no hand movement, nothing. So you'll have to with MMU style stuff anyway.

Apart from MMU made of parts, it's possible to construct robotic arm with Infernal Robotics, somewhat like the Canadarm on ISS, and maneuver Kerbals with it.

Oh, and there's also this mod - https://spacedock.info/mod/49/EVA Handrails Continued

Edited February 7, 2017 by Sol Invictus

[Temeter]

1 hour ago, Sol Invictus said:

Apart from MMU made of parts, it's possible to construct robotic arm with Infernal Robotics, somewhat like the Canadarm on ISS, and maneuver Kerbals with it.

Oh, and there's also this mod - https://spacedock.info/mod/49/EVA Handrails Continued

Canadarm style is a pain to use, even in reality it takes like 30 minutes just to bring the arm to the correct nodes, and the handrails mods is impractical and unreliable because it relies on KSPs ladder physics. I wouldn't mind taking an MMU with me, even if it actually weighted like 180 extra kg.

The whole discussion is kinda moot anyway. There is no way to switch between MMU/PSK or Safer (or something reasonable inbetween). So you either go full MMU with magic regenerating fuel or nothing. And I think the former is a lot better in that regard.

If you had a choice between those types, needed to store them (via KIS or so), manage fuel, that would be amazing, no question.

Edited February 7, 2017 by Temeter

[Friedrich Nietzsche]

18 hours ago, Sol Invictus said:

I wonder if Kerbals in Realism Overhaul should have EVA thrusters enabled at all. Couple of reasons against them off the top of my head:

That would brake the game in its current stage. How would you perform an EVA? Cluttering your ship with ladders, which have to clip though everywhere, just to provide ways to reach every neccessary point? And how would you safe a kerbal, which gets blown into space by awesome KSP physics? 

[Sol Invictus]

4 hours ago, Friedrich Nietzsche said:

That would brake the game in its current stage. How would you perform an EVA? Cluttering your ship with ladders, which have to clip though everywhere, just to provide ways to reach every neccessary point?

I already provided several ways of performing EVA without stock jetpacks. Let me list them for you:

1. building real Manned Maneuvering Unit out of parts: external command set, structural elements, two nitrogen tanks with 5,9 kg of nitrogen each and 24 miniature nozzle thrusters;
2. building robotic arm similar to Canadarm on ISS out of Infernal Robotics parts, then using it to move Kerbals around;
3. creating pathways on the external surfaces of your ship/station out of handrail parts, just as it is done in real life on ISS;

5 hours ago, Friedrich Nietzsche said:

And how would you safe a kerbal, which gets blown into space by awesome KSP physics? 

You see, that's the thing. Real EVA is NOT safe. Cosmonauts are risking their lives every time they're performing a spacewalk. Only through hard engineering work can this risk be somewhat managed. And that's what missing in KSP, as it's unrealistically safe to enter endless void of space and then return to the spaceship. I believe that extravehicular activity would be much more exciting and rewarding for the player if build-in jetpacks were to be disabled.

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

6 minutes ago, Sol Invictus said:

I already provided several ways of performing EVA without stock jetpacks. Let me list them for you:

1. building real Manned Maneuvering Unit out of parts: external command set, structural elements, two nitrogen tanks with 5,9 kg of nitrogen each and 24 miniature nozzle thrusters;
2. building robotic arm similar to Canadarm on ISS out of Infernal Robotics parts, then using it to move Kerbals around;
3. creating pathways on the external surfaces of your ship/station out of handrail parts, just as it is done in real life on ISS;

[...]

Could the stock jetpack be made into a KAS/KIS part that could be equipped on a kerbal?  So it could be put farther in the tech tree, and before that you'd have to use those methods?

[regex]

If there was a mod that did re-attachable EVA tethers I'd be all about removing the jetpack. Until then it's not worth my time.

[Friedrich Nietzsche]

1 hour ago, Sol Invictus said:

You see, that's the thing. Real EVA is NOT safe. Cosmonauts are risking their lives every time they're performing a spacewalk.

Yeah, all those glitches in the physics engine of the real world...

[Temeter]

2 hours ago, Mad Rocket Scientist said:

Could the stock jetpack be made into a KAS/KIS part that could be equipped on a kerbal?  So it could be put farther in the tech tree, and before that you'd have to use those methods?

You'd still need reliable securing lines to make sure your kerbals are safe. I imagine KAS could do that, tho.

As for the tech tree, the first US (no clue about soviet) mu was apparently the 'Hand-Held Maneuvering Unit' in 65.

2 hours ago, Sol Invictus said:

You see, that's the thing. Real EVA is NOT safe. Cosmonauts are risking their lives every time they're performing a spacewalk. Only through hard engineering work can this risk be somewhat managed. And that's what missing in KSP, as it's unrealistically safe to enter endless void of space and then return to the spaceship. I believe that extravehicular activity would be much more exciting and rewarding for the player if build-in jetpacks were to be disabled.

Problem is, KSPs physic can always just bug out a bit or handle in some unexpected way and shoot your astronaut into space without you making a mistake.

If you want hardcore difficulty, then you need strong game mechanics that dont fail.

Real EVA is dangerous, yet AFAIK nobody ever was in notable danger while doing EVA. Except the first soviet eva, which was relying on unsafe equipment and only really done because of political pressure. Because usually they EVAs have reliable security equipment and strong procedures; these days astronauts never go out without a small backup mmu style unit (SAFER).

Edited February 8, 2017 by Temeter

[Mark Tempe]

RO noob question (yes I've searched but haven't found a definitive answer):

Is there actually a version of Kerbal Engineer for RO in 1.1.3 that has working in-flight readouts for DV, TWR, etc, or does everyone who wants those readouts just use MechJeb alongside it?

[leudaimon]

@Mark Tempe AFAIK KER does not read delta-V correctly with RealFuels. I used it for some readings it did right, but surrended to MJ after all. If you configure custom windows it can give a very similar experience to KER

[demonloadz]

Hey all I'm confused how do I install the pre-release from the above link realism overhaul  1.2 pre do I just extract to my ksp folder and download all the required mods needed ? 

Does this work in 1.2.2

Thanks

 

Edited February 9, 2017 by demonloadz

[Sol Invictus]

@demonloadz I am flying in Realism Overhaul on KSP 1.2.2 right now. You can have it as well if you know where to look for updated dependencies. Start with this spreadsheet by @rsparkyc,