Realism Overhaul Discussion Thread

[Pixel of Life]

Not quite sure whether I should post this here or in the actual mod thread so I'll just leave it here: Non-RO KSP has felt a bit boring lately even though I'm using tons of mods. I've been thinking about trying this but it looks a bit too realistic and difficult. Should I give it a shot anyway?

[Hattivat]

Not so much difficult as very different. A big part of the experience is unlearning the silly simplifications and outright falsehoods that KSP has taught you. People think it is difficult to a large degree because they try to do things "the kerbal way" and expect that to work. Partially also because some people expect to start where they left off in regular KSP, e.g. launching an expedition to Mars pretty much straight after installation, and with the amount of changes to familiarize yourself with compared to stock/stockish KSP, that attitude is doomed to failure. If you are willing to have your assumptions challenged and approach it all with a "learning from scratch" attitude, you should be fine, there is nothing scary about RO.

However, if you are not willing to learn more about the realities of spaceflight, and instead simply want an increased challenge, you might want to take a look at this http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/96792-64K-v1-0-90-5-%28KSP-0-90%29-17th-Feb-2015

[ColKlonk]

I've been thinking about trying this but it looks a bit too realistic and difficult. Should I give it a shot anyway?

For thousandzzzzzz of years we've been looking up at the real sky, stars and moons.. So.. what's holding you back ??

You must think Beeeeg.. very beeg, though !!

For Kerballed flight you're looking anywhere between 2500-3500 tons of explosive stuff behind your Kerbals

[NathanKell]

Uh...? Can launch a single person (person, not kerbal, even if they look a mite green ) on about 60 tons of LV with modern hardware, maybe even less. 2500t is only if you're sending three crew to the moon and back...

[ColKlonk]

Working out alternatives for manned long distance 'exploration'

You want push a fair sized module around the solar system, but you need gas.. you always need gas.

How to configure a ship for solar system exploration ?? The monkey has to make a plan.

Maybe this might be an alternative idea.

Staging is only used to get the stuff into orbit, where one can plonk all the pieces together

Each section is (de)coupled allowing you to drop and collect as you please.

A big engine tank 'fairing' holding 8x LV-Ns (Although they only give 60 Thrust each, they give a whopping 800 IspVAC = economics)

Fuel tanks in the centre between the engine (I would have though heat might radiate from the engines and blow the tanks but not in KSP !)

That nice thing is that KSP empties the tanks furthest from the engine first (well in this case).. 20 tons a tank.. use and drop

The tanks will be in orbit for 'collection later'

And the main tank is still full - Got to the moon on a 'full' tank.

One could use this method to transport tanks (and supplies) to the moon orbit, for returning ships.

Similar to a shuttle service.

Edited April 2, 2015 by ColKlonk

[ColKlonk]

I'm not sure whether I'm missing something here...

Is there a way to control a satellite from the launch ship ?

I take a couple satellites to the moon and cannot find a way to link the ship and satellite, so that I can control it into final orbit.

I give the satellite a nice big dish for mission control links but this is not reliable (if at all), and another 2 shorter range aerials for local stuff.

I can get comms with earth orbits and mission control.. but further out is a problem with a 'mothership'

Or can one not do this in RSS

Have the Antenna Range mod installed.

Thanks for any help

Edited April 9, 2015 by ColKlonk

[Ravenchant]

I'm not sure whether I'm missing something here...

Is there a way to control a satellite from the launch ship ?

I take a couple satellites to the moon and cannot find a way to link the ship and satellite, so that I can control it into final orbit.

I give the satellite a nice big dish for mission control links but this is not reliable (if at all), and another 2 shorter range aerials for local stuff.

I can get comms with earth orbits and mission control.. but further out is a problem with a 'mothership'

Or can one not do this in RSS

Have the Antenna Range mod installed.

Thanks for any help

If the mothership has an antenna that can reach both mission control and the satellite, there should be no problem. Then again, I use RT2, not Antenna Range...

Question: My install works well for the most part, but there is one small issue- the FASA launch tower retracts upon loading the flight scene. Changing the staging order doesn't seem to help. Any ideas?

[FennexFox]

Hello, I`m building a giant version of Nautilus-X.

I use Porkjet`s BA330 as a inflatable logistic bay, so I wanna edit it into unmanned storage module.

but RO cfg seems somewhat different from stock one...How could I edit this?

plus, I wanna plus some volume of the module as I got rid of kerbanaut lifesupport things, how much would be fair enough?

- - - Updated - - -

I'm not sure whether I'm missing something here...

Is there a way to control a satellite from the launch ship ?

I take a couple satellites to the moon and cannot find a way to link the ship and satellite, so that I can control it into final orbit.

I give the satellite a nice big dish for mission control links but this is not reliable (if at all), and another 2 shorter range aerials for local stuff.

I can get comms with earth orbits and mission control.. but further out is a problem with a 'mothership'

Or can one not do this in RSS

Have the Antenna Range mod installed.

Thanks for any help

RT2 makes a 6-men onboard ship with a big guidance unit a mobile control center, you meant this?

[Hattivat]

Hello, I`m building a giant version of Nautilus-X.

I use Porkjet`s BA330 as a inflatable logistic bay, so I wanna edit it into unmanned storage module.

but RO cfg seems somewhat different from stock one...How could I edit this?

plus, I wanna plus some volume of the module as I got rid of kerbanaut lifesupport things, how much would be fair enough?

The answer to the last question depends on what you want to store and how. For things like water or oxygen, you can simply use the whole volume - 330 000 liters. For food, spare parts, etc. it depends on whether you want your crew to be able to access the stored items manually - in other words, if you want to leave space for "corridors" between the storage racks. If we assume an automated system with no manual crew access, then it can be almost the whole volume - 300 000 liters, let's say, but if you want "corridors" for manual access, they will take up to half of the storage space, leaving let's say 200 000 liters for storage.

As for modyfing the config - in any case, don't touch the original config, edit only the RO one (editing the original config can break the RO config, but not the opposite). The exact "how to" depends on what you want to edit. As an example, to change the storage volume you want to find the "ModuleFuelTanks" and change its "volume".

[FennexFox]

The answer to the last question depends on what you want to store and how. For things like water or oxygen, you can simply use the whole volume - 330 000 liters. For food, spare parts, etc. it depends on whether you want your crew to be able to access the stored items manually - in other words, if you want to leave space for "corridors" between the storage racks. If we assume an automated system with no manual crew access, then it can be almost the whole volume - 300 000 liters, let's say, but if you want "corridors" for manual access, they will take up to half of the storage space, leaving let's say 200 000 liters for storage.

As for modyfing the config - in any case, don't touch the original config, edit only the RO one (editing the original config can break the RO config, but not the opposite). The exact "how to" depends on what you want to edit. As an example, to change the storage volume you want to find the "ModuleFuelTanks" and change its "volume".

Ah, what a perfect solution! As I`m roleplaying some near-future thing, an automated one would make sense.

Thanks a lot, and I`m specifying my quesiton for you to reply...

1. if I wanna add a new feature of a part, would I just copy the feature from other parts which have it and paste into my one?

for example, add some crew seat(without IVA for sure) into my ATV, just copy and paste the code?

2 if I wanna add a new part which is from a same original part(saying, BA-330 and BA-330 logistics),

would I just copy and paste the whole code and change its name?

On a original CFG editting, I did that to make a new parts I remember...

Edited April 12, 2015 by FennexFox

[Hattivat]

1. if I wanna add a new feature of a part, would I just copy the feature from other parts which have it and paste into my one?

for example, add some crew seat(without IVA for sure) into my ATV, just copy and paste the code?

Sometimes yes, but generally you should first make sure that the part does not already have the setting in question. In this example, your part could have "crewCapacity = 0", so instead of pasting "crewCapacity = 3" in addition to it (which would probably break something) you should simply change 0 to 3.

Now you need to understand how RO configs work. You see, these are ModuleManager configs. ModuleManager gives the nice option of modifying the configs without changing the original files. There are different operators: ! deletes, @ modifies(overrides), % adds or modifies (whichever is applicable), + clones, and whatever there is that has no operator before it, is added (default behavior). I know this can be confusing, so some examples:

Original config says:

mass = 2.0

crewCapacity = 1

MM configs says:

@mass = 1.4

The result in game is:

mass = 1.4

crewCapacity = 1

Original config says:

mass = 2.0

crewCapacity = 1

MM configs says:

!crewCapacity = DELETE

The result in game is:

mass = 2.0

Original config says:

mass = 2.0

MM configs says:

%crewCapacity = 1

The result in game is:

mass = 2.0

crewCapacity = 1

So what you need to do is

1. See if the RO config does not already have the setting you want, and if it does, just change its value

2. If it does not, check if the part's original config has the setting you want, and if it does, add @theSettingYouWant = desired value (for example @volume = 330000) to the RO config

3. If it does not, paste the necessary code into the RO config, but add % at the front of it just to be sure.

2 if I wanna add a new part which is from a same original part(saying, BA-330 and BA-330 logistics),

would I just copy and paste the whole code and change its name?

On a original CFG editting, I did that to make a new parts I remamber...

ModuleManager provides a neat way of cloning the part without having to make a separate .cfg file. See how I cloned the centrifuge in the RO config for Porkworks Habitats for reference. First you make a pure copy of the part, without modifying anything other than its name, like this:

+PART[centrifuge1]:FIRST

{

@name = centrifugeXL

}

Then modify that copy as usual:

@PART[centrifugeXL]:FOR[RealismOverhaul]

{

%RSSROConfig = true

etc

etc

etc

}

Edited April 12, 2015 by Hattivat

[FennexFox]

What a perfect and kind answer! I appreciate your help with all my heart!

[Motokid600]

Question: My install works well for the most part, but there is one small issue- the FASA launch tower retracts upon loading the flight scene. Changing the staging order doesn't seem to help. Any ideas?

Im having this issue as well. I'll post logs later if need be.

[Hattivat]

You are welcome, FennexFox, let us know how it goes

[FennexFox]

My pleasure! but I have to go to Reserve Force Training for three days, so I`ll be here some days later.

Here`s my WIP picture - ISS Olympus!

Edited April 13, 2015 by FennexFox

[Motokid600]

I need a hypergolic, multi ignition, J2 equivalent thrust engine ( or anything close ) The most powerful engines i can find are the ones FennexFox is using there on his craft ( very nice by the way ) for an ejection stage. Anything i can do?

Because it turns out the Saturn S-IVB is a GREAT probe itself. But id like to convert it by using a hypergolic engine and fuel to negate boil off. Im trying to avoid the need of having a separate probe on top of the S-IVB with its own engines in order to keep my Dv numbers really high. Stick some small communications equipment on top of that control ring and you have a 9kms ejection stage its beautiful.

And it makes me wonder why the S-IVB was never used as such for a powerful ejection stage and a probe itself. Those APS modules are nice, but they dont have much kick to perform significant manoeuvres..

@FennexFox - What Dv are you pushing on that larger setup? And whats the TWR?

Edited April 15, 2015 by Motokid600

[FennexFox]

+PART[inflato1]:FIRST

{

@name = inflatoLogistics

}

@PART[inflatoLogistics]:FOR[RealismOverhaul]

{

%RSSROConfig = True

!mesh = DELETE

MODEL

{

model = HabitatPack/Parts/inflato1/model

scale = 1.52, 1.886, 1.52

}

@rescaleFactor = 1.0

@node_stack_top = 0.0, 6.601, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 3

@node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -4.715, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 3

@title = Bigelow BA330 Inflatable Logistics Bay

@description = A unmanned-logistic version of Bigelow BA330 inflatable habitat. It replaced any crew support capacity with a full automated logistics managing system. That`s why almost all the pressurized volume could be used to store supplies.

@mass = 20

@cost = 17000

@crashTolerance = 12

@breakingForce = 250

@breakingTorque = 250

@maxTemp = 800

!crewCapacity = DELETE

MODULE

{

name = LifeSupportModule

}

MODULE

{

name = ModuleFuelTanks

volume = 4500

basemass = -1

type = ServiceModule

TANK

{

name = Oxygen

amount = 113400

maxAmount = 300000

}

TANK

{

name = Food

amount = 540

maxAmount = 300000

}

TANK

{

name = Water

amount = 306

maxAmount = 300000

}

TANK

{

name = CarbonDioxide

amount = 0

maxAmount = 300000

}

TANK

{

name = Waste

amount = 0

maxAmount = 300000

}

TANK

{

name = WasteWater

amount = 0

maxAmount = 300000

}

TANK

{

name = ElectricCharge

amount = 28500

maxAmount = 28500

}

TANK

{

name = LithiumHydroxide

amount = 27

maxAmount = 27

}

}

MODULE

{

name = TacGenericConverter

converterName = CO2 Scrubber

conversionRate = 6.0 // # of people - Figures based on per/person

inputResources = CarbonDioxide, 0.0062500000, ElectricCharge, 0.010, LithiumHydroxide, 0.0000085683

outputResources = Water, 0.0032924498, true, Waste, 0.0000191062, false

}

}

As I don`t get what ModuleFuelTanks volume means, so I didn`t edit that.

I just copied the part and tweak all MaxAmount to 300,000.

It`s my first RO config edit, so now I`m gonna check it works properly or not...

@Motokid600 - I had a weird error with VASMIR engines, so I don`t get how they would work. I expect them to have very low TWR and some tens of thousands of Delta-V but not sure.

Edited April 18, 2015 by FennexFox

[ColKlonk]

I obviously haven't read the fine print..... thanks for the pointers

Anyway.. in the perpetual efficiency pursuit I'm bringing my rocket weight (as we're at sea level ) down.

I want (sounds demanding !!) to push at least a 70 ton payload into orbit...

I started with pure Kerosene stages.. but these are heavy.. so started to mix-n-match..

So far down to just under 2.3K tons, using kerosene for stage 1+2, and liquids for stage 3

A payload of 70'ish tons..

.. and after orbit leftovers after moon alignment

+- 5% fuel boiling away .. and a pity to dump it, but always good to have too much

.. and release...

[ColKlonk]

I think this is fine tuned.

Put the Mothership/Science vessel (72 Tons) into orbit minus 60ms for moon alignment.

I lost 3400Kg of liquid hydrogen from orbit to moon maneuver (approx 90 degrees of orbit - 20 minutes).. that's a helluva boil-off rate;.;

Using precious liquids...

Over the Mozambique Channel..

[Phylan]

I've been thinking about boil-off because the Atomic Age nuclear engines are pretty nifty and I would love to use them on long duration missions. Few thoughts I had --

There is a radiator part, I'm not sure what mod it comes from, that says "not supported by RO" in the description, but I was wondering if it might help slow down boil off anyway. Initial experiments with launching a tank of liquid hydrogen into orbit with a bunch of radiators on it were inconclusive. Boil off still occurred but I couldn't tell if it was slower than usual.

At least one of the nuclear engines, the lightbulb, also takes liquid methane, liquid ammonia, and water, in increasing order of ISP penalty. I'm guessing water doesn't boil-off at all, or hoping anyway, but does methane/ammonia boil off any more slowly, or not at all?

Also wondering if there's a life support loop solution. One of the TAC recyclers, I think the Sabatier, produces liquid methane from CO2, which might be a solution. Another produces hydrogen as one product of a reaction, but it doesn't specify liquid hydrogen, so I'm guessing it might not be usable in an engine?

[FennexFox]

I've been thinking about boil-off because the Atomic Age nuclear engines are pretty nifty and I would love to use them on long duration missions. Few thoughts I had --

There is a radiator part, I'm not sure what mod it comes from, that says "not supported by RO" in the description, but I was wondering if it might help slow down boil off anyway. Initial experiments with launching a tank of liquid hydrogen into orbit with a bunch of radiators on it were inconclusive. Boil off still occurred but I couldn't tell if it was slower than usual.

At least one of the nuclear engines, the lightbulb, also takes liquid methane, liquid ammonia, and water, in increasing order of ISP penalty. I'm guessing water doesn't boil-off at all, or hoping anyway, but does methane/ammonia boil off any more slowly, or not at all?

Also wondering if there's a life support loop solution. One of the TAC recyclers, I think the Sabatier, produces liquid methane from CO2, which might be a solution. Another produces hydrogen as one product of a reaction, but it doesn't specify liquid hydrogen, so I'm guessing it might not be usable in an engine?

Yes, there is no way to stop boil off right now, as I now. I hope that the "real heat" which is under developing now could help that.

Liquid hydrogen is the most cryogenic fuel, so any of other cryogenic fuels don't boil off as fast as liquid hydrogen. But for a long term exploration which would take more them couples of week they wouldn't help much...

I read somewhere that RO has a config which turn every hydrogen into liquid hydrogen but I'm not sure.

[ColKlonk]

One thing I've noticed wrt Gravity turns..

It seems to be accepted that you get your speed to 150ms and/or start rolling soon after launch.

I'm thinking that this would be different for every craft.

- If I start the turn asap after launch, I end up at around 90K (horizontal), at some speed that the rocket is warming up real fast.. which of course is not ideal.

- If I wait until I reach 10K altitude and a speed of 200ms, I'll end up at 130K with 20 degrees to spare, which will easily put me in 250-300k orbit.

One needs the speed to prevent too much G-Turn, but you'll also need altitude to minimise drag and heating effects.

At 10K and 200ms, I'd reduce the throttle so that the acceleration is just ticking over.. and leave it there until around 130K.

I also 'sort of' worked out a turn rate of approx 0.6 degree per 1000m gives a nice turn and prefer to do this manually.

These combinations allow me to run at approx 2/3rds->1/2 throttle the whole way.. minus a short period of 100% at launch.

Edited April 20, 2015 by ColKlonk

[FennexFox]

One thing I've noticed wrt Gravity turns..

It seems to be accepted that you get your speed to 150ms and/or start rolling soon after launch.

I'm thinking that this would be different for every craft.

- If I start the turn asap after launch, I end up at around 90K (horizontal), at some speed that the rocket is warming up real fast.. which of course is not ideal.

- If I wait until I reach 10K altitude and a speed of 200ms, I'll end up at 130K with 20 degrees to spare, which will easily put me in 250-300k orbit.

One needs the speed to prevent too much G-Turn, but you'll also need altitude to minimise drag and heating effects.

At 10K and 200ms, I'd reduce the throttle so that the acceleration is just ticking over.. and leave it there until around 130K.

I also 'sort of' worked out a turn rate of approx 0.6 degree per 1000m gives a nice turn and prefer to do this manually.

These combinations allow me to run at approx 2/3rds->1/2 throttle the whole way.. minus a short period of 100% at launch.

What you did is a pitch program, not a gravity turn. Gravity turn means the rocket is turn by gravity, not by a intentional piloting. The best way you could do to do a proper gravity turn is just do "kick turn" shortly after launch, take a look at prograde node until it drops 5 degree down then the pitch, let the rocket point to the node, and repeat this until you get a orbit.

[Motokid600]

@ColKlonk - If your waiting until 10km to perform any pitching I don't know how your even making orbit. Your increasing your DV needed to LKO by thousands. It's best to start pitching as early as possible so you can get the most out of the first stage. You need to be thrown as far downrange as possible.

[Hattivat]

As I don`t get what ModuleFuelTanks volume means, so I didn`t edit that.

I just copied the part and tweak all MaxAmount to 300,000.

It`s my first RO config edit, so now I`m gonna check it works properly or not...

It should work, but it would be better if you put volume = 300000, this would give you 300,000 liters to fill with whatever you wanted, not just the pre-defined set of supplies.