Realism Overhaul Career Mode Discussion

[NathanKell]

Can't remove the biomes as then you wouldn't get biomes in orbit. Can't remove biomeness from an instrument or it won't supported landed/splashed biomes on other bodies.

Zeroing science is *exactly* what we do though.

[tmikesecrist3]

Doesnt the mercury redstone engine look ery simiar to the v2? try Fasa

Yes I did And I do have FASA love te mod the problem with trying to use the redstone geno also known as the R-7 is that well it is of the same famly as the R-4 used in the V-2 if the model numbers are any thing to go by the R-4 was 3 generations newer, is larger and has a higher thrust then the R4 did.

[NathanKell]

I think you might be a little confused.

The V-2 was part of the Aggregate series of rockets, the missile itself was the A-4.

The Redstone (and the Jupiter C / Juno I) used the NAA75-110 engine, of which there were various models designated A1 through A7 (e.g. NAA75-110-A4, -A5, etc.), which were unrelated to the Aggregate series numbering, although the engine itself was of course a derivative of the V-2's engine. The A4 engine, used in Redstone, burned 75-25 Ethyl Alcohol / Water with LOx as oxidizer (like the V-2's engine), whereas the A7 burned Hydyne as its fuel, with LOx as oxidizer.

R-7 is the designation of the first Soviet ICBM, derivatives of which launched Sputnik PS1, Sputnik PS2, Objekt D, and with an upper stage Luna, Vostok, etc.

Please try to get the spelling and acronyms right, it's very hard to figure out what you mean otherwise...

[tmikesecrist3]

I see you point, I just wish i had an option that would give me something like the performance of the V-2s engine

[tmikesecrist3]

one thing I noticed that seems kind of odd... and with the last update the Administration building does not seem to be working

[tmikesecrist3]

Hey I just found somthing you may want to add it is a mod pack form rover dude.... for sounding rockets http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/102502

Edited December 17, 2014 by tmikesecrist3

[NathanKell]

RoverDude's sounding rocket model doesn't look very much like a real sounding rocket, honestly. It's cool, but it would not behave well in a real atmosphere with that big egg. Also, it would take a lot of work to convert, since his style is pretty much diametrically different from RO's, from the aesthetics to the part choices (sticks as launch clamps...) to the flavor text.

That said, RP-0 has had sounding rocket contracts long before RoverDude released his mod.

[tmikesecrist3]

I do rember those and nathen you have a point, I seem to rember there where some really good sounding rocket parts in RPl that was something that was lacking the low powered engines needed for a light little sounding rocket

[tmikesecrist3]

I know we dont have any piston engines unless we use fire spliter, but I think we should start with plane engines and a cockpit atleast by the 2nd node on the tech tree, I dont know but firespliter might not be a bad thing to add...

[Seria17hri11er]

Looking for a little help here.

Put the full shebang in. RO, RP-0 all the required content and recommended content. It's really feeling like a grind fest now. I like how the construction mod is warping time forward actually giving me a sense of days, but clicking back and forth from simulations and real launches and screw ups has become very tedious. Thinking about just replicating real missions with prebuilt rockets. But I digress.

I have very little control over these sounding rockets, and I cant keep em pointed up. What's the build method for these things? Haven't found a way to keep the CG more forward for stability. Fins didn't seem to help at all.

Using that very first sounding rocket motor.

What am I doing wrong here? I'm spending a whole hell of a lot of time failing (I know, pretty realistic right? ) The tediousness of building in RO is really putting me off. Really hope its just a steep learning curve that will fall off. Almost to the point of abandoning career mode.

[Hattivat]

The trick for sounding rockets is that the faster they go, the stabler they are. For that reason you want to have a "kick stage" with high TWR (probably solid-fueled) as your first stage to get it going. Fins do help, but only once you have some speed. Also, don't make them too large. Basically you want to construct something like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WAC_Corporal or this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerobee (notice both of them have solid boosters as first stages)

^That is, BTW, the cool thing about RO - that you can simply google a real-life solution to your problem and apply that, instead of learning silly game-specific concepts like "asparagus staging".

Another suggestion for the future, since many people seem not to realize this at first - you can rotate the rocket as a whole and then attach it to a launch clamp to fire it at some different biome (like this, but more vertical: http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/albums/album291/abf.sized.jpg )

And yes, RO does have a pretty steep learning curve, but it does get easier once you get used to everything. Once you get used to real-life engineering problems (like not having the ability to throttle or not having magically strong reaction wheels) it becomes easier to play RO than it is to play RSS with stock-scale parts, for the very simple reason that real-life engines have far better performance than stock ones. For me constructing a rocket to launch a satellite into a geostationary orbit is already completely routine. What never gets easy is landing on Mars, but then so is the case in real life

Edited January 11, 2015 by Hattivat

[BevoLJ]

Looking for a little help here.

Put the full shebang in. RO, RP-0 all the required content and recommended content. It's really feeling like a grind fest now. I like how the construction mod is warping time forward actually giving me a sense of days, but clicking back and forth from simulations and real launches and screw ups has become very tedious. Thinking about just replicating real missions with prebuilt rockets. But I digress.

I have very little control over these sounding rockets, and I cant keep em pointed up. What's the build method for these things? Haven't found a way to keep the CG more forward for stability. Fins didn't seem to help at all.

Using that very first sounding rocket motor.

What am I doing wrong here? I'm spending a whole hell of a lot of time failing (I know, pretty realistic right? ) The tediousness of building in RO is really putting me off. Really hope its just a steep learning curve that will fall off. Almost to the point of abandoning career mode.

There is a pretty steep learning curve to RP-0, but most of that is changing bad habits from the stock game into habits that are more in line with real life. It really isn't all that hard once past those bad habits from stock. A couple very cool things that has helped me a lot is first and most of all, like Hattivat said, google what they did in real life. Then apply that. 95% of the time the issues I am having in RP-0 has a solution from real life that I can find with a bit of Google. Rockets are hard, so there is a LOT of documentation out there on them.

Another thing I've learned to do that helps a lot is to do like real life and design launch systems and use those. I only click the build button when I know it won't fail. Rather I do a lot more clicking of the simulation button. With the simulations you don't need to wait all that time and do all that other stuff. Also it allows you to start on the pad or in orbit. It is VERY handy. But once I have a launch system that I know will work I make a subassembly of that launch system and I use that lauch system a lot. So for example I will have a bunch of stage ones from real life such as Atlas, Thor, Delta, and so on. Then have a bunch of stage two like the Able, Agena or Centaur and so on. Put these together just like they did in real life and you have the Thor-Able, Atlas-Agena or Atlas-Centaur and so on. I get the systems designed and tested to where I know they are good before ever clicking that build button and performing a launch. That testing may seem like a bit of work, but in the long run having well designed launch systems that are reliable saves me a LOT more time and money. (I put links to all the RL systems you can take a look at. I would suggest building to the specs from the real systems before designing your own system. The real ones work great in RP-0)

Edit: Oh, and the most important thing I've found is that when I run into issues I just ask folks like Hattivat or any of the many others on the forums. These folks know how hard space is and are absolutely AMAZING! They are super helpful. Space isn't easily conquered by one man, it takes a group effort.

Edited January 11, 2015 by BevoLJ

[Lilienthal]

Hi guys, just coming back to KSP after too much rl interference.

It is really nice to see RP-0. I played RO career mode back in November, and thought it was fun, but this is amazing on a totally different level. Great choice to have local control of probe cores. The messing with kOS just to break to land on the moon was not really worth it.

I have two suggestions on the OP:

a) My understanding is that without FASA, the start is very, very difficult. Maybe it should be noted as "working on, but already reccomended"?

I am a little bit embarrased to say that, but when I first ran it, I didn't click "enable" on the Techmanager, and played a few hours with the wrong tech tree... Now with CKAN, it is so simple, and people like me don't really read the list of mods anymore, that a comment in the OP like that might make sense: "after the first start, you have to enable the techmanager and choose CommunityTech". (It is a little bit embarrassing for me, not having done so, but thought I share anyway.)

Suggestion: pruner.

Would it make sense to design and maintain a list of non-RO, non-RP0 parts that can be auto-pruned by pruner? (I know Nathan says it doesn't make much difference to memory usage, but data shows that memory usage with FASA is significantly bigger than without.) Here I'd be happy to contribute, but not to maintain. (RL might force me to abstain from KSP again.)

(possble) Bugs:

- I don't seem to be able to complete the 5,000m height challenge. It just stays in the active contracts, no matter whether I reach 50km, or 250km. At one point in time it just disappeared. - Sounds familiar? more detail wished?

- I build a 700t unmanned craft. put a 2m core on it. I started it, could steer it. Then I dropped the solid rockets and steerage was lost. After another staging, the craft was small enough to be steered. - Sounds familiar? more details wished?

Best,

Gustav.

[Yemo]

- I don't seem to be able to complete the 5,000m height challenge. It just stays in the active contracts, no matter whether I reach 50km, or 250km. At one point in time it just disappeared. - Sounds familiar? more detail wished?

The stock starting altitude contracts can only be completed by manned vessels, not by probes.

This mini-mod might help you out:

InitialContracts

It replaces the buggy stock contracts with basic ContractConfigurator contracts, which can be completed by probes and manned vessels.

Though I do not know whether they need adjustments for different sizes of kerbin.

[Lilienthal]

Thanks. How do I know what's stock and what's not?

[Yemo]

Thanks. How do I know what's stock and what's not?

The stock contracts are deactivated by the initial contracts mod (launch, 5km - 56km contracts, reach space, orbit), at least if you start a new game (not sure what stays if you mod an existing save).

So with the mod installed, there are only 3 contracts: 18km, space and orbit.

As I said, you might need to ajust the payouts/advances if you play with larger kerbin sizes. Or you just compensate by giving you more money after completion, with the debug menu.

[Oksbad]

Hey guys, typing in "contract" in the CKAN GUI uncovers a whole lot of contract packs. Are they compatible with RP0? It seems I might have a problem with either planets that no longer exist (mimnus) or the different sizing of everything.

[NathanKell]

Contract packs are not balanced for RP-0 yet. Yemo, thanks for that link, though yours won't be balanced for RP-0 either.

[Oksbad]

What's the word on strategies available from the administration building? A quick look suggests most of them are utterly useless or completely overpowered. There are stock mods to make then more sane (such as Sane Strategies), are any of them recommended for use with RP0?

[NathanKell]

We haven't gone deep enough into funds/rep/science balancing to know what to do with strategies since as you say the stock ones are kinda nuts. For now I'd say just steer clear of them entirely...