[1.1.2] Realism Overhaul v11.0.0 May 8

[A1Ch1]

Baring that, we could postulate a HydroLOX version of a vernier (e.g. LR-101 or equivalent), which could help compensate, but it would be significantly less elegant.

I actually think we need a generic vernier, 2-4 kN or so, that switches between common fuels (LH2/LOX, KER/LOX, LNG/LOX, various hypergolics). Lots of engines use gas generator exhaust for roll control, seems like the closest way to simulate that. I've been using a cloned LR-101 for that purpose on my rockets. Of course a vernier to control a fixed nozzle J-2T rocket would require a higher thrust, more like the verniers on Soyuz 2.1v.

Regardless, it seems reasonable to imagine that had J-2T development continued a small vector range (maybe 1.5 or 2 degrees?) could have been developed. Now that gimbal range can be set in individual configs we can always leave the default fixed and have a gimbaling version for the sake of playability.

Edited May 10, 2015 by A1Ch1

[HKG4945]

Is there a fatal problem if I use this install on 1.0?

[StoryMusgrave]

Yeah, it plain won't work. RSS and RealFuels isn't updated, maybe a few others, don't recall off top of my head, so then rockets will be WAY overpowered. Take a Delta II to pluto and back, well maybe not that bad, but no, don't even try it.

[Kitspace]

It would be very nice to see generic verniers that could work with any fuel mixture.

That would just solve many problems with design flexibility.

[Vaporized Steel]

Can somebody help me out. I had a old 0.23.5 install folder on my computer some time ago with RO installed.. It's already been a while ago since I played RO and thus removed it from my computer. Because I didn't expect the current situation as it is. It is now however that I'm willing to play RO RSS again. I know that RO only works on v0.90.

No problem, I can download ksp v0.90.

What is a problem is that half the dependancy mods are updated for ksp v1.02 and the other half of the depandancy mods (including recommended ones) that are not updated.

I can't seem to find old mod versions on the specific addon release forum threads. Either the old v0.90 mods or the updates v1.02 mods.

Am I just a cross eyed bleep and are old mod versions being distributed somewhere, someplace, or are my findings right when I claim that my issue with installing RO is temporarily impossible.

If so, perhaps may I recommend to the RO modders association (modders I presume whom are in constant contact with one another) to continue the distribution of old mod versions so people like me can still install it on their computers.

It's probably to much to ask as that would require effort for a handfull of players like me. In that case I hope everybody is going to update their mods including RO itself to v1.02.

[Hattivat]

Usually if the mod uses github it should have old versions in the releases section. Like this one: https://github.com/NathanKell/RealSolarSystem/releases

[NathanKell]

CKAN should also be able to find the old versions.

Speaking of 1.0 however--it's been two weeks, and so here's the update. Nearly there.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[ColKlonk]

I'm reverting back to V0.90 for the time being...

The AddOn Support page looks really bad - shutz.. I never expected to see so many bees on a 'mature' release - very worrying indeed.

A big headache for the modders.. good luck - I for one, will wait patiently

[Insanitic]

CKAN should also be able to find the old versions.

Speaking of 1.0 however--it's been two weeks, and so here's the update. Nearly there.

http://imgur.com/a/hAEo1

Thanks for your efforts Nathan. I've been holding back on even running 1.0 just because I can't live without RO, Real Fuels and RSS. I've grown to love reality too much!

[sisyphean]

is the Aero in RO 1.0 going to be stock aero? i cant say im a fan of the semi-soup atmo with 1.0 stock

[jrandom]

is the Aero in RO 1.0 going to be stock aero? i cant say im a fan of the semi-soup atmo with 1.0 stock

I think it's sort of assumed that any RO users will be running FAR.

[NathanKell]

Why would you _ever_ expect RO to not use FAR?

edit: a random ninja appeared!

[sisyphean]

well that is a relief,

i was under the impression that squad changed the aero to be more realistic so that far would not be needed any more (though how the current aero with perfectly aerodynamic rockets deciding to flip over and point retrograde at 14km because the T/W ratio is below 10, could be construed as realistic is beyond me)

[SirKeplan]

It would be very nice to see generic verniers that could work with any fuel mixture.

That would just solve many problems with design flexibility.

Yes, generic verniers, or just more verniers, would be very useful!

Aerospikes without vectoring are a right pain, especially when there's no suitable verniers to use.

[sisyphean]

ive yet to find a use for aerospikes... they are just a bit too heavy for their thrust and taking that into account the performance gain is nominal compared to other Hydrolox engines of the same level.

just my take on them though and admittedly i havnt tried making any reusable launch systems yet (mostly on account of the terrain not being where the textures are)

as for thrust vectoring on them i was thinking that if in real life you used 4 of them symetricly you could use the throtles of the individual engines to achieve thrust vectoring, not sure if that would be possible to model in game though

[Lilienthal]

OMG it is really happening. RSS/RO/ RP0 for 1.0 ! _This_ is a reason for a hype train!

For the time being I still play 0.90 RO/RP0. However, it looks to me as if I re-discovered and old bug in RO that reappeared: I was not able to get science out of a small lander can. I traced it back to something Felger wrote in the old thread: the storagerange of the Science container is too small:

to quote Felger:

MODULE

{

name = ModuleScienceContainer

reviewActionName = Review Stored Data

storeActionName = Store Experiments

evaOnlyStorage = True

storageRange = 1.3

} Turns out the storage range is too small. If you climb up to the top of the can, you're close enough to the center of the can to access the modules:

http://i.imgur.com/dP3feiP.jpg

---

After I increased the storage range in the .cfg file in the SQUAD folder. I can now access my data. (And my first ever kerbals to walk on the moon _and_ make it back under RP0 came home )

My setup is Win7-64, running 32Bit KSP 0.90.750 (not sure about the 750 tbh) and the mods can be seen here:

http://imgur.com/5DxZBSM

Hey, would be great if you (Nathan?) could fix this before the RO comes out for 1.0.

Best,

Gustav

[Nansuchao]

Hi, I had a couple of short experience in the past with RO, but my pc isn't enough and some glitches discouraged me.

So I have a simple question, what's a good hardware configuration for RO?

[sisyphean]

im no expert on the requirements but m pretty sure any low-midrange processor and gpu and more than 4 gb of ram will handle it well enough.

i have an i5 3570k a gtx770 and 16gb of 1600 ram but i dont get noticeably better performance than a friend of mine who runs the same install with a g840 gtx550 and 8gb of 1333 ram.

its the ram limitations of the 32 bit game engine that cause the issues with modded ksp. if i could be bothered to get my linux running properly i would be able to run the game in 64bit then there would definitely be a noticeable difference

if your buying a new pc though id advise not to just settle for "good enough"

[jrandom]

My slick shiny happyfast linux laptop should be arriving soon. TO HECK WITH 32-BITS I say. To heck!!

[FennexFox]

well that is a relief,

i was under the impression that squad changed the aero to be more realistic so that far would not be needed any more (though how the current aero with perfectly aerodynamic rockets deciding to flip over and point retrograde at 14km because the T/W ratio is below 10, could be construed as realistic is beyond me)

You must check the latest FAR release, the glorious nuFAR. I mean, it's just glorious. Ferram4 would never be depreciated by stupid stock aerodynamic.

[Insanitic]

My slick shiny happyfast linux laptop should be arriving soon. TO HECK WITH 32-BITS I say. To heck!!

If that new laptop has an AMD GPU in it, you're not gonna be so happy as you are now.

AMD's driver performance in linux is still god awful with OpenGl.

[undercoveryankee]

as for thrust vectoring on them i was thinking that if in real life you used 4 of them symetricly you could use the throtles of the individual engines to achieve thrust vectoring, not sure if that would be possible to model in game though

It's a separate mod. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/67270-Throttle-Controlled-Avionics-1-4-1-0-90-%285-January-15%29

[jrandom]

If that new laptop has an AMD GPU in it, you're not gonna be so happy as you are now.

AMD's driver performance in linux is still god awful with OpenGl.

Intel i7 w/ nVidia 980something GPU.

[Insanitic]

Intel i7 w/ nVidia 980something GPU.

You still won't get the performance as if you're playing on Windows but you'll be fine. Have fun with KSP on linux!

That feeling you have when you know you can install all the mods you want is indescribable

[jrandom]

You still won't get the performance as if you're playing on Windows but you'll be fine. Have fun with KSP on linux!

That feeling you have when you know you can install all the mods you want is indescribable

8k textures, here I come!! (And hell, even my 2-year-old laptop runs KSP pretty well, framerate-wise. The graphics aren't the problem, the physics engine is the problem. That's why I ordered that 3.10GHz CPU.)