[1.1.2] Realism Overhaul v11.0.0 May 8

[Kitspace]

I do not know what the system is behind the configs overriding and prevailing over each other but usually the advice with installing this mod is to never install any other sets configs that come with other mods as they can interfere and cause bugs. So I guess yes it might help to delete the configs but just leave the ground stations file there and make a backup of everything in case something goes wrong.

By the way why do you think that the antennae are configured for the stock environment? I personally did not notice anything wrong with them as they currently are after a fresh installation.

Anybody can help me with my questions?

[Kitspace]

Regarding the extra modules bug I have found out that there is the most mess with pods that come from FASA.

Likely the mod was updated recently so something changed in there and the current configs do not cut the reaction wheels and stuff out.

Probably the configs need updating to compensate.

What about the stock pods holding stock resources I believe that comes from the stock revamp mod which mistakenly comes as a suggested one in the automatic install while in fact nothing in it is supported or accounted for in the game.

It is a very nice and a visually appealing mod but it does add stuff that messes things up.

I think that should be compensated by the configs to support it or it should be removed from the supported mods.

[jonathantm]

Hello guys, I've tried by myself to make these incredible effects of flameout work without the mod of re-sizing planets, I got some good results from that, and I'd like to see what you guys think about it by taking a try...

I mixed some files from the Overhaul mod with Nazari official mod, so here it is, download these two folders and put it into your KSP GameData, I recommend that you try it in the version 0.90 (the latest one). Here is the link to download it: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/qbwdwlkss61dovg/AABBfTUbrieKIogUWS5vrpaha?dl=0

[Sampa]

There are some excellent resources on the Wiki here: https://github.com/KSP-RO/RealismOverhaul/wiki that walk you through how to do a gravity turn with MechJeb.

The general gist of it is:

• Set gravity turn around 100m
  
• Set turn end altitude a little below your intended orbit
  
• Set intended orbit
  
• Set final angle to ~5-10 degrees
  
• Set "Keep within X degrees of Angle of Attack" to something relatively small, 5 degrees works well.
  
• Turn "Corrective Steering" off.
  

That should be a decent starting point, from there you should just need to fine-tune the curvature of the trajectory, and maybe your final altitudes.

Thank you, I'll try this out!

[Starwaster]

There are some excellent resources on the Wiki here: https://github.com/KSP-RO/RealismOverhaul/wiki that walk you through how to do a gravity turn with MechJeb.

The general gist of it is:

• Set gravity turn around 100m
  
• Set turn end altitude a little below your intended orbit
  
• Set intended orbit
  
• Set final angle to ~5-10 degrees
  
• Set "Keep within X degrees of Angle of Attack" to something relatively small, 5 degrees works well.
  
• Turn "Corrective Steering" off.
  

That should be a decent starting point, from there you should just need to fine-tune the curvature of the trajectory, and maybe your final altitudes.

I like putting my turn end altitude at around 70 since the atmosphere is already so thing by that point. With a final angle of 8 degrees. (though that last can vary by launcher and its TWR at that point)

I've been happy with the results of that so far.

[chrisl]

I've been encountering an issue with procedural SRBs. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if this is problem is coming from Realism Overhaul, Real Fuels or Procedural Parts. I haven't noticed the problem in my non-RO game, but I also don't use many SRBs in that game. Anyway, if anyone has any ideas as to what might be the issue, I'd appreciate some suggestions. What's happening is, when I setup a rocket that includes procedural SRBs that have a burn time that isn't in 30s intervals, by the time I get the rocket to the launchpad, the burn time will have changed (usually increasing). For instance, I'm building a version of the Titan III-E which has two tall, very power SRBs. I set these SRBs to burn for 115s which is what the historical data says they should burn for. While in the VAB, Mechjeb reports the same 115s (1m55s, actually) burn time that I've set the SRBs to. But when I send the rocket to the launchpad, the burn time has increased to 2m24s with a proportional decrease in thrust. Does anyone know what is causing this to happen and how to make it stop?

[jandcando]

I've been encountering an issue with procedural SRBs. Unfortunately, I'm not sure if this is problem is coming from Realism Overhaul, Real Fuels or Procedural Parts. I haven't noticed the problem in my non-RO game, but I also don't use many SRBs in that game. Anyway, if anyone has any ideas as to what might be the issue, I'd appreciate some suggestions. What's happening is, when I setup a rocket that includes procedural SRBs that have a burn time that isn't in 30s intervals, by the time I get the rocket to the launchpad, the burn time will have changed (usually increasing). For instance, I'm building a version of the Titan III-E which has two tall, very power SRBs. I set these SRBs to burn for 115s which is what the historical data says they should burn for. While in the VAB, Mechjeb reports the same 115s (1m55s, actually) burn time that I've set the SRBs to. But when I send the rocket to the launchpad, the burn time has increased to 2m24s with a proportional decrease in thrust. Does anyone know what is causing this to happen and how to make it stop?

I believe that has something to do with the way the atmosphere affects the thrust curve for the SRB. RO makes SRBs a bit more realistic by giving them thrust curves, similar to the Isp curves for the liquid rocket engines. Switching MechJeb to atmospheric mode might help, but I'm not so sure.

[Armchair Rocket Scientist]

I like putting my turn end altitude at around 70 since the atmosphere is already so thing by that point. With a final angle of 8 degrees. (though that last can vary by launcher and its TWR at that point)

I've been happy with the results of that so far.

I noticed the new version of mechjeb has an "Svel+" (pointing prograde relative to surface motion) option. Has anyone tried that for RSS launches?

[jonathantm]

Screenshots taken from Overhaul Flameout Effects working without Real Solar System mod.

Edited March 11, 2015 by jonathantm
The links of the images were wrong (I'm new in this forum ;P )

[Starwaster]

I noticed the new version of mechjeb has an "Svel+" (pointing prograde relative to surface motion) option. Has anyone tried that for RSS launches?

I've experimented with it and it's probably possible, but the Ascent Guidance does just fine for me.

Orbit Altitude = 420

Inclination = 28.609 (for the default launch pad I think, but you can put whatever you need here)

Limit to Terminal Velocity = off

Limit Acceleration = (usually) Off (sometimes I'll set this to 36-42 but if you keep a starting TWR of ~1.6 you're ok)

Limit Throttle = Off

Limit angle of attack = 5

(sometimes I go as high as 15 which is ok if it's set that way from the start. Don't suddenly change it halfway through flight or you'll flip the stack)

Ascent Path Editor

turn start altitude = 0.25 km

turn end Altitude = 70 km

Final flight path angle = 8

Turn shape = 40

[NathanKell]

Ashflare: Can you post a daytime shot?

[sashan]

Can anyone recommend an engine for my Orion? It has to look similar to the real one. I don't care which mod is it for - I still have a little bit of space left.

And is AIES compatible? Especially solar panels and other probe parts.

Edited March 11, 2015 by sashan

[-Velocity-]

OK, I was curious if you guys could help me out with some things. I've installed Realism overhaul and most of the recommended mods (the biggest one I left out was Remote Tech). Keep in mind, I’m coming off playing stock KSP for like the last six or nine months, and before that, the most “serious†mod I used was like KW rocketry and B9. Nothing that changed the game nearly to the extent that these mods do.

Anyway, to be honest, I don’t like the limited range of engines in the default install. I'd rather have a fully fictional set of engines that don't have any gaps in capability/thrust range that just behave realistically. They are also odd sizes, are extremely, extremely lightweight, and almost all have fixed throttles. That last part can’t be realistic, can it?! I’m pretty sure I remember while watching space shuttle launches Mission Control mentioning the space shuttle adjusting its throttle. They’d throttle down, for example, when passing max-Q. The inability to throttle any large engines combined with extremely lightweight empty fuel tanks means the rockets that I am launch start at a TWR of like 1.3 and end with a TWR of like 3, 4, or even more in some cases. I’m getting such a huge thrust I’m having a hard time doing a gravity turn, because gravity never really gets a change to pull my flight path down.

So, what am I doing wrong? Is all this stuff- super lightweight fuel tanks, extremely high thrust, lightweight engines, fix-throttle engines actually realistic? I'm going to look some stuff up when I get the chance (like, the masses of various engines and their thrusts IRL, and the fueled vs. unfueled weights of some rockets). Also, I don’t think there is a single throttleable rocket engine intended for atmospheric use by default. I do understand that the stock rocket parts can’t possibly be as good as real life rocket parts, because it takes a lot of effort to make a launcher with like 10 km/s+ dV in stock, but are things really this good (and bad, in the case of no throttleable engines) IRL?

Additionally, based off of my comments above, are there any specific additional mods or configs I should be using/setting?

Finally, how do we get the nice, immersive clouds? RVE isn’t available on CKAN, should (can?) we install it anyway, or should we be installing EVE?

Sorry if my questions seem a little basic, I'm just kind of on mod overload at the moment... I'm not used to all of these. I don't know where the configs are stored either.

Edited March 11, 2015 by |Velocity|

[sashan]

Did you read the wiki? There are just a few articles you should know.

Basically, if you play with FAR then the ascents are extremely similar. Over my last half a year of playing with it I've come to the same 1.6 optimal TWR. On stock Kerbin.

You must turn at a low altitude. And playing RO without autopilots is silly - real rockets fly completely on themselves.

As for the engines - yes, I don't like them as well. However, the configs are lengthy, cramped and difficult to navigate, so I am yet to try changing them.

I'd really like an integration with ven's stock revamp. It introduces lots of new stockalike engines, which would make an excellent base for this mod.

Edited March 11, 2015 by sashan

[regex]

Anyway, to be honest, I don’t like the limited range of engines in the default install. I'd rather have a fully fictional set of engines that don't have any gaps in capability/thrust range that just behave realistically.

You'll want to try out the Stock-alike Engine Configs then.

They are also odd sizes, are extremely, extremely lightweight, and almost all have fixed throttles. That last part can’t be realistic, can it?!

All of those things are realistic. Even the deep-throttling SSME only went down to, what, 68% thrust or something? You've got to maintain some sort of pressure in the ignition chamber. KSP's engines are almost completely unrealistic.

The inability to throttle any large engines combined with extremely lightweight empty fuel tanks means the rockets that I am launch start at a TWR of like 1.3 and end with a TWR of like 3, 4, or even more in some cases.

That sounds about right. I've got some rockets that get to six gees or even more before second-stage ignition. The Saturn V shut down its middle engine once the craft hit five gees since the F-1 doesn't throttle (or does so minimally, at most).

I’m getting such a huge thrust I’m having a hard time doing a gravity turn, because gravity never really gets a change to pull my flight path down.

If you're manually flying keep practicing and try nudging the craft towards the bottom of the prograde marker. Once you're out of the second atmosphere band you can adjust your trajectory much more freely.

And playing RO without autopilots is silly - real rockets fly completely on themselves.

It's not silly at all; I don't use MechJeb when I play RSS/RO and I get around just fine. Edited March 11, 2015 by regex

[Starwaster]

It's not silly at all; I don't use MechJeb when I play RSS/RO and I get around just fine.

That just means that you and he have differing definitions of what constitutes 'silly'.

For myself, it's your sandbox, do as you like in it.

[regex]

That just means that you and he have differing definitions of what constitutes 'silly'.

You imply that I called someone silly for using MechJeb when I didn't. I merely stated that MechJeb isn't a requirement for using RSS/RO and that I, for one, can get around fine without it. I mean, if we're going to go for total realism everyone should be using KOS and writing their own launch scripts to match their launchers rather than using MechJeb, but MechJeb works for some people, and KOS works for others, and flying everything by hand works for others, and none of those methods make the others silly.

[Specialist290]

EDIT: Nevermind, just me being silly. Don't let the autopilot debate overtake the thread, though.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Specialist290

[NathanKell]

|Velocity|, I realize KSP has taught you many things, right down to teaching you what "feels" appropriate and real. Problem is, it's not. Engines and tanks really are that lightweight, very few engines throttle, and the aerodynamics in real life work pretty much like that.

I highly recommend checking this wiki page, "False KSP Lessons" to help you adjust to how things work in RO (and in real life).

As for flying ascents, as mentioned there are some other great guides on the wiki for you. But do let us know if you continue to have trouble!

[sashan]

The "stock" engines are not enough to build something decent. I just scroll through all the engines and can't find anything decent for my rocket... IMO it is really worth adding a note about that to the top post.

Which mod would give the best selection of engines? Except Russian pack. I prefer building after European and American rockets.

Btw, is it possible to truncate the number of resources a little? There are so much unused ones that the lists are extremely long. Would just deleting them from the definition work or should the tank configs be edited as well?

[Starwaster]

You imply that I called someone silly for using MechJeb when I didn't. I merely stated that MechJeb isn't a requirement for using RSS/RO and that I, for one, can get around fine without it. I mean, if we're going to go for total realism everyone should be using KOS and writing their own launch scripts to match their launchers rather than using MechJeb, but MechJeb works for some people, and KOS works for others, and flying everything by hand works for others, and none of those methods make the others silly.

Don't go there. Don't put words in my mouth. You know .... .... that that is NOT what I said and NOT what I meant.

He used the word silly. You said it wasn't. I just said you and he had differing opinions of what constituted silly.

The "stock" engines are not enough to build something decent. I just scroll through all the engines and can't find anything decent for my rocket... IMO it is really worth adding a note about that to the top post.

Which mod would give the best selection of engines? Except Russian pack. I prefer building after European and American rockets.

Btw, is it possible to truncate the number of resources a little? There are so much unused ones that the lists are extremely long. Would just deleting them from the definition work or should the tank configs be edited as well?

If by that you mean edit the existing files, I suggest you don't. Make a Module Manager config that does the work for you or you'll end up having to re-edit files the next time RF updates. You'll want one section that removes from the resources files and one that removes the resources from the tank definition files. Finally you'll need one that removes (in bulk) from all ModuleEngineConfig sections.

It's a good bit of work. It's up to you as to whether you think it's worth it.

[sashan]

Well, ok. I am well familiar with module manager configs, but so far I won't change anything.

A few more questions if you don't mind.

Is it possible to make an engine switch modes in flight but retain "fuel type switch in hangar" functionality? I want to make NERVA with afterburner. I've did it in stock KSP and got so much used to it that it's difficult to do without one.

Are there any additional escape towers out there? E. G. for the small capsule.

As for MechJeb thingy - sorry if I've offended you. I've got no problems if you fly manually. However if we're all about realism we should make minimal manual adjustments. For my rockets, it usually includes roll maneuver right after takeoff (mechjeb does it after starting gravity turn) and LES jettison - as it uses docking port's decouple feature. Just my IMO.

Edited March 11, 2015 by sashan

[jandcando]

Well, ok. I am well familiar with module manager configs, but so far I won't change anything.

A few more questions if you don't mind.

Is it possible to make an engine switch modes in flight but retain "fuel type switch in hangar" functionality? I want to make NERVA with afterburner. I've did it in stock KSP and got so much used to it that it's difficult to do without one.

Are there any additional escape towers out there? E. G. for the small capsule.

As for MechJeb thingy - sorry if I've offended you. I've got no problems if you fly manually. However if we're all about realism we should make minimal manual adjustments. For my rockets, it usually includes roll maneuver right after takeoff (mechjeb does it after starting gravity turn) and LES jettison - as it uses docking port's decouple feature. Just my IMO.

You could try Tweakable Everything. It adds lots of good setting for lots of parts.

[sashan]

Yeah, it seems worth trying out even if just because it allows to extend solar panels in VAB.

On a side note: Is there an RO config for this? Tried making SLS in RO with mk 1.2 pod, the upper cryogenic stage is too thin to house any decent amount of propellant.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/64993-0-90-Chaka-Monkey-Exploration-Odyssey-0-27-1-EFT-1-Commemorative-Edition

[-Velocity-]

You'll want to try out the Stock-alike Engine Configs then.

All of those things are realistic. Even the deep-throttling SSME only went down to, what, 68% thrust or something? You've got to maintain some sort of pressure in the ignition chamber. KSP's engines are almost completely unrealistic.

That sounds about right. I've got some rockets that get to six gees or even more before second-stage ignition. The Saturn V shut down its middle engine once the craft hit five gees since the F-1 doesn't throttle (or does so minimally, at most).

If you're manually flying keep practicing and try nudging the craft towards the bottom of the prograde marker. Once you're out of the second atmosphere band you can adjust your trajectory much more freely.

It's not silly at all; I don't use MechJeb when I play RSS/RO and I get around just fine.

|Velocity|, I realize KSP has taught you many things, right down to teaching you what "feels" appropriate and real. Problem is, it's not. Engines and tanks really are that lightweight, very few engines throttle, and the aerodynamics in real life work pretty much like that.

I highly recommend checking this wiki page, "False KSP Lessons" to help you adjust to how things work in RO (and in real life).

As for flying ascents, as mentioned there are some other great guides on the wiki for you. But do let us know if you continue to have trouble!

Thank you both very much! Like I said, I knew that KSP stock must be unrealistic, because of how difficult it is to get like 10 km/s+ delta V with a high TWR the whole way (if it wasn't difficult to get 10 km/s+, it would be extremely easy to get to orbit in stock). I just was never able to figure out where the unrealism was creeping in from. So stock KSP's unrealism, in terms of rocket delta-V, creeps in through how heavy the rocket engines and empty fuel tanks are, and real rockets have very large rises in acceleration (due to decreasing mass but constant engine thrust) just before they stage?

Also, thanks for the tip on turning off engines- I had thought of that, but I hadn't tried to make use of it yet, partly because it just felt inefficient. I've only built a handful of rockets so far in this realism overhaul install.

Edited March 11, 2015 by |Velocity|