Phineas Freak Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 If you have never done it before then it is recommended to get CKAN and allow it to install all the required/recommended mods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon Dry Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 Perhaps I should mention that I didn't use the Windows Explorer since 1999, I use Total Commander and are able to synchronize from/into folders and archives as well. After downloading updated mods I have the download folder left side, the mod archive folder right side. I only unpack the archive file. Then I synchronize with the downloaded zip. After that I switch the left side to the GameData folder and synchronize with the new archive folder. Then I repack the archive folder after deleting the old archive file. I read so much about how CKAN is borked that I rely on my good old TC knowledge. 1 hour ago, Phineas Freak said: @Gordon Dryplease delete your entire installation, reinstall KSP from your Steam account and the install the required mods (at first) via CKAN. I am seeing a lot of errors caused by corrupted files, you are missing at least one critical dependency (ModularFlightIntegrator) and you have some incompatible mods installed (CrossFeedEnabler, SimpleBoiloff, InterstellarFuelSwitch, OSFairings, KSPI). It would also be a good idea to move your KSP installation outside of the Steam folder so when KSP is updated it won't be overwritten. Thank you for the hints, I try it without the mentioned mods and also copied the game folder and cleared the Steam folder from the mods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghod90 Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 I'm having a bit of trouble with the new patch, it seems that the manned 2m starting pods mass varies. It should be roughly 10t but when parts are added (can be anything added after or putting a pilot in the cockpit) the mass will shoot up exponentially. It seemed any time an object updated it added 40tons removing the supplies inside the pod also raised the mass. Workaround i used was to add the capsule last and save unmanned and man it on launchpad, however it seems that it still calculates the wrong mass on the pad (but will allow it to launch) with mechjeb registering a 5.0 twr i couldn't lift at all with over 400kn of thrust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nilof Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 (edited) Just made a Phoenix-inspired SSTO with lots of margin(more LEO payload than dry mass). Powered by 10 Merlin 1D+ and two Vulcain 2 engines: http://imgur.com/iqC6f7V Being able to get back to building cool rockets is awesome. Edited May 9, 2016 by nilof Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealTimeShepherd Posted May 9, 2016 Share Posted May 9, 2016 1 hour ago, ghod90 said: I'm having a bit of trouble with the new patch, it seems that the manned 2m starting pods mass varies. It should be roughly 10t but when parts are added (can be anything added after or putting a pilot in the cockpit) the mass will shoot up exponentially. It seemed any time an object updated it added 40tons removing the supplies inside the pod also raised the mass. Workaround i used was to add the capsule last and save unmanned and man it on launchpad, however it seems that it still calculates the wrong mass on the pad (but will allow it to launch) with mechjeb registering a 5.0 twr i couldn't lift at all with over 400kn of thrust. I am also having problems with the mass of command modules (and basically any of the starting parts with crew positions - with a couple of exceptions) As soon as I add the part, if I click middle mouse button on it, the mass is shown continually climbing. I am unable to launch even a tiny rocket as the TWR actually decreases in front of my eyes in the VAB I have confirmed that the issue disappears if I remove the Realism Overhaul folder from Gamedata, but I have not investigated any further as of yet - apologies! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viggen Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 I've also had a problem with mass of some pods and probe cores going crazy. After installing/reinstalling different mods it came up that problem comes from kOS - without it everything returned to normal. It seems to me that it have some kind of conflict with RO rescaling parts or whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frisch Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 17 hours ago, Temeter said: You mean the soviet/russian style quad nozzle arrangement? Bobcat soviet engines has - besides an awesome RD-170 - a modern upper stage quad engine, and SSTU also got RD108/107 (soyuz rocket) engines. Latter ones without Realplume support in RO tho, I'm currently working on them. I don't see it on Ckan, where is the easiest place to get it? thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealTimeShepherd Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 5 hours ago, Viggen said: I've also had a problem with mass of some pods and probe cores going crazy. After installing/reinstalling different mods it came up that problem comes from kOS - without it everything returned to normal. It seems to me that it have some kind of conflict with RO rescaling parts or whatever. Ahhhh, and confirmed by myself. Removed kOS and command modules now have static mass. Good catch Viggen - much obliged Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisjpak Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 I'm super excited to start using this mod, but I'm having trouble getting anything working - I'm running 1.1.2 with the latest available (well, everything), and anything I launch 'freezes' and has a speed of 0.2 m/s and sits burning fuel. Eventually it starts wobbling and explodes after a minute or two of this (at maybe 50-100 m off the ground, since it's moving at .2m/s) The initial TWR is > 2 (I also tried a booster with TWR of 35), so I don't think it's just a weak engine. Has anyone else experienced this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwerzar Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 (edited) I installed realism overhaul with only US and Soviet Rockets + RSS and i can't play, keep crashing for no reason. With open-gl i can load the menu, enter, and when i click the VAB or similar, in the loading screen i crash .-. . WIth directx-11 i can't even load the menu, but the loading is much faster. What's the problem?I have 64 bit, i5 4590, r9 280 and 8 gb of ram, why i can't even load a single thing? EDIT: I change the texture resolution of the RSS to the mid one, and now i can play easily and at 120 fps o.o (open-gl) . I never see kerbal so fluid and stable, and i crashed only 1 time after playing 2 hours, and in the VAB, not in the fly :3 Edited May 10, 2016 by Qwerzar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John FX Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 Thank you for putting out realism overhaul for 1.1.2. Whilst I like 1.1.2 I just cannot play now without a real size universe and all the other mods that make up realism overhaul. Unfortunately I am on holiday in Spain for the next week and a bit which will be the first time I get to load it up without worrying about running out of memory :-) The size of Craft I am now making means I only currently get about two launches before I have to reload Kerbal Space Program... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolls Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 You need a TWR of more like 5 for the first stage.... Recommend reading the RSS guides that have been made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypervelocity Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 3 minutes ago, rolls said: You need a TWR of more like 5 for the first stage.... Recommend reading the RSS guides that have been made. for the RSS/RO suite, a TWR of more than 1.45 for the first stage is a fuel waste Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rolls Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 Hmm. I must be confusing SLT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redhotita1 Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 40 minutes ago, rolls said: Hmm. I must be confusing SLT SLT is Sea Level Thrust to Weight Ratio, Optimal is from 1.25 to 1.45 i think, lower you'll waste too much dV at start, higher you'll slow down due to aerodynamic drag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Temeter Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, hypervelocity said: for the RSS/RO suite, a TWR of more than 1.45 for the first stage is a fuel waste 40 minutes ago, Redhotita1 said: SLT is Sea Level Thrust to Weight Ratio, Optimal is from 1.25 to 1.45 i think, lower you'll waste too much dV at start, higher you'll slow down due to aerodynamic drag. Eh, a higher T/W ratio allows you to escape gravity much faster, saving you a bunch of fuel. Terminal velocity in RSS/FAR is also higher than in stock KSP, so going a bit faster isn't as much of a problem, compared to truly expensive gravity losses. I mean, that's why SpaceX continues to increase the Merlins' thrust levels, they want as much efficiency as possible so they can still return the rocket after delivering the 2nd stage with a heavy satellite towards GTO. Engine weight isn't the biggest issue either, most rockets dry weight are absurdly low. Biggest detriment is rather the price, because engines and their turbopumps are expensive. And you don't want to go too fast either, that's true, already more because of aerodynamic stability and structural integrity. Can't throttle down most engines, although rockets like the Saturn 5 did shut down the middle engine during flight (here for pilots comfort, keeping G levels low). That said, afaik launch T/Ws of 1.8 should be perfectly acceptable. It's also more comfortable in a gameplay sense, because it shortens the burn. There is nothing like a 7 minute flight to Orbit. Edited May 10, 2016 by Temeter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Iron Crown Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 8 minutes ago, Temeter said: Terminal velocity in RSS/FAR is also higher than in stock KSP, so going a bit faster isn't as much of a problem, compared to truly expensive gravity losses. It's not the terminal velocity so much as the burning up during ascent due to aero heating. This is even more important in RO when you can't really throttle back to prevent it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Temeter Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 2 minutes ago, Red Iron Crown said: It's not the terminal velocity so much as the burning up during ascent due to aero heating. This is even more important in RO when you can't really throttle back to prevent it. Yeah, that's usually the thing that happens before drag becomes to high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theysen Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 Well guys, ferr4m's launch profile tutorial / introduction exists for a reason. Since your rocket would mostly survive a 1.8 SLT launch in KSP, your payload would be quite dead in real life as you have to pitch over quite aggressively so your Apoapsis doesn't rush into oblivion. Due to this you spend a significantly higher time in denser atmosphere going ridiculous speeds and thus increasing all the aero forces and heat. Personally I'd say 1.8 is the maximum if you're taking off with SRB's and even then there is much likely a better option which would soften the launch stress on the vehicle by far more means. But it's KSP and so you can do as you please - unless you mimic a Minotaur rocket or so, then you're absolutely fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpaceEnthusiast Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 What do you guys think about DMagicOrbitalScience? Does it make science gathering too easy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypervelocity Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 2 minutes ago, SpaceEnthusiast said: What do you guys think about DMagicOrbitalScience? Does it make science gathering too easy? DMagic is great and have been using it in all my carreer saves!!! I always felt there were very few science parts for my taste! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpaceEnthusiast Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 (edited) 1 minute ago, hypervelocity said: DMagic is great and have been using it in all my carreer saves!!! I always felt there were very few science parts for my taste! But it doesn't make science abundant/easy to obtain? I want to have to work for it. Edited May 10, 2016 by SpaceEnthusiast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theysen Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 DMagic you say? Well I'm sure at one point the orbital stuff might be properly implemented into RP-0 career mode as it offers some quite historically inspired parts which could be used to generate new contracts specifically aiming at certain mission types. But at this point, I don't think anybody has properly set up all the experiments because there's also the question of balancing against the RP-0 tech tree. It would generate too much science without careful tweaking of single parts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypervelocity Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 Just now, SpaceEnthusiast said: But it doesn't make science abundant/easy to obtain? I want to have to work for it. you can never have too much science!!! jajaja seriously now, I never felt it was much too easy, honestly I think it is well balanced, also you hit a point in the carreer games when unlocking a node is 1000 or more science points and for those amounts DMagic can come in handy! so basically yeah I never felt science gathering was too easy with this mod Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpaceEnthusiast Posted May 10, 2016 Share Posted May 10, 2016 Alright I'm going to wait for some more balancing then. Thanks very much for taking the time to answer, guys! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts