[1.1.2] Realism Overhaul v11.0.0 May 8

[Ultrazerglings]

An output log would be very helpful to help diagnose the issue, you can find it in KSP_Data/output_log.txt, or if the game crashed it'll be in the crash folder created.

It sounds like some part isn't finding the right resource or something, but the output log will help narrow that down.

I think the problem is that the newest version of procedural parts doesn't work in 64bit. That's a bit of a pain, but still. If anyone knows a workaround for that I'd be super happy, but I guess I just have to either live without SRBs in 64bit or live without 64bit all together. This wouldn't be a problem if it weren't for the huge memory consumption from RT2.

Also, sorta related note, it just hangs. It doesn't crash. It produces no logs as far as I can tell, so I don't know how I would help you with that.

Thanks a bunch, though!

[Hattivat]

KSP always produces logs. It's just that if it doesn't crash, they are kept in a different place (KSP_Data or KSP_x64_Data folder, depending on the version you use). The file you are looking for is called outputlog.txt

[plasmeus]

but I guess I just have to either live without SRBs in 64bit or live without 64bit all together.

Many of the mods in RO do not work in Win 64. I recommend using Active Texture Management instead.

[Felger]

Big update!

CKAN installation is now supported! See the OP for instructions. GUI installation will automate the whole thing, but you'll have to manually select the supported parts packs (Recommended and Dependency mods are installed as a bundle).

Release 7.0.2 was posted earlier today:

Changelog:

v7.0.2 -- \/

*Moved avionics inside every capsule. (MechJeb or Kerbal Engineer will be installed on every probe or capsule you have, if you have the mod installed).

*AIES Aerospace is now supported!

*ALCOR Pod is now supported! (Thanks Hattivat!)

*Re-kajiggered the Apollo CM roll thrusters one more time. Now uses the model from the Gemini roll thruster pod.

*Porkworks Habitats are now supported! (Thanks Hattivat!)

*Updated ModuleRCSFX to remove debug output. Should no longer slow the game down when you use your RCS thrusters.

[Guest]

You should add kOS, also to instrument units. MechJeb is nice for testing, but I feel that something more interesting (and realistic) should be implemented as well.

[Hattivat]

A showcase of massive new parts. Obviously neither of them have been built as of yet, but both are serious proposals.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[Guest]

That looks nice. I've almost finished a bunch of other improvements. Two Protons, Antares, Cygnus and FASA Saturn V ullage rocket are all coming sometime soon (around next week, likely). I might also throw in Stubbles' Zenit 3SLB, depending on how quickly this goes. It's especially nice that engine configuration (used to be the most time consuming thing in adding rockets) is usually done by copypasting the relevant engine data. Pretty much every flown one is in RO already. Spacecraft are harder, though, Cygnus is mostly what is holding me up (data on the service module and RCS would be welcome).

[Zaran]

Scratch that, figured it out.

However FASA and JSI seem to have a conflict with the Agencies file.

Edited November 23, 2014 by Zaran

[Starwaster]

Spacecraft are harder, though, Cygnus is mostly what is holding me up (data on the service module and RCS would be welcome).

Cygnus information is pretty sparse. You'd think Orbital would have a users manual like everyone else.

This is as much as I've ever seen

https://www.orbital.com/NewsInfo/MissionUpdates/Orb-1/files/Cygnus%20_overview.pdf

the 'REA' is probably a reference to its attitude control. 32 = 8 quads? 4 fore and 4 aft?

Propulsion: Dual-mode N2H4/MON-3 or N2H4, IHI Delta V engine (thrust 100 lbf.), 32 Rocket Engine Assembly (REAs, 6 lbf. thrust)

Power: Two solar array wings on the service module (6 panels total, generating

3.5 kW of power)

[coldblade2000]

Dat formatting is ...., nice work on the thread

Edit: Wow, that really got censored?

Edited November 23, 2014 by coldblade2000

[Felger]

OP is polished and ready for business!

Also, check out the Realism Overhaul Wiki, it's got some decent information, and will be expanded as time goes on.

[Guest]

Cygnus information is pretty sparse. You'd think Orbital would have a users manual like everyone else.

This is as much as I've ever seen

https://www.orbital.com/NewsInfo/MissionUpdates/Orb-1/files/Cygnus%20_overview.pdf

the 'REA' is probably a reference to its attitude control. 32 = 8 quads? 4 fore and 4 aft?

Propulsion: Dual-mode N2H4/MON-3 or N2H4, IHI Delta V engine (thrust 100 lbf.), 32 Rocket Engine Assembly (REAs, 6 lbf. thrust)

Power: Two solar array wings on the service module (6 panels total, generating

3.5 kW of power)

I've figured the thrusters out already. They're IHI biprop thrusters, there's plenty of info on them on IHI website. I'll probably dispense with the "dual-mode" thing for now (might do it later on the larger engine, I don't know if RF can do that with RCS). What I am missing is the propellant mass. Figuring it out from the mass breakdown didn't work (not enough data). Also, the Titan Sciences Cygnus is spot-on... except for the solar panels, which look nothing like they're supposed to. I'll use NearFuture Solar for now. Still, the worst thing is that I have no idea just how much MON3 and hydrazine is it carrying. There is no data on total dV, fuel mass or anything. 100kg gives the main over 717 seconds of burn time, so I'll leave it at that and maybe try to fly some rendezvous akin to what it actually does...

[NathanKell]

Also, they (specs) sometimes claim something's N2H4 when they really mean it's MMH or Aerozine, just for kicks.

RF supports ModuleHybridEngines RCS thrusters, yes.

[Guest]

I've also seen varying claims of it using MON3 and N2O4, too. But IHI website says their thrusters are MON3/N2H4. So that's what I'm sticking to. They even give O/F ratios. Besides, neither Aerozine 50 nor MMH can be used as monopropellant, only hydrazine can, meaning that if it isn't the fuel, then "dual mode" thing couldn't work. It's pretty consistent that it has dual-mode thrusters, though sources rarely elaborate on what it means.

I might try pulling that dual mode thing off, but that doesn't change the fact I still have no idea about propellant loading. Think I should e-mail them?

[NathanKell]

Well, it could be dual-mode where it uses the Nitrous Oxide in the MON3 as a monopropellant...but probably not.

Can't hurt, can it? Maybe show 'em some of pingopete's screenshots to whet their appetite.

[Starwaster]

I might try pulling that dual mode thing off, but that doesn't change the fact I still have no idea about propellant loading. Think I should e-mail them?

Sure, why not. After their accident, maybe they'd appreciate the attention...

[jandcando]

I just downloaded and installed RO/RSS with CKAN, and everything worked perfectly! Nice work guys!

[ToyToy]

Hey guys (and possibly girls) !

I am trying to build "copies" of real rockets in order to put together a Moonar mission : I already built a Ariane 5-like with a 10 tons capability payload for MTO. My biggest problem though is that there isn't an engine fueled with Liquid-Hydrogen / Liquid Oxygen and performing a 1000 kN thrust (or so). I would need such an engine for the first stage of Ariane 5 and the second and third stage of Saturne V. Actually, there is a 1000 kN engine, but it's powered with Kerozene/LOx, which is way heavier.

Is this "lack" of engine normal ? Do you play with another pack of engines ? I love every other engines until then, I'm sooooo sad I can't find this one ^^

Thank you for any response

[Kitspace]

Hello.

I do not know for sure currently as I am just going to install the current version but in the previous releases there used to be the real life choice for the engine you are looking for. It is named Vulcain and it says in the description that it is for the first stage of the Ariane.

Also I have a question about why does the original post say that the Hot Rockets effects will not match? Its own original post says that it has some experimental configs for the real life scale and it used to work. At least something makes me think so.

Thank you

[Hattivat]

Hey guys (and possibly girls) !

I am trying to build "copies" of real rockets in order to put together a Moonar mission : I already built a Ariane 5-like with a 10 tons capability payload for MTO. My biggest problem though is that there isn't an engine fueled with Liquid-Hydrogen / Liquid Oxygen and performing a 1000 kN thrust (or so). I would need such an engine for the first stage of Ariane 5 and the second and third stage of Saturne V. Actually, there is a 1000 kN engine, but it's powered with Kerozene/LOx, which is way heavier.

Is this "lack" of engine normal ? Do you play with another pack of engines ? I love every other engines until then, I'm sooooo sad I can't find this one ^^

Thank you for any response

The engine you want is already configured in RO, but you need to install the KW Rocketry mod to get it (you can manually delete non-engine parts if you are short on memory). There simply aren't enough stock engine models for all the real-world engines, so some only exist in the configs RO has for mods, I'm sure you can understand The two mods that I'd recommend the most for additional engines are KW Rocketry and Soviet Engines.

[AlmightyR]

Does anyone have a patch or config with more sensible engine sizes &/or thrusts?

-----

As for why...I know this has already been argued before...And what the authors stance is regarding this...But I'll rant it anyways...

This mod is called Realism-Overhaul, but contrary to reality, (stock) engines get scaled to sizes that don't match any other part's radial size in the game, as if the engineers making them never heard of standardization, and were planning to create a whole new radial-size group of FT for every engine they made, in an infinite strive to reinvent the wheel...

Not to mention that some ridiculously big engines get some ridiculously small thrusts...I mean...I don't think rocketry engineers would design engines with big nozzles, combustion-chambers and fuel-pumps that clearly don't get anywhere near being used by their ridiculously weak 60-something maxThrust and the accompanying ridiculously small fuel-consumption (in comparison to the capacity of the parts being used and the effects being generated)...

And there are even some clear cases of missbalance, like NSTAR being both less powerful and less efficient than the "XIPS 25cm ION Thruster" introduced by the (supposedly) supported RLA mod, for which the description states "Smaller cousin to the NSTAR"...Yes...You are not misreading...The mod itself states the smaller, more powerful and more efficient engine is "a smaller cousin" (meaning they use roughly the same technology and methodology to produce thrust...So it's illogical that the smaller engine is better)...

Not to mention the ION engines getting real-world values while none of the supported mods makes a small-enough, light-enough probe possible...A 100m/s burn takes...Like...3 freakin~ days!!! Authors, let me remind you of something: We aren't NASA and we can't send a signal to some craft in space and let it do it's thing on it's own for 3 days...We have a game, and it needs to be running...Preferably with us playing the game instead of staring at the seemingly unchanging orbital-speed gauge!!!

If the ION engines are going to be like this, you might as well remove them completely...because I don't think any sensible KSP player would trade their gameplay, and possibly their sanity, for a bit of fuel-efficiency...

Note: For anyone not willing to spend days in a single Ion-Engine burn, while still wanting electric propulsion to feel slow and realistic (rather than real [...real pain in the ass])...Use my "RO_ElectricPropulsionDeuselessnator_AlmightyR.cfg":

@PART[*]:NEEDS[RealismOverhaul]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]:HAS[@PROPELLANT[XenonGas]|@PROPELLANT[ArgonGas]|@PROPELLANT[ElectricCharge]]]:Final
{
    @MODULE[ModuleEngines*]
    {
		@minThrust = 0
		@maxThrust *= 100
	}
}

@PART[*]:NEEDS[RealismOverhaul]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEngineConfigs]:HAS[@CONFIG[*]:HAS[@PROPELLANT[XenonGas]|@PROPELLANT[ArgonGas]|@PROPELLANT[ElectricCharge]]]]:Final
{
    @MODULE[ModuleEngineConfigs]
    {
        @CONFIG[*]:HAS[@PROPELLANT[XenonGas]|@PROPELLANT[ArgonGas]|@PROPELLANT[ElectricCharge]]
        {
            @minThrust = 0
            @maxThrust *= 100
        }
    }
}

[Starwaster]

Does anyone have a patch or config with more sensible engine sizes &/or thrusts?

This mod is called Realism-Overhaul, but contrary to reality, (stock) engines get scaled to sizes that don't match any other part's radial size in the game, as if the engineers making them never heard of standardization, and were planning to create a whole new radial-size group of FT for every engine they made, in an infinite strive to reinvent the wheel...

RO isn't just some collection of config changes and re-scalings; it's comprised of various recommended/required mods, and if you have the mods it tells you to have then you don't have the problems you describe. If you're not willing to get all those mods then you shouldn't use RO. You're probably not the intended audience anyway so save yourself some aggravation, and the rest of us having to read the ranting and uninstall it.

Don't read that wrong; I'm not entirely unsympathetic but right now I'm just not feeling it. I think RO is just not for you.

Not to mention the ION engines getting real-world values while none of the supported mods makes a small-enough, light-enough probe possible...A 100m/s burn takes...Like...3 freakin~ days!!! Authors, let me remind you of something: We aren't NASA and we can't send a signal to some craft in space and let it do it's thing on it's own for 3 days...

There is a mod that makes realistic ions a tenable proposition. Orbit Manipulator, and it's listed on the front page. I don't think it lets you ignore the ion equipped probe, but you can time warp while the engine does its thing and get through the burn quickly. (not physics timewarp either; off-rails)

[plasmeus]

I have noticed several bugs in FASA for realism overhaul:

1. The Apollo Comand Module is still unbalanced and will flip over causing it to burn up. This will happen regardless of whether or not descent mode is on.

2. Gemini is missing several things, notably decouplers.

3. RCS on several parts is messed up and they will continuously fire even when SAS is off and no inputs are being pressed.

[Hattivat]

This mod is called Realism-Overhaul, but contrary to reality, (stock) engines get scaled to sizes that don't match any other part's radial size in the game, as if the engineers making them never heard of standardization, and were planning to create a whole new radial-size group of FT for every engine they made, in an infinite strive to reinvent the wheel...

The engines in RO are EXACTLY the size they are in real life. Engines in real life do not "match radial size", they are usually much smaller in diameter than the tanks they attach to. As for fuel tanks, if you are trying to use the stock ones, then I'm afraid you are not smart enough for this mod. You are supposed to use the procedural ones, or the ones that come with mods that simulate real rockets (such as FASA).

Not to mention that some ridiculously big engines get some ridiculously small thrusts...I mean...I don't think rocketry engineers would design engines with big nozzles, combustion-chambers and fuel-pumps that clearly don't get anywhere near being used by their ridiculously weak 60-something maxThrust and the accompanying ridiculously small fuel-consumption (in comparison to the capacity of the parts being used and the effects being generated)...

Yes, they would. Again, the engines are exactly the size they are in real life. The size of the nozzle has very little to do with how much thrust the engine has. Instead, it's mostly the function of whether the engine is optimized for vacuum efficiency. Engines optimized for vacuum tend to have huge nozzles, engines optimized for sea-level performance - small ones. The sizes of fuel pumps may be wrong, but there are limits to how much we can modify the models. In any case, the general dimensions of engines are always correct, feel free to google any particular engine and let us know if its real life dimensions or performance are different.

And there are even some clear cases of missbalance, like NSTAR being both less powerful and less efficient than the "XIPS 25cm ION Thruster" introduced by the (supposedly) supported RLA mod, for which the description states "Smaller cousin to the NSTAR"...Yes...You are not misreading...The mod itself states the smaller, more powerful and more efficient engine is "a smaller cousin" (meaning they use roughly the same technology and methodology to produce thrust...So it's illogical that the smaller engine is better)...

Real life is not "balanced". If you think the performance of one of the engines is wrong, you are free to google its real-life performance and let us know if anything is off.

Not to mention the ION engines getting real-world values while none of the supported mods makes a small-enough, light-enough probe possible...A 100m/s burn takes...Like...3 freakin~ days!!! Authors, let me remind you of something: We aren't NASA and we can't send a signal to some craft in space and let it do it's thing on it's own for 3 days...We have a game, and it needs to be running...Preferably with us playing the game instead of staring at the seemingly unchanging orbital-speed gauge!!!

In the time it took you to spout this crap you could've googled the fact that one of the recommended mods, Orbital Manipulator, which you quite possible already have installed, enables you to use time warp during ion engine burns. Next time think before you write.

Edited November 24, 2014 by Hattivat

[Felger]

@Starwaster, @hattivat

Thanks for the defense, but some of his criticisms are quite valid. For example: in stock we definitely do have a problem providing a complete set of engines. It's hard to do with the small set provided, that's why we're working on providing a better set for RP-0, the configs for which will be integrated with RO once we've tested them.

On the Ion engines, I agree that they're very hard to use right now if you don't use the Orbit manipulator mod listed in the OP. I'll add some notes, and if AlmightyR is willing I'll include his config file as an option with a note that it won't be very realistic.

At the end of the day, there are certain things that don't translate very well into a game setting, ion engines in their current incarnation are one of those things which is why the Orbit Manipulator mod exists, but I can understand the confusion new players coming from stock undergo when they meet these things that don't match up to their previous experiences.

I have noticed several bugs in FASA for realism overhaul:

1. The Apollo Comand Module is still unbalanced and will flip over causing it to burn up. This will happen regardless of whether or not descent mode is on.

2. Gemini is missing several things, notably decouplers.

3. RCS on several parts is messed up and they will continuously fire even when SAS is off and no inputs are being pressed.

1. I've gotten a few pieces of feedback about the FASA Apollo CM flipping out, it's definitely on my list of things to investigate.
   
2. What do you mean missing? As in parts that are in stock FASA that are missing from RO FASA? To my knowledge, we don't remove any parts.
   
3. Mechjeb does this if you're throttled up, it uses your RCS to push you forward. Is that what's going on? If not, perhaps zero your trim (alt+x)? Either way, it's probably* (*crosses fingers*) not a bug with Realism Overhaul directly.