[1.1.2] Realism Overhaul v11.0.0 May 8

[Lilienthal]

I guess as a basic question - why did we loose the temperature display on a part right click menu? Was it a Squad change?

I don't know what happened, but you can get it back with mod-F12-> Physics->Thermal-> display thermal in action menu.

[HoloYolo]

Can you fix the mod list please? Put all the necessary mods in one place, and everything else where they belong?

[NathanKell]

gruneisen: the temperature display was from DRE back before 1.0. Now that KSP itself provides more detailed thermal data (Debug Toolbar [mod-F12]->Physics->Thermal->Show Thermal Data) I guess Starwaster didn't see a need. Besides, there's now two temperatures to track anyway.

boosters++ that's a bug in how KSP determines what should be glowing, I guess. It's not supposed to do that until things get above 750K. And....hah.

sisyphean: As the OP says, to play in career you need RP-0. RO changes parts and engines willy-nilly, but doesn't touch cost or tech required, so career is basically unplayable without further mods (i.e. RP-0). You will get literally nonsense for career mode without RP-0.

Kaboom!: What do you mean? I just checked the OP, it has a nice table of Required, Recommended, and Suggested mods, all in their own cells...

[sisyphean]

sisyphean: As the OP says, to play in career you need RP-0. RO changes parts and engines willy-nilly, but doesn't touch cost or tech required, so career is basically unplayable without further mods (i.e. RP-0). You will get literally nonsense for career mode without RP-0.

sorry i should have mentioned that i am using RP-0. i didnt mention RP-0 because i cant find any config files about resource costs in the RP-0 folder.

im assuming its an incompatibility between kw, its 1.04 patch and Realism overhaul. i was just wondering where i would find the unit cost of the HTPB so i can manually adjust it to make sense. as it stands the HTPB works out at about 1.75 per unit which would be cool if it was vanilla units of like 200 per booster but when i have 5000+ units in the booster it throws the price way out of wack.

[Friedrich Nietzsche]

Hi NathanKell,

since you've got the Porkjet habitat pack on your suggestion list, I'd like to ask, if you also consider USI Colonization Systems as suitable for Realism Overhaul. The Porkjet habitation mod afaik doesn't provide the modules for ground bases, which makes the USI mod more interesting. What do you say?

[SirKeplan]

My flight computer is saying "out of power" and refusing to execute planned manoeuvres, even though my satellite with 2 OKTO2s has plenty of electric charge.

EDIT: only happens some of the time, this is odd.

Edited August 4, 2015 by SirKeplan

[Borogove]

I'm having problems with the LR89 booster in the RS-56-OBA config. Before I fire the engine it says propellant is very stable and there is one ignition, and I make sure I have 100% throttle. When I fire the engine I get a message saying there are insufficient resources to fire the engine and the ignition count goes to zero.

I see the same.

[Krakatomi]

There is any incompatibility with new version of AIES Aerospace(1.6.0) in RO?.

Thanks.

[gruneisen]

gruneisen make sure you update RealHeat to the latest version.

Nathan -

I was finally able to sit down last night to try this out, and I already had the most current version of RealHeat (v1.1) updated through CKAN. I re-downloaded the v1.1 release through github and installed just to be sure with the same results. Are there any other mods that might be affecting the way aeroFX are applied?

As far as I know, everything I have is up to date - I generally use CKAN and KSP-AVC for mod revision control.

Thanks!

[s10w10rr1s]

Just got back from air and space museum. saw mercury, gemini and apollo command modules. saw space shuttle/sls engine and F1 engine. my realism overhaul excitement is through roof.

Edited August 5, 2015 by Red Iron Crown
Keep it clean, please.

[Lazy8]

Sorry if this is a newb question but I can't find the answer anywhere and someone in the RSS thread recommended stockbugfix for a problem with landing thru the ground issues. My question is...is the stockbugfix addon compatible with RSS and RO? or is it not needed?

[SirKeplan]

I'm having an odd glitch where when an engine cuts out sometimes the plume and sound effects stay on, but flickering and stuttering. happens on the RD-107(KWRocketry), and the "AJ10 Upper stage engine (Early)"

[Laie]

Hold on a second -- do I see this right, RO does neither require nor recommend RSS?

If that is so, what good is one without the other?

[bos]

Hold on a second -- do I see this right, RO does neither require nor recommend RSS?

If that is so, what good is one without the other?

RO recommends RSS. But, you could do RO with a mod that scales up the kerbal system instead if you wanted. Or play on default and send Mercury capsules to Jool I guess .

Edited August 5, 2015 by bos

[Laie]

RO recommends RSS.

Not during the CKAN install I just did. And also (double check) not on the first post of this thread. (edit: should have triple-checked)

Hmmm. On top of that, I suspect that the version madness is biting me. Manually adding RSS and RP-0, I find myself without testflight, for example. Which my CKAN tells me is only available for v1.0.2. Just getting things installed properly may not be as easy as expected.

Edited August 5, 2015 by Laie

[Red Iron Crown]

First post of the thread lists RSS as a Recommended Mod. Perhaps you overlooked it since it's not abbreviated (I do this all the time).

[eirinym]

Is anyone else having trouble with SAS? It was working fine for me a couple of weeks ago, but now it won't point to any nodes. The only thing it barely will do is stability hold, and that's with any craft with any probe core or manned module. Not necessarily that it's RO causing it but I don't know which mod would be causing it, and I know someone else using RO with the same issue.

[jrodriguez]

Is anyone else having trouble with SAS? It was working fine for me a couple of weeks ago, but now it won't point to any nodes. The only thing it barely will do is stability hold, and that's with any craft with any probe core or manned module. Not necessarily that it's RO causing it but I don't know which mod would be causing it, and I know someone else using RO with the same issue.

Hi, I'm having problems to point my vessels using RCS/SAS using MechJeb. On 0.90 everything was perfect, but now it is like RCSs have a delay when changing direction.

Moreover, with the new ignitions limits It is almost impossible to plan an automatic ascent profile using Mechjeb, every single time I have to "take the control" to do a manual ascent. I love Realism Overhaul, but in my opinion using Mechjeb is also realistic taking into account that there is not manual flying of a rocket during the ascent in the real world.

Also, I feel RCS should be scalable via TweakScale because if you have an ultra heavy payload (let say 1000 Tns) RCS are almost useless because it will take forever to change direction.

Yesterday, after a frustrating afternoon I began to tweak the cfg file to multiple the torque of the Advanced SAS module by 100 (also the electric consumption) but even changing direction much faster doesn't work with Mechjeb failing to point on the right direction.

I was thinking that maybe it is my fault generating the incorrect momentum with my CoM, the SAS module location and RCS location...

Edited August 7, 2015 by jrodriguez

[gruneisen]

Hi, I'm having problems to point my vessels using RCS/SAS using MechJeb. On 0.90 everything was perfect, but now it is like RCSs have a delay when changing direction.

Often times changing the PID constants in the atittude adjustment settings on Mechjeb can help sort some of these issues out. If you are using extremely heavy stages, however, using Mechjeb to change the attitude of your craft may not be reasonable - often times the control signal is completely saturated since the ratio of the control signal to the error signal is so high due to the large mass of the stage and the small reaction forces generated by RCS / SAS. Patience is key when changing the attitude of the spacecraft in RO - it's not like stock where the SAS is so unrealistically powerful that you can move about with no consequence. Giving the spacecraft a small nudge manually towards your desired orientation and then using phyics time acceleration (up to 4x) with the spacecraft just coasting is a way to perform attitude changes in a more reasonable, game friendly amount of time.

Moreover, with the new ignitions limits It is almost impossible to plan an automatic ascent profile using Mechjeb, every single time I have to "take the control" to do a manual ascent. I love Realism Overhaul, but in my opinion using Mechjeb is also realistic taking into account that there is not manual flying of a rocket during the ascent in the real world.

This is a limitation of the Mechjeb automatic ascent module - what's happening is that once your apoapsis meets or exceeds the target you've programmed in, Mechjeb will want to cut the main engine off and coast to perform a circulization burn. This is completely unrealistic and often physically impossible due to the risk of re-igniting an ascent stage in orbit. Instead, you should be tuning your target altiude and gravity turn end such that all stages will burn continuously until you are circularized (or whatever your target orbit shape is). In Mechjeb, you can edit the ascent path and adjust the altitude at the end of the gravity turn as well as the turn shape - both of these factors are critical to performing an efficient ascent. The target altitude only tells Mechjeb where to perform the circularization burn which and does nothing to change the ascent shape and, as I say above, is not realistic.

Personally, I disable the ascent autopilot (if I'm using it) between staging and ignition of my upperstage so I avoid conflicts where Mechjeb wants to kill the throttle (and therefore flameout!) my mainstage engine. I try to tune my gravity turn start velocity, end altitude, and turn shape such that a continous burn of my second stage after first stage completion will result in entering orbit at my desired altitude - this is mostly accomplshed by trial and error, though there are some analytical tools you can use to predict how much time you need to apoapsis at first stage completion in order to successfully enter orbit on your second stage burn.

Also, I feel RCS should be scalable via TweakScale because if you have an ultra heavy payload (let say 1000 Tns) RCS are almost useless because it will take forever to change direction.

See above about having patience as you adjust the attitude of large stages - in space, time is almost free, so there is no reason to rush anything. Higher reaction forces mean higher accelerations which mean higher structural loads at both the beginning and end of the attitude change which ultimately means, in real life, more mass, which means bigger boosters and greater cost. Granted, this is not really a something we need to take into account in KSP, but it is why RCS and SAS forces are kept low - there is no reason to make them higher and doing so, if anything, has negative consequences! As RO is an attempt to make the game more realistic, all of these issues are taken into consideration.

Cheers and happy KSP-ing!

[jrodriguez]

Thanks @gruneisen . Everything make sense, but it will require a lot of time and patience

[Rabada]

Hi, I'm having problems to point my vessels using RCS/SAS using MechJeb.

What version of MechJeb are you using? Try deactivating your engines and see if MechJeb is better at turning with RCS with the engine deactivated. Another possible solution would be to try updating MechJeb to the latest stable dev build.

There was a bug with how MechJeb reads the torque available to a craft where it thinks it still has torque available from engine gimballing when the engine is not burning. I submitted a report in the official MechJeb thread a week or two ago. A subsequent dev build was released of MechJeb that had a fix for this issue, but I have not had the free time to test it.

Also if I recall correctly deactivating the engine (and maybe disabling the engines gimbal) also avoided this bug.

[IronSchu]

This may be a stupid question, but I just installed this into v1.0.4 that I just downloaded, and now I cannot get any rockets to launch due to insufficient fuel...I have never had this issue in the past, am I missing something with the install that may have effected this or am I not realizing a new step in the VAB process prior to launch?

Any and all guidance is much appreciated!

[jandcando]

This may be a stupid question, but I just installed this into v1.0.4 that I just downloaded, and now I cannot get any rockets to launch due to insufficient fuel...I have never had this issue in the past, am I missing something with the install that may have effected this or am I not realizing a new step in the VAB process prior to launch?

Any and all guidance is much appreciated!

Different engines use different fuels, so now just slapping an engine under some fuel tanks doesn't magically work. You need to fill the tanks with the fuel mixture specific to the engine you are using. So put the engine on the tank, then right-click the tank and select the fuel mixture that your engine uses.

--EDIT

Sorry, I thought you were new to RO, so I gave you the default "my engines are working" answer. So you have used RO without this issue in the past? More info would be helpful in trying to help you.

Edited August 7, 2015 by jandcando

[Squiggsy]

I just wanted to say this is an awesome mod, resparked my interest in KSP again after having lost interest the last few months, however there are a couple of glitches that looking back over the last few forum pages I have not seen mentioned (Thought they may well have been there are A LOT of pages to go through!)

The first is to do with the "Sub Orbital Spaceflight (Crewed)" contract; whenever I try to complete it I get up to the intended height, everything looks fine, it ticks the "reach 234050m" or whatever, but as soon as I drop back below that height it unticks it again, and I land and it doesn't complete the mission. I can't exactly stay up there AND return home so I assume this is not intended behaviour? Is this for Realism Overhaul or is there a thread of RP-O that I should direct this towards?

The next is that quite often just decoupling boosters causes the fuel tank the decouplers are attached to on the main rocket to overheat and explode, is this due to some change causing heat to be generated by decouplers controlled explosions or just a glitch? about 9 time out of 10 detaching boosters results in my rockets exploding and I can't see what is different on that 1 time they don't explode so I'm a bit confused by it all.

Aside from that, and a few minor glitches that are just from some of the dependencies which I will deal with, I LOVE THIS MOD! Just getting into orbit felt like an achievement (as it should) I had grown bored of regular KSP because I had played it so much everything became easy, first time I had felt a challenge in ages was when I undertook the Elcano Challenge, and once I finished that I sort of just stopped playing. So thank you for resparking my interest in this game!

[Lazy8]

Sorry if this is a newb question but I can't find the answer anywhere and someone in the RSS thread recommended stockbugfix for a problem with landing thru the ground issues. My question is...is the stockbugfix addon compatible with RSS and RO? or is it not needed?

This is the second time I've asked this question so I going to guess nobody really knows...maybe I'll phrase it different and ask if anyone here who uses RO and RSS also has the stockbugfixes mod installed as well?? anyone?