[1.2.2] Realistic Progression Zero (RP-0) - Lightweight RealismOverhaul career v0.53 June 12

[nanomage]

11 hours ago, Djordje200179 said:

Whenever I try to launch rocket in career mode of RP-0, rocket starts to shakes very fast and after few moments explode. But when I launch from sandbox mode all is fine. Does anyone know solution to this?

The first difference that comes to mind is that sandbox mode starts with a fully upgraded launch pad,  and maybe some buggy physics shaking occurs on the flat 1st level launchpad but not on the grated upgraded one. Could you please try holding your rocket with launch clamps if you aren't already - that's what you would've done realistically anyway?

[Maltman]

I've been playing RP-0 and RSS with some other mods like kerbal konstruction time. It was really exciting to do a lot of the cool historical rocket stuff and I enjoyed the challenge. But I don't know if it is the Avionics system with the weights or what. But I kept getting glitches wherein my staging, RCS, and SAS controls would get stuck for no reason, even though I was beneath the avionic control weight and all that.

That coupled with the fact that Kerbal Konstruction time wasn't properly disabling partfailures and remote tech drove me batty. I'm going back to stock for now.

Also I never got a real plume! I don't know if it's cause I never used solid fuel boosters or what. I installed most all of the mods through CKAN so I can't imagine what went wrong. 

I got to launching my first satellite into space. I had a vehicle with enough Delta V and with bad ass german colored tanks. But the bugs ended my career forever.

 

It was amazing though to be able to make a lot of the historical rockets. I was even googling their wickipedia articles to get the dimensions to learn how to build them. So cool.

Edited August 18, 2016 by Maltman

[przybysz86]

1. KCT have nothing to do with failurs - it's part of Test Flight and you can disable test flight in UI - this will disable failures
2. Test flight does nothing to battery as far as I know - maybe you have "dangit"?
3. Are you 100% sure you are under the avionics mass weight with all the fairing, etc?

As 1st attempt I'd suggest clean install of KSP + RO + RSS + RP-0 and re-check.

[Djordje200179]

13 hours ago, nanomage said:

The first difference that comes to mind is that sandbox mode starts with a fully upgraded launch pad,  and maybe some buggy physics shaking occurs on the flat 1st level launchpad but not on the grated upgraded one. Could you please try holding your rocket with launch clamps if you aren't already - that's what you would've done realistically anyway?

I have tried to fully upgrade launch pad, but shaking occurs again. I have also tried to use launch clamps. but same problem occurs, only difference is that all parts except command pods start to move upside at speed 0.2-0.3m/s, and after 5-6 seconds-all parts explode simultaneously.

Edited August 18, 2016 by Djordje200179
misspelling

[przybysz86]

36 minutes ago, Djordje200179 said:

I have tried to fully upgrade launch pad, but shaking occurs again. I have also tried to use launch clamps. but same problem occurs, only difference is that all parts except command pods start to move upside at speed 0.2-0.3m/s, and after 5-6 seconds-all parts explode simultaneously.

if installed uninstall Tweakscale and try - had similar problem some time ago with that mod. but frankly - I have it now and it works.

[Maltman]

11 hours ago, przybysz86 said:

1. KCT have nothing to do with failurs - it's part of Test Flight and you can disable test flight in UI - this will disable failures
2. Test flight does nothing to battery as far as I know - maybe you have "dangit"?
3. Are you 100% sure you are under the avionics mass weight with all the fairing, etc?

As 1st attempt I'd suggest clean install of KSP + RO + RSS + RP-0 and re-check.

1. I know that Test Flight adds the Failures and that KCT gives you option during simulation to remove them. However, when I select the option I still get the failures. Also when I select the option to not use RemoteTech it still has it enabled during my simulation. So for whatever reason the options aren't working for me.

2. Nope. I have Test Flight. And Nothing is going wrong with my batteries. They are fine. Sometimes SAS and RCS are stuck "ON" and sometimes "off". Also, I lose the ability to do staging.

3. Yeah I built multiple rockets and double triple checked them all and they all had these problems.. I was close to the avionics mass weight, like within .001 sometimes, I don't if that matters.

Yeah I am going to go for a clean install today. And maybe just add mod by mod slowly.

[nanomage]

5 hours ago, Maltman said:

1. I know that Test Flight adds the Failures and that KCT gives you option during simulation to remove them. However, when I select the option I still get the failures. Also when I select the option to not use RemoteTech it still has it enabled during my simulation. So for whatever reason the options aren't working for me.

2. Nope. I have Test Flight. And Nothing is going wrong with my batteries. They are fine. Sometimes SAS and RCS are stuck "ON" and sometimes "off". Also, I lose the ability to do staging.

3. Yeah I built multiple rockets and double triple checked them all and they all had these problems.. I was close to the avionics mass weight, like within .001 sometimes, I don't if that matters.

Yeah I am going to go for a clean install today. And maybe just add mod by mod slowly.

1. - I confirm this. Does not happen every time, but often I noticed that the buttons to 'disable part failures' and 'disable remotetech' do not do anything in simulation. You can engineer around it though

2. If you are using those blue procedural batteries, might be a good idea to check if they're actually full on flight start. I had problems with them all the time where they'd start out empty and i'd drain the small uppers stage batteries very quicky and lose control. Other than that, no idea  Do you see the "insufficient avionics, locking controls" anywhere on the screen or log when it happens?

[Maltman]

1 hour ago, nanomage said:

1. - I confirm this. Does not happen every time, but often I noticed that the buttons to 'disable part failures' and 'disable remotetech' do not do anything in simulation. You can engineer around it though

2. If you are using those blue procedural batteries, might be a good idea to check if they're actually full on flight start. I had problems with them all the time where they'd start out empty and i'd drain the small uppers stage batteries very quicky and lose control. Other than that, no idea  Do you see the "insufficient avionics, locking controls" anywhere on the screen or log when it happens?

1. How do you engineer around it?

2.No, I don't see avionics locking controls. And I don't think it's the batteries because on the launch pad SAS wont work and the staging wont work, then I will restart the simulation and they will magically work on the launch pad for no reason. Sometimes I even try to press the SAS button real fast before the game bugs out. I don't know if that actually helps though. Because on the last launch my SAS was stuck on.

So overall I suffer a loss of control cant turn SAS off cant stage. However, I can click on parts and open up the action menus and activate the parts manually. Which adds to the mystery.

[nanomage]

 

3 hours ago, Maltman said:

1. How do you engineer around it?

2.No, I don't see avionics locking controls. And I don't think it's the batteries because on the launch pad SAS wont work and the staging wont work, then I will restart the simulation and they will magically work on the launch pad for no reason. Sometimes I even try to press the SAS button real fast before the game bugs out. I don't know if that actually helps though. Because on the last launch my SAS was stuck on.

So overall I suffer a loss of control cant turn SAS off cant stage. However, I can click on parts and open up the action menus and activate the parts manually. Which adds to the mystery.

1. To test my mars and venus landers without being constrained by RT I had to start simulation in orbit, docked to a manned pod to allow direct control, stage/extend/deorbit/undock everything in advance and then use mechjeb during descent to override RT and allow 'wasd' controls. As far as i understand, you are now actually supposed to use smart parts to trigger that final retrorocket burn when landing on mars.

With test flight and engine failures, well you just keep pressing 'restart simulation' button until you roll a flight where none of your 36 NK-33 engines breaks. I think that button is free in terms of funds. Alternatively, you spend a month running a ground team collecting some engine data before simulating.

2. Smth is seriously wrong if a launch-clamped rocket on the pad wouldn't allow you control. Sorry I'm afraid i can't offer any assistance with this.

Edited August 19, 2016 by nanomage

[Maxsimal]

On 8/16/2016 at 7:03 AM, przybysz86 said:

@jarraya I'll check it when I get home from work. I'm curious as well.

 

EDIT: I've checked and I have the "hiccup" in sandbox as well. It's much, much less frequent but it's there. I think in your case contract configuration might be what gets it over the border.
I think it have to do with memory usage. I only have 8G of ram and lot of game temp memory is in page file and this restrict access availability so I think that's why my heavily modded game gets those lags.

Yeah I've noticed this too - I noticed the issue with it being much better in sandbox as well, but I had thought perhaps it was due to having few ships in flight since I only used sandbox mode to test out things with science I don't have yet.

The stutter is definitely due to garbage collection and memory usage - I use Memgraph - which is a great tool - and shows the HUGE amount of memory that RO + KSP runs through ( >150MB/sec).  You can do a bit of a fix with memgraph by forcing KSP to allocate more memory - be careful, especially if you're on an 8GB system though as you can force it to over-allocate memory as well and start thrashing your page file.

My game is getting near to the point of unplayability due to stutter but Memgraph has helped a bit.   It may also be a problem that I'm playing with the Historical Contracts for RP 0 mod for the extra missions there.

If it's contract configurator, it would be amazing to test and fix it.  Is there any way to profile the memory a mod is using specifically, I don't think you can remove Contract configurator without disabling RP0 right now, can you?

EDIT: I also wonder if it might have something to do with having a large number of completed contracts.  my save file is > 10MB right now mostly because of the 100's of completed contracts in there.  If there's anything in CC that allocates a lot of memory every time it iterates over completed contracts that could be a big culprit.

Edited August 19, 2016 by Maxsimal

[przybysz86]

13 hours ago, Maxsimal said:

 I also wonder if it might have something to do with having a large number of completed contracts.  my save file is > 10MB right now mostly because of the 100's of completed contracts in there.  If there's anything in CC that allocates a lot of memory every time it iterates over completed contracts that could be a big culprit.

do not think so - I have stutter in sandbox as well. Possibly contracts are one of the small reasons that together make game skip a frame every few seconds but they are not the main reason. In general I think problem is with memory usage. with 8G Ram on my machine most of the game is in "system compressed memory" somewhere on the hard drive and I think this gets it. And given that it takes 4-5G of this memory I do not think 10MB more will mage a huge difference.
But that's mine "hunch".

I think also mods like TAC LS, Orbital Decay or Persistent Rotation (I have all three) can impact performance as they do lot of calculations even "on rails"

[Maxsimal]

15 hours ago, przybysz86 said:

do not think so - I have stutter in sandbox as well. Possibly contracts are one of the small reasons that together make game skip a frame every few seconds but they are not the main reason. In general I think problem is with memory usage. with 8G Ram on my machine most of the game is in "system compressed memory" somewhere on the hard drive and I think this gets it. And given that it takes 4-5G of this memory I do not think 10MB more will mage a huge difference.
But that's mine "hunch".

I think also mods like TAC LS, Orbital Decay or Persistent Rotation (I have all three) can impact performance as they do lot of calculations even "on rails"

Actually, I posted in the Contract Configurator thread, and nightingale suggested some things to test.  Without active contracts, and without the 'record' contracts, my garbage collector ran every 20 seconds, instead of every 5 - which is a big improvement.  Certainly CC is not the only thing that allocates a lot of memory per frame, but it does turn out to be the biggest issue, from my testing, as that's a 75% reduction.

He said he will try to put some fixes in for it in his 1.19 release.  

[AyeLmao]

Why is 

- Lack's SXT (although only the engines have RO configs as of yet)

- Ven's Stock Part Revamp

- Contract Configurator

- Custom Barn Kit

Required.

[Maxsimal]

1 hour ago, AyeLmao said:

Why is 

- Lack's SXT (although only the engines have RO configs as of yet)

- Ven's Stock Part Revamp

- Contract Configurator

- Custom Barn Kit

Required.

not sure why the parts packs are required, though I think the point is that you have to have SOME of the realistic engines to make RP0 work.  There are other mods that will give them to you, of course. 

But the contract mode is definitely a requirement for the adjusting the missions allowed, and the barn kit for adjusting how progression of upgrading KSC works.

If you don't want to play with those, you can just play with RO, you don't have to use RP0 if you're not doing career. 

[HenrikH]

I can't seem to find the Infernal Robotics parts in the tech tree - however I will not rule out me being blind, so could someone clue me in on where I'm probably missing them?

[Nightside]

48 minutes ago, HenrikH said:

I can't seem to find the Infernal Robotics parts in the tech tree - however I will not rule out me being blind, so could someone clue me in on where I'm probably missing them?

Try installing Malah's quick search mod. 

[HenrikH]

2 hours ago, Nightside said:

Try installing Malah's quick search mod. 

Wonderful tool - now I shall be off to find which of the 77 other mods in my RP-0 game, if any, is what makes the IR parts go away....

[Aelfhe1m]

3 hours ago, HenrikH said:

I can't seem to find the Infernal Robotics parts in the tech tree - however I will not rule out me being blind, so could someone clue me in on where I'm probably missing them?

Assuming you also installed a part pack (IR has been split into main mod + parts) then you should find them in the three Actuators nodes

Spoiler

 

[HenrikH]

3 minutes ago, Aelfhe1m said:

Assuming you also installed a part pack (IR has been split into main mod + parts) then you should find them in the three Actuators nodes

Yeah, I just experimented on a fresh/minimal install....

I had not installed the one named "legacy parts", which is optional, because I thought it was just legacy parts (which it, apparently, is not >_<)...

[Aelfhe1m]

9 minutes ago, HenrikH said:

Yeah, I just experimented on a fresh/minimal install....

I had not installed the one named "legacy parts", which is optional, because I thought it was just legacy parts (which it, apparently, is not >_<)...

Well it is optional in that there's an alternative model pack

[Maxsimal]

Does anyone else have this issue in the tech tree, where advanced colonization is *prerequisite* for recycling?

Tech tree picture

[nanomage]

28 minutes ago, Maxsimal said:

Does anyone else have this issue in the tech tree, where advanced colonization is *prerequisite* for recycling?

Tech tree picture

I have this as well. My understanding is that recycling branch is not rp-0 compatible or ready, and is blocked in this way instead of slapping nono-rp0 tags on parts for some reason. Configs for recyclers and their reactions are indeed weird, so blocking them from use is probably intended.

[Maxsimal]

Just now, nanomage said:

I have this as well. My understanding is that recycling branch is not rp-0 compatible or ready, and is blocked in this way instead of slapping nono-rp0 tags on parts for some reason. Configs for recyclers and their reactions are indeed weird, so blocking them from use is probably intended.

That's odd - the recyclers are there even though I've removed non- RO parts.  And tbh, the values on the CO2 scrubbers in the pods are MUCH more unrealistic than the ones on the TAC LS stand alone scrubbers.

[nanomage]

oh, don't get me started on scrubbers

[Friedrich Nietzsche]

Since Hull Cam is working again it would be awesome, if the photographic Science Experiment would be replaced with a real camera taking real pictures

It also would be useful for a realistic docking cam.