<Starwaster>
I want to add new sounds for when Kerbals start to take thermal damage...
<acc>
like "ouch! eek!"?
<acc>
:D
<acc>
kerbals screaming when reaching limits would be really fun
<soundnfury>
"och deary me, Ah'm fast by the ingle"
<Pap1723>
anyone that is currently online from Canada?
<Starwaster>
acc: NO, I was thinking more like the sounds people made in Syndicate when you set them on fire
<acc>
heh
rsparkyc has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
<Starwaster>
I used to love that game... my favorite thing to do would be to run around using the Persuadertron to turn all of the citizens in an area into my personal army
<acc>
yeah, was a great game
<Starwaster>
I hated killing anyone.. it was so wasteful. Why kill them when I could hypnotize them and send them off to die instead of my own agents?
<TwistedMinds>
heh, I still play syndicate+ at least once a year
<Probus>
It has no markings about "Lunar return".
<Probus>
g'evening :)
<Probus>
Does anyone know if the FASA Gemini capsule heat shield can withstand a free return trajectory from the moon?
<acc>
I don't think so, but try it out :D
sandpiper has quit [Ping timeout: 190 seconds]
Qboid was kicked from #RO by *status [You have been disconnected from the IRC server]
Qboid has joined #RO
Starwaster has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
sandpiper has joined #RO
KevinStarwaster is now known as Starwaster
<acc>
hm, didn't work ingame :O
<acc>
but everything looks fine
blowfish has joined #RO
<acc>
arr, was not my fault
<acc>
someone elso who setup that patch in the first place forgot a AFTER[SSTU]
<acc>
now it works
Wetmelon has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
<github>
[RealismOverhaul] assassinacc opened pull request #1628: Tank diameter part upgrades for SSTU-SC-TANK-MFT-* (master...master) https://git.io/v9uao
riocrokite has joined #RO
schnobs has joined #RO
blowfish has quit [Ping timeout: 200 seconds]
SigmaAway is now known as SigmaSemi
Wetmelon has joined #RO
jclishman is now known as jclishwork
Wetmelon has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
TM1978m has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
TM1978m has joined #RO
<Olympic1>
o/
* schnobs
waves
<riocrokite>
o/
<SigmaSemi>
0/ Olympic1
<acc>
heya
<SigmaSemi>
Olympic1: I solved the CSS bug
<SigmaSemi>
it works fine on my pc now
<Olympic1>
I saw, ill test it this evening
<SigmaSemi>
the only remaining issue is that "default" still only display 1 result
<SigmaSemi>
I don't think it's worth it going through the trouble of fixing that, it would make the mod much more complicated
<Olympic1>
a default result is only shown when there is none for that situation
Rokker has quit []
Rokker has joined #RO
<Olympic1>
SigmaSemi: May we include it into CSS, if yes, under which license.
<SigmaSemi>
it's a very simple mod, consider it a gift
<SigmaSemi>
you can do whatever you want
<SigmaSemi>
(this includes only the "CSSFix" branch)
<SigmaSemi>
you can even make a github repo for it if you want
<SigmaSemi>
I will be happy to help you if you need some bugfixing
<Olympic1>
ok, I'll talk to DuoDex when he comes on
<SigmaSemi>
or you can put the source directly into the current CSS repo if you prefere
<SigmaSemi>
the only thing that does is add an * at the end of the key
<SigmaSemi>
so from KerbinSrfLanded to KerbinSrfLanded*
<SigmaSemi>
Olympic1: I haven't tested this very extensively
<SigmaSemi>
I just tried to do a couple of EVA at the launchpad and all of them seemed appropriate for the place
riocrokite is now known as riocrokite_away
<SigmaSemi>
Olympic1: also, this might interest you
<SigmaSemi>
with this it should be possible to use CSS on RSS
<SigmaSemi>
I have yet to implement all those changes, but it should pretty easy
<Olympic1>
nice features
<acc>
yeah, seems useful :)
Theysen has joined #RO
<SigmaSemi>
do any of you know what this does?
<SigmaSemi>
ConfigNode.RemoveValuesStartWith("");
<SigmaSemi>
I mean, if I use an empty string
<SigmaSemi>
would that delete all values?
<SigmaSemi>
or none?
<Olympic1>
test it
<acc>
no idea
<SigmaSemi>
I don't have VS or KSP here :D
<SigmaSemi>
judging from this:
<SigmaSemi>
string.StartsWith
<SigmaSemi>
This method compares value to the substring at the beginning of this instance that is the same length as value, and returns an indication whether they are equal. To be equal, value must be an empty string (String.Empty), must be a reference to this same instance, or must match the beginning of this instance.
<SigmaSemi>
I'd say empty string will target all strings
<schnobs>
We have a RD-108 engine with 2.95m diameter.
<schnobs>
Part named Size2MedEngine. Seems to come from SXT, so it's basically "Stock RO".
<schnobs>
If I'm not mistaken, nearly 3m is a bit wide...
<Theysen>
schnobs the engine diameter at the top ring is 2.95?
lijat has joined #RO
riocrokite_away is now known as riocrokite
Rokker has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
Niemand303 has joined #RO
Pap|MuchSleep is now known as Pap1723
<Pap1723>
o/ acc
<Qboid>
Pap1723: stratochief left a message for you in #RO [04.05.2017 04:02:01]: "it isn't the order that I'm pointing out, but that unrelated accomplishments hold back other ones from being offered"
<Pap1723>
Nice job with the SSTU upgrades
TwistedMinds has quit [Quit: Crash]
<Pap1723>
!tell stratosleep The design was always meant to be linear, but I think you bring up a good point(I have thought this before). There is no reason that I cannot treat it like the RP-0 progression and open up the progression.
<Qboid>
Pap1723: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
<schnobs>
Theysen: The engine model is a boattail thing, more like the stock 4x cluster. But yes, diameter at the top is 2.95 (+- 0.01, gauged with proc tanks).
Rokker has joined #RO
JeeF has joined #RO
Rokker is now known as RokkerBusy
<Theysen>
and that's too wide? I am pretty sure I always had the dimensions of the bottom tank of the R-7 correct and it matched perfectly
<schnobs>
according to my schematic, the core is 2050mm, the boosters 2650.
TonyC1 has joined #RO
TonyC has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
<Theysen>
the engine exhaust bells centers are 930mm apart, the complete core with verniers is 2700, the booster cores are 2680mm dia
B787_300 is now known as B787_Work
<Theysen>
so agreed to make the boattail smaller, no idea if we can modulate the rest of the engine model then to stay inline with correct dimensions
<JeeF>
Parts look pretty sweet and its the only mod I've found that is up to date and has a scramjet
<acc>
JeeF: not that I'm aware of
<Pap1723>
JeeF, there is not currently RO configs for it
<JeeF>
hmm... I might consider doing the configs myself, if you guys think it's viable. I haven't done RO configs before tho, so I don't know for sure how complex it is. I can take a look on existing RO configs and take it from there
<JeeF>
I really liked that mod, would love to see it in RO
<JeeF>
We have tons of parts for rockets in RO, but I think lacking a bit for airplanes
<JeeF>
If you take a look at the long list of parts that mod has, there are several that would be very nice to have in RO
<JeeF>
As far as I know it's just a matter of adjusting the values for thrust/ISP/temperature to match Earth and it's atmosphere
<JeeF>
correct?
<Theysen>
The lack of spaceplane is partially because of real world lackings too :P
TM1978m has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
riocrokite has joined #RO
<stratosleep>
JeeF: if you want to determine if RO has a patch for something, download the something, find the name of a few unique parts, search the Ro repo for that name. if it doesn't show up, then nope
<Qboid>
stratosleep: Pap1723 left a message for you in #RO [04.05.2017 12:13:10]: "The design was always meant to be linear, but I think you bring up a good point(I have thought this before). There is no reason that I cannot treat it like the RP-0 progression and open up the progression."
stratosleep is now known as stratochief
<Pap1723>
HEY stratochief thanks for the feedback on the contracts
rsparkyc has joined #RO
<Pap1723>
JeeF, Size is an important thing that needs to be adjusted as well
<stratochief>
Pap1723: no worry, thanks for the contracts. they are enjoyable, and have a well chosen history blurb for each. I currently find the path a dash unnecessarily linear. but as you say, that is a consious choice and could be changed
<Pap1723>
JeeF, you can base that off of the other Mk2 parts that have already been re-sized correctly
<acc>
hey stratochief :)
<stratochief>
JeeF: ideally, a part can be matched to a real counterpart, for comparison of what is a reasonable mass, size, thrust, etc.
<stratochief>
but nothing stops people from making parts configs that are scaled to work in RSS, that use Real Fuels, but that aren't as rigerously realistic as the parts we organize in RO. in fact, I've encouraged people to do things like that before
<rsparkyc>
Pap1723: let me know if you need any git help (saw your comment from last night)
<stratochief>
not reason that our standard for realism here should stunt anybody interested in making parts work realistic-ish-ly in RSS. I know I'd try mods like that out
<stratochief>
rsparkyc, SirKeplan, anyone who wants to test that PR can I'm PR'd out for the week after the past few days :P
<Pap1723>
rsparkyc, I am currently using the GUI version of Git so I can work my way through most things, but I know it isn't as powerful as using the shell
<stratochief>
I generally just use the website version, or the GUI version for KSP things. I also get by :P
<Pap1723>
stratochief, For the tech tree I am working on, do we want to keep the science costs about the same?
<acc>
shell <3
<stratochief>
Pap1723: the current costs of the RP-0 tree nodes feels reasonable, yeah. are you creating your tree through YAML they way RP-0 does? because that would mean you could just copy over the part costs
<Pap1723>
stratochief, right now I am organizing everything through Excel as that is how I can work best. I have pulled out ALL of the costs and entryCosts of every single part configed for RP-0 as well as others that do not have RP-0 support yet
<rsparkyc>
stratochief: i haven't used SSTU yet, so i'm not in a position to test that one
<rsparkyc>
Pap1723: when you say "the GUI version of Git", do you mean sourcetree?
<Pap1723>
I'll test the SSTU (if y'all trust me) as it is my mod of choice
<rsparkyc>
Pap1723, go for it
<Pap1723>
rsparkyc, it is called Github Desktop App
<rsparkyc>
hmm, never used that, let me take a look
<stratochief>
rsparkyc: you should try it out soon though, even in a minimalist install of stock or just RSS. SSTU is a lot of cool, flexible, pretty parts to be exposed to :)
<rsparkyc>
yeah, just still working on fixing the stuff i DO have installed :)
<stratochief>
Pap1723: I trust literally anyone to test out PRs. some feedback is always better than none
<rsparkyc>
how the heck do you add a new remote in this Github Desktop App
Oro has joined #RO
<Oro>
o7 all
<Pap1723>
rsparkyc, if you install SSTU, you get to delete many of the other packs you already have installed
<stratochief>
herro, Oro
<Oro>
I'm trying to download FAR fro 1.2, but I can't figure out if I got the right version XD
<Pap1723>
Ho Oro
<Oro>
I know it's one of the forks on the github, but I'm apparently unable to read :P
<rsparkyc>
Pap1723: i don't really have a bunch of part mod packs, since i mainly use procedurals (and it's the procedurals that are broken right now)
<Pap1723>
rsparkyc, SSTU has procedural tanks, that is my main draw to them -> ok done selling it now lol
<Oro>
thanks stratochief I was actually on that one already, so apparently I'm not 100% as dumb as I thought ;3
<Oro>
y'all are the best!
<stratochief>
rsparkyc: SSTU has somewhat procedural tanks, and also a variety of adjustable solids
<stratochief>
Oro: glad I could confirm your rightnes
<rsparkyc>
good to know
<rsparkyc>
though i still want our regular procedurals to work :)
<stratochief>
rsparkyc: agreed. the issue seems to be at the corner of ProcParts and Principia?
<rsparkyc>
and it's just the combination of RSS and Principia that breaks them
<rsparkyc>
yep
<Oro>
stratochief: do I need modular flight integrator as well?
<rsparkyc>
but add RSS to it
<rsparkyc>
without RSS, it works properly
<rsparkyc>
don't know why that would change it though
<stratochief>
JoseEduardo and I even got the SSTU solids to represent a wide variety of real SRBs, and they look nice and realistic to boot
<stratochief>
Oro: yep
<rsparkyc>
ok, time for a real meeting :)
<rsparkyc>
(real meaning for my real job)
<stratochief>
Oro: on the FAR Git home page: "ModuleManager and ModularFlightIntegrator are REQUIRED for FAR to work properly. Failing to copy this over will result in strange errors."
<Pap1723>
rsparkyc, Bite your tongue, this is a real meeting, lol
<stratochief>
rsparkyc: enjoy :)
<stratochief>
RO is a meeting of minds. 'real' meets are meetings of chairs, bad coffee, and flourescent lighting
<Pap1723>
and often someone speaking that just likes to hear themselves speak
<stratochief>
Pap1723: they better be listening to themselves, because nobody else is
<stratochief>
rsparkyc: maybe throw RealFuels into your crazy mix? maybe some patch is detecting RSS and changing the procedural SRB?
<Pap1723>
Are most of Raidernick parts not supported by RP-0 because that is not a focus of his?
<stratochief>
Pap1723: because pricing parts is hard, particularly for mods that break the rocket into many bits. also RN has tons of mods, so pricing all those parts would take many dozens of hours. some have been done, by him, me, and some others
<Pap1723>
got it
Wetmelon has joined #RO
<stratochief>
how much does this interstage cost? how much does this first stage exhaust manifold cost? subjective, artistic somewhat
<Pap1723>
so if you know the cost of a full rocket, do you just estimate and judge how much to price each component at?
<stratochief>
Pap1723: basically, yeah. or, build an equivalent rocket with procedural parts, gives a good idea of what things like tanks, interstages, decouplers should cost
<Pap1723>
makes sense
<stratochief>
Pap1723: if someone want to pick a specific RN rocket and config it for RP-0, I'd help them out somewhat
<Pap1723>
would it be better, for gameplay reasons, for me to put all parts in the proper tech nodes and worry about costs later on?
<stratochief>
Pap1723: I think that works, as RP-0 picks up on the lack of price and tags it "RP-0 nocost" or something? my preference is generally to do placing and pricing at the same time, but I recongize that can be challenging
<Pap1723>
ok
Thomas|AWAY is now known as Thomas
<Pap1723>
Here is where I am at...I pulled out the 3078 parts that are part of the supported mods of RO (ones that have been updated) and am going to place each one in a node
<rsparkyc>
stratochief: i have realfuels too, since that does change the behavior of the boosters
<stratochief>
Pap1723: I thought you were doing contract things first?
<rsparkyc>
not PR, issue
<Pap1723>
They are already marked as RO / RP-0 configured or not, but then that way, they shouldn't have to be moved
<Pap1723>
stratochief, I am doing both, have to keep multiple things going or get annoyed / burned out on one of them
<stratochief>
Pap1723: fair enough. just try not to burn yourself out too fast; you could do a lot of good for RO/RP-0 :)
<stratochief>
Pap1723: are you starting with parts/mods already also heavily supported by RP-0?
<Pap1723>
stratochief, thanks for saying that
<Pap1723>
stratochief, yes and no, the way I have the spreadsheet setup, I can put a ton of parts into the correct nodes very quickly and it will auto-generate a tree for me
<Pap1723>
But I am not focusing on the parts that are "Deprecated" those can come later
<schnobs>
Ahhhh. The joy of boiloff.
<stratochief>
schnobs: I love the smell of boiloff in the morning )
<stratochief>
schnobs: have you tried out the new HeatPumps?
<schnobs>
no. Will they be available and functional in a RP-0 carrere, contemporary with Centaur?
Theysen has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
Oro has quit [Quit: Web client closed]
<stratochief>
schnobs: maybe? first step is, seeing if they work, then tuning them to behave realistically
<stratochief>
in the mid 1960s, the US probably could have made an actively cooled centaur. probably not cost or mass effective, but RP-0 shouldn't only allow you to make wise choices :P
<schnobs>
stratochief: what they actually did was burn the propellant at variable rates.
<schnobs>
It would already help a lot if we could just automatically *dump* excess propellant.
<schnobs>
Oh, and have less boiloff to beginn with.
<stratochief>
schnobs: lol. well, everybody would like less boiloff, but ideally we'll have accurate boiloff
<schnobs>
Even on the puny centaur, boiloff alone was insufficient to provide ullage pressure (while running, of course).
<stratochief>
schnobs: and rsparkyc was thinking about the how a centaur adjusts the mixing ratio depending on how much boiloff has occured, to ensure no/minimal residuals are left over at burnout
<schnobs>
PUS, (Propellant Utilization System). Even the Atlas prototypes had one.
<stratochief>
PU-mode? Propellent utilization? Trick is, that will require a mod of its own since I for one know I wouldn't be able to dynamically adjust the ratio in order to achieve that goal
<schnobs>
As a rule of thumb, if a system used cryogenics, it also had a PUS.
<stratochief>
but rsparkyc was considering it as a mod idea
<stratochief>
indeed :)
<stratochief>
IIRC, the FASA centaur is setup to carry an excess volume of LH2, since boil-off is simply expected, and so you may as well carry enough to achieve a near ideal mixing ratio even after boiloff
<schnobs>
But that's not what I'm complaining about right now. My beef is that there should be zero boiloff while the engine is running -- and you should get free cooling down to boiling temp into the bargain.
<schnobs>
Oh, while I'm in full-on ranting mode -- is there still a way to fine-tune RCS controls? Like, this thruster only yaw but no roll, etc?
<schnobs>
Once there were tweakables for that purpose...
Senshi has joined #RO
<Pap1723>
schnobs, for the RCS, can't you right click on them, then click on Show Actuation Toggles (or something like that)?
<schnobs>
It's one fo the so-called "advanced tweakables" that can be activated in Settings (where you can also scale UI and whatnot).
<acc>
definetly should be activated when playing RO
<schnobs>
oh, and who's had the bright idea that simulations have to cost a fortune?
<schnobs>
WHILE PART FAILURES STILL WORK FOR CRYING OUT LOUD
<Pap1723>
ok, so on this one, I happen to agree with schnobs , the cost of planning and testing and simulating, etc has been built into the entryCost of the part, has it not?
jclishwork is now known as jclishman
<schnobs>
In oder to figure out how much extra hydrogen in need to put in the centaur I have to shell out 15% of the gross vessel cost, and all I get out iof it is a launch failure?
<schnobs>
Puh-Lease.
<Pap1723>
schnobs, back away slowly from the screen
<rsparkyc>
another example of this was the J-2 engine used on the saturn V
<schnobs>
Pap1723: the screen hasn't done me any wrong....
<schnobs>
Pap1723: as to your question re testing&planning, that's very much undecided.
VanDisaster has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
<stratochief>
schnobs: ? simulations with what mod? KRASH?
<schnobs>
yes.
<stratochief>
RP-0 will need to refine a config for KRASH costs. the KRASH defaults are far too high, and I set them low in my career game. feel free to experiment and provide suggested costs for that
<schnobs>
Pap1723: parts currently come not fully untested, but you're encouraged to hire teams and test tham some more in testflight.
<schnobs>
Pap1723: ultimately you won't get full reliability until you launch them yourself.
<stratochief>
schnobs: and in the main game menu (before entering a game) you can turn on more custom options, tweakables. that should give you the RCS feature you're seeking I think
<schnobs>
stratochief: as far as I'm concerned, simulation should come at no cost, but provide a fail-safe environment (disable testflight).
<Pap1723>
stratochief, somsone posted KRASH configs on the RP-0 thread a while ago, are those better and should we create a config that distributes with RP-0 to use those values?
<stratochief>
I'm not sure if testflight can be disabled in KRASH. ideal there would be sims giving you max data, but still limit to rated burn time, or else you might sim a rocket that has zero chance of operating
<schnobs>
Most of the time I want to run a sim it's in order to see if somethign works (like, "will that fairing come off cleanly"). Being presented with a multi-million dollar bill for such a task is silly at all times.
<stratochief>
Pap1723: I don't frequent the forums... frequently. link?
<stratochief>
schnobs: yeah. I figure a basical "does this launch, does this stage?" sim should cost 1-3% of a real mission, while a whole test to orbit and TLI should be something like 10-15%. those are my personal guesstimated feels
<stratochief>
Pap1723: distributing a custom KRASH config w/ RP-0 would be ideal yep
<stratochief>
schnobs: Starwaster was doing some serious rethinking and rework of thermal things, boiloff. if you guys don't regularly run into each other here, you should post your gripes on the HeatPump forum page, so you can communicate assyncronously
<schnobs>
Oh, ranting a bit more -- why can RCS thrusters fail?
<stratochief>
schnobs: I think there should be at least a bit of boiloff during stage burn, no? the heat of the engine will warm the propellant tanks, and aero heat will do the same to a small extend as well, eh?
<stratochief>
schnobs: why the hell wouldn't they be able to fail? valves stick, hypergol catalysts can wear, break, fail
<schnobs>
Might be an interesting failure mode, granted, but I just opened the TF window and have a hard time spotting my main engine among the rcs blocks.
<stratochief>
lol, fair. there should be an option in there to sort out/hide RCS :P Agathorn?
<schnobs>
It's a lot of clutter for a once-in-a-lifetime kind of failure. Also, how many CPU cycles does it eat? Is that really wothwhile?
<Pap1723>
stratochief, for Weather Satellite contracts, I was planning on including the 6 major Geostationary Constellations, US, Eurpoe, Russia, Japan, China, India -> Should they all be included? Should the player only choose one of them or should they be able to launch all 6 (not necessary, but if they want to)
<stratochief>
schnobs: you'd have to count them yourself (CPU cycles), nobody has an immediate accurate answer to that one
<stratochief>
Pap1723: why not make them more generic? randomly offered?
<stratochief>
Pap1723: also, IMO in terms of LOE satellite contracts, regular random GTO contracts would be the next thing to add to RP-0 IMO. geosats are modern times, and IMO boring to launch, precisely place
<Pap1723>
stratochief, the only problem I am coming up with, is I was going to have them as constellations, so they would require two satellites at specific latitudes. You think just make them one-off missions that releat?
<Pap1723>
*repeat
<stratochief>
but I'm not much of a LEO sat or RemoteTech guy, so that is clearly just my personal opinion
<stratochief>
Pap1723: and many thanks for the link for the KRASH config. schnobs, you can try that one out and give feedback on whether it is a good balance or not
<stratochief>
Pap1723: one at a time seems better, but again, I don't personally care much about constellations :P
<stratochief>
gimme a one man or two man station contract, or a rover contract on any body. now that is where RP-0 is clearly lacking IMO
<Pap1723>
stratochief, those will be there
<stratochief>
hopefully the LEO constellation fans will show up sometime and give you useful feedback :P
<Pap1723>
lol
<Pap1723>
I think you are right about the weather satellites though. And as a bonus, it makes my contract writing about 10 times easier
<xShadowx>
RT? constellations? only thing i use is draim tetrahedron ;3
* stratochief
mumbles about the Necronomicon
<stratochief>
Pap1723: what about weather satellites?
<stratochief>
my comment in RP0#614 ?
<stratochief>
RP-0#614
<Pap1723>
No, what you said above about the constelaltions
<stratochief>
dammit, qboid. Thomas, what I do wrong?
<Thomas>
Hmm
<Thomas>
rp-0#1
<Qboid>
[#1] title: Core dependencies? | What are our core dependencies for RP-0? Those things which we require the user to have installed in order for things to work. Ideally, as a lightweight RO experience, these should be as few as possible.... | https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0/issues/1
<Thomas>
RP-0#1
<stratochief>
rp-0#614
<Qboid>
[#614] title: Take a look at refining weather contracts | Since many of these contracts are "Trivial", it was noted that perhaps we should increase the tolerances of them since they're meant to be performed early on. Also, possibly adding the ability to com... | https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0/issues/614
<Thomas>
Not case sensitive
<Thomas>
s/Not//
<Qboid>
Thomas meant to say: case sensitive
<stratochief>
Thomas: can it accept RP0, rp0, RP-0, and rp-0?
<stratochief>
as well as RO and ro?
<Thomas>
!help setrepoalias
<Qboid>
setrepoalias: Sets an alias for the given repository
<stratochief>
I did take notes of your !help setrepoalias, so I could have potentially done what you just did, it would have taken me a ton longer though, and I'd probably have messed up sometime to boot
<Qboid>
xShadowx: I sent you a private message with information about all my commands!
<Thomas>
!wpn xShadowx
* Qboid
gives xShadowx a Lévy–Прохоров beta density
<xShadowx>
!acr -add KKS Kerbal Krash System
<Qboid>
xShadowx: Invalid key!
<schnobs>
stratochief, Pap1723, regarding Sim cost: it competes with hyperedit and revert to launch. The main benefit of the sim is that I can do it without putting the vessel in a pipeline and fast-forwarding X days.
<xShadowx>
o.o
<Thomas>
!acr -add:KKS Kerbal Krash System
<Qboid>
Thomas: I added the explanation for this acronym.
<schnobs>
That's why I'm of the opinion that sims must be dead cheap.
<xShadowx>
:D
<SigmaSemi>
I wonder what is the maximum amount of Ks found in a KSP-related acronym
<xShadowx>
Kerbal Krash Kourse
<xShadowx>
or go beyond 3? heh
<SigmaSemi>
I'd say 3 is a bad stopping point :D
<SigmaSemi>
either 2 or 4
<xShadowx>
but everything is 3
<xShadowx>
CIA NSA FBI
<SigmaSemi>
NASA
<acc>
the good things have 4, the bad things have 3
<xShadowx>
nasa doesnt count :P
<xShadowx>
HAH
<SigmaSemi>
4 letter, but 2 are the same, so it's really 3
<xShadowx>
>3 letters only works if it can be pronounced as a word
<xShadowx>
FEMA, NASA, SHIELD
<xShadowx>
i wonder how long it took em to find what SHIELD could be an acronym for XD
<Starwaster>
I wake up, I go to my computer and I see my name has been mentioned... and ranting.... should I go back to bed?
<SigmaSemi>
HTTP
<Starwaster>
HTTP is pronounced huh-tuh-tuh-puh
<Pap1723>
nah Starwaster you just have to make schnobs life easier for boiloff
<SigmaSemi>
8 titties pee
<HypergolicSkunk>
Aged Tittie-Pee?
<Pap1723>
FUBU
RokkerBusy has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
aradapilot has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
aradapilot_ has joined #RO
<stratochief|away>
Starwaster: is boiloff supressed at all, say, while a centaur is burning? by the dropping of pressure? schnobs expressed the opinion that it should be lower during a stage burn, I defer to your judgement
<stratochief|away>
or, by any mechanism, not necessarily just pressure things
<Starwaster>
you know, it's kinda funny, but boiloff is actually LOWER, consistently lower than it would have been from a historical perspective. FOr a number of reasons. One being that the code tends to underestimate the surface area of a tank. Two being that I overestimated the effectiveness of polyurethane foam insulation for hydrogen tanks. Three being that NathanKell|AFK added insulation to LOX tanks that historically they did not have
<Starwaster>
why would boiloff be suppressed? Did heat magically stop leaking into the tank when they ran the engines? If anything it would have increased somewhat because of pressure drop. But we don't model the effects of pressure or the lack thereof
<stratochief|away>
schnobs: ^
<Starwaster>
unless of course pressure was maintained during the burn.
<stratochief|away>
schnobs: yeah, I figured that the effects of aero heating on the tank surface and heating coming up to the tank from the flaming engine would heat the liquids, promoting further boiloff
<stratochief|away>
Starwaster, rather ^
<Starwaster>
I don't think it was for a Centaur... not even sure it was for a Saturn V
<Starwaster>
btw, I grossly underestimated the amount that skin-internal conduction would have to be increased to get reasonable conduction through the tank wall
<Starwaster>
I think I had proposed at one point increasing the skin-internal global by 8.3333? Apparently I was many orders of magnitude off
<Starwaster>
skin-internal would need to be increased 25338.89x
<Starwaster>
and rather than globally you would probably only want to do it for tank parts
RokkerBusy has joined #RO
<Starwaster>
I've temporarily abandoned that though in favor of using the skin to read the hot temperature (in the boiloff code) unless there is added insulation (MLI style) then I switch back to the original system. That way I can avoid changing things too drastically in a way that would break heat pumps or stock radiators
SigmaSemi is now known as SigmaAFK
<stratochief|away>
Starwaster: gotcha. so, is RealFuels 12.1.0 from ~10 days ago aligned with the way of thinking you've described?
stratochief|away is now known as stratochief|remote
<schnobs>
Starwaster: I'm under the belief that even Centaur had to provide gas in order to maintain ullage pressure.
<schnobs>
That is, as soon as the engine was running, boiloff alone would not suffice to provide pressure.
<Starwaster>
wasn't the pump strong enough to continue to draw once the engine ignited?
<schnobs>
You want a tank pressure of X psi at all times. Don't ask me why, but apparently it was important.
Theysen has joined #RO
<Starwaster>
For the Centaur, an accurate density
<Starwaster>
measurement is difficult. The Centaur uses boost pumps to supply Net Positive Suction
<Starwaster>
Head (NPSH) to the engine turbopumps. No make-up pressurization gas is added to the
<Starwaster>
propellant tanks during engine firing. This results in decaying tank pressures since mass
<Starwaster>
is leaving the tanks to supply the engines during firing. A state of thermodynamic equilibrium
<Starwaster>
is maintained at the liquid-to-vapor interface by bulk boiling of the cryogenic propellants.
<Starwaster>
The bubbles created by boiling alter the liquid density significantly from that for
<Starwaster>
a saturated nonboiling liquid. The bubbles and the continuous decay of ullage pressure
<schnobs>
On S-IV they allowed it to drop during the coast, but part of the re-ignition procedure was to restore ullage pressure.
<Starwaster>
make the use of a propellant mass-sensing method that requires an accurate knowledge of
<schnobs>
My main problem with boiloff is not that it exists, but that I have to cope with it. As in me, my own self, quite personally.
regex has joined #RO
aradapilot_ has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
<Pap1723>
schnobs, didn't the Centaur need a specific PSI because it was a bubble tank? It couldn't have supported it's own mass without sufficient pressure, correct?
<schnobs>
Pap1723: read the quote above, they just tapped the fuel and left the pressure to establish itself at whatever value. So no, in case of the centaur no constant ullage pressure was maintained.
<Pap1723>
ah, I see, I need to Git Gud at reading
SigmaAFK is now known as SigmaTrain
<stratochief|remote>
Pap1723: balloon tank. you're correct in how it was handled before and during launch, kept at substantial pressure so it didn't collapse (cue RokkerBusy's picture of a collapsed baloon tank)
<stratochief|remote>
Pap1723: in orbit, or under low acceleration, the pressure inside could be lower than was required to keep it at sea level under 1 G
TM1978m has joined #RO
<schnobs>
stratochief|remote: don't forget that it pushed at substantially more than 1g towards propellant depletion -- which would also be the time when pressure would be lowest.
<Starwaster>
schnobs if you personally don't want boiloff then you personally should make a Module Manager patch that removes all loss_rate values from TANK nodes (inside TANK_DEFINITION nodes) and remove all vsp values from resource definitions. (and possibly reinstate the hsp values for cryopropellants that were recently removed)
<schnobs>
Starwaster: sorry, I'm in a bit of a hurry but I'll try again. What bugs me most is that I have no coping mechanism short of flying several times and adjusting fuel loads at each revert.
<Starwaster>
well what I got was that you didn't want to cope with it at all so I gave you a means to not cope with it
<Starwaster>
anything else, should be accompanied by specific suggestions as to code changes and or actual code changes in the form of a pull request
<Pap1723>
Should the first EVA mission be allowed with only one person in orbit? Didn't someone else to be in there? Do we want to recreate that necessity?
<schnobs>
I don't see how any bit of code could predict boiloff better than I do -- and besides not knowing how to put my guesswork into code, there's also the small fact that my guess often turns out to be dead wrong.
<stratochief|remote>
schnobs: indeed. not much air pressure pushing from the outside, which helps.
<schnobs>
A PUS would be most welcome, but I'm afraid that it won't be allowed until someone finds a source on how it affects thrust and ISP.
<stratochief|remote>
schnobs: poke rsparkyc sometime when you're both around about whether he is still mulling over a PU mode mod or not
<stratochief|remote>
schnobs: and we do know how changing the mixing ratio affects thrust and ISP, good ole' nasa docs
<Starwaster>
it affects the ISP and thrust because molecular mass changes in the exhaust
<schnobs>
really? The only I ever found was a very simple schematic for J-2. Two straight lines, one going up, one down.
<stratochief|remote>
schnobs: personally, Just put in a bit excess hydrogen, because leaving a few dozen or hundred L of LH2 in the tank at burnout is better than leaving heavy LO2. also, I record my vidja/take notes, so I have an idea of how many % extra I should pack depending on how many orbits I expect between reaching LEO and my burn
<stratochief|remote>
schnobs: more complex ones exist, as I said. I didn't save the link and label for the figure/chart, but it was in this IRC within the past week, and rsparkyc got it, and he was the one who wanted it
<schnobs>
I'll poke him when/if I see him.
<stratochief|remote>
schnobs: and hell, having just two data points for ISP, thrust, mixing ratio and lerping between them would be good enough to start; the missing component is a PU mod, which would be complicated but do-able
<stratochief|remote>
so the mod calculates the best ratio to use, adjusts to that
<rsparkyc>
Still on my work meeting, but saw my name. Yeah, i'm still mulling over a PU mod
<schnobs>
but now, gotta go. See you tomorrow.
<Pap1723>
stratochief|remote, Should the first EVA mission be allowed with only one person in orbit? Didn't someone else to be in there? Do we want to recreate that necessity?
<stratochief|remote>
Pap1723: naw, should be possible once you've achieved orbit, or even after you've done your first crewed mission, like Mercury-Redstone
<Pap1723>
k
<Pap1723>
I'll leave it alone then
<Pap1723>
Sometimes (almost always) I make it more complex than it needs to be
aradapilot_ has joined #RO
<stratochief|remote>
I don't think the second person every really helped. it was a wise back-up, but not necessary to zip up your suit and pop out on an umbillical
aradapilot_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
aradapilot_ has joined #RO
schnobs has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
JeeF has quit [Ping timeout: 180 seconds]
SigmaTrain is now known as SigmaAFK
<xShadowx>
what is a PU mod?o.o
<rsparkyc>
propellent utilization
<rsparkyc>
variable mixture ratios for engines
<rsparkyc>
it lowers thrust, but raises ISP
<Starwaster>
or the reverse
<Starwaster>
?
<rsparkyc>
yep, i know in the instance of the J2, they would lower the thrust and raise the isp mid flight
<stratochief|remote>
they tend to pack extra LH2, since that will be lost most during launch, flight, and during coasts. also, dropping thrust is more acceptable later in flight, since the craft is already lighter so the TWR will still be acceptable
<stratochief|remote>
xShadowx: a mod controlling PU would adjust the mixing ratio of the engine so that the stage is empty of both fuel and oxidizer at burnout
<xShadowx>
ya i remember that being wanted, for fuels with boiloff :|
<rsparkyc>
it's not just because of boil off though, also to tradeoff thrust vs efficiency
TM1978m has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Wetmelon has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
<rsparkyc>
the tricky part of a PU mod is figuring out how much extra LH2 to add to the tank by default
<rsparkyc>
and obviously there's a min/max mixture ratio
<rsparkyc>
so you can't just double the LH2 and expect the engine work work
<xShadowx>
floatcurve, set per engine
<rsparkyc>
well the thing is, extra LH2 is dependent by 1) when you want to switch your mixture ration, and 2) what do you want to switch it to
<rsparkyc>
ultimately there's a max value (which would be burn extra LH2 for the whole burn), but you wouldn't want that much
<rsparkyc>
and since you can autofill tanks to have the right ratio, you'll probably want to select when you switch (and perhaps what you want to switch to) before you fill the tanks, so it can calculate the right ratios for you
<rsparkyc>
it would be great if you could hook up the ratio mix to a staging event
<rsparkyc>
i have no idea how to do that though (at least not yet)
<rsparkyc>
so that mod is probably a ways off
<rsparkyc>
but those were my initial ideas
<xShadowx>
rsparkyc: just use throttle to control mixture, curve.eval(throttle) > how much LH2
<xShadowx>
unless you want specific locked steps to goto
<rsparkyc>
but the mixture ration is independent of throttle
<xShadowx>
does the engine throttle AND control mi9xture?
<rsparkyc>
potentially
<xShadowx>
then you could fux up :D
<regex>
but they're not tied together
<rsparkyc>
IRL, adjusting mixture has a side effect of changing thrust
<regex>
If I'm trying to land my LM I don't want the mixture changing with the throttlwe
<rsparkyc>
but i don't think you would consider it a throttle control
<rsparkyc>
i think the main reason to change the mixture is to increase efficiency
<xShadowx>
my suggestion would only be for engines dont change throttle, just mixture
<rsparkyc>
since i think they normally do that to bump ISP
<rsparkyc>
yeah, i don't want that :)
<regex>
Then what happens when you have a throttle-able engine that can change mixure?
<xShadowx>
it adds the nice variable control though :( lol
<xShadowx>
regex: thats where the mod is fuxed ;p
<regex>
the fuck are you talking about?
<xShadowx>
my suggestion for using throttle control to change mixture - its a nice control, but then wouldnt work for engines throttleable
<regex>
okay
<xShadowx>
wouldnt be usable on them
<xShadowx>
accually
<xShadowx>
dont i remember some mod that added a 2nd throttle-type marker by navball?
<xShadowx>
why not just do the same? normal throttle controls, and a 2nd marker for mixture controls (showing markers for what is supported)
<rsparkyc>
the trick is knowing how much extra LH2 you want in the VAB
<rsparkyc>
and making it not a PITA to add that fuel in automatically
VanDisaster has joined #RO
<xShadowx>
thats up to design / experience :) open RF tank window > adjust tank to use % of each
<xShadowx>
now i want to know what tha mod was that added the 2nd theottle marker....
<rsparkyc>
right, but if i can configure "change mixture to X after Y seconds" then i can calculate the effective mixture ratio. AND if i could hook that up with staging, you could see the appropriate mechjeb/KER readouts to show the thrust at those times
<xShadowx>
would be fixed rastio though it? change it on stage, but not like manually control in a range?
<xShadowx>
oh too much typos not even gonna try
* xShadowx
sips hot tea from other hand
<rsparkyc>
lol
<rsparkyc>
normally it would switch from a fixed ratio to a "empty at the same time" ratio
<rsparkyc>
i may try to put something together
sandpiper has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<xShadowx>
youd have to project what the boiloff rate would be, which changes - i avoided the 'empty at same time' direction because sometimes i dont empty the tank fully, keep some extra for a coast in LEO, top off any tanks that lost some due to boiloff, then leave LEO
<rsparkyc>
yeah, and the amount you want to leave around for boiloff all depends on how long you want to stay up there
<xShadowx>
manually adjusting (or atleast auto adjust to keep X amount after) lets me fine-tune it
<rsparkyc>
yeah, that's a good point
<rsparkyc>
so basically a configurable boil off reserve
<rsparkyc>
and that's mainly a problem for LH2, right?
<rsparkyc>
(not as much for LOX?)
<xShadowx>
that said, whatever the new module is, to default the ratio to X on staging im not against, just sayin manual is nice on top ;p
<xShadowx>
google is failing me, trying to find that mod that added a 2nd throttle marker to navball
<xShadowx>
would be a quick how-to to adding one ;3
SigmaAFK is now known as Sigma88
rsparkyc has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
Olympic1 is now known as Olympic1|BRB
rsparkyc has joined #RO
<Theysen>
there's something satisfying about having your solid boosters completely nullify the whole rocket because you failed in proper stage timing <3 <3 3 <3 <3
<Theysen>
but the LES worked which is nice
Olympic1|BRB is now known as Olympic1
<Pap1723>
There is something nice about having to make sure your craft has an LES because failures are real in RO
<xShadowx>
<3 testflight
<Theysen>
Pap1723, trust me I actually think Agathorn nerfed the failure rate since he is now satisfied in his need for rage aimed towards him. :^)
* xShadowx
thinks someone should make configs for all the other failures he made
<Pap1723>
LOL
<Pap1723>
xShadowx, how many others are there?
<Theysen>
everything
<Theysen>
I think he even failed girders :D
<xShadowx>
Pap1723: publicly released TF? 30-50?
<xShadowx>
Theysen: no thats what KKS is for
<xShadowx>
:3
<Theysen>
:P
<xShadowx>
TF got the 'behind the scenes' stuff
<xShadowx>
KKS is foreground stuff you see stuff
<Pap1723>
Holy shit!
<xShadowx>
why you want angry bearded man in the sky shit? ew
<Pap1723>
I do think it would be neat to have things fail in a Command Module
<Theysen>
I could swear I get way less failures in early career than I did before
<stratochief|remote>
poor payload. did you release your Solids when they had lots of thrust?
<Theysen>
and I could swear I read somewhere what changed but I can't find
<stratochief|remote>
Theysen: ^
<Theysen>
stratochief|remote, maybe :^)
<stratochief|remote>
Theysen: could just be luck. take a look at the MTBF in flight. also, you may not be more aware of the rated burn time, so you design stages better
<xShadowx>
TF could use a game-setting-at-menu thingy for failure rate, to help the simple people ;3
* xShadowx
sets slider to maximum rate
<Theysen>
I'm talking Aerobee engine, it used to fail after 10 secsonds sometimes
* xShadowx
hacks slider to higher rate
<stratochief|remote>
xShadowx: which, of course, we would set to make failures twice as frequent, because fuck the simple people
<Theysen>
now it won't fail for me before overgoing
<stratochief|remote>
Theysen: starting to fly them at zero accumulated experience? or are you funding research teems before using them?
<Theysen>
anyways I set my separation motors to have the upper ones have more thrust but I must have flipped them somehow, so they angled right in
<Theysen>
no first 10 SR all go fine
<Theysen>
I'm gonna throw in the latest version and start over
<Theysen>
see if it happens again
<stratochief|remote>
I found that failures were much more frequent and expected when you use a cluster of engines, because statistics
<xShadowx>
:)
<Theysen>
I barely never use clusters
<Theysen>
if something has not enough thrust I just hack gravity
<stratochief|remote>
sooo many failures of H-1's on my Saturn 1 and Saturn IB. not too many lose of mission, though
<xShadowx>
:D
<Theysen>
okay sorry, I am not a kid.
* stratochief|remote
sets Theysen's gravity to 1.5, because I am an evil OP
<xShadowx>
stratochief|remote: i was just explaining that to a guy the other day, he was fixed in the mindset you must bring double every part else mission fails, no midground -.-
<Theysen>
been to the gym today since forever and boy I already feel like 3 elephants ontop of me
* xShadowx
places a goose on top of Theysen
<stratochief|remote>
Theysen: I carried a 40 pound (~20kg) backpack about a kilometre yesterday, also felt like I had been saddled by megafauna
<stratochief|remote>
xShadowx: not a bad idea, really
<Theysen>
geese are majestic animals guys
<Theysen>
and damn aggressive :(
* stratochief|remote
goes and kicks a goose
* Theysen
picks up stratochief|remote's dead body because the goose went crazy
<xShadowx>
stratochief|remote: waste of mass ;p smart designing, proper backups, escape for worst case :D
<egg|zzz|egg>
stratochief|remote: ah but is it a wild goose
UmbralRaptor is now known as NomalRaptor
Thomas is now known as Thomas|AWAY
Probus has quit [Ping timeout: 200 seconds]
Probus has joined #RO
Pap1723 is now known as Pap|Away
Senshi has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
<Olympic1>
Final release of Soviet Engines is out, which BobCat mod next?
<Theysen>
Olympic1, did you already patched the RO files for them? since you renamed part names?
<Olympic1>
I renamed the filenames, not partnames
<Theysen>
gotya, brain tire
regex has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<Olympic1>
made it more clearer in the changelog
Theysen has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<Olympic1>
maybe ISS, just need to find a replacement for the Canadarm
HypergolicSkunk has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
xShadowx has quit [Ping timeout: 200 seconds]
<Agathorn>
stratochief|remote: TestFlight provides an API specifically for Simulation mods to use for things like diabling failiures, controlling data acquired, etc. Sadly it sounds like KRASH just isn't using it. I did point the author towards it though once upon a time.
<Agathorn>
!tell theysen nothing has changed in TestFlight internally with how failures are calculated. It is possible that the RO config made things more reliable but I don't think so. Most likely your perception is simply wrong due to the annoyance of statistics :) You are having better luck now than in the past.
<Qboid>
Agathorn: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.