<Qboid>
NathanKell: egg|zzz|egg left a message for you in #kspacademia [05.06.2017 11:26:01]: "http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/139335-ksp-113-rss-datetime-formatter-v10/&page=2#comment-2857395 << when using principia, the start of the game is defined as 1951-01-01T00:00:00 Terrestrial Time (TT) [1]. This is what the RSSTimeFormatter uses [2], which makes sense since it shows TT when using Pri
<Qboid>
ncipia [3]. Now if you are interested in UT1, ΔT = ~30 s in 1950 [4], so the"
<Qboid>
NathanKell: egg|zzz|egg left a message for you in #kspacademia [05.06.2017 11:26:23]: "game starts about 30 s before the start of 1951 UT1; However no mods display UT1, so you should probably refer to TT."
<egg|zzz|egg>
NathanKell: I was sending those from #kspacademia after all
<egg|zzz|egg>
UmbralRaptor: references!
<egg|zzz|egg>
UmbralRaptor: time!
<egg|zzz|egg>
NathanKell: your bugs got addressed!
<egg|zzz|egg>
NathanKell: also Cauchy will have nodes for planets as well as target vessels
<egg|zzz|egg>
(in the EMB and MCEA frames, intersections with the reference plane, which is the orbit plane, will be shown)
<lamont>
egg: what tag should i build for principia?
<Agathorn>
is there a problem with the epoch in RSSTimeFormatter?
<egg|zzz|egg>
Agathorn: no
<Agathorn>
phew :)
<egg|zzz|egg>
Agathorn: NathanKell is just slightly confused about time
<egg|zzz|egg>
so I informed him
<Agathorn>
aren't we all?
<egg|zzz|egg>
or confused him, which is basically the same
<xShadowx>
we're all confused about time
<NathanKell>
What am I confused about?
<egg|zzz|egg>
NathanKell: which timescale you use and why :-p
<NathanKell>
I mean, I'm sure I'm horrifically wrong, but...
<NathanKell>
oh.
<Agathorn>
well you are apparently confused about being confused
<egg|zzz|egg>
NathanKell: basically what I said in my !tell
<NathanKell>
egg|zzz|egg: where am I being confused?
<egg|zzz|egg>
NathanKell: well, you were saying that the game starts a tad before 1951-01-01T00:00:00; that's technically correct (the best kind of correct) in UT1
<egg|zzz|egg>
NathanKell: but nobody will ever see a UT1 clock in game
<Agathorn>
I think this is just Pedantic PRevision Egg talking
<egg|zzz|egg>
unless Agathorn wants to load the EOP tables to display the time
<Agathorn>
You sure you aren't German?
<Agathorn>
s/PRevision/Precision
<Qboid>
Agathorn meant to say: I think this is just Pedantic Precision Egg talking
<egg|zzz|egg>
NathanKell: therefore people will see the game starting exactly at 1951-01-01T00:00:00
<egg|zzz|egg>
because they see TT
<egg|zzz|egg>
(and yes, that's 30 seconds before the start of 1951 in UT1, but unless they look up the EOP tables they won't see that)
<xShadowx>
Agathorn: wouldnt that be swiss? swiss...time...:)
<NathanKell>
I don't even know what you're talking about at this point...
<Agathorn>
Nah Egg is Pedantic and Precise about a lof more than just time
LittleJoe has joined #RO
<egg|zzz|egg>
NathanKell: UT1 is the rotation of the Earth, basically
<Agathorn>
NathanKell: just nod and say ok
<egg|zzz|egg>
NathanKell: whereas TT is actually time
* NathanKell
nods
<NathanKell>
ok
<egg|zzz|egg>
(specifically it's now defined as a scaling of TCG but let's disregard that)
Wetmelon has joined #RO
<egg|zzz|egg>
NathanKell: UTC runs parallel to TT (well really to TAI, but TAI measures TT), and has leaps to keep it close to UT1
<egg|zzz|egg>
so that it ticks actual time, but stays in sync with the Earth's rotation
<egg|zzz|egg>
but the only thing you'll see in RSS/RO is TT until somebody mods in the Earth Orientation Products tables to convert that to UT1 or UTC (the latter not being defined in the early game anyway)
<egg|zzz|egg>
NathanKell: basically nothing of importance, but you have been informed (with references!) :-p
<NathanKell>
I hereby acknowledge that I have been informed :)
<Pap>
Agathorn: want to add a teenie, tiny feature to TF? Would probably take you 5 minutes
<Agathorn>
takes more than 5 minutes to build TF
<egg|zzz|egg>
NathanKell: if you want more important stuff, there's KSP-RO/RealSolarSystem#91 that should get looked at by a planetmaker at some point
<NathanKell>
that should be on RSS-Textures tho I think
<NathanKell>
and we need to roll a new one of that for the updated biomes
<NathanKell>
so it Might Actually Get Done (tm)
<Pap>
Galileo released a config that got RSS working in 1.3 today
<egg|zzz|egg>
NathanKell: try to communicate the information of where the reference meridians should be and which way latitudes should flow, because otherwise you'll end up with more of those
<egg|zzz|egg>
(for Pluto it was easy to spot because Charon shouldn't see the heart, but for others it might go unnoticed for a while)
<Agathorn>
Pap: what is this super easy 5 minute thing? Bearing in mind that complexity to develop usually inversely proprtional to how easy someone things it is
<egg|zzz|egg>
Agathorn: :D
<Agathorn>
wow that was almost english
TonyC has joined #RO
<Pap>
Agathorn: I know for sure that this might not be the easiest thing to code, I was just trying to make it sound better from the start :)
TonyC1 has quit [Ping timeout: 201 seconds]
<Agathorn>
lol
<Pap>
NathanKell and I were talking about using TF to create a more efficient engine through use
<Pap>
The two ideas were to set a starting ISP/Thrust and an Ending ISP/Thrust that the more you used the engine (gathered points), the engine would increase it's efficiency by a small amount
<Agathorn>
heh not sure what you were saying but I had once upon a time a plan to allow small engine upgrades through a system that allowed you to essentially spend data units to buy % increases in things like thrust and ISP - never got done though
<Pap>
The other idea was to create a data market that would let you spend points on increasing Thrust, ISP or reliability beyond cap
<Pap>
yep, that's what NK said
<Agathorn>
^ :)
Agathorn is now known as Agathorn|Food
<NathanKell>
soundnfury: Are you suuuuuuure you want me to beat you? :P
<NathanKell>
and argh leudaimon beat me. If not for the failure on the first launch, ah well
<NathanKell>
coulda spent to rushbuild but didn't think he was ahead that much :]
TonyC has quit [Ping timeout: 200 seconds]
TonyC has joined #RO
* egg|zzz|egg
zzz
<Pap>
NathanKell: Tech Tree question...right now, the tree is built using nodes that exist in KSP already, That creates the necessity of having to ORPHAN parts to get them out of the tree. Would you prefer the new tree to not have any of the pre-built nodes and to have them all created from scratch
<NathanKell>
that would be very cool
<NathanKell>
easier at this point--at the start we didn't think we'd have to modify it so much, but...yeah, we do
<NathanKell>
and then nodes can have sane name
<NathanKell>
names*
<TheKosmonaut>
!seen Regex
<Qboid>
TheKosmonaut: I haven't seen the user Regex yet.
<NathanKell>
!seen regex
<Qboid>
NathanKell: I haven't seen the user regex yet.
<NathanKell>
...
<Pap>
ok, the only drawback to that is that the non-RP0 parts that are not placed in the tree will not show up at all, will that be an issue?
<NathanKell>
nope, no issue
<NathanKell>
more impetus to place/price them :D
<Pap>
great! makes my life 100 times easier
<NathanKell>
:)
jclishaway is now known as jclishman
NathanKell is now known as NathanKell|Twitch
HypergolicSkunk has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
Agathorn|Food is now known as Agathorn
<acc>
morn'
<Pap>
evn'
<xShadowx>
who we mornion?
<xShadowx>
mornin*
<xShadowx>
:|
<acc>
middle europe
<Pap>
xShadowx: you are the king of terrible puns
<acc>
4:42 am
<xShadowx>
Pap: lol :(
<acc>
heh
<Pap>
It is actually very impressive
<Agathorn>
the pun would have worked better if you spelled it properly :)
<Rokker>
Pap: it's midway day
<Pap>
Just was reading up a little on that Rokker
<Rokker>
Pap: and tomorrow is normandy
<Pap>
Does the US still win the war if they don't get lucky at Midway?
<Rokker>
Pap: ehhh
<Rokker>
Pap: probably, but not nearly as fast
<Pap>
That's what I would have thought as well
<Rokker>
!choose Rising Storm 2: Vietnam|KSP:RO
<Qboid>
Rokker: Your options are: Rising Storm 2: Vietnam, KSP:RO. My choice: Rising Storm 2: Vietnam
<UmbralRaptor>
I want to say that the US was building more than an IJN worth of fleet carriers a year for a few years there.
<Pap>
NathanKell|Twitch and others, I think the new tech tree is set up through Modern Day. Some nodes will have to be added/moved/adjusted/deleted, but I think it is a good framework
<Pap>
UmbralRaptor: I believe that is true, would the Japanese have had a foothold that the Americans could not have broken through?
<Pap>
Would the Japanese use Midway and the Aleutians to invade Hawaii? Or would they have had enough air power amassed there to harass any attempted build up there?
<UmbralRaptor>
Unless they manage to score a genuinly demoralizing win and get a negotiated victory, I'm not certain. Since as best I'm aware, lots of the islands were really hard fought anyway.
<Pap>
I'll be working on getting an in-game version done to show tomorrow
Bornholio has quit [Quit: Web client closed]
B787_300 is now known as B787_Bed
<lamont>
NathanKell: my fix to ascent guidance in MJ to make inclination more accurate has hysterical side effects
<lamont>
as you follow a great circle route south MJ goes “oh cool, now we’re at a lattitude where i can hit the inclination you want finally”
<lamont>
but once you’ve hit 28.36N latitude the vector for a 28.36 inclination orbit is due east — but you were travelling south to get there, so it burns north like crazy towards the end of the lanuch
<NathanKell>
yeah....
<lamont>
TL;DR is that you really need to dogleg south at the start aggressively (i just did -33.362 till 15k which may be overly aggressive) and you don’t want to randomly be typing in small numbers you want to go back to -28.362
<Pap>
off to bed, night everyone
Pap is now known as Pap|Sleep
<NathanKell>
o/
<NathanKell>
thanks Lamont
<lamont>
so i guess real TL;DR — 0 lead degrees, -33.362 to 15,000m, then back to -28.362 ==> 0.11 relative inclination
<lamont>
and now i’ll go run and see if i can think of a way to clamp it to make it less clever
Probus-Hawaii has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
Probus-Hawaii has joined #RO
<Starwaster>
I was just looking at pictures of Alan Shepherd and I never realized before but in probably 90% of them he's got the biggest grin that a human has sever worn...
Probus-Hawaii has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<stupid_chris>
NathanKell: hullo!
<NathanKell>
heya Chris!
stupid_chris has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<lamont>
NathanKell: i think your “panic button” for “oh shit i forgot to dogleg” is actually “0.0”
Shoe17 has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
<lamont>
or perhaps not…
<lamont>
oh
<lamont>
oh no
<lamont>
whyyyyyy
<lamont>
no no no, that’s much worse
<lamont>
never ever do that
<Starwaster>
err lolwhut?
jclishman is now known as jclishsleep
<lamont>
ascent guidance to the moon
<lamont>
another bit of horribly complex code that i put into MJ to try to make it all better
Probus-Hawaii has joined #RO
<Starwaster>
I don't suppose any of that code is the reason why MJ2 has gone back to veering off course just before shutting down the engines for its coast to orbit phase?
<lamont>
!tell NathanKell if you forget to dogleg, set your target inclination to your current orbital inclination — so 28.608-ish
<Qboid>
lamont: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
<lamont>
yes!
<Starwaster>
sigh
<lamont>
yeah so the simple solution is just to put in 28.608 right at the start of the launch (Kennedy’s N lat) and put 0 for the lead time, and you’ll get 0.42 degree relative inclination to the Moon and it won’t wobble
<lamont>
machjeb needs to get patched so that it doesn’t ever try to lower your actual orbital inclination
Probus-Hawaii has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<lamont>
lamont !tell NathanKell (you also have tons of time to do that, you don’t even get 0.1 degree of steering until like ~60 km in the ascent profile, and it doesn’t get aggressive until much later)
<lamont>
!tell NathanKell (you also have tons of time to do that, you don’t even get 0.1 degree of steering until like ~60 km in the ascent profile, and it doesn’t get aggressive until much later)
<Qboid>
lamont: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
<acc>
time to launch my two first venus flyby probes: Despin 1 and 2
aradapilot has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
aradapilot has joined #RO
aradapilot has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<xShadowx>
NathanKell: just got a chance to finish watching your stream, sorry you lost comms at last second ;x
aradapilot has joined #RO
riocrokite has joined #RO
<acc>
perfect launch in the early morning from the cape :)
TM1978m has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Hohman has joined #RO
Starwaster has quit [Ping timeout: 180 seconds]
<soundnfury>
NathanKell|AWAY: it's not that I _want_ you to beat me, it's that I know you (or leudaimon) _will_, and if 'twere done when 'tis done, 'twere well it were done quickly
<Pap|Sleep>
soundnfury: how hard would it be to place point values on the milestones? I was thinking that it could be a fun way to see who was in the lead. Instead of only having the leapfrogging that is done now, have an overall leaderboard based on the points of contracts?
Pap|Sleep is now known as Pap
<soundnfury>
Pap: eh, maybe
<acc>
hey Pap, soundnfury
<soundnfury>
btw, why are there not a full set of Deimos contracts? there are for Phobos
<Pap>
heya acc
<Pap>
soundnfury: I left it out because of the size of Deimos, is it possible to land on it? What is the SOI? 5 km?
<Pap>
I am asking, I actualyl don't know
<acc>
you can at least somehow stick to it
<acc>
but should have the landed "status" like all other bodies
<soundnfury>
Pap: fairly sure I've landed on it before
<soundnfury>
though it _is_ a tiny SOI, and it feels more like docking than landing
<soundnfury>
(tbh so does Phobos)
<Pap>
Yeah, that was why I left it off. In the real world, if you are within 2000km, you would count it as a flyby as you could image it, not really possible in KSP and I left it off because of that. To add them in would be a very easy addition so I could do it if people wanted me to
<acc>
fair choice
<soundnfury>
*shrug* do whatever you think is best :)
<Agathorn>
trying to rebuild my whole UI backend..it needs to be done but refactoring it is almost as confusing as it was to use the original mess
Thomas|AWAY is now known as Thomas
<Agathorn>
I need to do it though..the original hodgepodge wasn't working as the UIs got more complex and interdependant
<Agathorn>
there is surpsiringly little informaiton or assets out there for Unity that really cover a full game level user interface
<Agathorn>
everyone seems to focus on just a single window - which isn't a game. The complexity scales up a lot when you start passing information around, moving between UIs etc
<leudaimon>
saw the new tree! I'll have a look in detail later, but it is awesome!
<Pap>
thanks! There have been some (very) small changes as I have been working on it for entry into KSP, but overall, pretty much what I posted
<Pap>
Have you beatn NK toi more milestones recently?
<leudaimon>
lol, lunar orbit and impact are the more recent ones
<leudaimon>
haven't seen his videos for a couple days, just looking at the progression in RIS page...
<leudaimon>
I assume I rushed my lunar orbiter a bit to make sure I would beat him
CobaltWolf has joined #RO
<leudaimon>
I intend to play this evening, launch another lunar orbiter/impactor for the contract money, and then a reentry vehicle without a heat shield...
<leudaimon>
but I still have to design this reentry vehicle... my plan is to use something similar to the lunar orbiter, use the TLI/Lunar insersion stage as a boostback to cut off my speed in half
ferram4 has joined #RO
<Pap>
ah, that is clever
Theysen has joined #RO
<leudaimon>
Pap, as far as I can see, the tree is very nice... just one thing that is looking strange, but maybe just placement... there seems to be a loop or something like that around basic capsules
<Pap>
That is just strange placement on the Visio document, it is showing that Basic Capsules requires Stability
<Pap>
That shouldn't exist in the in-game version
<Pap>
^ the loop I mean
<leudaimon>
ah, ok
<leudaimon>
no problem then
<leudaimon>
I was talking to rsparkyc another day, I think for this tree we could try to devise a more straightforward way to define tech levels for proc. avionics...
<leudaimon>
the era design of the tree contributes to that... I'll try to delve deeper into how exactly the parameters work, to see if there is some rule we can follow for progress
<Pap>
that would be great leudaimon
<Pap>
The Procedural Avionics are awesome, but they definitely need some tweaking to make them fit inline better
<Pap>
This tree is going to take a TREMENDOUS amount of play-testing to get a feel for proper costs, unlock times, etc
<Pap>
It is such a different approach to anything I have really seen or done before
<leudaimon>
yeah, I wonder how the original one came into the current values
<Pap>
I know that NathanKell|AWAY did a TON of work playtesting and balancing, but his interest is really only in the first 15 years of the game really, after that, the costs were never really balanced I don't think
<leudaimon>
ah, I see...
<leudaimon>
yeah, part-wise there is not much above this period also
<Pap>
!tell Probus I have a couple of questions for you on the balancing you did for ETT whenever you have a chance
<Qboid>
Pap: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
<Bornholio>
morning. Hey Pap result of your help yesterday posted in "What did you do in KSP today" thread.
<Pap>
Nice Bornholio!
<Pap>
What mod is that that you configured?
<Bornholio>
Used the same SXT models that the NERVA II configs work on.
<Bornholio>
Looked at Blender too. Learning curve....
blowfish has quit [Quit: Leaving]
Wetmelon has quit [Ping timeout: 180 seconds]
CobaltWolf has joined #RO
jclishman is now known as jclishwork
<Theysen>
i love the T2 drama
<Theysen>
there can't be enough drama
ndng28 has quit [Quit: Web client closed]
szyzyg has joined #RO
szyzyg has quit [Client Quit]
szyzyg has joined #RO
<acc>
Theysen: what drama?
<Theysen>
peeps freaking out over the microtransactin and mod bans that are coming
<Theysen>
^ never confirmed nor planned at this point as stated by the pr members, but people already getting the pitchforks out on reddit
<Theysen>
2 threads with 450+ comments in one week about how the game will be absolutely ruined
<acc>
ah, take two
* UmbralRaptor
assumes that the worries are along the lines of ingame text including "Unlock the RT-15 for only $0.99, and the LV-T52 for only $1.99!"
<Theysen>
my god people should stay rational
<UmbralRaptor>
As long as TakeTwo isn't like EA.
* UmbralRaptor
stares at Sim City.
<Agathorn>
Ok got my UIColor system working finally. Will be good for players long term as colors can be customized, and good for me short term because I don't have to keep manually coloring every element. Just tag it, and the rest takes care of itself
<UmbralRaptor>
(Which I get the impression it isn't)
blowfish has joined #RO
<Theysen>
UmbralRaptor, how on Earth would they justify paying for those superior model and textures? How to keep track of what is unlocked? SQUAD explicitly said it will be kept DRM free, mod friendly as of right now and microtransactions in a SP really don't make sense
<Theysen>
but then again, I love drama :^)
riocrokite has joined #RO
<UmbralRaptor>
Yeah, the nightmare would require the new owners to break basically all previous promises and rewrite the game.
<xShadowx>
Theysen: just download every mod regardless of what it is, and backup ksp folder, no matter what happens, current state lasts forever ;p
* xShadowx
did it
<Theysen>
nah I got you for it /s
* xShadowx
sends a tornado through UmbralRaptor's city
<UmbralRaptor>
Oh no, not again!
<xShadowx>
Theysen: squad also said new wheel system would be great :D
<Theysen>
blame the devs, not the publisher I guess
<riocrokite>
xShadowx: it's unity's fault this time :P
<riocrokite>
even awesome shadowMage wheels don't work as good as stock ones in U4
<xShadowx>
im accually still tempted to go back to 1.0 to play ;/ but the stuff in u5 is piling up, people are using the new particals, new mods, and fixes for big mods that i couldnt possibly understand enough to revert to 1.0 :P
<xShadowx>
s/particals/paricles
<Qboid>
xShadowx meant to say: im accually still tempted to go back to 1.0 to play ;/ but the stuff in u5 is piling up, people are using the new paricles, new mods, and fixes for big mods that i couldnt possibly understand enough to revert to 1.0 :P
<xShadowx>
eh screw it
<Pap>
Theysen: there has been a lot of pitchforks and mobs
<Pap>
Everyone keeps trying to compare KSP to GTA V, they couldn't be any different
<Pap>
A closer comparison (which is not close at all) is between Civ V and KSP and Civ V had not microtransactions, tehy had small DLC that if you didn't care about, you didn't buy
<Hohman>
the difference between small dlc and microtransactions is splitting hairs at best
<xShadowx>
Pap: downside is those DLCs were required to play multiplayer, friend has one, you dont, he wont play b/c he wants his fancy new civ ;p then theres the mods that depend on those DLC b/c the mod decided to change a thing in UI so it has to req the DLCs b/c modders assume you have all DLC
<Pap>
Yeah xShadowx I can see that being an issue. That is the same with any expansions whehter they are small DLC or major expansions
<Pap>
Hohman: I disagree. To me, a microtransaction is spend $0.99 to increase your science generation through this playthrough
<Pap>
A small DLC could be, Pay $2.99 for these new textures for the spaceplane parts
<Hohman>
so what is $1.09 for a part that increases your science intake but isn't replaced if you crash it?
<xShadowx>
Pap: what does DLC stand for?;p
<Pap>
I get that we are splitting hairs here
<Hohman>
At least for KSP it's relatively easy. There should be no out of game transactions.
<Hohman>
Also @Shadow DownLoadable Content
<Bornholio>
bunnies are tastey i'm not sharing my hares.
<xShadowx>
Hohman: i know, i was making a point
<Bornholio>
So KSP 2 already on a planning desk is the real exciting point. TTI wouldn't have bought it if it wasn't the next step.
<Hohman>
It was, sure. Now it's an uncertainty that carries a lot of potential frustration on its shoulder.
<xShadowx>
given valve news reccently, makes ya wonder if squad / T2 started aiming for a ksp2 in panic XD
<Hohman>
And by "some" it was kind of "most" wasn't it?
<xShadowx>
yep :P
<SigmaAway>
Anyone I might have known?
<stratochief>
plenty. I don't know the whole list, but KathanNell was amongst them
<stratochief>
is? is. oh, language tense
<SigmaAway>
Oh nathankell? Cool
CobaltWolf has quit [Client Quit]
<stratochief>
you've pinged him! now there will be orange in his backchat. ooooh, the huge-manity
<xShadowx>
nk, tani, porkjet, mu, forgot rest :|
<egg|zzz|egg>
stratochief: s/ity/atee
<Qboid>
egg|zzz|egg thinks stratochief meant to say: you've pinged him! now there will be orange in his backchat. ooooh, the huge-manatee
CobaltWolf has joined #RO
<SigmaAway>
Lol
<stratochief>
egg|zzz|egg: yeah, that is better. hey egg, sigma makes planets or does planet related things. perhaps he would be able to address the RSS problem you addressed?
<stratochief>
*that you mentioned.
<stratochief>
or, at least give a more accurate idea of what would need to be done, and how involved that might be
CobaltWolf has quit [Client Quit]
<Pap>
stratochief: do you have 5 minutes to do me a favor?
<stratochief>
Pap: depends on the favour, as always. Your 5 minutes may not be my 5 minutes
<stratochief>
just booting KSP takes me 10-15 minutes
<stratochief>
ahh, something I can do w/o a boot. mission accepted :)
<xShadowx>
this irc channel will self destruct in 1 second~
<Pap>
damn, it went boom
<stratochief>
Pap: I think for some things you fall to the mentality of "recreation overhaul" (like putting nuclear propulsion steps out to 80s, then 2020s), but as long as they don't explicitely rely on other future-tech, that should be fine
<stratochief>
someone can push for '2020 nuculear thermal rockets' in the 1980s, of they so choose :P
<stratochief>
*nuclear
<xShadowx>
we coulda been to mars in the 70s :|
CobaltWolf has joined #RO
<stratochief>
do you want to/need to force someone to alternate between getting new RTGs, and new nuclear power reactors? I mean, you can, but an alternative is to have them as seperate branches, both depending on material science advances?
<stratochief>
xShadowx: we also could have had world peace at any point, and could have it tomorrow. I don't see either as a reasonably expectable though
CobaltWolf has quit [Client Quit]
<stratochief>
Pap: also, grid fins aren't exactly complicated. IIRC, the soviet Soyuz escape system has had them a long time, and they were present on the N-1 for steering during launch/ascent
<xShadowx>
stratochief: nah cant have world peace, esp with US claiming to push the concept of 'freedom', as it has to a) not stomp the little troublemakers or b) let them be stupid and attack US first to cry foul and stomp them in 'defense', and the little troublemakers wont go away until they lose their toys
<stratochief>
it all looks reasonable to me, I don't see any explicite life-support/ISRU section
CobaltWolf has joined #RO
<leudaimon>
I agree with stratochief, a LS/ISRU branch would be nice, and I also think spreading things along the eras even when in real life there were some gaps seems reasonable
<Pap>
stratochief: what do you mean by "recreation overhaul" ?
<xShadowx>
those days when you launch jeb on a suicide trip to mars, just to get away from earth
<stratochief>
xShadowx: right, but a Mars mission in the 70s is also unrealistic, because clearly every country on earth would rather spend their money elsewhere. nobody even made a token shot at Mars, or did missions do demo basic tech necessrary for humans to Mars
<Pap>
leudaimon: a LS/ISRU branch might work, but after LS is unlocked before 1960, it will be empty for a long time, wouldn't it?
<stratochief>
Pap: as in, 'we didn't develop nuclear thermal rockets, therefore they must be future-tech"
<Pap>
ah stratochief I see what you are saying
<leudaimon>
same for LS/ISRU, things could be more like continuous progress
<stratochief>
Pap: there is basic LS tech, like a food and O2 storage (ie. Mercury), then a bit more complicated (air from LO2, make-up gases, ability to pressurize and depressure)
<Bornholio>
ISRU should have some things like gas compression long before the "Ore" to "Liquid" stage.
<leudaimon>
new CO2 filter, water reclaim thech
<stratochief>
then, basic fuel cell, water emitting fuel cell. also Co2 scrubber back in merc and gem
<Pap>
leudaimon and stratochief but none of those applications currently exist in RO/RP-0, do they?
<Pap>
I had put Fuel Cell in Power Generation
<CobaltWolf>
Agathorn: have you used the new Maya UV editor/toolkit yet?
<stratochief>
riocrokite: full Moon on the pad? :P
<leudaimon>
Pap, lots of stuff in this tech tree don't exist on RP-0 yet I think
<riocrokite>
large solar concentrator
<stratochief>
Pap: but yeah, like Bornholio suggested, a Co2 capturer would be possible in the 60s, same with some basic chemistry systems like Co2-> O2 & CO
<riocrokite>
I'll probably spend next week working on its code :/
<stratochief>
Pap: RealISRU has lots of parts, just not placed and prices into RO/Rp-0 yet, but that could easily change
<stratochief>
some parts will get placed and priced, since I'm using them for my Mars Direct
<Pap>
So for the LS/ISRU stuff, essentially just make it so that there would be a node that unlocks in each era and stuff could be added to that in the future?
<stratochief>
riocrokite: you mean, giant solar death ray from space?
<Bornholio>
ISRU in '70s should be able to do moon dust to O2 since its not even oxides.
<stratochief>
Bornholio: what do you mean, "its not even oxides" ?
<stratochief>
moon dust is rock sand. the poles have ice, but that isn't 'moon dust'
<Bornholio>
Lots of free oxygen in lunar regolith, among other things
<riocrokite>
76m diameter dish that concentrates solar energy and sends it to smaller dish that then heats stuff beneath
<riocrokite>
stratochief
<UmbralRaptor>
For values of free that mean liberating it from aluminum.
<stratochief>
Bornholio: oxygen bound up into rock, which ain't free. if you can cite/link me something, I'll learn something new, but I currently believe you're mistaken
<stratochief>
riocrokite: ahh, nice. or, a fleet of them to warm Mars :)
<riocrokite>
just following he3 miner documentation
<Agathorn>
I think anytime you find yourself saying "X should/would have been possible in Y" you should make sure you really consider all the angles. I mean a lot of things "could" have been done earlier, but they weren't for various reasons
<stratochief>
Pap: but yeah, there should definitely be an ISRU/LS branch. you can give it filler names for now, no need to worry hard about that deeply until config'd parts exist
<Agathorn>
hindsight as they say
<CobaltWolf>
Agathorn: they integrated Nightshade and a lot of the Headus UV Layout functionality. Is exciting, but I can't figure out how to download it.
<Pap>
stratochief: consider it done
<Pap>
what about future nuclear technologies?
Theysen has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<stratochief>
Pap: what kind of future nuke? like, nuclear thermal rockets, or nuclear power, or like fusion?
<Pap>
A big part of the nuclear propulsion being setup the way it is, is that there is only 3 nuclear engines configged for RO
<Pap>
stratochief: basicallally incorporating the Near Future nuclear stuff
<Bornholio>
I'm trying to provide derivatives of all the rover ones
<stratochief>
near future (as far as I know) isn't realitically configured. but I could be mistaken
<stratochief>
many of the systems they use are speculative at best, or unrealistic from what I've seen in stock use
<stratochief>
but yeah, the near future nuclear power sources could be config'd to be nuclear electric sources. not much of that has been done, and plenty of historical examples exist, and plans for various advanced RTGs or actual orbiting nuclear fission systems
<stratochief>
Pap: IMO, I'd say leave speculative, unconfigured tech as filler branch names, to be better defined/refined if/when someone configs the parts
<stratochief>
unless I'm extravagantly incorrect in how well config's NearFuture is for RF/RO
<Pap>
I actually do not know as I haven't played around with it at all stratochief
<Pap>
I will have them in there and will leave it as generic nodes
<stratochief>
there are plenty of small and medium sized NTRs that could be configured from american tests of NTRs, like Bornholio mentioned
<Pap>
stratochief: the article I just read stated that nuclear rockets could have been a thing in 1965, is that accurate?
<stratochief>
Pap: err, well, the soviets considered it as far back as 1960-1965, but it never got any real funding there
<stratochief>
and the US had a vigerous program that could have fielded a ~1000 kN NTR in 1972, but the program was cut in 1969
<stratochief>
but, a smaller 50-100 kN one could perhaps have been flown in the 1965-1970 region, if that had found to be necesary to complete the moon landing, yeah
<stratochief>
1965 is just in the fringe of possibility IMO, for a small american NTR
<Pap>
So what is the best way to structure Nuclear rockets techs? HAve the first unlcok the NERVA in 1972 like it is now and then just have one generic node per era for future variants that might be configured?
<stratochief>
Pap: perhaps have an empty node pre-NERVA, since a 1965-1970 one could have been possible, and someone coud easily clone and config one
<stratochief>
then, one NTR node for each era, generic, until someone fleshes it out
<Pap>
that I can do
<Pap>
We are going to have to make Hide Empty Tech Tree Nodes mandatory for RP-0
<stratochief>
like, after NERVA they could have gone a lot of ways. it was in the 1980s they considered an NTR that also served as a power source, which was unique and possible
<stratochief>
Pap: yeah, that seems to make sense with the new tree
<Pap>
which sucks, but I don't see another way around it with the different mods that people play with
<Pap>
Even the current tree, once you hit Space Stations, you are unlocking a lot of empty or non-configured parts in nodes now
<stratochief>
naw, auto-nide empty nodes gives us and users flexibility, while reducing confusion in many circumstances
<stratochief>
Pap: true. maybe we want an optional config that cuts non-configured parts from showing entirely, for the average player? then, the patch can be deleted if they want to see the unconfig'd stuff?
<stratochief>
also, I'd like RP-0 and that new tree to still work without 'hide empty tech tree nodes', since that may be useful for illustration/planning purposes, and for troubleshooting
<stratochief>
but I agree it makes sense to suggest/require it by default
blowfish has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<Pap>
actually stratochief, I was talking to NathanKell|AWAY about that. The way this tree will be setup, no parts will show up in the tree that are not expressly placed for RP-0, we are not going to be using any previosuly used tech node names
<Pap>
Yeah, probably suggested as it will work absolutely fine without it
<stratochief>
ahh, great point. very nice.
<Pap>
I had asked which he preferred, it allows us to skip having to make an Orphans node
<stratochief>
yep. which means no more double entry accounting when configuring previously Orphan'd parts
stupid_chris has joined #RO
<stupid_chris>
o/
<Pap>
stratochief: I also read in a different article that the hydrolox engines should probably be a pre-requisite for NTR, true?
<stratochief>
o/ stupid_chris
<ferram4>
stupid_chris, o/ Would you like to hear some rage-inducing BS?
<Pap>
o/ stupid_chris
<stupid_chris>
ferram4: I love rage inducing BS
<stratochief>
Pap: good point, yeah. basic hydrogen handling, tankage is necessary for NTR
<Pap>
ok, great
<stupid_chris>
can't really be as worse as AppScenes.SpaceCenter loading AppLauncher buttons in both the SpaceCenter and flight
<stupid_chris>
at least I hope it isnt
<stratochief>
or, at least, the american route. technically an ammonia fueled NTR like the soviets considered wouldn't, but I don't expect someone to configure that anytime soon
<ferram4>
stupid_chris, According to the Versioning class, KSP is not 1.3.0.whateverthefuckbuildID, it is actually 0.1.3.whateverthefuckbuildID.
<ferram4>
I think it's worse. :D
<stupid_chris>
....
<stupid_chris>
that's worse
<stupid_chris>
the versioning class as a whole is a major fuck up
<stupid_chris>
just fucking set it as the assembly version and update it like everyone else
<stupid_chris>
why is this EVEN a monobehaviour
<ferram4>
Because UNITY spongebobimagination.gif
Wetmelon has joined #RO
<stupid_chris>
I made a version checker for my own personal game that only relies on a txt file :|
<stupid_chris>
I just added an extension to the unity build process and it updates a .txt file in the output folder with the universal time and bumps up the build number
<ferram4>
I'm tempted to modify CompatChecker to look for the string that's displayed in the main menu and parse that.
<stupid_chris>
and I just have to manually bump the other numbers if I need to
<ferram4>
Also been working on making it support localization.
<stratochief>
Pap: there are a couple other EDL systems that I'm not sure where they should be placed. there are Ballutes (which a mod already exists with), a folding shield like ADEPT, and I don't know if Venus landers should have a seperate config/node or not
<stratochief>
my desire to squash things down suggests a Venus rated thing should just be in the Lunar node, but I haven't done extensive Venus testing with heatshields to know how truely harsh of a mistress she is
IronCretin has joined #RO
Nertea has joined #RO
<Pap>
stratochief: would Venus be considered part of Advanced Uncrewed Landing?
<stratochief>
Pap: possible. although it isn't entirely advanced. Venera landed fine. I'm not talking human systems. no human should land on Venus :P
<Qboid>
[#1415] title: Vessel relative velocities change when switching to EVA | Park 2 vessels close to each other with as less relative speed as possible. Perform EVA from anyone of the vessels. The other vessel starts moving away with relative speed of about 2-3 m/s (as reported by the target frame navball.) Attaching a save file where this can be immediately verified.... | https://github.com/moc
<Qboid>
kingbirdnest/Principia/issues/1415
<Pap>
stratochief: there are not currently any Venus rated heatshields out there, correct?
<Pap>
Maybe I rename Improved Landing Engines to Improved Landing Procedures and it can include Venus landings
<leudaimon>
Pap, stratochief about hydrolox for NTR, shouldn't the tech required by within the bluesky research node that unlocks both?
<stratochief>
Pap: nothing stand-alone. the mod config I recently merged from phineasfreak included Venera
TM1978m has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<stupid_chris>
egg|zzz|egg: hah
<stratochief>
leudaimon: true. that 'blue sky tech' could be taken to represent hydrogen handling and tanking
<Pap>
and per NK request, the Blue Sky Tech is where the new tank types and sizes will unlock, so that makes sense
<leudaimon>
yeah, my text was terrible, I'm surprised you understood lol
<leudaimon>
by the way, I posted another couple "chapters" of my RIS game
<leudaimon>
I'm up-to-date with my game now
Duncan has joined #RO
<Duncan>
I am not smart enough for this mod
<Duncan>
I made an thor-able-alike and it only got up to 5km/s at apoapsis. Then I stuck on 4 big boosters. now it gets to 6km/s
<Duncan>
there is some key factor I am missing
<Duncan>
I think I need around 25km/s so I am not even close
<leudaimon>
what do you need 25km/s for?!
<stratochief>
Duncan: rough rule of thumb is that each stage is about 5 times as big as the stage atop it, at least for me. 9.5 - 10.5 km/s to get to orbit
<Duncan>
thats what the online orbital velocity calculator said for earth orbit at 150
<Duncan>
maybe it is wrong but I am definitely not fast enough
<stratochief>
the subway map is good, to give you a basis for planning vehicles for various missions
<stratochief>
you'll get something like 1% of your launcher mass to orbit for an efficient vehicle at first. later engine will let you raise that and throw around 1% at the Moon
<Duncan>
so my setup with boosters adds up to about 7.5k delta v
<leudaimon>
that's not enough
<Duncan>
I dont know how to read that map
<Duncan>
I was told a two stage setup with the engines I am using should make it to orbit
<Pap>
Duncan: think very small payload, and then the more stages, the better, you would rather have multiple smaller stages than fewer larger stages
<stratochief>
Duncan: are you still trying to stay under 40T launcher, or no?
<Pap>
Duncan: best bet is to watch NathanKell|AWAY or stratochief RSS-RO series on YouTube, they do into details on this stuff
<leudaimon>
you might not be using the correct size for your stages, or trying to lift a too heavy payload
<stratochief>
going from the surface to LEO to a requirement before you can throw things at the Moon or Mars, so the map is additive. you're trying to do the first stage, which the map says is ~9400 m/s
<Duncan>
no I have the big launchpad
<Duncan>
thanks for remembering me
<stratochief>
Duncan: ahh, then just make a bigger rocket :P you can share a picture of your craft in the VAB so we can see your dV per stage?
SigmaAway is now known as Sigma88
CobaltWolf has joined #RO
<Duncan>
so with multiple small stages, should I try to find an engine that matches the stage because it is hard to find middle sized ones
<stratochief>
Thor-Able could get a ~200 kg payload to LEO; the vehicle you showed us yesterday was similar, but about 50-70% the size of Thor-Able
<Pap>
Duncan: Solid Rockets are good for upper stages, something not done too often in stock
<Bornholio>
One and a half stages to orbit baby, Mercury...Solids to de-orbit.
<Duncan>
that is the initial setup based on thor-able
<Duncan>
without the extra boosters which seemed unuseful
<Bornholio>
Much lower TWR upper.
<stratochief>
that upper seems to have a high TWR, is that an AJ-10?
<Duncan>
yes, mid
<stratochief>
is the second stage stretched to its max burntime?
<Duncan>
stretched?
<Duncan>
it has a 5 min burn time
<stratochief>
longer, larger, more fuel and therefore burntime
<Duncan>
thats the engine rating
<Duncan>
so yes
<stratochief>
ahh, kk. if that is the limit to the burntime
<stratochief>
you could probably throw a small solid onto your payload, so make it 3 stages (which isn't uncommon in that era) and call it good?
<Duncan>
I will see what it looks like with a solid third stage
<Duncan>
wont that be uncontrollable?
<stratochief>
you can put some tiny solids on the second stage to spin it up before firing the solid?
<leudaimon>
spin-stabilization
<stratochief>
or, use RCS on the second stage to do that, angled so it can spin you up
<leudaimon>
did you check if you reduce your second stage if your delta-v goes up or down?
<Pap>
Those numbers do not look right
<Duncan>
the biggest solid I have is only 200m/s delta v
<stratochief>
Duncan: how much does that solid weigh? how heavy is your payload, if you remove both the second and first stage?
<Pap>
An AJ10 second stage burning for 5 minutes should definitely give more than 3800 m/s
<Duncan>
just fyi there was no separation of the payload from stage 2 before
<Pap>
Well, I guess not with a 1.5 ton payload, that is the issue
<Duncan>
payload without fuel tank or motor is 0.75t
<stratochief>
Pap: an AJ10 requires a highly pressurized tank, so not huge dV from that
<Pap>
Yep, forgot that part of it
<stratochief>
Duncan: yeah, I said ~200kg was in the range for a Thor-Able
<stratochief>
and the first satellite by the americans was under 100kg :P
<Duncan>
the lightest avionics unit I have is 0.6t
<leudaimon>
actually under 20kg lol
<leudaimon>
use the sounding rocket core
<leudaimon>
don't you have the 20in core?
<stratochief>
the Atlas D could place over a ton in orbit, but she was over 100 tons on the pad
<Duncan>
no, guess I need to research that
<stratochief>
the 20in core is a little sphere, right?
<stratochief>
I don't know if that is in VSR or SXT perhaps
<stratochief>
Pap: keep in mind, the avionics unit is required to even fly the second stage
<leudaimon>
if you are doing thor-able, you should have the able avionics unit, right?
<stratochief>
Duncan: my Thor-Able, although with this I'm throwing something at the Moon: https://youtu.be/M9Y_2E6F54M
<Duncan>
no I havent done the first avionics research yet
<Duncan>
with a smaller payload I now have about 9.1k delta v
<stratochief>
Duncan: coo. is that with the solid third stage? if not, try adding that
<Duncan>
yeah doing that now
<stratochief>
my first stage gets like 2km/s more dV than yours. I'm not sure why
<stratochief>
possibly you're using heavier tankage, or a less efficient first stage engine
<stratochief>
yeah, could just be that I have lighter avionics tech available to me. my craft islike 5.5T when the first stage burns out, and the first stage is like 2.5-3T dry
<Bornholio>
What tech are you up to Duncan. I have a Aerobee only at T0 at 9000 dV three stage to take Pressure/temp/telemetry sounding, you are up to or past AJ (Mid)
<Duncan>
i powered up to that without getting avionics or anything
<Bornholio>
do you have the proceedural avionics part? Should be that the starting 1m and sounding rocket. unless they came from other mods -> RO
<Duncan>
yes but making that small enough costs more than the rest of the ship
<Duncan>
300mm procedural costs 12k
<Duncan>
the whole ship apart from that is 4
<stratochief>
Duncan: so, did it make it to orbit?
<Duncan>
didnt try it yet
<Duncan>
It has insufficient avionics with the numbers I quoted
<Duncan>
so if I research avionics for 200 days I will still be under 9.3
<stratochief>
ahh. yeah, might need to get a bit more tech to get lighter, better avionics
<Duncan>
which is not going to be enough
<Duncan>
yeah I might also try to research the alternate engine configs, they have a small improvement there as well I think
Thomas is now known as Thomas|AWAY
<Duncan>
but for now I ahve to stop, I have work tomorrow and it is late
<stratochief>
if you're just attempting to make orbit, a tiny upper stage works.
<stratochief>
the video I linked shows me throwing a tiny probe at the Moon with basically your craft
<stratochief>
good night!
<Duncan>
I know that the RO orbit guide works
<Duncan>
but I want a design I can reuse and do contracts with
<Duncan>
the tiny solid booster end stage is hard to position accurately
<stratochief>
no matter how hard you try, your very first craft to orbit won't be something you're proud of later, or is particularly good, or re-useable. You should be rightly proud getting anything into orbit the first time though :)
<stratochief>
ahh. well, the Able isn't a particulaly grand upper stage, IMO AgenaB/D is the first one that I end up re-using a lot
<Duncan>
I should maybe restart and focus on just unlocking tech
<HypergolicSkunk>
Agena is love :)
<Bornholio>
hmm my 300x150mm proceedural avionics is 197funds
<Duncan>
accept the orbit contract later
<Duncan>
ok, why is mine so expensive?
<stratochief>
Duncan: utilization?
<Duncan>
not sure what that means?
<stratochief>
lol. well, the slider on the proc avionics part
<stratochief>
keeping it around the middle is best
<Duncan>
that will be it
<Duncan>
I never even notice/understood that one
<Duncan>
thanks
<Agathorn>
Agena is life
Theysen has joined #RO
<Duncan>
good to know
<Bornholio>
if you click << on proceedural avionics then change no other size it will display 15.8k+other costs in funds total, click the other sizes till it says correct size you want and it would set to a normal 200ish cost
stratochief is now known as stratochief|away
<Theysen>
aw yeah Proton launch coming up, me gusta
<Theysen>
wasn't electron for polar orbits specifically?
<Duncan>
rocket lab usa its not an NZ company
<Bornholio>
tests are all at the "Test Site 1"
<soundnfury>
wow, kathannell sounds so *bitter* about leudaimon beating him by 12 days xD
<leudaimon>
really? haven't seen his streams for some days now
<leudaimon>
(but I did rush my orbiter to make sure I would have it ready on time based on the RIS page)
<Agathorn>
soundnfury: how sweet :D
<soundnfury>
Agathorn: let's not say anything unsavoury
<Agathorn>
your british is showing
<soundnfury>
shouwing.
<soundnfury>
;)
<Agathorn>
lool
<Agathorn>
loul
<leudaimon>
hey, btw... do you guys know if the RD-108 shouldn't be able to roll by itself? With so many verniers I thought it could, but in my LV it doesn't
<lamont>
dammit Agathorn i’m testing mechjeb Y U kill my LR105???
<Agathorn>
lamont: bored
<leudaimon>
also, is there any vernier configd for the RD-0105/0109?
<soundnfury>
leudaimon: 'fraid I wouldn't know, I don't use commie engines :P
<soundnfury>
(well, except sometimes the staged combustion upper stages)
<leudaimon>
they are so great!
<leudaimon>
and the staged upper stages too
<Theysen>
NK-X masterrace!
leudaimon has quit [Ping timeout: 180 seconds]
<Theysen>
SpaceX will launch a X-37B nice
<Bornholio>
what launch date projected
LittleJoe has quit [Ping timeout: 180 seconds]
<Theysen>
August
<Pap>
Wow, I thought X-37 was onlu ULA
<Bornholio>
wow thats abrupt. usually a couple years out for those. Gonna rile up the X37 conspiracy junkies
<Bornholio>
wonder if it will bump Falcon Heavy/Demoflight 1
Duncan has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
B787_Work is now known as B787_300
Senshi has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
rsparkyc has joined #RO
leudaimon has joined #RO
Rokker has joined #RO
jclishwork is now known as jclishman
<soundnfury>
o/ clishman
<leudaimon>
man, 600k on the R&D building upgrade hurts a lot
<jclishman>
\o
<soundnfury>
leudaimon: yeah, given that I nearly killed my career paying 300k for the VAB
<soundnfury>
gonna be interesting when I need the R&D huts
Raidernick has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Raidernick has joined #RO
Raidernick has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<leudaimon>
I was considering taking the VAB, but don't think I'll put the money into it
<leudaimon>
the problem with the 600k R&D is that it will take ages to finish, so I should start soonish, to have it finished once I start getting to the techs that have more than 100 science
<Bornholio>
lol, yeah lobbing rockets into orbit with a 40t limit is fun, why VAB? Multibuilds?
<github>
[TestFlight] jwvanderbeck pushed 3 new commits to dev: https://git.io/vHoNf
<github>
TestFlight/dev dfdabed Starstrider42: Prevent failed engines from re-activating....
<github>
TestFlight/dev 78849e9 Starstrider42: Copy ShutdownEngine fix to IgnitionFail....
<github>
TestFlight/dev 0cb1ca5 jwvanderbeck: Merge pull request #170 from Starstrider42/Bug_160...
<github>
[TestFlight] jwvanderbeck pushed 3 new commits to dev: https://git.io/vHoNT
<github>
TestFlight/dev 78dcc5b jwvanderbeck: Merge pull request #172 from Starstrider42/Bug_163...