<Bornholio>
Linda spencer last seen over the island of Cuba on a transit of the caribean disapeared on radar in an apearent hostile act. only time will tell of her survival.
<Bornholio>
⚡TF⚡
<Bornholio>
or cuba
Smithnet_ has joined #RO
<Bornholio>
should have put more reasearch into that -137
Smithnet_ is now known as Smithnet
<Bornholio>
yeah Karman! 4 survives and is picked up by a destroyer south of cuba
QuantumSwag has joined #RO
<soundnfury>
NCommander: spacex stream up
<NCommander>
I should probably sleep
<NCommander>
I'm going to go lie down and watch from the laptop
<Bornholio>
headphones off, slam thud thud thud wtf is going on bob
Kraken has quit [Quit: This Quit Message has been passed on through my family for generations.]
Kraken has joined #RO
Kraken has quit [Client Quit]
Kraken has joined #RO
leudaimon has joined #RO
<leudaimon>
o/
<Bornholio>
leudaimon is there any way to get a small amount of avionics <.5tons on anything early or on proceedural?
<leudaimon>
Bornholio, the design of avionics in the early game is thought for avionics only in boosters, that's why it is not available for upper stages or probes...
<leudaimon>
if you look at the historical progression, all satellites and kick motors were unguided
<leudaimon>
^ early on
<Bornholio>
trying to do small lunar orbitter is falling through just for the avionics
<leudaimon>
you can manage a lunar orbiter by having a guided TLI stage, then create a maneuver for the orbital insertion, point towards its direction and then spin-stabilize and separate
<leudaimon>
otherwise, if you have an upperstage avionics, you can take a bunch of batteries with you to the moon
<Bornholio>
i just got solar so it can be done i just have to rely on the transit buss to do everything
<leudaimon>
then you can do the same thing I suggested, but with the advantage that you can spin-stabilize and separate just before orbital insertion
<leudaimon>
I'm not very familiar with the new tree, but if you got solar you might have the first probe avionics, no?
<acharles>
I just used the ranger core for lunar orbit
<acharles>
the first probe is the node after the first solar panel
<Bornholio>
not quite at ranger core yet.
<acharles>
and the first solar panel is smaller than the previous tree
<leudaimon>
ah, ok! sure, it was my suggestion and I forgot that
<leudaimon>
(the first small solar panel)
<Bornholio>
I'll just design the whole thing around a minimum size proc
<acharles>
I usually just wait, since I prefer missions with less complex requirements even if I have to wait longer :P
<leudaimon>
yeah, with a 3T upper stage avionics you can make TLI and go to the moon, and then insert with a small kick stage and the 20in probe core
<leudaimon>
(whatever its name)
<acharles>
20in xray detector
<leudaimon>
that one
<leudaimon>
does anybody know if rsparkyc has been around?
<acharles>
When I watched NK’s tutorial last year, I spent 4-5 launches trying to impact the moon with baby sergeants and while it was cool to do it with such low tech and to know that I can, it’s not much fun.
<acharles>
I haven’t seen him the last few days.
<acharles>
But perhaps that’s just me.
<Bornholio>
have not seen him.
<leudaimon>
i noticed an issue with proc. avionics I'd like to investigate... it seems (at least in the current level I'm at in the RIS playthrough) that for boosters the cost is not behaving as expected
<Bornholio>
they are weird. density is so low for a upper
<Bornholio>
bulky i should say
<leudaimon>
you are on the new tree, right?
<Bornholio>
yes
<leudaimon>
I borrowed density more or less from the agena
NathanKell is now known as NathanKell|HERE
NathanKell|HERE is now known as NathanKell
<Bornholio>
lol
<NathanKell>
leudaimon: rsparkyc is still dealing with his brother's recent death I believe
<leudaimon>
yeah, that's what I thought... such a terrible thing to happen
<NathanKell>
yeah :\
<taniwha>
NathanKell: did you see the results of last night's mathing?
<taniwha>
executive summary: the singularities evaporated
<NathanKell>
\o/
<leudaimon>
in a lighter tone, I finally catched up with you guys on RIS
egg|df|egg is now known as egg|zzz|eg
<NathanKell>
leudaimon: that's one way of putting UTTERLY DOMINATING us :D
<leudaimon>
:) I just finished a crewed lunar orbit
<NathanKell>
Yep, but there's no payout, yeah?
<NathanKell>
well, no RIS payout
<leudaimon>
and burned 1.5mil just to be able to plant a flag on the moon (is this really the only benefit of the astronaut complex level 3?)
<NathanKell>
so I was saving it for proofing Apollo
<NathanKell>
Did you Mk1 it?
<leudaimon>
yeah, no RIS payout, but I Mk1'd it
<NathanKell>
The benefits are supposed to be training once we get training in
<taniwha>
KerbalStats ;)
<NathanKell>
(and unlimited nauts, compared to the moderate limit of the T2 complex)
<taniwha>
(for managing the extended attributes)
<leudaimon>
now I intend to go for first space station actually
<NathanKell>
Good luck on the money
<NathanKell>
dem parts are *expensive*
<leudaimon>
yeah, that may be an issue
<NathanKell>
It's sorely tempting to do an LOR-LOR mission on 800t pads for the mic drop of it :)
<leudaimon>
I plan to do that on gemini also, as it's necessary to take 2 people there
<leudaimon>
I already bought the pad upgrade
<NathanKell>
Yes, I know. But give me _some_ level of hope :P
<leudaimon>
it's almost ready... but all this money in building upgrades is likely putting me back in R&D and BP rates
<NathanKell>
I'm going to have to eat the AC one at least, if I want to do flags and footprints
<leudaimon>
you do plan to go for apollo capsules, right?
<NathanKell>
I had planned to, yes
<NathanKell>
But for 800t LOR-LOR I will probably do Gemini-Langley Lander
<leudaimon>
yeah, me too... gemini for space stations and apollo for the landing
<leudaimon>
LOR-LOR is when you send the lander and spacecraft with astronauts separately to the moon orbit, right?
<NathanKell>
yep
<NathanKell>
they rendezvous in lunar orbit (first LOR) and then perform an Apollo LOR mission
<NathanKell>
that was the original "LOR" mission type, but Apollo did a hybrid of direct ascent (everything chucked at the moon at once) and LOR
Pap|SemiAFK is now known as Pap
<Pap>
o/
<leudaimon>
yeah, this design seems much more efficient than Apollo...
<leudaimon>
o/ Pap
<NathanKell>
heyo Pap
<Pap>
NathanKell: just finished reading backchat, should we highly reccommend the LGG mod that forces astronauts to take breaks after missions to make the Astronaut Complex more worthwhile to upgrade?
<Pap>
NathanKell: I saw that in order to stop Maxsimal from destroying RP-0 we need to move attitude jets out of start again?
<Bornholio>
god no
<leudaimon>
I'm not seeing Maxsimal's playthrough, but shouldn't cap the number of rush building for each craft solve most issues? Maybe find a way to reduce the effectiveness of reusability somehow?
<NathanKell>
Pap: I wasn't aware he made one. Does it use my stuffs?
<leudaimon>
what is he doing with attitude jets?
<Pap>
NathanKell: Depends, what did you include in there? I'll link it
<NathanKell>
The whole G system can be used for that too
<NathanKell>
you set kerbals inactive after a mission with the active time of when they should be back on the roster
<NathanKell>
and the game does it all for you
<Pap>
Wow it does?
<NathanKell>
:)
<NathanKell>
Papa Kell provides :P
<taniwha>
red hat and pants?
egg|zzz|eg is now known as egg|zzz|egg
<NathanKell>
I'm going to take a wild guess and say LGG wrote his own overly complex and kinda-working system rather than taking advantage of the simple stuff we added. :P
<Pap>
^^^ Sounds accurate
<Pap>
Actually, let's be honest, he probably just borrowed someoene else's mod, re-compiled and pushed for 1.2.2
<NathanKell>
...
<NathanKell>
You know I begged Magico not to remove sims? :P
<Pap>
:)
<leudaimon>
why did he remove them?
<NathanKell>
less to maintain
<leudaimon>
oh
<NathanKell>
Holy smokes you're right Pap, 90% of LGG's topics are XXXXX Continued
<Pap>
Oh yeah, I wasn't joking
<lamont>
LGG just picks up old mods and runs with them
<taniwha>
not necessarily a bad thing in its own right
<lamont>
good thing
<NathanKell>
^
<NathanKell>
but still
<taniwha>
but there is a point when one begins to spread too thinly
<Pap>
I appreciate what he does, keeps some mods alive that otherwise would have died a long time ago
<acharles>
I just hope he doesn’t burn out from it some day and no one picks up any of the mods. :P
* TheKosmonaut
lost count on the amount of "I've taken this mod over and started a new thread, please close old one" reports he's gotten from LGG
<lamont>
he’s a bot that runs around and takes KSP N-1 mods and ports them to KSP N after the maintainers have quit the game
<NathanKell>
Pap, what's the mod called?
<Pap>
I think he is over 75 mods maintained right now
<TheKosmonaut>
It'll be interesting to see how he copes if/when KSP updates to a point where mods are completely borked.
* TheKosmonaut
stares at the Take-Two boogeyman lurking in the corner.
<lamont>
KSP could kind of use a group of LGGs to spread out the workload
<taniwha>
maybe he has a bunch of Malaysian kids in a sweatshop
<NathanKell>
Known Issues
<TheKosmonaut>
taniwha: Malays are too well-paid.
<NathanKell>
Most likely NOT compatible with KCT
<lamont>
its not really that hard for any 1 or 5 mods, its just impressive with 75 of them
<TheKosmonaut>
Gotta go to Cambodia.
<taniwha>
ah, I'm out of touch
<TheKosmonaut>
It's funny, of all the things sweatshops make in the world, quality zippers still aren't one of them.
<TheKosmonaut>
They almost all come from YKK, a company in Japan.
<lamont>
heh, was gonna say YKK
<TheKosmonaut>
Look at your fly, I can almost certainly guarantee it's got YKK on it
<lamont>
both my drysuits have YKK zippers
<NathanKell>
Pap: Maybe I'll write something for RP-0 that just sets people inactive due to their flight log
<acharles>
I’m too much of a perfectionist to have my own mod, much less maintain 75 mods mostly created by other people.
<NathanKell>
I think KCT will be compatible with that
<NathanKell>
I *hope* KCT will be compatible with that
<taniwha>
NathanKell: again, check KerbalStats to see if it has anything you need
<taniwha>
(the progeny module won't, I'm sure, but the core might)
<xShadowx>
entirely depends how complex a mod is, i STILL have mods from 0.90 that work with only recompile ;3
<taniwha>
also the experience tracker
<taniwha>
xShadowx: yeah, simple mods that don't poke too deeply into KSP's guts are least affected
<xShadowx>
75 mods is nice work though <3
<TheKosmonaut>
NathanKell: have you ever tried to make a Falcon Heavy?
Hohman has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.93 [Firefox 54.0.1/20170628075643]]
<NathanKell>
TheKosmonaut: Nope
<NathanKell>
Rockets, like music, stop at 1970.
<TheKosmonaut>
I continue to think that SpaceX pads their numbers a bit when they are putting stats up for potential/would be Rockets
<leudaimon>
:D
<xShadowx>
taniwha: indeed, its nice when its simple enough to never need maintaining :)
<TheKosmonaut>
I've tried about 20 times now on a near perfect Falcon 1 replication and haven't gotten their claimed LEO mass to orbit
<TheKosmonaut>
I've gotten their successful payload to orbit, but not their claimed payload.
<Bornholio>
subcooled oxygen
<NathanKell>
on F1!?
<TheKosmonaut>
Not on the F1 Bornholio
<TheKosmonaut>
At least I didn't thin kso
<Bornholio>
thoughts thats why they did the new helium tansk for it
<Bornholio>
tanks
Probus has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<ferram4>
Kestral could be better than the reported performance.
<ferram4>
Merlin 1A could be better than the reported performance.
<ferram4>
The tank structure could be lighter.
NathanKell is now known as NathanKell|Twitch
<acharles>
It’s unlikely that they are lying, since it wouldn’t help them any. If a customer gives them Xkg to put in orbit, they either succeed or fail.
leudaimon has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<TheKosmonaut>
Musk has a tendency to exaggerate his numbers
<TheKosmonaut>
Not just w/ SpX
<TheKosmonaut>
Iirc the proposed payload for F1 was using a Merlin 1E ferram4
<ferram4>
?
<TheKosmonaut>
ferram4: also, the proposed Falcon 1 used a Merlin Vac upper stage
<TheKosmonaut>
I gotta find the page that showed this
<Bornholio>
side boosters are subcooledm ain is subcooled
<acharles>
TheKosmonaut: It’s easy to see if the numbers are right, just pay him to put whatever payload you think he’s lying about into orbit. :P
<TheKosmonaut>
ferram4: I mean Merlin 1C, not E.
<ferram4>
Ah.
<TheKosmonaut>
Falcon 1E proposed a Merlin 1 C first stage, and a Kestrel 2, which IIRC sort of merged into a Merlin Vac. It gets fuzzy because this was not really anything that went beyond their drawing boards.
<TheKosmonaut>
They also proposed a Falcon 5 ha
<NathanKell|Twitch>
Pap: Uh, the RCS biprop unlocks were tied to Improved Flight Control. They need to be changed to Early Docking
<NathanKell|Twitch>
what file are they? I can do 'em
<NathanKell|Twitch>
I have nothing better to do during launch :D
<ferram4>
lamont, you around?
Probus has joined #RO
<lamont>
here
<ferram4>
lamont, so, I think I might have found two issues in PEG guidance. Note that I'm still using the latest pre-release though.
<lamont>
surprised you’ve only found two
<ferram4>
lamont, one is that if PEG enters terminal guidance, but then the stage burns out before the orbit is set up (so say, 10s terminal guidance, and the stage burns out 8s from when PEG wants it to have burned to) it seems to get locked out of PEG.
<ferram4>
The entire thing gets stuck in an unguided gravity turn from then on.
<lamont>
oh yeah, heh
<ferram4>
The second one is that with a sufficiently high TWR first stage, it can end up trying to go to terminal guidance just as the first stage goes to cut out.
<ferram4>
Resulting in aerobics.
<taniwha>
and aero-confetti?
<lamont>
see, told you it could recreate Ariane 5
<ferram4>
Well, no.
<ferram4>
This was high enough up that my 2nd stage did a backflip and proceeded into stable PEG guidance.
<ferram4>
Although considering it burned out 200 m/s short of orbit, it might have actually caused the first bug to occur in this instance. :P
<github>
[RP-0] pap1723 pushed 1 new commit to Pap-TechTree: https://git.io/vQzC6
<lamont>
yeah, the first bug is going to be somewhat hard to work around, the problem is clear, i’m not sure what kind of coding solution there should be there… that’s very difficult to deal with actual upper stage burnout right in terminal guidance. maybe that gets better with N-stage PEG and you could manually bump it up to two stage when you see it ain’t gonna make it
<lamont>
the second bug i think is again due to the way i’ve lazily run single-stage PEG throughout the whole launch, even while the booster is active.
<lamont>
i think you can work around that by manually disabling PEG during the booster and then right after stage separation manually enable it
<ferram4>
Oh, third issue I've found (you're right, only 2? :P):
<ferram4>
I had a very low TWR upper converge to stable PEG early in the flight, but at about 5000 m/s it ended up losing a stable solution and gave up.
<ferram4>
This was as it was falling back down post-Ap, (Ap was ~310 km, inserting to 200 km), so I dunno.
<lamont>
(second bug seems surprisingly obvious from the code and your description — i’m only confused that i haven’t seen it on every flight — it’s possible the AoA limiter may have been saving me)
Smithnet has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
<ferram4>
Or that your taking a more aggressive pitchover later on.
<ferram4>
*you're
<lamont>
yeah
<lamont>
i’ll have to pay more attention since it looks like problem #2 should be very common from the code
<lamont>
that also should go away when i get proper N-stage PEG
ferram4 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<ferram4>
with initial pitch at 15s, 0.5 deg/s, stop pitch at 125s
<lamont>
third bug is probably because you asked it to do something too difficult and either you need a different pitch problem (or lower stage/booster PEG and/or the math in the other Altas-Centaur paper for proper initial pitch angle)
<ferram4>
Needs SSTU and RO and RP-0.
<lamont>
yep
<ferram4>
THat'll give you the acrobatic 1st stage.
<lamont>
i’ll add that to my test craft
<ferram4>
Also should fall just short and give you terminal -> no reenter PEG
<ferram4>
lamont, also, FWIW, there are places where you can make optimizations already. Like using vessel.obt_speed rather than vessel.obt_velocity.magnitude. A few divisions that you can avoid, some math simplifications.
<lamont>
oh i’m sure there are
<ferram4>
Depending on the range you expect for the argument to that Math.Exp call, you can also simplify that to a polynomial and accept some error.
<ferram4>
I say because running PEG noticeably hits my framerate on my potato.
<lamont>
heh, yeah, i have not even been thinking about optimization
<lamont>
i dropped the number of max cycles down to 50 already, probably can get cut in half from there
<lamont>
so i’m right in the middle of trying to get N-stage PEG going tonight
<ferram4>
\o/
<lamont>
or at least 2-stage
<lamont>
so maybe hold off on the optimizations for a couple days
<lamont>
but definitely would love an optimization pass from you after it solidifies a bit
<ferram4>
Fair enough
<lamont>
hmmm 0.95 isn’t actually all that low
<ferram4>
No, this isn't the one that has the 3rd issue
<ferram4>
This one will get you #3. Although I forget the booster pitch settings I used
<ferram4>
Also. It should have two sep motors explode shortly after lighting the 2nd stage
<ferram4>
That is intentional
<ferram4>
Not something to worry about.
<Bornholio>
lamont what settings should i use to ignore the booster time period and only do upper stage guidance?
<lamont>
do the pitch program for the whole booster burn time
<lamont>
or just manually disable it
<NathanKell|Twitch>
lamont: a cheap thing to do might be instead of enable/disable, a 'start PEG at stage' box?
<NathanKell|Twitch>
so you can say no peg until (KSP) stage 3
<lamont>
ahhh, 0.43 TWR upper stage, yeah, that’s going to be interesting to play with
<lamont>
yeah
<ferram4>
:D
<ferram4>
It used to be lower
<ferram4>
But that was asking too much
<ferram4>
0.31 TWR
<lamont>
i think i’m about 80% of the way to 2-stage or N-stage PEG which will both do away with the need to disable it as much, and probalby require some UX on selecting how many stage PEG you want, rather than when you want PEG engaged
<lamont>
yeah, i’m definitely using this one to test 2-stage PEG from the launchpad and see how it deals with it
<lamont>
you are meaner to algorithms than i am, i started with like 0.70 as a “low TWR” upper… =)
<ferram4>
It's not really supposed to do 2-stage PEG. The storable upper is (ideally) supposed to be inserted into orbit with no burning.
<ferram4>
Look, it could be worse.
<ferram4>
Give it a Delta IV Medium 4,0 and see what happens.
<ferram4>
ALthough really, a Delta IV Med 5,2 would be worse from the upper POV
<lamont>
this will do nicely for a start
Hypergolic_Skunk has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
<lamont>
this is cool because that’s precisely the kind of rocket i would never build because i suck at lauching low TWR rockets. they always wind up with me burning up at a 45 degree angle and cursing a lot as i reenter…
<ferram4>
Well, SSTU 3 starts out at 45 degrees for its upper. :P
<ferram4>
So that's actually correct, you're just doing it at the wrong time
<Pap>
NathanKell|Twitch: when you are done, I have some questions about Sounding Rocket contracts...namely, without researching any techs, I can put a 2000 KG payload up to 186km, with that being said, I think it is going to be tough to determine accurate masses and altitudes (or do we just need to put them all very high?)
<lamont>
yeah i’m always too worried about steering losses early in the upper burn, and by the time i get worried about vertical velocity its too late
<lamont>
this is why i want math to get me into orbit, because otherwise i’m bad at it...
<taniwha>
lamont: btw, I can highly recommend maxima
<taniwha>
it does a pretty good job at symbolic math
<lamont>
ah
<lamont>
cool. how does it compare with matlab?
<taniwha>
it does take a bit of getting used to its quirks, though (odd choices of ordering, giving -ve answers when you expect +ve)
<taniwha>
I haven't used matlab since the early 90s, so I don't know
<lamont>
ah macsyma
<taniwha>
yeah, ex-dod project iirc
<acharles>
lamont: You should be able to determine how many stages you need to get to orbit without the player having to ask for a specific number of stages.
<lamont>
kind of
<lamont>
the estimate of the final dV to orbit seems to be off with PEG a little bit and it never quite consumes as much dV as it predicts
<lamont>
that could cause PEG to kick up to planning to use your TLI stage when you have no need for it
<acharles>
It should be fine to overestimate the number of stages.
<acharles>
Underestimating would be dangerous.
<lamont>
the thing to do is see how it works
<lamont>
i’ll definitely try to have it run in “be as smart as possible” mode and then adjust as it gets into trouble or not
<acharles>
And terminal guidance with N-stage PEG should be better, since it should note that the next stage will have lower initial acceleration and therefore, not even enter terminal guidance before that.
<lamont>
well it shouldn’t enter terminal guidance for any stage other than the last stage ever
<acharles>
PEG should result in the lowest dV to the intended orbit, well, at least compared to manually flying it. So, it shouldn’t matter if it considers your TLI stage, since it will stop long before that anyways.
<acharles>
And that’s completely ignoring the fact that PEG can be used to do TLI anyways, since that’s what the paper talks about, in part.
<lamont>
yeah but its estimates of where it needs to place your upper will be incorrect if its assuming it’ll need to use the TLI stage
<lamont>
right
<lamont>
that’s sort of my point though that i gotta build this first bridge in front of us
<acharles>
I don’t understand why that would be an issue.
<acharles>
If it correctly uses 1k dv of a 2k dv single stage, why would it suddenly incorrectly use 1k dv of a 500 dv stage followed by a 1500 dv stage.
<lamont>
its the TWR
<acharles>
They should be the same fundamental problem, since it makes the stage transition continuous.
<ferram4>
Basically, if it decides to take dV from a very low TWR orbit-only stage in the insertion calculations, then it will have all the earlier stages aiming to put the rocket higher up so that it can fall back as that low TWR stage burns.
stratochief is now known as stratosleep
<lamont>
^ yep
<lamont>
there’s just the question over how large of an effect that is, and i would need to be a vastly better mathematician to be able to predict that
NathanKell|Twitch is now known as NathanKell|AFK
<NathanKell|AFK>
Pap: Well yeah, with a V-2. But with a WAC, not so much. You could I guess add LV mass limits to the contracts...
<taniwha>
don't the payouts effectively cover that?
<taniwha>
too big an LV = lower profits (or even > losses)
<taniwha>
too small an LV = failure
<Pap>
taniwha: That can be true, but we are talking small dollars here, I am going to have to run a lot of tests to make sure that we are giving good payouts for what needs to happen
B787_300 is now known as B787_Bed
<Bornholio>
pap is the Universal storage material science (take pictures) item removed on purpose?
<Bornholio>
item dmUSMat, needs Dmagic and Universal Storage
<Pap>
You are saying it is not in the tree?
<Bornholio>
did not see it , double checking its not hiding somehwere
<Pap>
Nope, I did not add that to the tree
<Pap>
Dunno why actually
<Pap>
Will do it now
<Bornholio>
there was another but i have to remember it now
<Pap>
If you do, let me know and I'll add it back in
<Bornholio>
noticed i don't have anything in EDL first node
<Bornholio>
looks like i have almost no heat shields
<Pap>
Bornholio: do you play with Deadly Reentry?
<Bornholio>
double checking
<Bornholio>
yes, i'll make sure i didn't mess it up though since its hand installed 7.6
<Pap>
All of the heatshields (non Lunar Rated) are from Deadly Reentry and are in that node
<Bornholio>
yup its empty folders for some reason
<Bornholio>
and thats because 7.6 zip is empty
<Pap>
^^ Well, that will fix the kerbals exploding bug
blowfish has joined #RO
Pap is now known as Pap|Sleep
Bornholio is now known as borntosleep
<xShadowx>
!tell Pap* kerbals exploding isn't a bug, its been long known that explosions are a part or their reproductive cycle
<Qboid>
xShadowx: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
Technicalfool_ has joined #RO
Technicalfool has quit [Ping timeout: 201 seconds]
<blowfish>
ok wtf
<blowfish>
how is RF reporting delta-t as 1.79769313486232E+308 if that is outside the range of double?
<blowfish>
hmm, pretty close to Double.MaxValue
<blowfish>
flight integrator is reporting that as the time since last fixed update on the first frame apparently
<blowfish>
okay, so just need to check for that
Pap|Sleep has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<blowfish>
don't think I'm going to get to a release tonight but at least I figured this stuff out
NathanKell|AFK is now known as NathanKell
<NathanKell>
blowfish: Yep, if a vessel has never been loaded before, it gets infinite dt to force complete analytic
<blowfish>
yeah, I see that in the source now
<blowfish>
hmm, looks like I still need the tanks to know wether they're attached to a launch clamp
<NathanKell>
yeah, I had no way of knowing what the actual loaded UT was, so I needed a way to signal 'this is a fresh vessel, apply analytic fully;
<NathanKell>
s/;/'/
<Qboid>
NathanKell meant to say: yeah, I had no way of knowing what the actual loaded UT was, so I needed a way to signal 'this is a fresh vessel, apply analytic fully'
<blowfish>
it *almost* works if we just set the part's temperature in the launch clamp
<blowfish>
but (1) it's slightly unstable in analytic mode (fuel drains very slowly) and (2) if you leave it on the launch pad and then go to the space center and timewarp you loose fuel because the fuel pumps have no analytic catch-up
CobaltWolf has joined #RO
<NathanKell>
blowfish: Make the pump implement the analytic interfaces.
<NathanKell>
That lets you jump in before analytic runs, which solves both problems.
<blowfish>
I've never worked with the analytic interfaces before
<NathanKell>
simple enough, you don't care about them except for run order
<NathanKell>
Ah, wait
<NathanKell>
doesn't Starwaster's code still run in a *@% coroutine?
<NathanKell>
Then you need to run post-analytic and reset the temps, too
<NathanKell>
the interfaces should give you enough hooks
<NathanKell>
that also solves the unloaded bit--when you detect analytic with a big deltaT, just pump against all tanks with infinite amount :)
<NathanKell>
(that, combined with resetting temps, should fix everything)
<blowfish>
doesn't order matter there though?
<blowfish>
if the pump's analytic code runs before the tank's then the pump will see full resources and not fill anything, then the tank will take away resources
<blowfish>
I'm not sure why the boiloff happens in a coroutine tbh. All it does is wait for a FixedUpdate in non-analytic mode
<NathanKell>
starwaster wants it to run after FlightIntegrator does
<NathanKell>
Which is, IMO, wrong, but also, there's the whole Timing stuff in 1.2 to make that unnecessary.
<blowfish>
which timing stuff?
<NathanKell>
TimingManager
<NathanKell>
you now have a bunch of options as to when code runs--it's almost as good as Unity execution order
<NathanKell>
so you can register a method with timing manager and ask it to run after flightintegrator
<NathanKell>
and it will
<blowfish>
interesting, definitely more than I have time to look at tonight though
<NathanKell>
yeah, what you want is doable, but not super simple :)
<blowfish>
actually the pumps probably aren't working at all in timewarp/unfocused right now
<blowfish>
since they rely on FixedUpdate
<NathanKell>
that works in warp but not when unfocused, yes
<blowfish>
do the analytic interfaces run when unfocused as well, or do they just assume catch up when you get into physics range?
<NathanKell>
analytic only runs when focused
<NathanKell>
so the interfaces too
<blowfish>
ah ok
<NathanKell>
that's the whole delta time thing
<NathanKell>
we compute how long the vessels's unloaded
<NathanKell>
for new vessels, that's double.maxvalue
<NathanKell>
as you saw
<blowfish>
ok, this is proving to be much more complicated than I originally thought
<blowfish>
hmm, I fixed focused warp, but if you go to the space center and warp you still loose fuel when you refocus
<blowfish>
this may have already been the case though
<NathanKell>
don't think it was--before the boiloff calcs checked flight state, right?
<NathanKell>
so prelaunch always meant no boiloff
<blowfish>
ah yeah
<github>
[RP-0] NathanKell pushed 1 new commit to Pap-TechTree: https://git.io/vQzzz
<github>
RP-0/Pap-TechTree e583396 NathanKell: Tweak comsat rewards, fix some howlers of mine.
<blowfish>
guess I'll have to think about this some more
<blowfish>
is there any way I can get code to run on the clamps before the analytic code runs when the vessel is loaded?
<NathanKell>
Yes, the interfaces
<NathanKell>
if you implement them, one of those methods (I forget which, but the API docs tell you) will be run before analytic
<NCommander>
egg|zzz|egg, I'm trying to wrap my mind on how the new flight planning works. It's interesting watching my probes orbit move around due to interactions from the moon and it begins to decay
<egg|zzz|egg>
NCommander: hm, odd (the build failure). (skipping 5 contexts in backtrace; use -ftemplate-backtrace-limit=0 to see all) <<< can you do that?
<NCommander>
egg|zzz|egg, is there any way to get the current Ap/Pe to show up in the tracking view under Principia?
<egg|zzz|egg>
NCommander: tracking station? nah, not yet
<NCommander>
egg|zzz|egg, :/, it's hard to keep track of where my Sputnik is in it's eventual return to Earth
<egg|zzz|egg>
you can track it from another spacecraft's map view now though, by targeting it; a bit awkward, might add some plotting to the tracking station if I remember
<NCommander>
egg|zzz|egg, why do I feel like my first orbital rendevous is going to be interesting with principia installed
<egg|zzz|egg>
NCommander: tbh I hear that people get along pretty well with the target LVLH frame; it's a different eggsperience from stock's, but it's apparently good
* NCommander
needs to re-read the acrynom list
<egg|zzz|egg>
I might not have added this one
<egg|zzz|egg>
"some documentation may be out of date"
<egg|zzz|egg>
but it's in the wiki concepts page
<NCommander>
egg|zzz|egg, http://i.imgur.com/IRugUub.png - I also assume remote tech has some issues :). The laster show is pretty but :)
* egg|zzz|egg
should go to work and return safely before the decade is out
<NCommander>
lol
<egg|zzz|egg>
NCommander: um, apparently it is confused by the fact that we rotate the world
egg|zzz|egg is now known as egg|afk|egg
<NCommander>
egg|afk|egg, physics is a bitch :)
* NCommander
is not sure if he'll keep prinicipia installed
<egg|afk|egg>
anyway, I'll be back soon from egg|work|egg
Moistmelon has joined #RO
<egg|afk|egg>
NCommander: yeah, that RT thing is odd, hadn't looked at that previously
<egg|afk|egg>
(we rotate planets ourselves so maybe RT gets confused?)
<NCommander>
egg|afk|egg, yeah, I'll probably take it out for now, but keep trying it. This is mostly meant to be a save to unwind with, and things like that kinda bug me :/
* NCommander
will throw it back in when I start doing inter-plantary transfers
<egg|afk|egg>
\o/
<egg|afk|egg>
rendez-vous can be fun too though
<egg|afk|egg>
anyway, afk
Moistmelon has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
egg|phone|egg has joined #RO
<egg|phone|egg>
!Wpn NCommander
* Qboid
gives NCommander a quadrupole floating point formalism with an array attachment
* NCommander
doesn't have a FPU attached, and returns line noise to egg|phone|egg
* egg|work|egg
bolts an x87 to NCommander
<egg|work|egg>
NCommander: might be a good idea to open issues to track your request for plotting a trajectory in the tracking station and that RemoteTech compatibility issue
egg|phone|egg has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<egg|work|egg>
the former shouldn't be too hard, the latter might prove tricky (requires making sense of another mod), but I think there's also weirdness with the stock comms system anyway so maybe we can stab two dinosaurs with one stone
BadRocketsCo has joined #RO
BadRocketsCo has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
Hypergolic_Skunk has joined #RO
<NCommander>
egg|work|egg, the mod itself works right, I think it's just the fact it keeps ray tracing from a moving PoV
<NCommander>
egg|work|egg, and I also just put my first probe into orbit that has active control, and I just learned to appreicate RCS more than I ever have since I came up short on reaching the target orbit
<NCommander>
!help
<Qboid>
NCommander: I sent you a private message with information about all my commands!
<NCommander>
!tell Pap Possible bug, the first atmospheric analyssi satelite doesn't require a new ship. I was able to do this with the first sat I sent to a polar orbit.
<Qboid>
NCommander: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
* NCommander
does note that that in some ways it makes sense not to require a new satelite if you already had one that can do the job
<NCommander>
What has ComSatBus resources?
Daz has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
ferram4 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
ferram4 has joined #RO
Hohman has joined #RO
Rokker has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
Maxsimal has joined #RO
TM1978m has joined #RO
TM1978m has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
SlainteMaith has joined #RO
<SlainteMaith>
Someone said something about a PEG?
<Qboid>
Pap: xShadowx left a message for you in #RO [04.07.2017 05:03:48]: "kerbals exploding isn't a bug, its been long known that explosions are a part or their reproductive cycle"
<Qboid>
Pap: NCommander left a message for you in #RO [04.07.2017 10:51:39]: "Possible bug, the first atmospheric analyssi satelite doesn't require a new ship. I was able to do this with the first sat I sent to a polar orbit."
<riocrokite>
\o
CobaltWolf has joined #RO
<Pap>
NCommander: they are supposed not need a new ship, I am goig to be changing the altitudes so that you need a craft that is designed for that. Right now, all you need to do is just barely enter the atmo and you can complete the contract
<Theysen>
Hey Pap, did you catch my request on discord
Senshi has joined #RO
TM1978m has joined #RO
<Pap>
Nope, sure didn't
<Theysen>
just asking if you could add a support channel and maybe like mission-reports for pictures and such, since otherwise #general will be flooded with CKAN support bullshit Pap
BadRocketsCo has quit [Quit: Nettalk6 - www.ntalk.de]
BadRocketsCo has joined #RO
<Bornholio>
pap yes :P just that nasty taste in my mouth after reading most of them.
<Bornholio>
lamont put a little gif animation of your PEG in action in my latest http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/27292-what-did-you-do-in-ksp-today/&page=1404#comment-3110931
<lamont>
hah cool
<Bornholio>
watch that beautiful pitch control
<lamont>
yeah i keep on meaning to post in that thread, i was gonna take a pic of my whiteboard with too much math on it the other day…
<Bornholio>
lol, please do
<Bornholio>
mine over the last few should include my desk with a fluid dynamics book, material failure analysis and mt. dew cans along with nerva pictures
<NathanKell|WORK>
So, I know I'm biased, but *dang*, seeing Bornholio's post and comparing it to the other posts in that thread...#ROMasterRace indeed
<Pap>
Which post?
<lamont>
egg: i’m getting there, up to a dozen
<NathanKell|WORK>
Pap: the one Bornholio just linked
<Pap>
Boy am I dense today!
<NathanKell|WORK>
No worries :)
TonyC has joined #RO
<egg>
lamont: yes but are you an egg
<lamont>
not yet
Thomas is now known as Thomas|AWAY
CobaltWolf has joined #RO
<Bornholio>
lol
Ramh5 has joined #RO
<Ramh5>
is it normal that my kerbals are on fire in orbit? or just disapear, poof when EVA?
<Bornholio>
yes,
<Bornholio>
upgrade to DRE 7.6.0
<Bornholio>
or add a patch to 7.5.0
<Bornholio>
also cyrogenics in tanks can cause combustion when returning to them from elsewhere. Fix on the way
<Bornholio>
.fingersCrossed
<blowfish>
note: DRE 7.6.0 is not showing on CKAN due to a discrepancy in how CKAN thinks it is packaged vs how it is packaged
<blowfish>
NathanKell|WORK: any objection to C#7 syntax in RF?
<blowfish>
Also work today?
<lamont>
how come i have like 5 launch clamps all with pump enabled and i still burn fuel on the pad?
<blowfish>
maybe the fill rate needs to be upped?
<lamont>
i am using 4xLR89
<lamont>
and how do i bump up the fill rate?
BadRocketsCo has quit [Ping timeout: 201 seconds]
<Maxsimal>
Pap: Maybe I'm reading this wrong - but if you do early communications network (4 satellites) won't you also automatically complete early communication network (3 satellites)?
<blowfish>
it's a field
<Bornholio>
maxsimal, it forces iut unavailable
<blowfish>
lamont: can you confirm that fuel is actually pumping? i.e. if you shut off the engine the tanks fill
<CobaltWolf>
what's good peeps
<lamont>
that’s a good question, i’ll try that
<Maxsimal>
Bornholio: What do you mean? I have both available in my test career - if I take one it removes the other?
<Pap>
Correct Maxsimal
<Maxsimal>
Gotcha, thanks
<Maxsimal>
Can you complete these with 1 LV and 4 probes, or must it be 4 LVs?
<Pap>
1 LV with 4 probes is fine
<Hypergolic_Skunk>
enjoy the lag :P
<Maxsimal>
K, something to look forward to (I'm just alt-f12ing contracts to see what's upcoming in my test)
<NathanKell|WORK>
blowfish: No objection
<blowfish>
cool, thanks!
<NathanKell|WORK>
And Valve doesn't do holidays per se, we have a set amount of time off and can use it as we wish
leudaimon has joined #RO
<leudaimon>
o/
<blowfish>
ah
<NathanKell|WORK>
I'll be going home early but saw no reason to take the whole day :]
<Bornholio>
whats the best low impact way to put clouds in?
<Ramh5>
Bornholio: thanks for the fix on DRE, I just replaced the DeadlyReentry.dll with the one for 7.6.0 from the forum thread, is there a way to load it into the game without having to quit and reopen RO (takes ages)
<leudaimon>
no way Ramh5
<Bornholio>
ramh if you just patched the dll it might throw exceptions. it will at least be missing the audio fixes that went along with it and some heatshield expansions
<xShadowx>
NathanKell|WORK: my job is kinda same way, i technically dont even get xmas o.o but i stickin around full day today b/c nothing fun happens til near dark
<leudaimon>
NathanKell|WORK, I just read Maxsimal's comments on rp0#714, lots of stuff are related to manufacturing/launch costs that are long term objectives for rp-0, right? The more immediate stuff I see as doable is disabling/nerfing rush builds, disabling strategies and seriously nerfing reusability
<Qboid>
[#714] title: [Suggestion] Balance changes to remove exploits | NK's asked me to add some suggestions for balance changes based off my speed run playtest:... | https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0/issues/714
<Maxsimal>
pap: These satellite contracts don't consider at all how much comm bus you ask for in the in the contract - I'd have imagined that the contract reward would be scaled by the launch weight requirement.
<xShadowx>
NathanKell|WORK: p.s. VR fireworks show for vive when? :P
<blowfish>
the latest DRE download only contains the DLL
<blowfish>
I think that might be a mistake
<Bornholio>
yes, thats a problem
<blowfish>
also what's causing CKAN to not index it
<blowfish>
sent a message to Starwaster but no response yet, might be away
<blowfish>
(or just not on IRC)
<leudaimon>
oh, weeks later I probably discovered why my reentries were not working then!
<Bornholio>
I was missing heatshields and grabbed the master, but i must say i think it may be a github problem, i have an empty zip from downloading master before
<Bornholio>
maybe the problem is that 7.6.0 for 1.3 is just the .dll
<leudaimon>
hum, so it was not that... I grabbed 7.6 for 1.2.2
<Bornholio>
so did I but i have a 35kb zip DeadlyReentry_v7.6.0.zip with nothing but MM dll and folders
<NathanKell|WORK>
leudaimon: I need to think about how to make rush builds increase unreliability
<NathanKell|WORK>
That would be sufficient nerfing
<NathanKell|WORK>
Also the cap that Maxsimal mentions
<NathanKell|WORK>
reusability...yeah I'd be half tempted to just remove the KCT-recover function entirely
<leudaimon>
I thought about capping also... 4 or 5 rushes at most
<leudaimon>
that makes sense for 90% of the progression, I would agree with removing that
<lamont>
launch clamps just weren’t enabled…
<Ramh5>
on the RO wiki I can read that an efficient launch uses 9.3km/s and suggest having 9.6km/s, With my first crewed orbiter I get to orbit with deltaV Expended of 8.8 km/s
<NathanKell|WORK>
we need KCT to detect when modules change on a replaced part
<leudaimon>
it is just not realistic at all that if you spend a bunch of money a rocket gets ready instantly
<NathanKell|WORK>
and charge you for that part's cost
<Ramh5>
is it normal or significantly lower?
<NathanKell|WORK>
Ramh5: Depends on gravity losses
<NathanKell|WORK>
I've done 8.7 with a good ascent
<NathanKell|WORK>
or up to 9.7 on a lofted one
<ferram4>
It almost always means that your crew is unhappy though.
<NathanKell|WORK>
if you have a high TWR at liftoff and fast-burning stages, you'll do well on dV
<leudaimon>
if you have high TWR it's pretty doable to get orbit with 8.8
<NathanKell|WORK>
ferram4: heh
<ferram4>
Titan II burnouts ftw.
<leudaimon>
ninjaed
<Ramh5>
ok good, I just wondered if it was way too low or possible, 1.4km/s gravity losses
<Ramh5>
max G of 5.6
<Ramh5>
not that bad
<ferram4>
Ramh5, it almost certainly means that you can add more fuel to your 1st stage, or drop an engine from it.
<NathanKell|WORK>
^
<NathanKell|WORK>
solids ftw tho
<ferram4>
True.
<ferram4>
But that means you can add more fuel to your 1st stage.
<ferram4>
Delta II ftw
<Ramh5>
hum ok I indeed have 4 solid booster and one LR105 sustainer for 1st stage, one AJ10 second and last stage
<ferram4>
Initial TWR?
<Ramh5>
1.4
<leudaimon>
that is not always true... you may be limited by burn time in the first stage
<Maxsimal>
Pap|NathanKell : Gonna go on record and say that the rewards on these satellite contracts are not worth the trouble of doing them. The cost, in both terms of build time and player time, vs the reward, its more beneficial to just grind sounding rockets than do the repeatable satellite contracts.
<ferram4>
Solid burnout TWR?
<Ramh5>
1.5 iirc
<ferram4>
?! Are your solids tiny tims?
<Ramh5>
procedural solid boosters
<Ramh5>
I can give you a screen shot of the thing with deltaVstats in a couple minutes
<leudaimon>
most of my designs have 1.35-1.5 starting TWR, but working only with liquids
<ferram4>
Oh, you mean TWR of the core once the solids drop. I meant the TWR just as the solids are about to burnout.
<NathanKell|WORK>
Maxsimal: which in particular?
<Bornholio>
US launched 75 A-4 based sounding rockets, go a head Maxsimal
<Ramh5>
ferram4: aaa ok I don't know by heart, I will check, but max G is 5.6 somewhere in the sequence
<Maxsimal>
NathanKell: Early & Second Generation Weather sattelites - as far as I can see, those are the only repeatables in there - though everything else besides the 3/4 commset network contracts have similar rewards
<ferram4>
Depending, that'd be either the core or the solids. Probably the solids though. Which, if that's the case, yeah, no wonder your grav losses are low
<NathanKell|WORK>
Maxsimal: do commsat contracts
<NathanKell|WORK>
Maxsimal: after you do the First, and then like 3 Test, you get the commsat repeatable
<NathanKell|WORK>
it's fairly rewarding now
<NathanKell|WORK>
Advanced Weather rewards were about right IMO
<Bornholio>
easy to get sounding rewards on most of the comsat ones also
<NathanKell|WORK>
since you only need ~50t of LV to do 'em
<ferram4>
Clearly, sounding rocket contracts need to have fewer and fewer rewards every repeat
<soundnfury>
I agree with Maxsimal, the weather sats pay a pittance
<leudaimon>
in the "old" tech tree repeatable commsats are fairly rewarding, not sure about in the new tree with the comm bus resource
<NathanKell|WORK>
We probably should just get rid of the SR contracts once, say, the weather or commsat repeatables open up?
<Bornholio>
sounding rockets are a pity reward
<Maxsimal>
NathanKell: I don't see how you get to the Communication Satellite Contracts - They're blocked by the Commincations Test Satellite Contract, which has a prereq of the Commnet 3 AND the Comment 4 - which you can't do both of
<leudaimon>
I think those are only clutter in the contract list after you get the first sats contracts
<Bornholio>
maxsimal do them an see
<Bornholio>
it all works out
<Ramh5>
ferram4: is it a problem in term of realism or what ever other reason that it does not have much gravity losses? anything above 4g is too high?
<Maxsimal>
Bornholio: I am doing them (with f12 cheats ;) )
<Pap>
Maxsimal: when was the last time that you updated the branch?
<ferram4>
Ramh5, nah, it's generally that it works out to get better payload per unit cost by adding more fuel, dropping TWR, burning longer, and having higher grav losses but compensated with more than enough dV.
<NathanKell|WORK>
brb, going home
NathanKell|WORK has quit [Quit: Web client closed]
<ferram4>
Ramh5, you're basically flying early US-style rockets right now.
Pap is now known as Pap|AFK
<Maxsimal>
Pap: 6ish days. I'll update and see if that has a fix.
<Ramh5>
ferram4: so the cost saving is in having less/cheaper engines? so maybe I could just correct my launcher by having 3 boosters vice 4
<ferram4>
.tell NathanKell, we clearly need military applicaton contracts. Spy sats w/ bucket recovery. Early warning sats. In the 80s, STAR WARS CONTRACTS :D
<ferram4>
Ramh5, yeah, that could work. Although probably better would be to stretch the core a bit more, maybe stretch the upper. With solids, the higher TWR tends to happen at launch at least.
<Maxsimal>
btw, when updating rp0, do I need to blow away my MM cache generally, or no?
<soundnfury>
ferram4: that's not how you !tell
<ferram4>
Qboid, how does tell?
<ferram4>
Ah, alright
<ferram4>
!tell NathanKell, we clearly need military applicaton contracts. Spy sats w/ bucket recovery. Early warning sats. In the 80s, STAR WARS CONTRACTS :D
<Qboid>
ferram4: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
<leudaimon>
Maxsimal, in my experience, MM cache resets whenever I change the gamedata folder
<soundnfury>
ferram4: don't forget missiles
<ferram4>
Well, yes. But setting up that kind of contract and proving it will work might be... weird
<soundnfury>
"Contract: deliver 200 units of, uhm, YellowCakeBus to these co-ordinates which just happen to be in Moscow."
<ferram4>
Problem: it needs to change based on where your launch site is
<ferram4>
I mean, Baikonour will have no problem delivering HadesBus to Moscow
<soundnfury>
True
<ferram4>
lamont, I am looking at your latest code, and I am horrified. You have a recursive method that includes a Math.Pow call, with an always-integer exponent.
<lamont>
heh sorry
<ferram4>
lamont, Called in for loops.
<ferram4>
Jesus, this requires an exorcism's worth of optimization. :D
<lamont>
yeah, i’m worried more about behavior now and sorting the algorithm out in my head
<lamont>
it is very, very, very…. very bad for those things that you care about..
<lamont>
you won’t believe what i haven’t yet committed...
<ferram4>
lamont, look, make sure that you understand it, because when I come in for an opt pass, I'm gonna ask a lot about, "well why can't we do X?" to simplify things.
<lamont>
but mostly that is just copying memory around needlessly
<ferram4>
I don't wanna horribly break things because.
<lamont>
yeah
<ferram4>
Well, you've got all the important data in classes, right?
<lamont>
i’m not 100% certain yet what the important data is
<lamont>
the stuff i’ve got now (uncommitted) is going to be very, very verbose about state
<lamont>
then i need to do my own opt passes to reduce it
<lamont>
at the end of that i’ll actually understand wtf is going on...
<lamont>
its slowly becoming clearer as i push forwards...
<blowfish>
okay, think I made the launch clamps work as expected
<blowfish>
fuel pumps, that is
<lamont>
part of the problem is that the orbiterwiki writeup on PEG looks like it was just mistaken… which is more or less what everyone is flying now… and the 2-stage PEG in the orbiterwiki is… odd…
<Ramh5>
ferram4: yea it is 1.66 TWR at launch, 4.99 just before booster burnout, then 1.32 with only LR105 and 5.7 max, finally .8 to 2.51 with 4 minutes burn of one AJ10
NathanKell|AWAY is now known as NathanKell
<ferram4>
Ramh5, okay, that initial TWR is very... happy.
<lamont>
so i’m reading through the state machine in the original paper, which is very 1960s-era optimized
<lamont>
you’d actually probably really like it ferram
<ferram4>
I have been reading it.
<Ramh5>
so I guess my happy fix would be to have an LR105 with just a little less thrust
<ferram4>
I like reading papers for giggles.
<ferram4>
Ramh5, what kind of speed does the upper ignite at?
<leudaimon>
1.66 is high... do you need the solids Ramh5?
SlainteMaith has joined #RO
<Ramh5>
leudaimon: I probably don't need them 4 =D
<ferram4>
With just an LR-105 though, he needs at least 2
<lamont>
so B = ( alpha * delta-r - gamme * delta-rdot ) / det, A = ( delta-rdot - beta * B ) / alpha
<lamont>
that looks optimized to remove a single multiplication
<ferram4>
lamont, yes. Look to try and remove divisions. Those are the most expensive of the basic math operations.
<leudaimon>
yeah, if they are procedural you can lenghten their burn... or get rid of 1 or 2
<ferram4>
Mults are on par with adds and subs.
<NathanKell>
Ramh5: Named after the Tu-144?
<Qboid>
NathanKell: ferram4 left a message for you in #RO [04.07.2017 19:50:14]: "we clearly need military applicaton contracts. Spy sats w/ bucket recovery. Early warning sats. In the 80s, STAR WARS CONTRACTS :D"
<NathanKell>
ferram4: If you wanna make a Military RP-0 Contract Pack, be my guest :)
<lamont>
numerically its: B = ( alpha * delta-r - gamma * delta-rdot) / det; A = ( delta * delta-rdot - beta * delta-r ) / D which is just the matrix inversion
<NathanKell>
CC would even support creating waypoints a given distance from a launch site I think
<ferram4>
I may have to if it's simple enough.
<ferram4>
Spy sats will probably have orbits at, like, 150x150 orbits. :D
<SlainteMaith>
Egads, I've not thought about IRC since the early 90's.
<NathanKell>
Maxsimal, Pap|AFK: I see no issues in the REQUIREMENT code for the commsats. Maxsimal, do a pull.
<Ramh5>
ferram4: upper ignites at about 5.3km/s
<NathanKell>
whoah
<NathanKell>
is this a BLEO vehicle?
<NathanKell>
What kind of upper only gives you 2.5km/sec if not!?
<ferram4>
Ramh5, stretch the upper a bit then. 0.8 TWR on an AJ10 with that little velocity to orbit means you have lots of payload to gain with that.
<Ramh5>
one AJ10 4 minutes burn with 3km/s deltaV but I have 600 left in orbit
<ferram4>
Maybe stretch the core a little bit to help compensate for the loss in dV from the heavier upper
<NathanKell>
Ramh5 or does the RAM-H mean something different for you?
<lamont>
terminal guidance bugs are so annoying to debug
<ferram4>
:D
<Ramh5>
NathanKell: Ram is my real full name and h5 is just because ram is generally taken
<lamont>
restart KSP all the way up to launching, do a full 8 minute ascent, watch it do something screwy, patch a line of code and recompile, wait 15 minutes again to test it…
<NathanKell>
Ramh5: Ah, I see!
<NathanKell>
I thought it was a Tu-144 (RAM-H) reference :]
<ferram4>
lamont, have you experienced the acrobatic stylings of Test US SSTU 4 yet? :D
<egg>
!wpn ferram4
* Qboid
gives ferram4 a zonal soliton
<egg>
!wpn NathanKell
* Qboid
gives NathanKell a theta noun DDOS-like algebra
<Ramh5>
NathanKell: lol I didnt get it I pretended to have missed it !!!
<lamont>
nope, still trying to repair my PEG guidance after refactoring and breaking it
<NathanKell>
^_^
* egg
pokes lamont in the principia Makefile :-p
<lamont>
i’m getting acrobatics now with formerly stable rockets
<lamont>
hahahaha
<egg>
!wpn
* Qboid
gives egg a semisimple diagram
<lamont>
!wpn egg
* Qboid
gives egg a zygomorphism
<SlainteMaith>
I'd be willing to help test the PEG as well. It's, in fact, why I'm here. Mr. Kell invited me. =)
<Ramh5>
ferram4: so so I could easily have less than .8 twr on my upper?
<ferram4>
At that kind of speed? Absolutely.
<NathanKell>
yep
<NathanKell>
at 5.3km/sec you could probably have like 0.2
<Ramh5>
=D
<ferram4>
I have a rocket that can get to orbit on 0.41, but starting at ~3.5 km/s
<lamont>
well, i will have at least 2-stage PEG pretty Soon(tm) now…
<ferram4>
Now, granted, guidance doesn't like it, but it can be made to work. :D
<NathanKell>
\o/
<Ramh5>
at some point you just get more steering losses I guess
<Maxsimal>
NathanKell: Yeah that fixed the issue.
<NathanKell>
\o/ 2.0
<ferram4>
Steering losses tend to be surprisingly small actually
<ferram4>
Ramh5, remember, engines are expensive. Slightly larger tanks with more fuel less so.
<Ramh5>
ferram4: yea just by removing 2 SRBs I save 2.5k funds from the 12.5
<Qboid>
[#714] title: [Suggestion] Balance changes to remove exploits | NK's asked me to add some suggestions for balance changes based off my speed run playtest:... | https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0/issues/714
<Maxsimal>
NathanKell: And yeah, this one has a more interesting, scaling reward, I like the tweak on using the unlocked tech count. The range of values that can be generated isn't very broad however.
<Ramh5>
another interrogation I have : I am playing with testFlight for the first time and by watching Nathankell play I have an idea how it should work, but I never had a fail on my LR105 or AJ10,
<Ramh5>
never had to do any research
<NathanKell>
Maxsimal: The range is like 20kg through 5 tonnes
<NathanKell>
Ramh5: In flight, click the testlfight window and look and see how much data the engines have, and what their MTBFs are
<NathanKell>
then let me know
<Maxsimal>
NathaKell: Maybe I'm reading the generation function incorrectly then.
<Ramh5>
NathanKell: the MTBF is like 38 minutes, been like that without any data or with some data now
<NathanKell>
ok. So statistically, if you burn them for the rated time (~5 minutes), you should get ~12% failures
<NathanKell>
If you burn them for a shorter period of time, you'll be less likely to hit a failure
<Maxsimal>
NathanKell: The function looks like it's 2^(rand(.5,1.5) * some other stuff.
<egg>
*ping*
<NathanKell>
Maxsimal, no, it's (rand(.5,1.5)*otherstuff)^2
<NathanKell>
and the otherstuff is 0.3 + tech count, so anywhere from 0.4 through 2.88 in practice
<Maxsimal>
There 244 techs?
<NathanKell>
258
<NathanKell>
IIRC
<NathanKell>
so anywhere from 40kg through 18.6t.
<blowfish>
found one source that claims the RL-10B2 can burn for an hour ... wonder how reliable it is
<NathanKell>
seems not that unlikely tbh
<NathanKell>
they probably test fire it for like 30 minutes even before it flies
<NathanKell>
I mean, it's a handbuilt engine that costs more than some countries.
<ferram4>
...given the low chamber pressure, I'd wonder exactly what's there that could fail.
<ferram4>
Maybe the turbine? But that's not even getting beaten up that bad.
<SlainteMaith>
lamont: Ah, the nefarious 'pretty soon.'
<Maxsimal>
Ah ok, over the course of your career it'll vary significantly, sure, but over the course of 2-3 launches the variance won't be that high. So you'll have to progress LV's over the course of your career, but even toward the end, the payload variance between two launches will be a factor of 8 at most
<lamont>
yeah, its turning out to be slightly harder than i thought it was going to be
<Bornholio>
lol SlainteMaith what are you sooning for
<Maxsimal>
And early in your career - where most RO play lives - the variance will be a factor of 2-3.
<Ramh5>
NathanKell: so it is normal that the MTBF be quite high even without any data on a new engine? I was expecting to have MTBF similar to the rated burn time initially (example the RL10 with rated burn 7 minutes, no data and MTBF 39 minutes)
<SlainteMaith>
lamont: If it was explained to me correctly what you're doing--a 'generic' ascent program for RO using PEG--that's pretty serious. I know most KoS scripts work for specific rockets.
<Bornholio>
yup using it now, at least the 2 stage version
<SlainteMaith>
Or I should say 'are written for specific rockets.' 'work for' might be too strong a term.
<NathanKell>
Ramh5: If the MTBF were about equal to the burn time, you'd expect a failure nearly every launch
<ferram4>
It's difficult to measure though because we don't have a standard deviation with that data.
<NathanKell>
Maxsimal: Yeah
<Ramh5>
NathanKell: that is what I expected to happen without any flight data, and would have to test flight a little
<NathanKell>
0 data means "no launches yet. But tons of test stand running, and ready to fly"
<lamont>
yeah basically porting the Altas-Centaur multistage PEG to MechJeb
<lamont>
unfortunately that one got an inaccurate tag put on it so it doesn’t appear as the latest one
<Bornholio>
scrambles to install
<Maxsimal>
NathanKell: Hrmm ok. I'll play it and see how it goes when I get there, but my hope for it was that, even within a particular 'generation' of LV's, the player would need to build a variety of sizes. 50kg to 5tons in the 60's, 100kg to 10tons in the 70's, etc.
<lamont>
i don’t think there’s a lot you’re missing though, but it will clean up the logspam if you have a potato puter which hates that
<NathanKell>
Maxsimal: Ah I see.
<NathanKell>
Interesting thought
<NathanKell>
I mean, kinda the weather sats do that
<SlainteMaith>
lamont: Thanks, I'll give that a go. =)
<NathanKell>
You only need a 50-60t LV for them, vs 150+ for the commsats
<Bornholio>
lamont the zip is comming as .xml
<lamont>
not for me...
<SlainteMaith>
Bornholio: The .zip I got was fine.
<Ramh5>
NathanKell: I don't remember, closed the game now, I guess the basic one
<Bornholio>
try number five works, amazon serving up weirdness
<NathanKell>
Oh wait you're not on the dev branch are you Ramh5
<NathanKell>
then that's a decently reliable engine, the one used for Atlas-Mercury
<SlainteMaith>
lamont: My pc is decidedly non-spud.
<Ramh5>
ok
<lamont>
yeah mine is non-spud as well, which means i can get away with writing awfully performing code that ferram shakes his head at...
<SlainteMaith>
lamont: Is the program strictly for Atlas, or are other rockets being tested as well?
<lamont>
it should be generic
<Bornholio>
i abuse it with everthing
<ferram4>
So much improvement in computing power, and it all gets used for bloat. :P
<Bornholio>
^ so true
<lamont>
indeed
<Maxsimal>
NathanKell: Another issue is that the comasat bus resource seems to be extremely low density. I have a 1mx1m cylinder tank that only stores 68 kg of comsat bus - so it's density is .1g/cm^3? That's lower than balsa wood.
<lamont>
the only limitation the code is going to have is that mechjeb will need to be able to figure out the staging
<NathanKell>
Ask Pap|AFK :)
<SlainteMaith>
I have a coder-friend who laments the downfall of Linux into bloat.
<NathanKell>
Maxsimal: He set the density to achieve realistic sat sizes IIRC
<lamont>
and it needs to be a vaguely sane rocket...
<lamont>
i can’t fix 0.99 SLT
<Ramh5>
NathanKell: no I am not on the dev branch, I installed the 1.2.2 release from the forum thread and CKAN, I think in my life I spent more time installing and fixing RO than playing RO, now that it works for me I am so happy and don't wanna touch it =D
<NathanKell>
:D
<Maxsimal>
NathanKell: Gotcha. Anyway, this is still an improvement over the 'swap science experiment' contracts from the previous version. Will be fun to try to put a 10 ton comm sat into a huge-ass fairing.
ferram4 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
ferram4 has joined #RO
<NathanKell>
Maxsimal: To be fair, for a 10t sat you probably want a 5m fairing IRL too
<Agathorn>
Hey NathanKell just saw your comments on git.. you found a way to tell if a build was ruches in KCT?
<Agathorn>
rushed*
<NathanKell>
Agathorn: No, I figured out how to write that
<Agathorn>
ahh
<NathanKell>
Agathorn: Create a TF module that exists just to hold data
<NathanKell>
like TF_RushbuildModule
<NathanKell>
with a single persistent double KSPField, rushAmount
<NathanKell>
then in KCT, store number of 'rush' clicks, and when launching the craft, pm foo = vessel.rootpart.AddModule("TF_RushbuildModule"); foo.Fields["rushAmount"] = number of rush clicks
<NathanKell>
then TF can take it from there by querying the root part on start
<Agathorn>
that is so hacky lol
<NathanKell>
My specialty :P
<Agathorn>
so when you enter the flight scene does KCT know it was rushbuilt?
<Maxsimal>
NathanKell: Btw, what did you think about my suggestion to add a cost at launch? I don't think you should entirely remove vessel recovery, but adding a cost at launch, especially if it varied per part class, could fix a number of issues at once.
<Agathorn>
If so, be nice if KCT just provided a delegate/Event that TF could register to receive
<Qboid>
[#680] title: Current To-Do List | I have started a to-do list of things that I know need to be completed, I was going to keep this locally, but it doesn't make any sense to do that.... | https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0/issues/680
<SlainteMaith>
lamont: First go using a titan.
<NathanKell>
That's been true since I asked Magico to add launch costs like 2 years ago, we just haven't had time to support what he added :]
<blowfish>
taniwha, you around?
<NathanKell>
blowfish: Not for another 4 hours
<NathanKell>
It's sleep-o-clock in Japan
<Maxsimal>
NathanKell: Oh well, late to the party as usual :P
<blowfish>
ah
<NathanKell>
Maxsimal: Wanna do 'em? ^_^
<Maxsimal>
NathanKell: Do I need to have a developer build environment, or just do configs?
<NathanKell>
cfg only
<Maxsimal>
Nathankell: Ok, that I can do. Tbh I spend too much time at work in Unreal, I don't want to come home to do code :P But writing formulas is still fun.
<SlainteMaith>
Hrm. Surely I'm not knowing what numbers to enter for the Titan/Gemini configuration of launch.
<NathanKell>
Pitch program should probably be 15s start, 0.7dps, end 120s.
<NathanKell>
to a 150x285 orbit
<NathanKell>
You may need to tweak the pitch program, that's a wild guess
<NathanKell>
that might not be a sharp enough program, but you'll see
<SlainteMaith>
I'm doing a Gemini 3 orbit--slightly lower on ap and pe.
<SlainteMaith>
True. The titan is tricksy.
<SlainteMaith>
What -really- helps is when I'm not in another window when I need to manually stage. =)
<NathanKell>
Maxsimal: Rollout cost...for now it will sadly be proportional to vessel cost, since we can't do anything just for that
<NathanKell>
Maxsimal: I don't see any way to get at, say, crew count on the vessel
<SlainteMaith>
And thanks for the info NathanKell, and for the preview, lamont.
<NathanKell>
err, crew space
<NathanKell>
SlainteMaith: :)
<NathanKell>
R-7 in boost phase has very similar TWRs and times to Titan, so that's why I had a fair guess
<Maxsimal>
NathanKell: No, he has stuff on his wiki saying that the crew count/type variables are available to the rollout formula. However, I don't see a way to connect what I'd really want, which is a per-module type multiplier.
<NathanKell>
Maxsimal: He said crew variables. See what they are bleow, they're not what you think.
<Ramh5>
anyway thanks for the help everyone, I am going to the Playground with my 2yo now and then some diving refresher at the pool. have a good evening
<NathanKell>
below*
<NathanKell>
Ramh5: o/
<NathanKell>
and Maxsimal that's why I said proportional to total vessel cost, because that does have per-part and per-module multipliers, the bit I linked you
<NathanKell>
Actually hmm lemme ask
<Ramh5>
NathanKell: I hope one day I can find a way to be usefull and contribute to RO, I love coding, ksp and space in general (physics degree) but I am not expert in neither coding nor space exploration,
<NathanKell>
It doesn't take much to get started, no worries! :)
<NathanKell>
And there's always tons to do
<Ramh5>
NathanKell: so for now I contribute by liking and commenting on your youtube videos =D but really where should I start?
<Maxsimal>
NathanKell: Hrmm, so you're saying if I fill in KCT_Preset_Part_Variables { Module_Variables { [liquidfueldengine] = 2}} then LFE's costs are doubled - but would that not be applied generally? I don't see how it'd get connected specifically to the rolloutcost formula
<Maxsimal>
NathanKell: I also don't know that liquidfueled engines have a specific module name. Engines do, yes? But you'd have to look at the fuel type to determine if they're LFE's
<NathanKell>
I believe--but I am about to ask--about whether the cost used is the KSP cost or the KCT effective cost.
<NathanKell>
And what we'd do is make a tag module, like IsLiquidEngine, and add it to all liquid engines
<Qboid>
[#680] title: Current To-Do List | I have started a to-do list of things that I know need to be completed, I was going to keep this locally, but it doesn't make any sense to do that.... | https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0/issues/680
<Qboid>
[#1242] title: RO/RP-0 "What is to be done" list | per @dxdy_name's suggestion. This is no roadmap yet; right now it's just a list of everything we can think of that needs doing.... | https://github.com/KSP-RO/RealismOverhaul/issues/1242
<NathanKell>
Ramh5: Anything grab your eye?
<Ramh5>
NathanKell: thanks opened them in tabs and will check it out later tonight2
<Ramh5>
is there a way to be "away" on IRC?
<NathanKell>
change your nick?
<NathanKell>
i.e. '/nick Ramh5|Away'
Ramh5 is now known as Ramh5-away
<NathanKell>
o/
<Ramh5-away>
\o/
<Maxsimal>
NathanKell: From his wiki, it seems that no, Rolloutcost is not set up to allow you include the effective part cost. What you'd want is a per-part effective rollout cost, like he has a per-part effective cost.
<Qboid>
[#160] title: Question about rollout cost and PartVariables | So, extreme apologies for asking for this stuff and then not taking advantage for like a year. RealLife4Lyfe etc.... | https://github.com/magico13/KCT/issues/160
<NathanKell>
so we'll need to probably write some level of preprocessor in perl or Excel or something
<NathanKell>
but we'll see
<NathanKell>
Maxsimal: Launch costs, I *think*, tend towards 3-8x (average 5x) the cost of the parts themselves. So when you add them, you probably need to flat out mulitply all contract rewards by 10 and quintuple all facility costs (and also put KCT upgrades at 50k/pop rather than 10k/pop).
<NathanKell>
Crewed missions are obviously far more than 5x.
<NathanKell>
something like 20x maybe?
<Maxsimal>
NathanKell: Indeed - would be annoying that you can only check if the vessel can be manned, so unmanned capsule tests would be similarly multiplied.
<NathanKell>
Yes, which encourages boilerplate tests.
<Maxsimal>
NathanKell: Also, it'd be good to set up whatever tagging to consider if the engine has an air intake. Finally, I imagine some UI would have to exist to tell players what the launch cost will be, I'm not sure magico added anything for that when he added this for you.
<NathanKell>
Agree,I have no idea about ui
<SlainteMaith>
Re: The PEG program for McJeb, I'm guessing the (in the 'burnout stats' section, the dv (estimate) is the estimated dv required for the specific orbit and launch profile selected? What then is the number under it? (dv guidance)
<SlainteMaith>
Or is the estimate the estimated dv of the particular rocket, and dv guidance is the estimate of how much dv will be required?
<SlainteMaith>
No, that can't be either...
<lamont>
i’m going to drop the “estimate"
<NathanKell>
what was it for?
<NathanKell>
I forgot to ask, but am as confused as SlainteMaith
<SlainteMaith>
So I was right? One can tell at a glance then if the rocket is 'coming up short?'
<lamont>
uhm
<lamont>
yeah it was to try to guess how many stages would be required
<lamont>
and its basically the ISS calculation from here:
<lamont>
The average speed is 7.7 km/s, the net delta-v to reach this orbit is 8.1 km/s (the actual delta-v is typically 1.5–2 km/s more for atmospheric drag and gravity drag).
<SlainteMaith>
It seems useful if that's the case. I'd rather abort if I know I'm not going to have enough dv to get the orbit I want (or the one I need).
<lamont>
only its attempting to do it continuously
<lamont>
yeah
<lamont>
but the PEG algorithm from the actual NASA paper is doing considerably better at estimating dV than the orbiterwiki paper
<lamont>
so i’m likely to drop the estimate and just go what PEG says, but you’re not using that algorithm
<NathanKell>
yeah, the Guidance dV number is pretty accurate
<lamont>
you’re using the orbiterwiki paper
<lamont>
yeah but it always overestimates a bit and then goes down
<Qboid>
NathanKell|Twitch thinks SlainteMaith meant to say: So what is the benefit/drawback of extending/shortening the terminal guidance period?
<lamont>
the shorter you can get away with it the better since you run guidance up to the end
<lamont>
but right at the end it wigs out and gets dramaticall worse
<lamont>
what i’m seeing with the updated guidance algorithm though is that it looks like i can rely on the guidance equations to stop converging and then terminate guidance then
<lamont>
which actually happens a bit earlier
<lamont>
but means tweaking that box is going to become much less useful in v2.0
<NathanKell|Twitch>
ah
<NathanKell|Twitch>
neat
<lamont>
i think the orberwiki page author tweaked the algorithm to try to make terminal guidance more stable, but it changed the dV-to-go estimate, etc
<NathanKell|Twitch>
ahhhh
<lamont>
my approach is to just converge the PEG algorithm every time (which is why its often steps = 2 or whatever)
<lamont>
actual Atlas-Centaur didn’t do that because 1960s-era computational power
<lamont>
it is looking like the advantage of that is that i can terminate guidance when it fails to converge though
<lamont>
and since the algorithm is supposed to be convergent that’s a pretty good termination condition
<lamont>
the orbiterwiki page looks like it went another direction and tried to make the terminal guidance more stable by adjusting the algorithm...
<SlainteMaith>
My first couple (failed) attempts to get the Gemini capsule into -any- orbit, I think, was my fault. I had too much *stuff* crammed in the equipment section.
<SlainteMaith>
Too heavy.
<NathanKell|Twitch>
SlainteMaith: If memory serves, with the complete FASA build as RO has it, it's very tight.
<NathanKell|Twitch>
Easier now with guidance probably
<NathanKell|Twitch>
because I essentially did manual-PEG those days :D
<SlainteMaith>
Yep. It's happier now. I was thinking about tracking the consumption per kerbal per hour rates to get a better feel for how much of everything I need for an 'x' duration flight.
<SlainteMaith>
I'm sure I could just look those numbers up, but where's the fun in that?
<SlainteMaith>
KSP is -all- about reinventing the wheel.
SlainteMaith is now known as SlainteMaithAFK
<NathanKell|Twitch>
SlainteMaithAFK: click the TACLS button in the VAB
<NathanKell|Twitch>
it shows :P
<NathanKell|Twitch>
(shows how long your resources will last)
stratosleep is now known as stratochief
<taniwha>
!tell blowfish possibly launch clamps built away from KSC (using EL). I don't remember the conditions now
<Qboid>
taniwha: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
Senshi has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
egg is now known as egg|zzz|egg
<SlainteMaithAFK>
NathanKell: I don't have that button. I think I didn't do a very proper install, if I'm honest.
<SlainteMaithAFK>
nick SlainteMaith
<SlainteMaithAFK>
Duh.
SlainteMaithAFK is now known as SlainteMaith
<NathanKell|Twitch>
SlainteMaith: Yeah, if you're missing life support, then your install is a bit borked :]
<SlainteMaith>
I have it--just not that button. Which seems odder still. I'll probably reinstall from scratch just for grins anyway.
Maxsimal has quit [Quit: Web client closed]
stratochief has quit [Ping timeout: 200 seconds]
<NathanKell|Twitch>
SlainteMaith: No, the resources don't come from TACLS. They come from CRP, which RealFuels brings with it (and so does TAC, but...). So you can have the resources without having a life support mod
Starwaster has joined #RO
<SlainteMaith>
So yep: "Borked." I'll reinstall.
<leudaimon>
no streaming for the spacex launch today?
<SlainteMaith>
leudaimon: No spacex launch today, I don't think.
<SlainteMaith>
Says this on their site:
<SlainteMaith>
"Out of an abundance of caution, SpaceX will be spending the 4th of July doing a full review of the rocket and launch pad systems. The next launch opportunity for Intelsat 35e from Launch Complex 39A (LC-39A) at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida is now no earlier than Wednesday, July 5 or Thursday, July 6. Additional updates will be posted to this page as they become available."
<leudaimon>
weird, nextrocket.space says the launch is in 20min
<SlainteMaith>
Sounds like some people are going to be very disappointed.
<SlainteMaith>
I'm showing 23 hours.
NathanKell|Twitch is now known as NathanKell
<leudaimon>
oh, I think I didn't refresh it for too long >.>
<NathanKell>
WAIT YOU WERE AT MICROPROSE!?
<NathanKell>
SlainteMaith: Awesome!
<NathanKell>
What'dja work on, if I might ask?
<NathanKell>
My dream growing up was to work there or Origin :)
<SlainteMaith>
I was, yes, back in the day. I was customer service at first--although I worked on CivNet. My first proper project was Civ 2: Multiplayer Gold, then European Air War, then Falcon 4, then Majesty, uh... I was the lead certification tester for Civ 3.
<SlainteMaith>
And I had various other projects thrown in. Civ 2: Test of Time was one.
<leudaimon>
wow
* NathanKell
bows
<SlainteMaith>
But yes, I worked in the same building with Sid. =)
<NathanKell>
:)
<SlainteMaith>
Who is a very nice guy, and annoyingly humble.