NathanKell changed the topic of #RO to: Welcome to the discussion channel for the Realism Overhaul (meta)mod for KSP! Realism Overhaul Main Thread https://goo.gl/wH7Dzb ! RO Spreadsheet http://goo.gl/Oem3g0 ! Code of Conduct http://goo.gl/wOSv2M ! | [15:01] <soundnfury> Straight Eight Stronk (and) RP-0/1 is basically "Space Agency Spreadsheet Simulator" with a rocket-flying minigame
awang has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
awang has joined #RO
Hypergolic_Skunk has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
Ezko has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
Ezko has joined #RO
VanDisaster has joined #RO
Starman4308 has joined #RO
<Starwaster> So how do other people here handle launchers such as the Delta Heavy or Falcon Heavy where the center booster is throttled independently of the side boosters? Or do you just say fuck it and use crossfeed so it has extra propellant after the side boosters separate?
<Starman4308> I think there's a throttle controlled avionics mod somewhere? Otherwise, I'd probably try to rig it up somehow with kOS.
<Starman4308> I haven't really gone in much for replica craft, so that issue hasn't really arisen for me... though for some boosters with a very fixed throttle-down, perhaps there could be a throttle-down button added?
<Starwaster> starman4308 I'm not too much for replicas per-se but I figure, why reinvent the wheel for scaled up star systems? Delta Heavy is probably my favorite go-to when I need to put something big up but after SpaceX's launch of the Falcon Heavy, I've been giving that a try
<Starwaster> Also, awang, very clever but it's like the buttered toast principle... no matter which way I throw my rover on the floor it's going to fall butter side down. (so to speak...)
<Starwaster> hmmmm. so is the buttered cat a source of infinite renewable energy? I mean, cats ALWAYS land on their feet... but buttered toast ALWAYS lands butter side down... so if I strap some buttered toast (butter side up) to the back of a cat and toss the combo on the ground...
<Starwaster> well it should just sit there spinning in mid-air indefinitely right?
<Starman4308> This could be an alternative source of energy in addition to passing laws that set founding fathers spinning in their graves.
<Starman4308> Also, in my kOS investigation: you would need to do the following.
<Starman4308> Get a list of all the necessary engines. Simplest thing would be to give them a unique tag, and call SHIP:PARTSTAGGED(String str)
<Starman4308> Get the ModuleEnginesRF module (part:GETMODULE("ModuleEnginesRF)).
<Starman4308> Use SETFIELD("thrustlimiter", float).
<Starman4308> The float is in percent: 1 is 1% thrust, 100 is 100% thrust.
blowfish has joined #RO
<blowfish> evening
<Qboid> blowfish: awang left a message for you in #RO [28.02.2018 14:04:29]: "Basically if you want to change things in RP-0 related to the tech tree or unlocks, it goes into Pap's spreadsheet"
<Qboid> blowfish: awang left a message for you in #RO [28.02.2018 14:04:49]: "I think"
<Starman4308> You know, I'm a bit glad I looked that up: it'll be very useful to me once I unlock first-stage engines with a throttle range that isn't 100%-100%.
<blowfish> awang: where is this spreadsheet?
ProjectThoth has joined #RO
<awang> Starwaster: Does Engine Group Controller do that?
<awang> idk if it's even working, since no one here seems to use it
<Starwaster> awang I do not know
<awang> I know lamont would like to add that functionality to MJ, but that's another thing
<Starwaster> I am ashamed to admit that I'm really not sure what it does
<Starwaster> NathanKell|AFK I CHOOSE YOU
<awang> Starwaster: That's unfortunate for your rover :(
<Starwaster> tell me about it. After a few such incidents it stopped driving straight. Miraculously, all the pieces were connected... unfortunately they were all CROOKED
<Starwaster> I'm not even sure how that happened... Next time I launch a rover I'll try the rigid connection option but I've had some bad luck with that
<awang> I know that physics loading can cause issues
<awang> I had lots of fun with probes when their engine went off-axis after the physics jerk
<awang> idk if that's what is happening for you though
<awang> Apparently Engine Group Controller allows you to assign engines to groups in the editor and then throttle them independently during flight
<awang> No clue if it's actually working in 1.3.1, though
<Starman4308> Anyways, what I commonly see listed for Vandenburg is an azimuth range from 158 to 201 degrees. Was that just for the Shuttle with its limited delta-V, or are other satellites also restricted from going west of 201 degrees?
<ProjectThoth> I would assume a delta-v limitation moreso than anything else.
<Starman4308> The 158 degree minimum azimuth, though, does make for a slightly interesting challenge when launching to prograde Molniya orbits: you have to dogleg a little bit because you just barely can't go far enough east.
Starman4308 has quit [Ping timeout: 180 seconds]
Shoe17 has joined #RO
awang has quit [Ping timeout: 198 seconds]
lamont has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
lamont has joined #RO
Mike` has quit [Ping timeout: 207 seconds]
Mike` has joined #RO
technicalfool_ is now known as tfsleep
<blowfish> .tell awang thanks! Are there instructions on how to use the spreadsheet somewhere?
<blowfish> !tell awang thanks! Are there instructions on how to use the spreadsheet somewhere?
<Qboid> blowfish: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
Daz has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
blowfish has quit [Quit: Leaving]
leudaimon has quit [Quit: Leaving]
aradapilot has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
aradapilot has joined #RO
ProjectThoth has quit [Quit: +++out of cheese error+++]
leudaimon has joined #RO
Maxsimal has joined #RO
<Maxsimal> !tell soundnfury: But it's an awesome space agency spreadsheet simulator :)
<Qboid> Maxsimal: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
<soundnfury> Maxsimal: yes, it is
<soundnfury> my remark was not intended to be in any sense disparaging
egg|work|egg has joined #RO
<Maxsimal> Hahah no worries. I know schnobs for instance, doesn't really like how spreadsheet-ish it is, but I feel like, in aiming for realism/simulationism, it kind of has to be
qwertyy_ has joined #RO
qwertyy has quit [Ping timeout: 198 seconds]
<soundnfury> yeah, I actually said that in response to schnobs complaining about, essentially, the spreadsheet-itude :D
qwertyy_ has quit [Ping timeout: 182 seconds]
qwertyy has joined #RO
awang has joined #RO
awang has quit [Ping timeout: 182 seconds]
awang has joined #RO
<awang> !tell blowfish There aren't any instructions as far as I know. I think changes are fairly straightforward -- just change whatever looks like it corresponds to your change -- but dropping Pap a !tell is probably a good idea if you aren't sure
<Qboid> awang: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
<Qboid> awang: blowfish left a message for you in #RO [01.03.2018 06:13:30]: "thanks! Are there instructions on how to use the spreadsheet somewhere?"
<Pap> soundnfury: you and Maxsimal obviously have some coding skills... How hard would it be to have some of the new RP-1 features as toggleable?
<soundnfury> Pap: which kind of features?
<Pap> soundnfury: tooling, maintenance and crew training
<Maxsimal> NK would be the best person to ask, didn't he add all of those himself? Now that you can add mod-specific options to the difficulty modes, might be best to move something like that there.
tfsleep has quit [Ping timeout: 182 seconds]
<soundnfury> Pap: toggling crew training might be tricky because part of it is in KCT, but I think we could make the RP-1 side just always say "yes, you're trained"
<soundnfury> toggling maintenance would be trivially easy, just force all the costs to 0
<soundnfury> you could do something similar for tooling (make every part always tooled or make untooled parts not have extra cost or BP), but that'd be a bad idea because of how utterly it would smash the balance
<leudaimon> maybe have multipliers for those in the difficulty mode?
<soundnfury> you _could_, but the overall funds multiplier is probably enough control of how broke you are :P
<leudaimon> yeah, so the toggling is more for people that don't what to care about it?
<soundnfury> indeed
<leudaimon> hm, I see
<soundnfury> (but in that case, why don't they just play stock :P )
<leudaimon> haha, my thought exactly
<leudaimon> or sandbox
<Maxsimal> Or RO without RP-1.
Shoe17 has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
BadRocketsCo has joined #RO
<BadRocketsCo> Hullo
<Maxsimal> o/
leudaimon has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
schnobs has joined #RO
<schnobs> o/
leudaimon has joined #RO
Senshi has joined #RO
<Starwaster> when SpaceX goes to the ISS, do they first launch into a lower orbit or direct into the ISS 400km orbit?
<soundnfury> they go via a parking, or at least a phasing, orbit
<soundnfury> I don't know the details but ISTR initial orbit insertion by the second stage takes place at the same ~180km it would for a GTO mission.
<soundnfury> (you could verify this by checking the telemetry on an old webcast I suppose)
<leudaimon> given it takes them ~2 days to rendezvous, they definitely start in a lower orbit, question is if this orbit has the 400km apogee or not
<soundnfury> indeed
<leudaimon> I have seen a orbital profile of this 2-day rendezvous (not specific for Spacex) at some point, but don't remember the details. what I do remember is that most of the time the orbit has a 400km apogee, and perigee is raised slowly to phase both orbits
<schnobs> !tell awang the no-downgrade dlls work as intended: no downgrade on vessel load.
<Qboid> schnobs: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
lamont has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
lamont has joined #RO
<schnobs> Starwaster: any news about docking?
lamont has quit [Ping timeout: 182 seconds]
<Starwaster> yeah, I turned torque off completely and that worked great but I accidentally turned off attraction as well which is a problem for MJ2 because it shuts off the autopilot when it is within attraction range
<awang> schnobs: \o/
<Qboid> awang: schnobs left a message for you in #RO [01.03.2018 17:32:07]: "the no-downgrade dlls work as intended: no downgrade on vessel load."
<awang> What happens if you try to launch with an unpurchased config?
<Starwaster> so I have to play with it a bit more, but without the torque it's fantastic
<schnobs> awang: still need availability checks before rollout, though. But I guess that's the ob of KCT.
<schnobs> *job
<schnobs> Starwaster: could you explain torque?
lamont has joined #RO
<schnobs> I thought it was just plain old attraction (which we call magnetism). Do you say it has a sense for direction?
<awang> schnobs: Oh, does it let you roll out/actually launch with a config that hasn't been purchased?
<schnobs> awang: didn't even test, asuumed it as a matter of fact. Hold on...
<Starwaster> it is but as far as I can tell (and I might have misinterpreted) it also applies torque... not just torque resulting from the attraction
<Starwaster> I'm looking at the docking node code again
lamont_ has joined #RO
<Starwaster> there's also torque around its long axis to align the port but I don't care too much about that I think
<schnobs> awang: I get a popup about craft dimension/mass which promises to prevent rollout until the pad has grown. No complaints about unavailable parts whats-o-ever. Not even standard parts like the 1m Guidance Units, which isn't researched yet.
lamont has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
<schnobs> awang: but that's an old hat, KCT has not checked these for ages, if ever.
<awang> Huh, interesting
<awang> At what point is KCT supposed to stop a launch if a part hasn't been purchased, then?
lamont_ has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
<schnobs> Before it enters the build queue, I'd say.
lamont has joined #RO
<schnobs> Oh, and while I'm at it: I can tool tanks I haven't bought or researched.
<schnobs> (happily tooling a tank-II that's still six months away)
<schnobs> Sincerely, most of my complaints are ultimately down to KCT.
<schnobs> Which has become the main interface to RP-0. Research, KSC upgrades, vessel construction, everything but contracts is filtered through KCT.
<schnobs> If you ask me, KCT isn't especially realistic. Build times are nice and fine, and I agree that stuff shouldn't just pop out in an instant. But.
<schnobs> Wholly independent workshops in SPH&VAB.
<schnobs> Building construction depends on build rates in SPH&VAB.
<schnobs> (because building rockets is just like pouring concrete)
<schnobs> Wholly independent build queues (IRL several teams can and do work without stepping on each other's toes)
lamont has quit [Ping timeout: 198 seconds]
<schnobs> Research is equally broken -- temperature readings from in space high over earth become new engine specs, lolwut?
<schnobs> Ok, that's beyond even KCT to fix.
lamont has joined #RO
lamont has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
lamont has joined #RO
<awang> schnobs: Check out RealScience for research
<awang> One of those things that is Coming Soon (tm)
<schnobs> It only changes how science is done. I'm more about the mechanism that turns scientific findings into technological breakthroughs.
<awang> As for the rest, sounds like fixing that would require a redesign
<schnobs> yup.
<awang> Really? I was under the impression that RS also categorizes data, so data from one thing can't be used for a totally unrelated thing
<awang> But the problem is that not many experiments are directly involved in rocket tech
<awang> Maybe cryo stuff for telescopes, but idk what else
<Starwaster> did MJ landing guidance get worse?
<schnobs> Well, many of the early launches were quite research-y. Material X should do for a heatshield, or can engines even ignite in vacuum. But that's not the kind of science we do in the game, nor would it be a suitable driver past 1960 or so.
<schnobs> But, item: the KCT interface is not really up to the demands we put on it.
<schnobs> And if it gets redone, one might as well look into the mechanics it implements and reconsider wether they are even sensible.
<schnobs> Which, IMO, they are not.
<schnobs> But my main grudge is sheer usability.
<schnobs> Talking about mechanics, how about ordering tanks and engines for assembly?
<Starwaster> can rocket tech find its way into my kitchen?
<Starwaster> (spoiler alert: it already did)
<schnobs> Tooling already takes us halfway there.
<Starwaster> to my kitchen?
<schnobs> How about "tooling" means ordering from a contractor? So you not only provide size and shape, but also count?
<schnobs> Of course, then you'd have an inventory to keep track of...
<schnobs> *Checks clock* time to wind things up for today, but out of curiosity:
<schnobs> Starwaster: did you have one particular kitchen item in mind?
<Starwaster> corningware products
<Starwaster> not the standard glazed ceramics
<Starwaster> the stuff you cook in
* schnobs had to look up the trademarked name, but recognizes the product
lamont has quit [Ping timeout: 182 seconds]
Hypergolic_Skunk has joined #RO
lamont has joined #RO
schnobs has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
lamont has quit [Ping timeout: 207 seconds]
lamont has joined #RO
BadRocketsCo has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
lamont has quit [Ping timeout: 207 seconds]
lamont has joined #RO
lamont_ has joined #RO
lamont has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
lamont_ is now known as lamont
lamont has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
lamont has joined #RO
lamont has quit [Ping timeout: 182 seconds]
lamont has joined #RO
Daz has joined #RO
lamont has quit [Ping timeout: 182 seconds]
lamont has joined #RO
<Starwaster> omg Mach 48 reentry...? is this survivable?
leudaimon has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<Ezko> Starwaster: try
Senshi has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
VanDisaster has quit [Ping timeout: 198 seconds]
VanDisaster has joined #RO
Maxsimal_ has joined #RO
Maxsimal_ has quit [Client Quit]
Hypergolic_Skunk has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
ferram4_ has joined #RO
ferram4 has quit [Read error: -0x1: UNKNOWN ERROR CODE (0001)]
VanDisaster has quit [Ping timeout: 207 seconds]
<Starwaster> uhm.... next block of Falcon 9 is going to be the Fuller Thrust....
<Starwaster> what's next, Fullerer Thrust? Fullerest?
VanDisaster has joined #RO