ferram4 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 ! | Maximal & soundnfury's RP-1 Race Into Space Signup: http://bit.ly/2DEVm2i [15:01] <soundnfury> Straight Eight Stronk (and) RP-0/1 is basically "Space Agency Spreadsheet Simulator"
<Rokker> Bornholio: booo, reports appear to be bull
<Pap> Any consensus on what to do with RP-1?
<Bornholio> you guys had a big convo :)
<Bornholio> I say release 0 then release 1 shortly after. But i'm biased :P
<Pap> I think we scrap all changes for 1 except for tooling and science and call it RP-0 still. To me, the other stuff happens too much behind the scenes to make it player friendly and game play fun.
<schnobs> To me, staggered science (and the new tree!) are the reason why it's RP-1.
<Pap> Oh really, interesting. You might be right. I was too close to those things to see them as the major changes.
<Bornholio> training does not affect earnings its just slows dow the path. it could drop easy. similarly maintenace is minor and has little impact. Tooling is significant and a bit of learning curve, a tool all button would mitigate that a lot
<schnobs> ^ack.
<Bornholio> tech tree is awesome, and needs the smaller increments from the pad/r&d levels
<Bornholio> it impacts the moeny needed by virtue orf demanding research points and R&D purchases
<Bornholio> rollout costs is the biggest impact to launch costs, any large impact to moeny should at least change the difficulty default % if not contracts as a whole
<schnobs> Rollout cost is the elephant in the room. Even tooling doesn't have all that much of a monetary impact, at least not until you get to the Saturns.
<schnobs> Could a single :FINAL patch deal with payout?
<schnobs> Though as I said on git, even without rollout I never felt as if i was rolling in cash.
<Bornholio> i'm pretty sure its reasonable as is. i'm in 80's tech with late 60's timeline. but that requires a lot of grinding to be that far ahead.
<Bornholio> launch some delta heavy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebILIKHi9wo
<schnobs> Yeah, training needs a master switch. Can't start a sim because all pilots are in school.
<schnobs> need moar krash dll.
probus_ has joined #RO
Probus has quit [Ping timeout: 190 seconds]
schnobs has quit [Ping timeout: 190 seconds]
Kraken has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
<Raidernick> Bornholio, you like testing things?
<Bornholio> yes i am curren;ty in the land of suffering
<Raidernick> you want to test my n1, l3, lk, lok
<Raidernick> just finished it
<Raidernick> I am testing it myself
<Raidernick> but could always use another set of eyes
<Bornholio> i can't i'm working on three work projects
<Raidernick> damn
Kraken has joined #RO
Probus has joined #RO
probus_ has quit [Ping timeout: 190 seconds]
probus_ has joined #RO
Probus has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
Probus has joined #RO
probus_ has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
probus_ has joined #RO
Probus has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
Probus has joined #RO
probus_ has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
TM1978m_ has joined #RO
<Rokker> Pap: I then to think burning RP-1 is the best method
<Rokker> tend*
TM1978m has quit [Ping timeout: 182 seconds]
<soundnfury> Pap: opinions submitted :)
Moistmelon has joined #RO
Wetmelon has quit [Ping timeout: 190 seconds]
blowfish has joined #RO
aradapilot has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
aradapilot has joined #RO
<Raidernick> hey to anyone here 900dv should be more than enough to get back to earth from lunar orbit right?
<soundnfury> Raidernick: the bare minimum is 820 according to the chart I have
<soundnfury> so 900 is a bit of a narrow margin for a manned mission, otherwise I'd say that's fine
<Raidernick> does it matter what kind of orbit you are in?
<Raidernick> i was in a 100x100km polar lunar orbit
<Raidernick> i had like 938
<Raidernick> and somehow i was like 348 short
<Raidernick> so i'm assuming i fucked something up during the burn
<soundnfury> ooh polar is interesting, because it matters what your plane is
<soundnfury> you want to be able to depart retrograde wrt the moon's orbit, and you can't do that if your orbital plane is perpendicular
camlost has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
<Raidernick> it wasn't EXACTLY polar
<Raidernick> it was like 70 something degrees retrograde
<Raidernick> i came in free return and to save some fuel burning radial i went into a more inclined orbit
<Raidernick> i was testing my n1/lok/lk configs
<Raidernick> so i did the entire mission from start to finish
<Raidernick> plenty to get there and land and take off again
<Raidernick> rendezvous no problem
<Raidernick> the return burn i must've done something wrong
<Raidernick> the game says my lok has 928m/s
<Raidernick> that SHOULD be correct
<Raidernick> to the real thing
<soundnfury> how long between lunar arrival & departure?
<Raidernick> 3 days
<Raidernick> it should be an 11 day jounrey max
<Raidernick> the lok can support 2 people for 11 days
<Raidernick> lk can support 1 for 3 days on surface
<Raidernick> so maybe a tiny bit more than 11 days
<Raidernick> i wouldn't stay longer than 12
<soundnfury> then yeah I'm gonna say you just did bad manœuvers
<soundnfury> you should be able to get home with a single burn that's prograde along your lunar orbit, gives you a basically retrograde "C3" lunar exit
<soundnfury> (it's all about the timing)
<Raidernick> i THINK i can squeeze about 1016m/s out of lok
<Raidernick> if i mess with the amount of fuel for the fuel cells
<Raidernick> which i dont think you need all of
<Raidernick> does that give a comfortable amount that would work in pretty much every situation?
<soundnfury> also: any time you find yourself doing a radial burn, that implies that at some point earlier on you did something wrong
<soundnfury> 1km/s should definitely be enough, yeah
<soundnfury> biab, eating dinner
<Raidernick> k
<blowfish> Starwaster, you around?
<soundnfury> om nom nom
<soundnfury> so Raidernick when you say you think you messed up during the burn, I'm confused. did you have a manœuvre node for the burn, and was it <928 before you ignited?
<Raidernick> yes
<Raidernick> it was 746
<Raidernick> to get to 50km at earth
<Raidernick> i did the burn in flight switched to the map after and i was nowhere close
<Raidernick> i was at like 2 million km
<soundnfury> and then your tanks burned dry and you weren't there yet?
<Raidernick> yes
<soundnfury> you sure you didn't burn _more_ than the node?
<Raidernick> yes
<Raidernick> not stupid, the ship has insanely low twr
<Raidernick> it's impossible to accidently pass it
Mike` has quit [Ping timeout: 198 seconds]
<Raidernick> unless you leave it unattended
<soundnfury> something making the ship heavier than it should be? oberth effects from the low twr? idk
<Raidernick> nope
<Raidernick> infact the ship is constantly getting lighter
<Raidernick> even when not burning the engines
<Raidernick> because of the fuel cells
<Raidernick> you get a 200m/s increase in dv by the time you leave the moon
<soundnfury> hmm
<Raidernick> because of the lh2 and lox it burns off
<soundnfury> (it just vents the steam overboard I take it?)
<Raidernick> no
<Raidernick> it turns it into water
<Raidernick> the ship only carries a few hours of water to start
<Raidernick> the fuel cell refills it the whole time
<soundnfury> well then the mass of the water should be the same as the mass of the lh2+lox
<Raidernick> they are using it
<Raidernick> so both are disappearing
<Raidernick> and the piss is jettisoned
<Raidernick> like on apollo
<Raidernick> so it does lose mass
<soundnfury> ok. Point being that _something_ is vented
<Raidernick> yes
<Raidernick> the game doesn't simulate that obviously
<Raidernick> the matter just vanishes
<soundnfury> and it's that, the wastewater, that's relevant here (doesn't really matter where it came from)
<soundnfury> but yeah if your manœuvre node isn't burning down as far as it should, then that's a "wtf gamephysics" problem rather than the "orbital mechanics" problem I initially thought you had
<Raidernick> so i did or didn't do the burn wrong?
<Raidernick> i just want to make sure i have enough dv
<Raidernick> so when i release this i don't get complaints
<Raidernick> that people can't get back
<Raidernick> i want to make sure i just fucked it up
<soundnfury> you have enough dv if the thing telling you you have 928dv isn't lying
<soundnfury> (since your node said you only needed 746)
Mike` has joined #RO
<soundnfury> so _either_ you fucked up the burn _or_ there's something in your game (which may or may not be in your mod) that's breaking physics and/or whatever you're using for dv readouts
<soundnfury> and there's not a lot I can do to distinguish those from this distance, sorry
<Raidernick> soundnfury, just tried to hyperedit the ship back to the same orbit with the same supplies i had on board
<Raidernick> 118 degree inclination
<Raidernick> the best i can get on any burn back is 1118m/s
<Raidernick> which is unacceptable
<Raidernick> so i think before my readout was wrong for the node
<Raidernick> and my orbit REALLY sucked
<Raidernick> i probably should've put myself into a better orbit to begin with
<Starwaster> I thought there was a way to see biome maps from the map view... did I imagine that?
<soundnfury> Starwaster: I think if you have a scansat biome map you can get scansat to display it as an overlay, but I've never tried that
<Starwaster> blowfish what did you need? I'm here now
<blowfish> Starwaster: with the NewCryo stuff merged, do you think it's worth doing another 1.3.x release of RF?
<blowfish> Also do you have a brief explanation of the changes I could put in the changelog?
<Starwaster> probably. if anyone is still on 1.3 then they'd appreciate having MLI
<soundnfury> yep :)
<Starwaster> I should probably do one more merge of what I've done in the past couple of days since my last merge though
<blowfish> okay, no rush
<Starwaster> change notes: improved analytic, configurable multilayer insulation, improved cryo storage for ServiceModule tank type
<Starwaster> one of the changes I put in (I think I already put it on the master branch) is that ServiceModules use the Dewar model for heat leakage
<Starwaster> and if we want to we can configure tank configs to start with MLI but I don't know if we want to... unless it's for a new TANK_DEFINITION
<Starwaster> one quirk of the insulation is that it makes the skin prone to overheating. One thought I had to solving that so that skin doesnt overheat and burn up was to burn off MLI layers until it stops
<Starwaster> the other idea, more easily implementable was to incorporate convection term into the MLI so that it's more conductive in atmo
<Starwaster> that's in my latest round of changes that I need to merge
<Starwaster> just need to tweak the coefficient a bit
<Starwaster> all in all it's coming along nicely
<Starwaster> blowfish: one thing that the MLI code does is actually alter the analytic rate at which internal heats up, which I always had trouble getting right but this time it actually seems to be working, even when switching to a ship that you had inactive for long periods
<blowfish> nice!
<Raidernick> soundnfury, you were correct
<Raidernick> my initial orbit setup was bad
<Raidernick> if i put myself more into plane with lunar orbit it's all good
<Raidernick> 800m/s
<Raidernick> and it's ACTUALLY 800m/s
<Raidernick> i could've easily done that when i was on the way there
<Raidernick> and i didn't think of it
<Raidernick> dumb mistake on my part
* soundnfury has the advantage of having already understood orbital mechanics before ever installing ksp :)
<Raidernick> i knew that being in plane would use less dv
<Raidernick> i just didn't realize it would actually be impossible to get back
<Raidernick> if i didn't do that
<Raidernick> lol
<soundnfury> technically if you time it right, getting back from polar _can_ be just as cheap
<soundnfury> it's just you might have to wait two weeks for the window xD
<Raidernick> well i don't have the luxury of waiting yeah lol
<Raidernick> by the time i need to leave i have 3.5ish days of life support left
<Raidernick> so you need to go immediately
<soundnfury> heh yeah
<Raidernick> also tacls glitches out when you have sutff producing resources
<Raidernick> it just says infinity
<Raidernick> totally useless
<Raidernick> so you need to guess
<soundnfury> well, you could calculate by hand :P
<Raidernick> i COULD do that
<Raidernick> but i'm not going to
<Raidernick> lol
<soundnfury> :D
TM1978m_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
TM1978m has joined #RO
TM1978m has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<Starwaster> so just when I have NaN issues licked in RF, just to be pissy with me, KSP decides to start throwing NaN temperatures at me in parts that not only don't HAVE MFT in them but arent even CONNECTED to a part with MFT in them.... (i.e. can't be an issue with conduction corrupting other parts with NaN
Raidernick has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Raidernick has joined #RO
<Starwaster> I swear to god I hate NaN so much.... it's not just an error, it's like it's taunting us. like that error where you've got a bunch of coordinates and it's like NaN, NaN, NaN and if you read it out loud it SOUNDS Like you're being taunted
<soundnfury> ... watman.
<Starwaster> NaN, NaN, NaN - NaN, NaN, NaN - NaN, NaN, NaN
<Starwaster> soundnfury (means Not a Number)
<Starwaster> fucker I KNOW IT ISNT A NUMBER LEAVE ME ALONE
<soundnfury> I was referencing a thing
<soundnfury> I'll find a link in a bit
<Starwaster> why isnt it a number...
<Starwaster> please just be a goddamn number for me
<blowfish> ...that
<Starwaster> lol
<soundnfury> (my favourite bit is "which, as you can see, you do.")
VanDisaster has quit [Quit: Miranda NG! Smaller, Faster, Easier. http://miranda-ng.org/]
VanDisaster has joined #RO
blowfish has quit [Quit: Leaving]
Shoe17 has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
Senshi has joined #RO
Shoe17 has joined #RO
Senshi has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
wb99999999 has joined #RO
<wb99999999> It feels like I've been living under a stone for the last few years, and hello XD
wb99999999 has quit [Client Quit]
<Probus> Starwaster, I read multilayer as multiplayer and got chills. :)
<Probus> It would be fun to have a multiplayer build of a space station.
<Probus> or mission to mars.
probus_ has joined #RO
Probus has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
schnobs has joined #RO
<schnobs> o/
probus_ is now known as Probus
<Probus> \o
VanDisaster has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<schnobs> heya.
<schnobs> Probus: regarding Mars mission, were you looking for advice, ideas, anything?
BadRocketsCo has joined #RO
TonyC has joined #RO
awang has joined #RO
<awang> \o
* schnobs waves
<awang> Did I miss anything interesting last night?
<schnobs> regarding release talk? I don't think so. The little talk there was basically only rehashed the github discussion.
<awang> Well, anything in general
<schnobs> My ISP signed me off at 0100 UTC. Until then I think it's safe to say you didn't miss anything important, or very interesting.
<schnobs> Some cheering about a supposed US airstrike in syria, discussion about "center" of thrust being a silly term because a vector has no center. That's about it.
BadRocketsCo2 has joined #RO
<awang> Hm
<awang> Thanks for the summary!
BadRocketsCo has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<schnobs> Ahm. What's a something.dll.mdb file?
<awang> It holds debug info
<awang> Mono version of VS .pdb files, IIRC
<schnobs> OK.
<schnobs> Still wondering about why techlevels are no longer honore for engine sub-types.
<awang> What do you mean by that?
<schnobs> At start node, I can unlock the XASR and AJ10 configs of the WAC. No research required.
BadRocketsCo2 has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<schnobs> Same for all other engines I checked. As soon as I have the base model, I can unlock all configs.
<awang> Um
<awang> That is definitely a problem
<schnobs> RP-0 configuration files look fine. So I guess it's either RP-0 not telling, or RF not listening.
<awang> Can anyone else reproduce it?
<schnobs> Havent found anyone yet. But for all I know, I may have installed it wrong.
<schnobs> Did a re-install a few days ago. RSS and RO for KSP 1.3.1 can now be installed through CKAN. As can be most other dependencies of RP-1.
<schnobs> The only manual installs were ProcWings, Testflight, KerbalRenamer and RP-0(dev).
<schnobs> I replaced dlls for KRASH, X-science and ContractConfigurator. All others were left as is.
<schnobs> Just for lulz and giggles, I just replaced the RF and RP-0 dlls with those I had on my last working install. No effect.
<schnobs> Oh. And for something different, proc tank sizes:
<schnobs> I long wished they would have snaps for common sizes (1.450 Able, 3.050 Titan tankbutts, ...), not to mention scaling interstages to match the height of the engine they're covering.
<schnobs> That's definitely outside the scope of what can be done with config edits, though. You can only set how big "large" and "small" ticks are to be.
probus_ has joined #RO
Probus has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
TM1978m has joined #RO
TM1978m_ has joined #RO
TM1978m has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<TonyC> hi, are spacedock downloads broken for anyone else ?
Probus has joined #RO
probus_ has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
TM1978m_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<schnobs> TonyC: can confirm. Get 500 page.
<TonyC> oh well
<schnobs> CKAN doesn't understand it though, keeps trying.
<awang> schnobs: Wonder if a non-CKAN install would work
<awang> Although that would probably be pretty painful to set up
<awang> Snaps for common sizes is an interesting idea. Maybe we can add those as presets for toolings?
probus_ has joined #RO
Probus has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<Rokker> Bornholio: AWACS North of Syria a little while ago, P-8 off the coast now. on civilian flight trackers tho
Raidernick_ has joined #RO
qwertyy__ has joined #RO
<schnobs> awang: Snaps for common sizes probably could be implemented at reasonable effort, but I'm not sure if it would really help, with there being so many common sizes.
<schnobs> It would probably need to be user-configurable much like the angle snaps of editor extensions. So users can set it up for whatever are their favorites right now.
Raidernick has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
qwertyy_ has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
<Rokker> Bornholio: oooo, also brought out a woflhound
<Rokker> wolfhound
<Rokker> Bornholio: spec ops possibly in Jordan then
Probus has joined #RO
probus_ has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
probus_ has joined #RO
Probus has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<Rokker> Bornholio: AWACS off the Russia polish border too
Probus has joined #RO
<schnobs> What's the right place to rescale the Scinece Jr? RO or RP-0?
probus_ has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
Senshi has joined #RO
probus_ has joined #RO
BadRocketsCo has joined #RO
<awang> schnobs: So similar to the "snap to existing tooling size" feature
<awang> Hmmm
<awang> Wonder if those could be combined somehow...
Probus has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<schnobs> awang: I'd say a smarter solution to the "common size" problem would be to sense the size of attached parts. No idea how hard that would be.
<schnobs> awang: smart tanks? https://youtu.be/lfABcCLxxC0?t=67
Senshi has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
BadRocketsCo2 has joined #RO
BadRocketsCo2 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
BadRocketsCo has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<schnobs> Oh my, what happens to the files when a mod is released?
<schnobs> I wanted to make a small PR to RO.
<schnobs> Sorting out my own fork and making sure that it's up-to-date with master was one thing, but eventually I made it.
<schnobs> But now the supposedly up-to-date files I cloned from git are all different from the latest RO release I installed yesterday.
<schnobs> How can that be?
<schnobs> Or rather... "diff" shows no difference, not even whitespace. But the md5sums are different. Dafuq?
<schnobs> sorry, my fault. Diff shows a difference, too.
VanDisaster has joined #RO
<schnobs> got it. All the released files have a MS-DOS CR+LF.
camlost has joined #RO
camlost has quit [Client Quit]
BadRocketsCo has joined #RO
<BadRocketsCo> *sigh*
<BadRocketsCo> Had a battery derp on my laptop so it restarted mid-game
<BadRocketsCo> And now, everything else works BUT mechjeb
<BadRocketsCo> Tried reinstalling mechjeb, deleting module manager cache and still nothing.
<BadRocketsCo> Huh, apparently the dV and orbit info window were deleted for some reason...
Probus has joined #RO
* BadRocketsCo is dumb
probus_ has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<Rokker> Bornholio: spec ops C-32 over Portugal, left America this morning, headed through the med it looks like
<BadRocketsCo> Rokker: are we using #RO for spy info now? :D
<Rokker> Bornholio: also a P-3 popped up on civilian trackers out of nowhere after doing something in the med
<Rokker> tho he might not have anything to do with syria
<Rokker> BadRocketsCo: I'm just watching the fun unravel. this is all public info
<Rokker> BadRocketsCo: you ready to put that NATO membership to use?
<BadRocketsCo> Rokker: what do ya mean?
<BadRocketsCo> Hold up, changing networks
BadRocketsCo is now known as BRC2
BadRocketsCo has joined #RO
<BadRocketsCo> Aight, back.
<BadRocketsCo> Ooh, I see what you mean.
<BadRocketsCo> Oh boy.
<BadRocketsCo> I mean, I'd be one of the first ones to be drafted...
<BadRocketsCo> I'm a 18 year old physicaly healthy male...
<BadRocketsCo> Rokker: be sure to equip your mohawk :D
<schnobs> Not gonna happen. If things come to the point where a draft would be required, we're Cuban Missile Crisis-like short of things retting really nasty.
BRC2 has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
<schnobs> Actually, all your talk about plane sightings makes me feel uneasy.
<BadRocketsCo> Heh, yeah.
<BadRocketsCo> Well, best case scenario is that both sides are not dumb enough for M.A.D
<BadRocketsCo> Or well, the BEST case scenario is that it's just some sort of a training mission to an all
<BadRocketsCo> ally*
<BadRocketsCo> Would a mission t
<BadRocketsCo> Ugh
<BadRocketsCo> Would a mission to a actual warzone really be required to keep a transporder on?
<BadRocketsCo> Transponder*
<BadRocketsCo> I'm outside and my fingers are cold :D
<schnobs> As long as it's several hours out, in friendly airspace, and among a lot of traffic as usual... methinks it would be sensible to act normal.
camlost has joined #RO
<BadRocketsCo> Hmm, good point.
<BadRocketsCo> Welp. I'll keep an eye out for bottle caps on my walk :D
<schnobs> ?
<BadRocketsCo> It's a Fallout joke
<schnobs> never played that. Nevermind.
<BadRocketsCo> Heh.
<BadRocketsCo> But yeah
<BadRocketsCo> Let's hope for the best. Probably just a training mission or something.
<soundnfury> schnobs: I've seen that too. A recent regen from the spreadsheet broke TREE-Engines.cfg
<soundnfury> the top-level MM selector should be @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEngineConfigs]]:BEFORE[RealismOverhaulEnginesPost]
<schnobs> soundnfury: sure? That file looks fine to me, as does the MM cache.
<soundnfury> or at least, that's what it used to be, and that's what works for me
<soundnfury> and no, I don't know why the new one doesn't work.
<BadRocketsCo> Ohay soundnfury
<schnobs> ...and we have a winner. Thanks soundnfury !
<soundnfury> hiya BadRocketsCo
Hypergolic_Skunk has joined #RO
<BadRocketsCo> Waddap?
<soundnfury> schnobs: you're welcome. (I've reported it to Pap but he hasn't updated the spreadsheet to fix it yet. Maybe I should pester him some more.)
<soundnfury> BadRocketsCo: not a lot, just playin' some wt. You?
<Pap> I'll pester you Mr soundnfury
<BadRocketsCo> soundnfury: building a surveyor-style lunar lander
<soundnfury> Pap: I put a comment on the spreadsheet saying exactly what I think needs to be changed.
probus_ has joined #RO
<soundnfury> BadRocketsCo: cool. let me know how well it works :)
Probus has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<schnobs> soundnfury: made a PR, FWIW.
<Pap> Fixed and pushed soundnfury thanks for the help
<soundnfury> no problem :)
<schnobs> Pap: I couldn't know that you'd be around shortly. I assure you that the file *can* be edited directly; my patch would have fixed it for the time being.
<TonyC> rejoice, spacedock works!
<schnobs> Also, under the assumption that you're still around... Pap, would you terribly mind if I made the early science equipemnt cheaper?
BadRocketsCo has quit [Quit: Bye]
<schnobs> As it is, the presence of scientific experiments inflates construction time by quite a bit.
<Rokker> soundnfury: oooo, the Wright Patt E-4B took off a few hours ago
<awang> I should probably add some stuff to soundnfury's spreadsheet replacement at some point
<awang> Too good an idea to pass up
<schnobs> Hello? Are you still there?
<schnobs> anyone?
* awang pokes schnobs
<awang> What's up?
<schnobs> Thanks. 80 minutes without as much as anyone dropping the connection...
<schnobs> I was just wodering if IRC died without my client noticing.
<awang> Ah
<schnobs> awang: what do you think needs polishing about avionics? They're about as good or broken as they ever were.
<awang> schnobs: At least last time I spent any significant time playing the slider bars were really finicky
<awang> I think it's at least partially because the bars don't know how to react to their upper/lower bounds changing while you are dragging them
<awang> I've also experienced some amount of "snapping", where I can normally control avionics down to the kilogram except for ~5kg around an upper/lower limit
<awang> The utilization percentage probably isn't the most user-friendly, either
<schnobs> Can't say I noticed these.
<awang> I think there was some talk at some point about not having avionics being based on mass
<awang> Which I agree with, it's just that better options are way more complex
<schnobs> Re utilization, and proc avionics in general, I found it bearable.
<awang> schnobs: At the time I was trying to eke out every possible kilogram to get under the 60t pad limit, so I might have hit some corner cases
<awang> I sort of feel that avionics should work more like pilot levels in stock
<awang> Better avionics are heavier, but more capable
<schnobs> My main gripe is that they tend to come out on the heavy side even at high utilization, and that they barely carry enough power for their own use.
<awang> Response time may be something else to consider
<schnobs> Nah, please don't go there.
<awang> Yeah, the avionics power thing is not fun
<awang> I think there was some talk some time ago about removing the battery completely from the avionics
<awang> And letting an actual battery take care of charge
<schnobs> Response time was one of NK's worst ideas, ever. All it really did was to give PID programmers a headache.
<schnobs> For manual pilots it hardly matters. Modulo my respose time, all rockets fly the same.
VanD has joined #RO
VanDisaster has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<awang> It seems alright to me in principle, if you're going for realism
<awang> btw, what action is response time for?
<awang> gimbal or throttle?
<schnobs> Oh, no doubt it is. And control surfaces moving instantaneously looked patently silly.
<schnobs> On rockets it wasn't half as obvious.
<schnobs> Throttle response time was in the game since like forever (jet engines spooling up).
<schnobs> Gimbals would move anywhere in an instant, though. AFAIK they still start moving instantly, but now they take time to get there. And back again.
<schnobs> So the gimbal response thing in the config is the time it takes them to move around.
<Mike`> awang, i noticed problems with avionics too, i think, mainly in sandbox though
<Mike`> i think they caused very high cpu usage/lag, some kind of infinite/very long update loops maybe
<awang> schnobs: Ah, so that's the difference
<awang> I've always wondered
<awang> idk, gimbal response time seems like one of those things that you deal with when playing RO. It's more realistic, so your PID needs to handle more realistic scenarios
<awang> I haven't written one myself, though, so idk exactly what it takes to compensate
<awang> And I guess gimbal response time should really be gimbal rotation speed?
<awang> Or maybe the "time" part is time from neutral to max angle?
<schnobs> I don't know the units. I don't even know if higher numbers are faster.
<awang> Mike`: That doesn't sound right. At least from what I understand of proc avionics' internals they should be pretty low overhead
<awang> I think it's a mass check followed by activating/deactivating an input lock?
<Mike`> awang, err, i mean with their UI, thise problems happened when i was trying to move their sliders
<Mike`> those*
<awang> Mike`: Ah, my bad for misinterpreting
<awang> I can't remember if I had performance issues when dragging sliders
<schnobs> awang: at it's core, avionics is an issue similar to rollout cost.
<Mike`> it was fine in career though, so i guess those problems only happen in certain conditions, maybe with max upgrades or something...
<awang> Mike`: I mean, in theory the checks in career and sandbox should be identical, so there shouldn't be a performance difference
<schnobs> awang: besids tanks, engines and all structural claptrap, rockets also needed controls, which, especially in the early days, were quite heavy.
<Mike`> awang, it was clearly a bug
<awang> idk, another thing to add to my "look at eventually" list
<Mike`> i just't don't know which conditions trigger it
<Mike`> normally the sliders and their performance is fine
<Mike`> but when the "bug" triggers, KSP itself gets totally unresponsive
<schnobs> Mike`: your description sounds a bit like garbage collection.
<Mike`> schnobs, it sounds like an infinite loop
<Mike`> that i managed to trigger somehow
<schnobs> Well, such things certainly exist. My game takes a five-second break every time I unlock-purchase a new part in the VAB.
<awang> Took a quick look through the proc avionics code. Nothing that depended on game mode should be that expensive
<awang> It's mostly just math
<Mike`> awang, i didnt mean to say that it depends on game mode :)
<awang> Mike`: Yeah, I know, but that was the easiest thing to check :P
<Mike`> i guess there exists a condition that some fromula/logic breaks to trigger an infinite loop
<Mike`> my personal guess is that it might have appeared in sandbox and not in career because in sandbox i was obviously using the best avionics part, eg with all unlocks
<awang> Mike`: Wait, does your KSP now-I-have-to-kill-it hang or time-to-get-a-coffee hang?
<Mike`> so formula paramerters are different
<Mike`> however, i might have aswell been unlcky, but i thinki had trouble more than once but so far never in career
<Mike`> awang, good question. i think the problems went away once i closed the proc avionics gui
qwertyy_ has joined #RO
<Mike`> but don't worry too much
<Mike`> well, let me just start ksp andf see if i can trigger it in sandbox
<awang> Hey, it's a bug, so I gotta worry about it
<awang> Especially if other people are busy
qwertyy__ has quit [Ping timeout: 198 seconds]
<schnobs> awang: Back to avionics? "Mass" is just a proxy for complexity. There's others i could think off, just don't know how hard to implement.
<Mike`> awang, in a quick test i could instantly reproduce a similar problem. I couldn't get KSP unresponsive/laggy, but instead the proc avionics sliders didn't respond, morew or less. tried to make it smaller, larger, both lenght and diameter - nothing worked
<awang> schnobs: Ehhh, idk about that. Balloon tanks are really light, but using those technically shouldn't affect complexity. If anything, it should make avionics more complex because now the tank can't take as much lateral force (I think?)
<awang> In terms of controls, I suppose it depends on where you say avionics stops and the control surface/gimbal begins
<awang> In one view, it doesn't matter how simple or complex an engine gimbal is, as long as it responds in the same way then the avionics would work
<Mike`> however, if proc avionics work fine in sandbox for you, maybe it's something with my installation
<awang> I'd imagine avionics improvements would be in processing speed, mass, and the guidance algorithm used
<awang> I'm not sure what else avionics is responsible for, though
<awang> Mike`: That's interesting. Can you open an issue with the steps you took?
<awang> I haven't booted KSP in a while, and haven't played sandbox for even longer, unfortunately, so I have no clue whether I experienced the same issue in sandbox
<Mike`> well, yeah, i could do it, maybe i should try the latest version before that, however, i'm still on rp1 dev from a few weeks ago
<schnobs> awang: "avionics" isn't merely gyroscopes and gimbal control, but controlling all the valves in the right order to start up the engine, keeping the tanks pressurized, what-have-you.
<schnobs> Have you been around for the great "can J-2 have three ignitions" discussion?
<awang> schnobs: Oh, is that how it's normally understood? My bad
<awang> I was thinking avionics = guidance-related things, and the other stuff is part-specific and therefore folded into the corresponding part
<awang> Even then, I don't think mass is a great proxy for complexity
<schnobs> Agreed.
<awang> There's a huge complexity difference between gas-generators and full-flow staged combustion engines, but mass doesn't really matter much beyond "this engine is big enough to put things into orbit"
<schnobs> It's not totally wrong, either. Heavier rockets tend to have more stuff to look after.
<awang> I guess a more accurate thing would be to have parts have a "complexity cost" of their own, and you need to have enough avionics to match that cost
<schnobs> Even more sensors in the tanks.
<awang> True
<awang> Er
<awang> brb
<awang> Sorry
<schnobs> NP, I'll just keep talking. :)
<schnobs> The complexity thing seemed to be too big an idea at the time, but now I have the feeling that there might be synergies with rollout cost.
awang has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<Bornholio> lucky rokker getting to watch it unfurl while i bury my head in work
<Rokker> Bornholio: Russian navy has a notam in effect?
<Starwaster> is there something wrong with me if I enjoy sending my crew out one by one during reentry so I can hear their screams?
<schnobs> Screaming? Is that a 1.4 thing?
<Bornholio> DRE adds burny kerbs
<Bornholio> rokker there is twelve current NOTAM/nav warnings for cyprus https://syria.liveuamap.com/en/2018/11-april-notam-and-navigation-warnings-in-force-around-cyprus added Rus Navy one
<schnobs> performance loss on a sepratron :(
<Bornholio> i sprinkle in a few early sepatron based rockets early to get DP up on those
<schnobs> I didn't expect that to be a valid failure mode in the first place.
<Rokker> Bornholio: crazy how that happens to be exactly where the poseidon was flying
<schnobs> Failure to ignite? OK. Blowups? Certainly. But... performance loss?
<Bornholio> i can see that easy, a couple of my early sugar rockets didn't get full length combustion right away and then they sparklered
<Starwaster> schnobs the past few versions of DRE have had screaming Kerbals
<schnobs> Ahm, Bornholio, I think the 1.3.1 golden spreadsheet can be simplified a great deal.
<Bornholio> probably can a lot. like deleting the RO page :P
<Starwaster> can MechJeb's scripting module handle complex things like flying a reentry inverted until a certain point or time and then re-inverting?
stratochief_ has joined #RO
<schnobs> Bornholio: https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0/issues/872 might serve as a starting point, I'd like another pair of eyeballs on it before I update the wiki.
<Qboid> [#872] title: Installing RP-0(dev), April 2018 | Since the recent RO release, it has become much easier to install RP-0. All essential mods except TestFlight and RP-0 itself can be installed through CKAN. ... | https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0/issues/872
<Bornholio> love to do that, don't rely on me for a while tho
<Rokker> Bornholio: why can't we jus MacArthur them
<Rokker> Bornholio: syria
<Rokker> or the Syrian military
<Bornholio> i only agree with vaporizing anyone using NBC weapons.
Olympic1 has joined #RO
<Rokker> Bornholio: what about CNN weapons
<Bornholio> yeah, no
<Rokker> Bornholio: anyways, let's nuke Assad already