search

KSP-RO / RP-1

Realistic Progression One - Career mode for Realism Overhaul
Other
338 stars 214 forks source link

TweakScale or multi-scale avionics? #123

Closed pjf closed 7 years ago

pjf commented 9 years ago

It would be nice to have tweak-scale friendly avionics, or different housing selections. The big guidance units I have are:

For a lot of my launches, the 2m unit looks pretty good, however I keep wanting to place them on my existing design 1.5m upper stages, where they stick out. With new designs I'd change shapes to accommodate, but if I could tweakscale them up or down, that would happily solve that matter. :)

Ditto for the various probes. Most of my probes weigh in between 0.4 and 0.8 tonnes. The Ranger core is too small (and has a lot of extra struts that reduce coolocity of my craft), and the surveyor core looks huge.

So totally happy for the stats to remain the same, but different sized packages would be great. :)

NathanKell commented 9 years ago

I would suggest asking on the Tweakscale thread if there's a way to change size without changing stats. Probably, but I don't know it.

pjf commented 9 years ago

Gosh dang it, I was hoping I'd be able to continue in my absolute ignorance as to how parts and TweakScale in particular actually works. :)

BevoLJ commented 9 years ago

I would love to see some tweakscale added to these. Especially the probe cores. Currently trying to design an atmospheric probe is (from what I can figure out) derpy due to the surveyor probe being 2.2 meters in size and only allowing 1t, but a 2+ meter heatshield is 1.1 tons. Only solution I have found is no avionics or a bunch of Rangers or going back to the good old OKTO2 and putting a whole bunch of them in there (they do .2t so need 10 of them for to do what the Surveyor is supposed to do(heatshield + shoot + science)). lol

And I gathered the purpose of Avionics mechanics was to get away from the OKTO2 in the first place. So either tweakscale or perhaps something that will supplement/joins the Surveyor that allows for heat shields would be cool.

Edit, just noticed the Delta Avionics is .8 meters in size. Is this intended? It does allow for 8T but seems more intended for rockets rather than landing probes.

BevoLJ commented 9 years ago

One other thing tweakscale might be able to help with is trying to keep part count down. I'm finding on some of my launches 10- 20% of my part count is now avionics. IRL they didn't need to worry about part counts breaking physics. :D

pjf commented 9 years ago

After a brief glance at the TweakScale documentation, it looks like we can tell tweakscale to keep away from our mass, price, and other attributes altogether. This means we could have tweakscaleable avionics which cost and weigh the same, but are just in different sized housings. This means no avionics funnily sticking out from the side of rockets, no giant sized landers, no weird probes that are pinched in the middle, and all those other things that have been bothering me forever.

NathanKell commented 9 years ago

That sounds like a fine solution until we get real procedural avionics (which can be done by referencing the Proc Parts DLL and adding a some new classes I think), or I extend RealFuels so you can add Circuitry as a fuel type in ServiceModule tanks (but that one requires https://github.com/NathanKell/ModularFuelSystem/issues/60 and https://github.com/NathanKell/ModularFuelSystem/issues/59 ).

rsparkyc commented 8 years ago

Sorry to dig up an old thread, but I had a question about the "realism" factor of the probe cores. Is it realistic that certain cores can only control ships up to a certain mass, or is it just an attempt to balance probe core capabilities (instead of just having one core that can do-it-all)?

rsparkyc commented 7 years ago

I'm working on procedural avionics (https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0/issues/623), so I'm going to close this, as I think it will be solved by procedurals.