Angstinator

This appears to be a tick underpowered for real scale, real fuel launches - even with GravityTurnContinued attempting to optimise the launch I can't quite get a (payload-less, otherwise stock) Heavy to orbit. I do, however, know a bit of part config-fu, are there any adjustments you would recommend?

At some point you just can't use normal materials to confine a continuous nuclear explosion.

Ah, scope bloat. Good luck with that!

How's that "couple of weeks" treating you?

Time is always a valid concern, I feel you there. Form factor I can see with belts, but who in their right mind would want variants of a molten-metal spray nozzle (with or without magnets)? People, I guess.

While the radiator parts included here are definitely welcome, the selection seems to be restricted to various types of panels. Are there plans for other, potentially higher-capacity (or smaller-footprint) designs such as belt, bubble, droplet, or Curie point radiators? I know NASA has been examining them, there's a memorandum up on their Technical Reports Server. Additionally, is open-cycle cooling (i.e. just dumping coolant overboard) within the scope of this mod? It would be a cost- and mass-effective way of handling peak heat load on spacecraft that mostly operate at lower temperatures.

Visually you might have a point, as an engine exposed to atmosphere it'll have to be all streamlined and sleek. However, I see an option in detailing the fusion device powering the engine. That reactor - I'd pick a stellarator for its lack of central solenoid - may require permanently-attached conformal radiators and/or a LACE-style precooler that liquefies part of the intake gas and flushes it through the reactor's divertor plates. This means lots of pipes, external radiator or maintenance access panels, and potentially secondary intakes or outlets for the cooling systems. Gameplay-wise I've been imagining a charge hog that actually drains less energy the further you crank up the throttle, since the reaction will begin to sustain itself at some point. I can see the primary concern at high throttle levels being overheating even with integral cooling, but this may create a problem if we assume slow throttle response. I imagine it to be faster than the fission jet's, however, what with fusion processes being quite sensitive to changing conditions.

I understand any proposed features are unlikely to make it in, but I've had an idea that struck me as too interesting (== crazy, presumably unworkable) not to try. You've included Project Pluto-like nuclear fission ramjets in Near Future Aeronautics; have you explored the notion of nuclear fusion jets befitting this mod's tech level? My limited understanding of jet propulsion systems says it should work: after all, all the nuclear reaction does in either case is superheat the air going through the engine.

I just have to ask if this works with RO.

Ah, well. Guess I'm putting my 'nauts on a diet, then.

Seeing as a few modules (barely) fit inside the 0.625m bay, are there plans to add mounting nodes? If not, I would like to at least request options to extend it up to quad size as with other service bays.

It seems that the save settings button does not save the window position of the launch map. I'd like to request that it should.

I've also found (and should have a lot sooner) that it's most efficient to maintain constant TWR between stages, i.e. set the hard throttle so that when a stage ends, the next stage will ignite at the same or slightly greater TWR.

Is there a best practice for adjusting SRB throttle in the VAB and letting GTc calculate new parameters when designing a mostly solid-fuelled rocket (think Vega-like) that only has a small liquid-fuelled upper stage for circularisation and manoeuvering?

Thank you.

I figured as much from my experience with GravityTurn. Kind of a shame, of course, but unpowered ballistic guidance and gauging the launch zone indicator for range to target after setting a heading manually seems to be an acceptable substitute.

Thank you, this got everything working well enough. I mean, a missile guidance module obviously doesn't like unguided bombs and doesn't provide a bombsight, but it works well enough.

That's a shame, but quite understandable. Good luck with whatever is taking up your time.

Well, I'd disagree here: in practice it means that it hasn't yet been updated and that the chance of it being updated is low, not that it is most certainly not going to be updated in the future. I'd already assumed that much, of course, but I'd much rather have a definite answer from the author whether or not my assumptions have any factual basis; thus I'm asking in this thread as opposed to writing a PM so that the answer is visible to everyone else who might have a similar question. With that in mind, I'll have a ton of time next week and might look at this mod more closely. Maybe there's something I can do.

With that in mind, I would like to respectfully note that it's been two years without updates, and I'm not quite sure what this means in practice.

Am I correct in assuming incompatibility with 1.7.x?

Wasn't there an add-on with parts specifically designed for modular missiles? I can't seem to find it anymore, and I'd really like to try and build a Disney bomb (for which I'll need a warhead, obviously.)

Two years with Kramax later I don't know what made me switch away from this. Not that Kramax is all bad, but PID tuning is unpleasant and so the only thing I find it useful for is the glideslope/flight plan thing enabling autolanding and slightly smoother take-off. This, on the other hand, actually lets me fly.

I do have two pairs of ullage motors igniting 0.3 seconds after booster flameout, but further experiments have shown things that don't quite fit: The motors cannot prevent ignition failure despite being staged to burn for three seconds before main engine ignition. Propellant stability snaps to 25% or 0%, depending on circumstances I do not yet understand, on stage jettison instead of booster flameout. When the main engine is staged to ignite together with the boosters vapour formation and flame-out occurs the moment the boosters are jettisoned despite the engine operating at up to 50% power.

Is propellant stability degrading to 25% after staging a normal occurence or did my install go wrong somewhere?