• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

216 Excellent


About Pand5461

  • Rank
    Sr. Spacecraft Engineer

Profile Information

  • Location ☆☆☆☭

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Pand5461

    [WIP] UnKerballed Start

    I do agree that the Ven's SRB are more fitting. The VSR licensing seems to allow bundling parts with other mods (although it's best to ask the permission before the offcial release). My only concern is what happens if they are used alongside the VSR itself, will there be duplicated parts? With the engines, I am uncomfortable about the idea of using the same model for two parts. It's better to use LV-T15 model, set the gimbal limit to 0 and then give it the full range through an upgrade. As for the reaction wheels in a probe core: there is, as of current, a cockpit with a built-in 10 torque reaction wheel in T2. That doesn't make 0.3 torque in a probe core at T3 unreasonable. Even worse, that may make first flight with a crewed cockpit easier than with a probe core, which defeats the main purpose of the reshake. And trying to play shows that those insanely powerful reaction wheels in fact save more parts (the rocket needs less aero surfaces for stability and control in low atmo) than having a probe with tiny reaction wheels and SAS. Apart from that, I would revamp the LV-T15 even more radically, with power reduced to 5..10 kN and mass to 0.06 t. Rationale: with the mass of half a ton and thrust about 20 kN, LV-T15 is just a much worser Spark and has zero use after unlocking T4. Tier 1 - LVT10 -> LV-T15 with 0° gimbal range. Tier 2 - Mk0 or radial decoupler. Rationale: to make the completion of the "Escape the atmosphere" contract possible at this tier. Otherwise, T3 provides you with enough tech to skip that as a step of its own and get straight to orbit. Tier 3 - give LV-T15 actual gimbal range.
  2. Pand5461

    Why are probe cores so heavy?

    Almost. Haha
  3. Pand5461

    [WIP] UnKerballed Start

    I'm thinking of more radical changes. Tier 1 - Flea only Tier 2 - Adding Hammer and Ant; radial decoupler and Mk1 -> Mk0 adapter in the Fabrication node. It makes it possible to build two-stage spin-stabilized sounding rockets. Tier 3 - OKTO core and small nosecone in the Stability node (reaction wheels one tier later). With some creativity, that could then be the only T3 node to unlock to reach orbit. Spark in the General Rocketry node (probably with gimbal range set to 0 at that point to unlock later via the part upgrade system). Tier 4 - Thumper booster and LV-T30. A bit confused for the further tech, but tweaking tech costs sounds like a great idea. The thing I have in mind is to not unlock efficient engines and Mk2 engines before the R&D upgrade. So, maybe the Heavy rocketry node can cost 110 science to unlock, and as for efficient engines - I don't know, there aren't suitable subtrees. Construction maybe, with names like "Advanced metalworks" and such?
  4. Pand5461

    Why are probe cores so heavy?

    Because kerbals never cared to use anything more advanced than vacuum tubes and ferrite core memory units, as they'd better add more boosters. Just look at the size of that probe!
  5. Pand5461

    [WIP] UnKerballed Start

    This time actually played a bit with this tech tree. It's a bit harder to get through the first tiers, but after you get the Terrier in tier 4 and the Poodle in tier 5 - it's pretty much end game. My suggestion is to stretch the progress in engines as that is the main limiting factor in game. Historically, one may say that it was always a problem to design engines to send capsules to space. The tech tree seems to have, by the moment the first crew capsule unlocks, engines capable enough to use that capsule for a Duna mission.
  6. Pand5461

    [WIP] UnKerballed Start

    More feedback. How is there a probe core in the starting node and no batteries? I'd vote for the Z-200s, like in UbM, but anything will be okay, really. Also, I confirm that it is possible to build an orbital vessel using Sparks attached in clusters via cubic struts, and even do that within 30 part limitation in 2.5x rescale. But that requires a fairing for the Sputnik core, FL-T400 tanks and radial decouplers. It is possible to do an orbital launch with the OKTO probe, small nosecone, Z-200 battery, Hammers, a Flea and an Ant, FL-A10 adapter, Mk1 and Mk0 stack decouplers and Elevons (no. 4). All of that took 20 parts and goes into orbit in 2.5x scaled system. For stock, just one Hammer booster would suffice, I guess. So it is indeed possible to start with low-level SRBs and Mk0 engines. The game may be still playable with Mk1 LFO engines not before Tier 4, however, lack of gimbal on the Reliant may render if it's unlocked after the Spark (but who knows, it has thrice the thrust of 4-Spark cluster, after all).
  7. Droptank - обычно, подвесной бак. Wrapper - т.е. он, по-видимому, облегающий по форме, а не просто как шарик сбоку подвешивается. Коротко и близко к тексту, мне кажется, не перевести, но "подвесной / сбрасываемый / отделяемый / внешний топливный бак" основную идею передаёт.
  8. Pand5461

    [WIP] UnKerballed Start

    I agree on that in general. The rationale I had in mind is a bit different. From the gameplay prospective, a stack of small tanks is 100% equivalent to a large tank, which is not the case in real life. Therefore, giving only the FL-T100 in Stock Tier 2 has the sole reason of making a decent rocket take most of the 30 part limitation of Level 1 editors. Historically, there hardly was a case when an engine has been developed and the tanks of "appropriate size" for it were technologically unavailable. Moreover, at later stages in the game, giving only the largest tank of a new size may be a bigger limitation to the gameplay, as only a few engines would be available to take off with it, fine-grained control of tank volume is impossible (one can change fuel levels, but that worsens wet/dry mass ratio). We seem to agree on a bigger problem, however, that some stock nodes have no use on their own. I found that deeply irritating that in order to make a 2.5m or 3.75m stage, one needs to unlock half of the corresponding tech tier: engines in one node, tanks in another, decoupler or an adapter in a third one. I'd be extremely grateful to see that fixed. I tried that, don't think it's frustrating, if the cubic strut or thrust plates are available. I'd like that style to get more promotion, too. Starting with 0.625m engines is nice, too. IIRC, clustered Sparks give enough umph to lift an orbital rocket with a Mk1 capsule.
  9. Pand5461

    [WIP] UnKerballed Start

    Hello there. I love that probe-first tech trees have got a new round of attention. I have a general proposition on engines and tanks progress. What's bugging me with this tech tree and has bugged with the stock one is that first 2.5m engines and tanks appear in two separate nodes in the same tier. That does not make sense - the tanks must be available by the moment one unlocks the engine size. So, maybe move one of the 2.5m tanks to General Construction (in which case the Rockomax adapter would at least make some sense to be there)? Also, on the order of unlocking fuel tanks and engines. Stock tree gets things about right for 1.25m parts, but everything past Tier 4 appears do be just placed in random-ish order with the general idea of bigger -> later. The earlier tiers rather follow the approach "from generic to specialized", which, to my taste, is more logical. In that respect, I think there should be more distinction between booster / sustainer / upper stage tech, just as it is for Reliant -> Swivel -> Terrier progress. Following the same logic, I'd suggest to unlock 2.5m tanks in the order 16 -> 32 -> 8 & 64 (really, by the time a player gets to 2.5m tech 30 parts per vessel are unlikely to be a limitation, and that seems to be the only reason to not give properly-sized tanks right from the start), and the engines in the order Skipper -> Mainsail & Twin Boar in one node + Poodle in another one -> Wolfhound.
  10. Yes, if all one wants is to just use kOS. But this is avoiding the kOS support problem in this very mod, not solving it. I think the initial balancing was to put first kOS processors into the same node as the first probe (not sure, haven't played with a crew-first tech tree for ages). UbM certainly had basic kOS processors right from the start. From the looks of the tech tree, my opinion is that kOS parts belong more to the science & electronics subtree. Here's my rearrangement: //kOSMachine0m is a deprecated dupe of the KR-2042 @PART[kOSMachine0m]:AFTER[kOS]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree] { @TechRequired = unresearcheable @entryCost = 4500 @cost = 850 } @PART[KR-2042]:AFTER[kOS]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree] { @TechRequired = start @entryCost = 4500 @cost = 850 } @PART[kOSMachine1m]:AFTER[kOS]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree] { @TechRequired = basicScience @entryCost = 6000 @cost = 1200 } @PART[kOSMachineRad]:AFTER[kOS]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree] { @TechRequired = precisionEngineering @entryCost = 10000 @cost = 2500 } @PART[KAL9000]:AFTER[kOS]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree] { @TechRequired = automation @entryCost = 25000 @cost = 4500 } Is there an "official" discussion / proposition platform, like a Github repo or something? I have some other rearrangement ideas for stock parts as well, and the forums thread isn't a convenient way to discuss them.
  11. @_Zee I have a request regarding kOS support. Can you put at least one of the machines into the starting node? It does not feel right to drive "probe-controlled" rockets by hand.
  12. Why I'd like to see probe functions on capsules is to do unmanned tests, e.g. for reentry, and to have kOS controls without the need of a probe core (I know for sure that kOS does not have control over vessels without SPU when RemoteTech is installed, and manned capsules don't have that; but with stock CommNet - I don't remember). I myself was thinking of making configs for "boilerplate" capsules - i.e. basically capsule-shaped probe cores, for the very purpose of unmanned rehearsals of missions. But laziness took over
  13. I mean, add SAS capacity to the crew capsules' ModuleControl and remove the min crew requirements for the control at higher tech tiers.
  14. Great! With UbM abandoned, such mods are much needed indeed. Have you thought about adding probe functions to command modules through part upgrades?
  15. Pand5461

    Tuning changes in 1.6

    I think the Wolfhound as a monopropellant engine with Isp of, say, 320 s and thrust matching the Poodle would still be a better representation of the historic engine. At the same time, the Skiff certainly still looks too light and too weak for its size. Maybe its place is between the Skipper and the Mainsail (which puts the thrust near the Vector, but the Vector has its niche for the small size and good atmospheric Isp, and the Skiff ASL Isp may be nerfed to, say, 220 s to emphasize its intended use).