• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

23 Excellent

About Tonas1997

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location Crying in a corner, complaining about not having enough RAM
  1. Ok, last problem: anyone uses KSPI-E with RealPlumes? The turbojets don't seem to have any defined plumes for any fuels other than atmospheric mode (using IntakeAir as fuel). I was told to post this here on the RealPlumes thread, btw
  2. [1.3.1] RealPlume - Stock [v1.0.1 - 3/12/17]

    Does anyone use this mod with KSPI-E? The nuclear turbojets don't seem to have a defined plume/sounds for any propellants other than IntakeAir.
  3. @Arivald Ha'gel Thanks for the reply! I thought RealFuels removed and replaced any pre-installed fuels (like the ones from stock + KSPI-E)., but thankfully turbojets are still as OP as they've always been. Now I'm dealing with missing engine plumes for anything other than IntakeAir, but that's a problem for the folks over at the RealPlumes thread
  4. [1.3] Real Fuels v12.2.3 July 30

    A pejorative name used to describe individuals with a high sex drive. Four letters, starting with "s".
  5. [1.3] Real Fuels v12.2.3 July 30

    Thanks for the answer! I was actually comparing prices before and after installing RealFuels: a near identical SLS replica costs about 1.200.000 w/o RF, but the adapted version (with the same engines and hardware apart from the tanks) costs only around 250.000. I don't have a problem per se with this, but it kinda makes super-heavy rocketry way cheaper than it should be, which doesn't force me to design rockets economically - and I'm a kind lady for added difficulty. Edit: love the autocorrection to "kind lady"
  6. [1.3] Real Fuels v12.2.3 July 30

    Thanks! I haven't been able to solve it yet, since it has to do with the changed stock fuels, but I'll keep looking into that. Quick unrelated question: is there a way to revert (or at least) adjust the fuel tank prices? I feel like having a 150.000 funds super-heavy lifter is a bit too OP...
  7. Does the nuclear turbojet/ramjet work as intended?
  8. Quick question: I just installed the RealFuels mod and, to my despair, nuclear turbojets and ramjets are no longer functioning. My guess is that it has something to with the way RealFuels replaces stock fuels and somewhat changes the way they work (boiloff, density, ullage, etc.). Is there a way to configure KSPI-E so that both engines can recognize the new fuels, and if yes, has anyone attempted it? Note: most other engines, like the Kerbstein, seem to work fine. I already posted my problem on the RealFuels thread, but since that mod changes a LOT more (mechanics-wise) than Interstellar, any compatibility ajustements will have to be done on the KSPI-E side - AFAIK.
  9. [1.3] Real Fuels v12.2.3 July 30

    I was not sure whether to post this here or on the KSPI-E thread, so I chose one randomly. Guess what. So here it goes: for those of you who play with Interstellar, you probably know about the Turbojet/Ramjet engines (both of which use that whole thermal power shenanigan and some fuel to produce ungodly amounts of thrust). Well, as I expected, RealFuels rendered these engines obsolete, since their fuels - and the very concept of "IntakeAir"! - were overwritten by RF; most likely, it has something to do with the fact both mods change the way resources work. This doesn't seem to translate to other "simpler" KSPI-E engines, like the Kerbstein. The question is: is it possible to create/edit configs so I can revert the engines to their "normal" functionality (quotation marks because there would be some adjustments to be made, like writing custom configs for Kerosene and RF's Hydrazine), and has anyone attempted it?
  10. Yup, the radiators fixed it! Thank you Now I just need to add extra power plants... the solar panel isn't nowhere near enough to power the radiators, the antimatter cannister and the life support systems at the same time
  11. So selecting "next propellant" - via action group, for example - isn't the same as switching to closed cycle? As of now, I'm using LiquidFuel as the secondary propellant. Both "atmospheric" and "liquidfuel" modes on the turbojets work flawlessly on lower altitudes (albeit with different ISP, thrust, etc. as expected), but over a certain altitude, speed, temperature or whatever, the fuel flow drops and, IIRC, so does the thermal output of the reactors, which results in a miserable TWR. The performance does seem to improve a little if I add an ungodly amount of radiators, but it still isn't nowhere near enough to get me to orbit (TWR << 1.00) The antimatter is contained inside the ship (1000 units). Oh, and I just remembered: sometimes, when I use the turbojets on LiquidFuel right from the start, the reactors undergo an "emergency shutdown" due to overheating, and recover some time later. Not sure if it has something to do with my problem, but I though it was worth mentioning.
  12. Not sure this is the right place to get help, but I'm having problems building a SSTO powered by two (upgraded) thermal turbojets, which get thermal energy from an antimatter reactor each. Low-altitude, low-speed flight works fine, and I often get a TWR of over 7 (and that's some acceleration...). However, after going past a certain speed/altitude limit (can't figure out which...), the TWR drops significantly. Switching propellants to Liquid Fuel drops it even further to an impractical 0.20ish, which only allows me to reach 15km high before falling back down. The ship itself is relatively simple: it has a delta-wing design (based on Orbiter's Delta Glider), basic life support and RCS systems, a small cargo bay... As for the engines themselves, they are composed of the turbojet, an antimatter reactor and a radiator, all attached to a fuel tank. Picture for reference: The air intakes and radiators are below the wing, attached to the aft section of the long, white tanks. (this is a screenshot from a version I made when I was experimenting with the ramjets; otherwise everything's the same)
  13. [1.3.1] Kerbal Star Systems [v0.7.3] 11 Dec 2017

    I totally get you; I tried the To Boldly Go mod a while back, and while a procedurally generated cluster is definitely impressive, it just doesn't compare to hand-made systems.
  14. [1.3.1] Kerbal Star Systems [v0.7.3] 11 Dec 2017

    I mean... Elite Dangerous did it, but we're talking about the Unity engine here
  15. [1.3.1] Kerbal Star Systems [v0.7.3] 11 Dec 2017

    About the whole Delta-V discussion; won't the Transfer Window Planner calculate dV maps for the Kerbol system like usual? So far, I only used the mod with the stock system, but I had the idea it integrates with modded systems as well.