Clamp-o-Tron

Members
  • Content Count

    312
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

309 Excellent

2 Followers

About Clamp-o-Tron

  • Rank
    KSP_x64.exe has stopped responding.

Recent Profile Visitors

650 profile views
  1. That is absolutely perfect! I'll go ahead and write some resourceDefs for those. Progress update: I've written the template for hydrazine (monoprop) engines, and will start applying it to Tantares stuff later today.
  2. If you all aren't too busy with bugfixes and Delta IV, can I request the quick addition of the RL10A-5 engine that powered the DC-X and the conceptual DC-Y? This is a pretty good look at the piping and greebles. It's pretty similar to the regular RL-10 plumbing. Here's a good look at the engine bell and the relative size. Strangely enough, a paper showed up in the image search results with a great picture of the engine in operation: (On the right is obviously not an RL-10.) Do note that the point of the image was to show overexpanded exhaust, so the plume wouldn't have looked like this once out of the prototype stage. I hope that's enough info and you're willing to do this awesome engine!
  3. Thanks, Aerozine sounds good. I might stick with NTO though. RE: B9 part variants that use different fuels. I'm having some trouble with those part switches. That might just be because the MM patch is extremely poorly written (which I will optimize over the next few days). Restartability is definitly one of the advantages of hypergolic propellants. The others are that they are storable without cryostats, and the combustion cycle can be much simpler than a kerolox or hydrolox engine. I don't know if I'll do Kerbalism configs (never have played with it, it's just incompatible with too much stuff), but that won't stop someone (hint hint) from doing them, it's a good idea. Engine ignitor is the mod I wish was more supported, but it's patchwork. Storability might be a good upside to using these instead of cheaper kerolox. Maybe I'll make oxidizer (LOX) boiloff?
  4. Thanks for the interest! It is (obviously) still very much in flux and might not see the light of a 1.0 release until I can figure out some efficient MM patching and find all the edge-case bugs. The names can change, if you have any suggestions tell me. I'd like to stay away from stuff like "Propellium" or "Explodium" and go with real-ish names. I don't believe I've seen any change in the engine performance. BDB Titan II at 80% fuel load performs with about 150 m/s of margin on a BDB Gemini, and BDB Apollo SPS is just about right for capturing in Mun orbit, and returning home. That said, I only did those and the Belle upper stage as tests, if anything weird shows up, please alert me.
  5. Nice to know that someone is interested. Keep on mind, though, that this version is not ready to be played in a save you care about. It's mostly out for playtesting and to give you all a chance to try it out. Here's a list of what's coming in 0.2: Pin down a few stubborn BDB engines. Get part switch for BDB LR87/91 working (I think I know what the problem is) Create a new template for MonoProp engines. Add support for tantares (+lv&sp). (maybe?) have convert-o-trons be able to make the hypergols. Try to figure out an issue with monoprop disappearing from parts when fuelswitch is set to hypergol. Add support for a couple new mods (TBD).
  6. KSP Stockalike Hypergols A stockalike Kerbal Space Program mod to add another fuel mixture to the game for (very) partial realism. This is HEAVILY in Dev, more mod support will come soon! Until I accumulate enough support, this will remain in beta. QIIWBFAQBNHSTY: Q: Why are these all AZ50/NTO? A: Simplicity. We don't need to go all RealFuels, this is STOCKALIKE hypergols. Q: It's not right! [x] doesn't burn AZ50/NTO! A: Shoo. Back to RO with you. Q: Does this need RealFuels? A: Nope. Q: Why doesn't this affect monoprop engines? A: I'm assuming those are meant to just be hydrazine engines. Q: How do I request compatibility for stuff? A: Raise an issue on Github, ping me @Clamp-o-Tron, or make a pull request on the repo if you've done it yourself! There's a guide in the package if you want to do that and don't know how. Q: You messed up a .cfg, made a typo, made an engine hypergolic when it shouldn't be, etc. A: Oops! I am a very fallible human. Contact me with the info in the same way as above. Q: Is this compatible with KSP version x.x.x? A: It won't work with KSP2 (yet), but any KSP1 version with a working Module Manager and B9 Part Switch should be just fine! Q: What in the heck does QIIWBFAQBNHSTY mean? A: Questions I Imagine Would Be Frequently Asked Questions But Nobody Has Said These Yet. Q: How do I download? A: We're still in beta, so you'll have to grab a prerelease from GitHub instead of Spacedock. Dependencies: B9PartSwitch ModuleManager CommunityResourcePack Supports (As of 0.1): Bluedog Design Bureau Shuttle Orbiter Construction Kit + reDIRECT Stock ReStock+ Making History Yeah, it isn't very much, but more will come! Credits: @Jso for basis of the patch @RoverDude and other community members for Community Resource Pack @blowfish for B9 Part Switch @sarbian for Module Manager
  7. Rolled a 25, what does that get me from NASA? Also, AHEM, funding check We have nerds of the other kind here, too.
  8. I would love that! A quick glance at the KK source code, however, suggests that you may need support on their end.
  9. I’ve got the same TWR problem. Stock aero, default JNSQ atmosphere, only mods JNSQ, all the visuals, other parts mods, and the dependencies. Interestingly, it’s exactly twice as thrusty as it should be.
  10. This is the place to post your questions and bug reports related to RSS. If there are any technical problems resulting from unknown mods, they should go in the Technical Support (modded) or Add-On Discussion subforums. I honestly have no idea what's happening here, again, the best place to ask would be in the RSS thread.
  11. Okay, it's been a while after release, and still no screenshots and congratulations, but whatever, here you go. Such a majestic silhouette! The original 4 test pilots rove over to the launchpad for a suborbital flight test of the prototype Mk-33. Mandatory elevator and access arm photo ops. The crew settle into their seats, and power on the systems. Unlike the Kane capsule and KSTS orbiter, the Mk-33 is designed to be flown by nearly anyone, making rapid flights possible. The crew access arms retract, leaving plenty of space for the wings at liftoff. Engine start! The Mk-33 makes a very sharp gravity turn, as it's only going to Welcome Back Island. Using RCS to hold attitude, it falls on a ballistic arc back towards the thick of the atmosphere. Jets on as it turns to the approach vector towards Welcome Back Airfield. Jeb can't have the automated landing system have all the glory, so he switches into manual control and guides the glider down very slowly. Dammit Jeb!
  12. Wow. This is astounding. KSP2 isn't really necessary when we have awesome mods like this. I'm assuming, however, the terrain is determined algorithmically with a few textures to serve as colors?
  13. I try to see if 4MV can handle JNSQ Eve entry. Standard craft, launched on a Proton (not visible) Course correction. Eve is visible with Distant Object Enhancement if you look right. Kerbin, Mun, Minmus, and Jool are visible as tiny specks. Eve looms ahead. Lander separates from orbiter after orbital insertion. Atmospheric entry imminent. Lotsa plasma. Unfortunately, I lost the whole thing about 5 seconds after this screenshot. So there, it can't handle JNSQ entry. No screenshots of an empty screen, sorry. I'll make a PR to github tomorrow increasing the resistance if JNSQ is installed. Love it @Beale!