Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'propulsion'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • General
    • Announcements
    • The Daily Kerbal
  • Kerbal Space Program 2
    • KSP 2 Discussion
    • KSP 2 Dev Diaries
    • KSP 2 Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Show and Tell
  • Kerbal Space Program
    • KSP Discussion
    • KSP Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission ideas
    • The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP Fan Works
  • Community
    • Welcome Aboard
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
  • Gameplay and Technical Support
    • Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
    • Technical Support (PlayStation 4, XBox One)
  • Add-ons
    • Add-on Discussions
    • Add-on Releases
    • Add-on Development
  • Making History Expansion
    • Making History Missions
    • Making History Discussion
    • Making History Support
  • Breaking Ground Expansion
    • Breaking Ground Discussion
    • Breaking Ground Support
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU Forums
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Website URL



About me



Found 25 results

  1. V0.8.0 (Southern Cross Plays Softly in the Distance) Welcome to the Prakasa Aeroworks Release Thread Freshly imported from an interstellar race with no Prime Directive, Prakasa is a pack aimed at aircraft and spaceplanes, namely with the objective of filling the 2.5 meter void between the diminutive Mk2 and massive Mk3. The parts are themed towards a somewhat more distant future than stock, offering greater interior space and a cleaner, spaceship-er aesthetic. The focus is on pods and associated IVAs, but propulsion, utility, and aerodynamic parts are included/being developed as well. Propulsive balance favors large, heavy parts with a lot of power behind them for the sake of aesthetically pleasing lines/aerodynamic viability/framerate over engine clusters. Since dual-threading seems to be the way of things around here and I've grown confident in my drive to continue this project, I thought it time for a proper release thread. Stick around for releases and comments. For development progress, suggestions, et cetera, please see the breathtakingly similar development thread over here. With a proper place for released material it should be a bit more development-y from here on out. Key Features: Lots of pods across all form factors (save 0.625), ALL featuring complete IVAs for maximum comfy. I've lost count exactly how many, and don't feel like counting them up. SCRAMjets and nuclear turbines a variety of form factors Ion engines for 1.25 and 2.5 form factors, with generators to support them Comfy Crew Cabins and Science Modules so you can literally stare into space while burning many hours working on stellar spectrographs Engine design suited to minimizing part count (powerful, versatile, heavy, physically large engines) Custom Engine Effects Futurist A E S T H E T I C My very own fuselage profile with associated adapters Big crew cabins with fuel included Tenuous story canon that probably nobody cares about except me A great cross section of my progress from sucking to being decent Image Album: Reviews: (A pretty old one, but it'll do) Current Features: -Seven 2.5m pods with IVAs -Three 1.25m pods with IVA -Two Mk3 pods with IVA -One Mk2 pod with IVA -1.25m SCRAMjet -1.25m Ion Engine -2.5m Ion Engine -1.25m Fuel Tanks -2.5m Fuel Tanks -1.25m Hybrid Nuclear Turbojet -2.5m Hybrid Nuclear Turbojet -1.25m Intake -2.5m Intake -1.25m Generator -2.5m Generator -2.5m Hybrid SCRAMjet -MK2 Three Function Engine -2.5m Structural engine housing for 1.25m engines -2.5m Passenger Cabin with windows mounted high to allow for center mounted wings. -2.5m Science module THAT DOES SCIENCE! Future Plans: -A set of 2.5m tanks so as not to require the use of standard rocket tanks, which often don't look quite right on aircraft (Done) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -More aerodynamic and structural components -Random pods that strike my fancy or are requested -A bit more in the propulsion department, mostly large, heavy, multipurpose/multimode engines to save myself/everyone else lots of clustering. -Possibly Wings? -Some kind of price balancing? Input on that would be greatly appreciated; I rarely play Career. I know Sadhak, Kalpan, and to some extent Dekhana are lagging behind the quality of the others. The Asima series represents a great deal of improvement on my part, as well as settling on a particular style. I've been working on bringing those first two up to date, but due to that new experience, a bunch of problems I didn't realize were problems the first time around are keeping me from making it happen as of yet. For those of you who like the first two I will make it happen, though if there's real demand for it I might figure it out sooner. Sadhak is due to be completely overhauled to the Nireksha/Naga standard. Kalpan will probably also have to be remade from scratch. Changelog: 0.1 - Initial Release (Sadhak, Kalpan) 0.2 - Added Dekhana and Asima S1 0.3 - Added Asima S2 and SCRAMjet, patched Asima. Both versions of Asima now have togglable lighting. Uploaded to Curse following the heat death of *. 0.4 - Added Bhatak Naga, Nireksha, 2.5m Passenger Cabin, 2.5m SCRAMjet, 2.5m engine housing. Patched Asima S2 to match texture styling on other added parts. Fixed a few flavor text spelling errors. 0.4.5 - Added Ankhen, Fuel Tanks, Ion Engines, Generator 0.5.0 - Added Akashe, Sabhee Viaktar, Sashakt and Dohan Kshay hybrid nuclear turbojets, Vatavar + Vaayu Intakes, Science module THAT DOES NOTHING 0.6.0 - Added Dhyana, Raksha, Made the science module do stuff 0.7.0 - Added Jalakag and the MK2 Engine Notes: RPM required for full IVA functionality This mod is primarily wish-fulfillment on my end (having sprung from a Laythe flying boat project for which I couldn't find a suitable pod) but if you've recommendations, I'm happy to hear them. Download (Things are cooperating in 1.1): Curse (0.4) (it works if you really want the .4 version from curse for some reason) Github (Coming Soon) SpaceDock (0.8.0) Special Thanks: Squad for texture references K.Yeon for pointing me in the right directions Lots of people in my horrifying normals thread, and various others for helping me build some semblance of non-cluelessness. Your aid is much appreciated. EDIT: I've heard that downloading via CKAN can result in receiving the 0.2 version, which was the last one released on *. Since * is dead I'm not sure how to get to it to fix it. Barring that, the direct downloads from curse and spacedock are fine. License: This work is Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
  2. [KSP 1.8.1-1.11.X] (V0.4.1) Interstellar Technologies [Antimatter Catalyzed Fusion Engine Powered Interstellar Spacecraft - Kepler] An Interstellar Propulsion System mod, made by Kepler- At long last, after months of hard work practicing modeling, and after finally unlocking the secrets to textures, The mod is finally released. This parts pack will be used to expand from the mod Kerbal Space Program Interstellar Extended. Those parts are extremely imbalanced with going around the stock system. The engines are made off the base of the KSPI-E engines' statistics, [DEPENDENCIES] All of the required mods for Interstellar Technologies to function properly is now in the main mod folder. Note that the KSPI-E folder is stripped of some of it's parts, due to complaints of complexity of KSPI-E. [RECOMMENDATIONS] Those are recommendations to download to play with the mod. They are NOT required. - Far Future Technologies - TUFX - MEV Heavy Industries - Galaxies Unbound - A Stellar Odyssey - Interstellar Extended (The whole pack in order to get all the parts) - Near Future Mods by Nertea - Singularity (For Galaxies Unbound) The parts pack will be updated quickly, releases will be *quick*. I will be available in the KSPI-E discord server and the Galaxies Unbound discord server, please @ Kepler (No spacing) to make suggestions for future changes. Special thanks to @Cyne for helping me with learning to texture models. [Some of the Parts include...] - Daedalus Inertial Confinement Fusion Drive (v.0.1.0) - Antimatter Catalyzed Fusion Drive (v.0.1.0) - Kugelblitz Drive (Black hole drive) (v.0.1.0) - Laser Core Antimatter Drive (v0.1.0) - Multi Mode Interstellar Afterburning fusion drive (v0.1.1) - Multi Mode SSTO Fusion Engine (v0.1.6) - TRIGA Core Static/Pulsed Trimodal Nuclear Thermal Rocket (0.1.7) - "Coaxial" SSTO Fusion Engine (0.1.7) And so much more as the mod updates! [SCREENSHOTS] [DOWNLOAD] Primary (SpaceDock): https://spacedock.info/mod/2674/Interstellar Technologies - A KSPI-E Expansion For Additional Bugfixes and all (Probably mostly for science mode and that) please contact me through Discord through the KSPI-E or the GU discord server. The mod uses the CC BY-NC-SA License.
  3. Cargo Accelerators Maxim 24: Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a big gun. This mod aims to provide mass driver parts (gigantic coil and maybe even rail guns) and control aids that can propel engine-less unmanned cargo vessels with high acceleration to effectively perform precise orbital maneuvers with enough dV to go from, say, LKO to the Mun. And with careful planning even beyond. With the help of mods like MechJeb and TCA it should be possible to organize a network of accelerators and decelerators (still not present) for moving cargo around the system cheaply and easily. So far it provides a single part - Orbital Accelerator It is a massive resizable coil accelerator with extendable barrel (up to ~1.5km) so heavy that I don't know any way of putting it to orbit aside from building it there or using the orbit editor (F12). It has its own powerful reaction wheels and RCS thrusters that are capable to reorient it in space; and enough tanks capacity to store fuel for recoil compensation. It also has dedicated UI that allows it to connect to the payload, read its maneuver node and either execute it by turning the right way and firing at precise moment with precise final delta-V; or tell you that it can't do it for various reasons. The model still lacks textures and most colliders, as it is used to develop and test functionality rather than play. But it's enough to get a hand on things and toy with the concept. Demonstrations Future plans In-orbit construction of barrel extension segments by kerbal engineers from EC and Material Kits + Specialized Parts Proper model for Orbital Accelerator Orbital Decelerator -- a counterpart that should, in theory, catch the payload on the other end of the trajectory and decelerate it. Needs further investigation. Ground-based Accelerator -- an accelerator that can be positioned on the ground and launch engine-less cargo straight to orbit. Needs further investigation. Download So far only from GitHub: https://github.com/allista/CargoAccelerators/releases/latest SpaceDock and CKAN will come when it's playable enough to be out from alpha
  4. After finding these articles I was wondering if the Devs knew about this. They did say they were planning on adding realistic engines to the game and this, while very difficult to build, could be an amazing way to do interstellar travel. https://interestingengineering.com/a-faster-than-light-warp-drive-powered-spaceship-may-be-possible https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a32449240/nasa-warp-drive-space-time/ https://www.sciencealert.com/how-feasible-is-a-warp-drive-here-s-the-science For those of you who didn't read it: A bubble of Space-Time is created, you sit in the bubble, the bubble shoots through the space-time fabric, you can travel at ridiculous speeds and it technically isn't faster than the speed of light.
  5. You're looking to, or you've already downloaded @Nertea's shiny, shiny things so the air filters on your Laythe base keep filtering, or so the cryogenic fuel in your Eeloo probe doesn't escape. But how do you use these exactly? How do you balance the reactors, engines, radiators and overall dry mass to get decent TWR, consistent burns and keep the reactors in their prime too? Here is all the introductory info you need to get you going. Topics will be added over time so don't worry too much about things missing from this post. Glossary Reactor + Engine Balance Reactor + Radiator Balance Reactor Longevity Reactor Control Capacitors Capacitor Control (Soon) Fuel Performance Argon Xenon Refueling Lithium Reactor + Engine Balance When picking a reactor, watch its Fission Generator > Power Generated value and Fission Reactor > Required Cooling value. When picking an ion engine watch its Propellants > EC consumption and you'll find that this consumption will tend to be exact to the output of a given reactor and that there are several more such pairings begging for you to notice them. Reactor + Radiator Balance Once you can keep in mind how much the Fission Reactor > Required Cooling of a given reactor is, it should be easy enough to look at the stock radiators and add or multiply their Radiator Specs > Core Heat xFer values. Once your total exceeds the reactor's Required Cooling value that's it, that's how many of that radiator you need. This is a good setup: 400kW from 2x large static radiator > 300kW from 1x Garnet. Also, never forget that static radiators must be attached directly to the reactor or its parent part or else. I don't need to install a radiator mod to show how to balance a reactor with them, but I would need to install one because stock radiators do have their limitations, and "options" are especially important for ion-powered vehicles that dare to pass through an atmosphere with their reactors running. Reactor Longevity Don't get swept away with the power of a nuclear reactor that you decide to or completely forget to put an RTG or solar panel on your craft. Always include an alternate means of power generation so that the probe core can be kept alive and that you don't waste the reactor's nuclear fuel Enriched Uranium between the last orbital maneuver and the next. In flight there is the danger of the reactor overheating and the loss of core health (separate from core life). Core Health is expressed as a percentage and iirc, once health is lost, total output becomes capped and it can eventually meltdown and become dead and useless (I don't know if it explodes, haha). Core Life is the amount of time you get depending on how full it is with Enriched Uranium and what the output cap is. The output cap is controllable via a slider in the NF Reactor toolbar panel between 0 and full EC/s rate, technically allowing the reactor to run for decades or centuries as an oversized RTG. Reactor Control The final thing about nuclear reactors is, of course, how to operate them directly, especially from the snazzy NF GUI app. Look for this in your KSP toolbar once you have Near Future Electric installed and a nuclear reactor on the active vessel. (It does not show in Map View.) Every proper nuclear reactor mod out there should integrate into Near Future and can be controlled through it, and that makes life good. Such mods (that I know of) include USI Core and Mk2 + Mk3 Stockalike Expansion but exclude KSP Interstellar which changes all nuclear devices in its own way. Do not expect this to control any radiators associated with a reactor. Those must be toggled separately. The UI Elements are as follows: The radio (circle) button under a reactor name is the main switch and lights up when toggled on. The thermometer (with two checkpoint markers) respectively indicate the thermal range, the peak operating temperature, and the overload/shutdown temperature. The number will always be the temperature at a given moment. The three symbolic items above the thermometer represent kilowatt output (not necessary to most of us), the ElectricCharge output (most important) and Core Life (very important). When a reactor is on it will show you the duration in years instead of "Reactor Offline". Basic Controls is the output control slider (at 100% by default) which lets you finely control the ElectricCharge output. Accordingly, the kW, EC and Core Life values over the thermometer will change. Most of us don't need to click Advanced Controls. I didn't, so I don't even know what that looks like. This screenshot features the 2.5m USI device with its context window open and the NF control window. Note that in both GUI its output slider is set to 25%. Both windows have their distinct advantages, but NF's window shows you what matters right now, and for all your reactors if you have more than one, removing the need to pin all your reactors' context windows if you ever have to access them all at once. You do not want to end up like this! In the odd chance that you visit an infernal planet and decide that solar panels were not necessary...or they are present but useless at the time, make sure to never leave things on that will guzzle the current. In this case I had a life support device on and the ship's radiators were maxed out, causing them to fail to cool the reactor, which in turn led to the reactor gradually overheating, losing output efficiency, and nearing its overheat/shutdown temperature. If it reaches its shutdown temperature and does not receive cooling, it will remain super-heated and its Core Health (the percentage status of the core, not the output duration bit) will start to fall, meaning it's decaying and it will become a metal brick. As long as it is hot it will decay. If there's a separate power source able to feed the radiators and cool the reactor down, the decay will stop. Jebediah! Capacitors As @Supercheese mentions below (which helps me a lot in do this part, so thanks muchly ) installing capacitors instead of a reactor can save cost and weight and increase deltaV by quite a lot. As shown in the first picture, you get 8x the amount of StoredCharge to ElectricCharge for the same mass and volume of the part. Each part here weighs 0.25 tons but one quarter-ton of capacitor shines brightly against 2 whole dark tons of normal battery. (Stock 2.5m batteries featured here) While that is a great thing, they have their disadvantages. They are not a 2-way street like batteries and cannot be used out of while they're charging. A capacitor can be paused from charging (and when charging it will feed from everything that produces or stores ElectricCharge) but it cannot be paused while discharging (in doing so it will feed everything that stores or consumes ElectricCharge). You can control* the discharge rate of a capacitor in the VAB and in flight at the Near Future Capacitor toolbar button. As shown in the second picture: because the visible ion engine consumes 1999 EC/s I set the discharge rate to just over that to feed the engine and any vital systems. Unfortunately, as far as I know, you must manually discharge capacitors in series to feed your engines. If you discharge them all at once that's quite literally wasting tons of power. * There are certain lower limits to the discharge rate depending on a capacitor's size which will occasionally force you to add an engine or else waste a portion of the released power. Even if for some reason you end up stacking a reactor's weight or more in capacitors (and heavy, heavy solar panels...) on a craft, you're still saving more than just cost. You're avoiding the troubles of nuclear fuel and reactors themselves if you're still skeptical about the things, but you'll remain at the mercy of solar panel efficiency if you're operating very far from a star. The next thing to consider is how many capacitors set at a given discharge rate will afford a consistent engine burn up to a desired maximum length. The reference formula to measure by is very simple: Total StoredCharge / Discharge Rate = Maximum burn time in seconds. Fuel Performance If you're a nut for fuel performance, then here are a few opening stats including engine sizes to help weigh Near Future's propellants in your mind before you read about them below. Argon Engines 1 ~ 54.55 kN, 2800 ~ 5500 Isp 0.6m, 1.25m, 2.5m Xenon Engines 1.4 kN, 4000 Isp (Stock Dawn engine) 2.3 ~ 5.6 kN, 6500 ~ 19300 Isp (Added engines) 0.6m only VASIMR Engines (can halve their Isp for nearly triple thrust, no change in propellant consumption) Xenon mode: 4 ~ 68 kN, 6000 ~ 7000 Isp Argon mode: 2.5 ~ 44 kN, 8500 ~ 9500 Isp 0.6m, 1.25m, 2.5m Lithium Engines 46 ~ 237 kN, 2900 ~ 3800 Isp 0.6m, 1.25m, 2.5m Argon I personally prefer ArgonGas over XenonGas because it's more abundant in-game (as it is irl) than Xenon and is hence easier to harvest from Duna and other planets with atmosphere. Here I modify a probe that was never meant to go far from wherever it's deployed, to (almost) be able to cross SOI. Almost = not enough fuel but there's plenty, plenty room to fix that. Adding a radial Argon tank (or 4) and changing the Garnet to its TopNode subtype so I can attach things to its other end. Xenon Here's a Xenon-powered Duna probe I launched soon before KSP 1.2.0 was even announced. This is 6 tons, 1 TWR in low Mun orbit iirc, and 11km's dV! The Garnet reactor underneath has 2x Radiator Panel (edge), the straight ones with 150kW cooling power directly attached and they're exactly enough (300kW together) to keep it at/within its limits (300kW). The particular Xenon engines on this one have been deprecated so I can't explore them now. Refueling There are two mods I know of that supply a means not just to use Argon or Xenon, but to replenish your tanks. The first is Karbonite, part of USI. Its low-altitude atmosphere scoops come in 1.25m and 2.5m size. They have very poor intake values since they are firstly filter type devices, and they operate better the faster you're moving and the thicker the atmosphere. Strap some of these, a karbonite power cell and a USI kontainer (for Argon) or a stock Xenon tank to your airplane and fly around (if you have the patience or an autopilot mod). Have the scoops filter karbonite too to feed the power cell and even better, feed some karbonite jet engines so you can infinitely fly and refuel faster.... Or you know, spam them on a landed craft and do the timewarp disco. (Forgive me for mentioning so much karbonite.) Then there's Near Future, of course. It provides the AIReS Atmospheric Sounder (Science category) and the M-2 Cryogenic Gas Separator (Utility category) for harvesting Argon and Xenon. The AIReS is a scanner and both parts only work in atmosphere. Unlike karbonite's scoops, the M-2's performance is not influenced by whether it's moving, and it consumes between 12 and 24 EC/s, or 12 + 24 depending on which gas, or both, you're processing. Lithium The story isn't very different for lithium-fueled crafts, except that Lithium, being a solid material is much denser than Argon and Xenon and that makes it better for crewed ion vessels. TWR is much better at the cost of Isp, and empowers heavy landers and even enables Duna SSTOs. I've made Argon-fueled SSTOs (in KSP 1.1.3) but those required very, very tedious mixing and matching of USI and NFT's reactors, karbonite scoops (to refuel themselves), and engines for sufficient dV and TWR. I don't know if it's still possible now. I haven't been at this kind of thing since KSP 1.2 arrived. Sometime perhaps I will post examples of a perfected ion-powered SSTO. Near Future Propulsion adds Lithium modules to the stock drills and stock ISRU (and the ISRU of Kerbal Planetary Base System if also installed). Here we have an Augustus-capable Lithium SSTO prototype. Since I always have Galileo's Planet Pack installed, I have KER set to Augustus, a moon, and it compares as follows: Augustus: 0.35g, 65km atmo, 350km radius. Duna: ........0.30g, 50km atmo, 320km radius. The Garnet reactors have just enough cooling and this Lithium engine pairs it perfectly for EC flow. The 3 tons of Ore simulates precious cargo like LS resources. Full or empty, though, this craft can make it (however, it's not aerodynamically sound). When devising a Lithium-driven vessel and want to make your engine setup controllable, make sure to add this to your procedure: Setup the reactor on its own stack and if possible, attach all the needed radiators to it. Attach its complement engine and if necessary, nerf the engine so it doesn't drain more EC than is produced (this is only necessary for the huge engines). Take that stack now and multiply it with symmetry until you get a satisfying number for TWR. This only really matters if you want to land or launch in atmosphere. With the prototype craft below, 2x is not enough and 4x is even better. But this isn't always the case. Diminishing returns are hard to avoid or control, especially when the payload fraction goes up from here. Here's a mothership I launched from Minmus. It doesn't claim to be an SSTO but it had about 6km/s dV fully loaded and had some LFO and roughly 1.2km/s for its VTOL mode and a tiny chemical rocketed lander. it was rated for operation with the surface gravity of Vall which is greater than that of Mun. It also contained 3x Near Future's 8 ton Prometheus reactor and 6x 1.25m Lithium engines.
  6. The quest for fusion power has been a long one. Sadly it seems that fusion is doomed to be decades away for quite some time. However, fission reactors are a well understood technology. Indeed, fission reactions are much easier to initiate than fusion reactions - fission requires interactions between heavy nuclei and neutrons whereas fusion requires light nuclei to overcome the electrostatic barrier between them. So fission is easier to initiate. However current conventional fission reactors - while efficient and better suited for baseload power than other low emission concepts - are quite expensive. They also produce waste and don't burn much of their fuel sources. Not to mention they require processed fuel that requires larger concentrations of U-235 than natural uranium. So I started thinking. What if we took Inertial Confinement Fusion drivers and used fission fuels instead? Assuming we also used a suitable neutron source, it's likely possible to use natural uranium or even natural thorium by employing fast neutrons. This could lead to more economical fuels than conventional fission reactors. It should be possible to get fairly large burnup rates for the fuel as well, so less waste could be produced per unit of energy than conventional nuclear reactors and less fuel would be required. Such reactors would also be safer than conventional nuclear reactors - meltdowns are completely impossible since a very small amount of fuel is reacting at any instant and the reactions only occur if the driver is operating. It could also be possible to have higher power densities than conventional reactors, so smaller facilities would be required and less shielding mass would be needed. Of course this depends on the size of the facility for the driver but the actual reactor itself could be much smaller. Such reactors could also be more thermodynamically efficient by combining conventional heat engine technology with MHD technology. And compared to fusion inertial confinement fission seems to be more achievable. So it could be more economical, safer, more efficient, lower waste production, and smaller than conventional reactors for a given power output. And compared to fusion such reactors could be possible much earlier. And it could lead to the development of more efficient drivers that could make inertial confinement fusion more practical. Or hybrid systems that use fission to initiate a fusion reaction could be possible. Now for some applications. The first one is obvious - baseload electricity. If such technology is more economical than current reactors it could be competitive with other energy sources as well. If developed as a small modular reactor it could be deployed quite rapidly. The second one may be less obvious but still important, though less likely: propulsion for cargo and container ships. Ocean shipping is responsible for quite a large percentage of pollutants and a decent percentage of GHG emissions, and those emissions are expected to grow substantially over time. And of course the one we're all probably more interested in: space propulsion. This can be done using nuclear pulse propulsion or nuclear electric propulsion. If the power density can be made high enough then nuclear-electric systems may be capable of interplanetary missions with reasonable mass ratios. And of course nuclear pulse propulsion could do the same. Such a system would probably be similar to Mini-Mag Orion but without the Z-Pinch system and without the need for other components that limit the performance of the Mini-Mag Orion system (such as the conductive elements needed for the Z-Pinch). So fast transfers to the outer planets would be possible with manned missions. I can't find much literature on this concept - mostly because the words "inertial confinement" are associated with fusion. But it could work with fission. And it seems that it could have some serious advantages over conventional nuclear reactors. Thoughts?
  7. Aerospike Industries Had enough of boring old nozzles? Want to have great efficiency? Then this mod is for you! In development, just a simple mod aiming to provide more Aerospike propulsion to the game. Not really balanced yet or textured. Current parts: "Mtirala" Hybrid fuel booster To-do: Texturing More engines/boosters Balancing Download: SpaceDock https://spacedock.info/mod/2291/Aerospike Industries License: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International
  8. KSP desperately needs larger (1.875 and 2.5 meter) jets, to bring down part and engine-count for players who build really large spaceplanes (since they take so long to get to orbit, the only way to do them, IMHO). I would like to request a modder build a simple mod with stock-alike 1.875 and 2.5 meter jet engines. The objective, eventually, would be to hopefully get SQUAD to work with that modder to make the engines Stock. So focusing on doing a really, really good job with just a few parts would be preferable.
  9. So it looks like we're getting a few new engine types in KSP 2. My analysis is that we'll get Orion drive; atmo and vacuum rated metallic H, the Daedalus ICF, and the torchdrive we see in the trailer. It appears to be performing a brachistochrone deceleration burn, Expanse-style. I think the tech progression will be roughly Orion>Metallic H>Daedalus>Torchdrive; though it would be interesting if they are alternatives to each other on the tech tree. This would force a strategic decision on which branch to pursue short-term. Also can't wait to see colonies and stock clouds! Any thoughts on the new propulsion types? Anything I missed?
  10. Assume a rocket is standing on the ground with mass = 1000 kg, and near the top of rocket we apply a force of 100 N for say 1 sec,now assume that this is sufficient to tip rocket over/start tipping over. If the rocket is mid air and accelerating at 30 m/s^2, then likewise how much force would be required to tilt it pi/180 rad or change its trajectory by some degree, please neglect the change of mass due to consumption of fuel because the value calculated with this assumption is going to be a a value higher than required, so that is not an issue. Will the force required mid air be the same as the force required on the ground with no acceleration ?
  11. The propellants in KSP: Liquid Fuel, Oxidizer. (Sorry Monopropellant, you are for another discussion). The classics, designed to be unambiguous. However, the KSP community has always tried to put a definition on them. Liquid Fuel was easy - liquid hydrogen. It can run as a high efficiency vacuum engine, or as a jet engine along sea level. As a first stage or in a NERVA. Liquid Hydrogen checked all boxes. Oxidizer, on the other hand, has stayed in debate if not given up on. Liquid Oxygen feels like a good candidate, but fails in one area: hypergolic-ness (Okay, that’s the dumbest way to say that). What I mean is that to keep with KSP’s engine style of instant ignition and many starts and stops, the propellants probably have to hypergolic. (If you aren’t a rocket nerd, that means they ignite instantly upon contact). Unfortunately Oxidizers that are hypergolic are quite rare, and almost all of them only are with fuels like hydrazine. But then I found one: (really a family of propellants, but I settled on one.) fluorine or one of its chemical siblings, chlorine trifluoride. These are hypergolic with pretty much anything (It doesn’t care if it’s liquid hydrogen or flippin concrete!) Also, with proper treatment, ClF3 can be stored in tanks made of many different metals. It even has a high ISP! Why isn’t this miracle propellant being used? Well it turns out that government officials don’t like exhausts of hydrochloric acid and hydrofluoric acid in the air. Kerbals? They love going to space more than anything! Who cares? Even in the original KSP, there is a green goo on the launchpad. Guess what is a yellowish-green? ClF*. All in all, a real propellant that has the magical aspects of oxidizer: Instant ignition and good efficiency. Why not? flamma est ubi? *Of course it isn’t ClF3! The concrete would be on fire!
  12. I have been trying to create a mod and made this: New! The super-boosters 1 & 2 are the latest way to get into space without more than the bare essentials. Ridiculously overpowered and ridiculously overpriced the super-boosters are the latest way to get into space-with a price. Comes in rockomax and 1.25 sizes. They are on 1.2 and uses lv-t30 config with extra power. It is my first mod and 3D creation so it is rather shoddytm . I want support from the community, so don't be afraid to criticize. Anyone who can help me with part attachment node offset will be greatly thanked. I am happy to announce that I am in partnership with @Benjamin Kerman.(Thanks Ben o7.) Github: https://github.com/BenjaminCronin/SuperBoosters Licence: MIT Thanks to @Vjrcr , @steedcrugeon , @JPLRepo , @SpaceMouse , @tg626 , @Gamax19 @Benjamin Kerman, @TMasterson5 Owen Maley. To Harry Maley- My Rocketing cousin
  13. I think I mentioned this back in 2013, but there wasn't much science behind the concept. Basically I propose an inline rocket engine (nozzle). It's an upside-down inline aerospike (only noticed that after functionally modeling it) that let's you stack tanks or other engines directly behind it. Back in the day IIRC we didn't have radial thrusters yet, so I realize that three years later the utility is a little lost, BUT, I still think it's interesting that it may actually work, and may potentially be used to reduce surface drag. In any case, it would have helped with regular staging in lieu of the abominable asparagus staging that is so common nowadays. This idea was motivated by the concept of aerodynamic skin effects (IDK what they're actually called, I'm just a pretend engineer) Well anyways, let me share with you my findings, and you can let me know what y'all think: the nozzle: now to validate this thing a little I ran a couple sims. here's a 2d prototype: and here's the thing in 3d. although I think the 2d cross section is more useful. The boundry conditions here are all the walls at 1atm pressure, and the spigots in the engine shovel 1kg/s of air through the engine. Color is temperature. Now in the 2d pic we almost see an airstream that stays under sqrt(x). that would mean that the efficiency on these things (given the right geometry) could be really good! What I really didn't expect to find was this low pressure area/hourglass air density around the nozzle. that surprised me, but it's possible that I set up the boundaries wrong. (not a real scientist). So I was wondering if y'all had any opinions on the concept, or if someone was willing to independently verify this. you think this type of engine would be a nice addon for ksp? PS: a name for this thing would also be nice, if it doesn't already exist.
  14. dear community, as discussed here first images of following mod 'Rocket Factory' : STS - AIAKOS 1 - Space Transport System projectstatus : work in progress. get AiKOS Project album on IMGUR view album on IMGUR and here
  15. Remember the fusion rocket concept I posted a couple months ago? It turns out the company responsible behind it is also developing what the thread is named after - ELF thruster, for short. Here's a couple papers. In a nutshell (as far as I can understand), the thruster turns whatever propellant it was fed (water and simulated Martian atmosphere was tested) into a blob of field-reversed configuration plasmoid, then accelerating it with magnetic coils. If this works, we may have what could be a revolutionary engine for aircraft - an electric jet engine without moving parts. Still needs some way to power it, though. So, what do you guys think?
  16. Dear KSP Kommunity, i have just published my second release. - the follow mod of 'Rocket Factory' - AIAKOS 1 - Space Launch System < this project is currently on hold > HD Trailer coming soon ! stay cool cheers ! Mod Focus : - a complete Space Launch System for Interplanetary Exploration and Adventures. - Specials : real Rocket Engine & SRB sounds ! sound sources : Ariane V boosters, nasa Delta-v and many more.. mixed, looped and specally provided for KSP Moding requirements. prerequisites : - few parts of Mod 'Rocket Factory' a detailed information about development history can be found here in the development thread.
  17. My first mod, an EM drive. No external dependencies, no-frills thingy that is more of a curiosity than a game-changer, due to 0.1kN of thrust (vs Dawn's 2.0), higher EC consumption, serious heat production, and a bit higher mass and price. But primarily, the thrust. Maybe, just maybe you could use it on Gilly to keep yourself pushed to the surface? Download here. The model is a "brass&copper" recolor of stock Ion drive, and it's available in the same research node.
  18. *points to the title* Now there's a combination of words I never expected to see... or at least not in a serious context! But a company called Tethers Unlimited is quite serious about it. They've built a hydrolox thruster for microsatellites - main propulsion for large cubesats, or attitude thrusters for slightly larger craft. However, it doesn't carry cryogenic liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen. No, it carries plain old de-ionized water. And it will use electricity from the satellite's solar panels to electrolyse that water, creating oxygen and hydrogen which is then injected into the combustion chamber. The main idea behind it is that small satellites that ride as secondary payloads often struggle to find rideshares if they carry propulsion, because those propulsion systems and the fuel they contain pose risks to the primary payload (or to other secondaries). These risks need to be insured, which costs insurance money, and mitigated, which costs development money. But a spacecraft carrying water needs neither of those two, because the propellant is "non-toxic, non-explosive, and unpressurized". It's also dirt cheap, and (in a future scenario) can be easily replenished by ISRU in space. So much for the theory, but in practice? The system may launch into space for the first time as early as 12 months from now. It's been test fired plenty of times on the ground. (Source) What do you guys think? Hydrolox has the potential for the best specific impulse by a wide margin among the chemical propellants typically used today, and removing the need to carry the low density, hard cryogenic LH2/LO2 bipropellant instantly removes its biggest drawback. But how much extra dry mass and volume does the electrolysis equipment require? How much effort does it take to consistently draw the right amount of liquid from an unpressurized tank in zero gravity? How much electrolysis power can a cubesat's solar arrays provide - will that be enough gas to build sufficient combustion chamber pressure and temperature to actually get the nice, high Isp? Or is the system ultimately no better than a common hydrazine thruster, and its only advantage is the propellant safety? And what about comparing other options for solar electric supported propulsion, such as electrothermal rockets (resistojets)?
  19. http://www.engadget.com/2014/08/18/nasa-origami-solar-panels/ I was going to add this to a pre-existing thread that would have been perfect for this topic, but for some reason moderator locked it, if said moderator feels the urge to unlock the thread, then please merge this post with that thread.
  20. DESCRIPTION: This is standalone expansion to my Rusty Star Rockets mod. It adds parts for new propulsion system: ZPE (Zero Point Energy) propulsion system It also adds new fuel resource: Quantum Fluctuations. ZPE propulsion system works like this: 1. Quantum Fluctuations are generated in Quantum Fluctuations Extractor (QFE) 2. Quantum Fluctuations are stored in Uncertainty Containment Chamber (UCC) 3. ZPE engine uses Quantum Fluctuations and electricity to create thrust. Since Quantum fluctuations are generated constantly by QFE, this is sort of infinite fuel mod, but it is somewhat justified by ZPE propulsion concept. Nevertheless, i wouldn't dare call this mod near future or even very realistic. But it could be fun. Especially because of funky particle effects and custom engine sounds. All parts are on the very top of tech tree, on additional experimental nodes, and are VERY expensive. SCREENS: Changelog: Instalation: 1. dump RSR_ZPE to GameData folder 2. have fun! Legal stuff: ZPE Propulsion System by GagaX is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
  21. Hi! I have been much idle time, but I'm back and I'm back with a new idea: more nuclear propulsion. Justification of more nuclear propulsion: In Kerbal no evidence of the existence of a cold war, nuclear testing and non nuclear proliferation treaty; and also the only life there are those green people living in the rocket base, so no problem with nuclear contamination. (forever alone) The atomic propulsion that I suggest: - Nuclear thermic engine (update): Now make use of only hydrogen (more down) instead fuel and oxidizer. - Radioisotope engine: A little engine similar to ionic engine, little more heavy, that make use of hydrogen (instead xenon) and not requires electricity. - Atomic bulb: A big powerful engine that make use of hydrogen and little of uranium (more down), and produces electricity. - Nuclear liquid uranium engine: A medium powerful engine that make use of hydrogen and uranium. - Nuclear gas uranium engine: A big very powerful engine that make use of hydrogen and lots of uranium. - Uranium bubble: A medium very powerful engine that make use of only uranium (need a new animation to represent ioniced uranium bubble), and lots of electricity. - Nuclear pulse engine: A very big and very powerful engine that make use of 0,8 to 25 kilotons range nuclear detonations to propelling (need a new animation to represent engine move and nuclear explosions), make use of nuclear nukes (there is of different types, mass and power). - Advanced nuclear pulse engine: A extremely big and powerful engine that make use of 25 kilotons to megaton range nuclear detonations. - Polywell nuclear thermic engine: A little-medium engine that make use of a controlled fusion reactor to heat up hydrogen (make use of only hydrogen), and produces much electricity. - Antimatter injection thermic engine: A little-medium engine that make use of very low amounts of antimatter to heat up hydrogen (make use of hydrogen and antimatter), and produces much electricity. Fuels and materials to propulsion: - Liquid hydrogen: in containers of similar size to "fuel-oxidant" containers (any size). - Uranium: in little and shorts containers. - Antimatter: in little and shorts heavy containers, with reinforced texture, these containers consumes a lots of electricity to contain the antimatter, if there is no electricity, it will explode. - Nukes (very expensive, care): of various types, in very width and shorts containers: - 0,8 kt (60 units) - 2 kt (30 units) - 5 kt (20 units) - 10kt (10 units) - 25 kt (5 units) - 50 kt (3 units) - 100 kt (1 unit) of various types, in very width and large containers: - 25 kt (30 units) - 50 kt (20 units) - 100 kt (10 units) - 250 kt (5 units) - 500 kt (3 units) - Megaton (1 unit) Utilities: - Big radioisotope battery. - Nuclear isomer battery: like classic radioisotope battery, but with more intensity, less duration and rechargeable. - Nuclear power reactor (produces a lots of energy, consumes uranium). - Polywell power reactor (produces more energy than fission nuclear, consumes hydrogen and requires big quantity of energy to start). Technology tree: After nuclear node (thermal nuclear engine): - Add: little and medium hydrogen containers/tanks After nuclear node (thermal nuclear engine): - Advanced nuclear node: nuclear power reactor, big radioisotope battery, radioisotope engine, little uranium container/tank, big hydrogen containers/tanks. After advanced nuclear node: - More advanced nuclear node: atomic bulb, gas nuclear thermal engine, liquid nuclear thermal engine, medium uranium container/tank. - Basic nuclear fusion: polywell power reactor, isomer battery. After more advanced nuclear node: - Kiloton: nuclear pulse engine, little nukes containers, uranium bubble. After basic nuclear fusion node: - Advanced nuclear fusion: polywell engine. - Antimatter: antimatter containers, antimatter injection engine. After kiloton node: - Megaton: advanced nuclear pulse engine, big nukes containers.
  22. One major reason to mine asteroids and the moon is to get water for rocket fuel in space, rather than having to lift it out of Earth's gravity well. Suppose that you've got to build a generic solar-powered water-fueled rocket for something like an unmanned space tug. You have to budget tankage, solar collector, engine, and associated structure/modules. Assuming that you have access to mined water in orbit at each possible destination, what makes more sense: building a solar-thermal water rocket, that simply uses giant mirrors to focus solar radiation, boil water, and eject it out the back of your rocket (low Isp but very simple), or solar panels that convert solar energy to electricity that is used for electrolysis to split water into hydrogen and oxygen to burn in a thruster?
  23. We have been having a running discussion in this subforum for the last year or more concerning a type of energy that does not require an apparent mass to generate momentum. Although energy can be converted into light which has momentum it has very little momentum given the energy contained within, and so finding something that has a magnitude more momentum per input energy created alot of discussion. In the end here I hope to show that it really matters little. To start off this analysis lets imagine the settlers of the mid 19th century American west. To accomplish their journey they had wagons with supplies and draft animals to pull the supply, this carried them across an expanse that was devoid of trade goods to either feed themselves or their livestock. Along the way the live stock feed, and because high energy foods spoiled they would kill animals and butcher them for meat and fat. There was a thing called winter, at which point unless you had settled in, it would not be a good thing to be in space. Conceptually speaking all major exploratory journeys are like this, if we imagine the discovery ships, they had to have supplies to last them several weeks, they might stop at islands to pick up water and supplies, and they would not want to be caught in a hurricane. Therefore the concept of expanse, resource management and risk have been dealt with. So now lets consider the trip to or any planet. Our Mississippi river is the LOE, we first have to get our ship up across the problem of drag and its desire to fight orbits. During this phase of the journey we cannot rely on any space resource and so it is a given that the initial state provides the energy and mass to create momentum. Once we have a semi-stable orbit we then can examine the problem of space. Space is a name, it has a sort of implicit meaning that it has no stuff in it. Actually space has alot of stuff, at least our local space, relative to the vast expanses of emptiness between galaxies. The stuff in space however tends to get concentrated into inertially defined bodies. Between these bodies are gases and for a traveler these gases are always in motion and because the gases are almost always charged (that means gas is a mixture of plasma and gas), the gas is maintained in a rarefied state by momentum and electromagnetic energy from the sun, as a consequence it can at times be non-inertial. To be clear here, the density of gas, even in the atmosphere of the sun, is so dilute it is of little practical use. That is to say in the time frame of our journey their is neither the time or a relevant volume of space to collect this an use it. The material state of vacuum space is more than an annoyance if anything, in LOE it creates drag and in interplanetary space it carries ions that can damage equipment or injure travelers. The bodies in our space fall basically into three categories. The smallest of these are asteroids and comets. Asteroids are the left overs from planetary genesis, the gas from our sun slows down and hits things out in the outer system, cools, and gases and dust that did not form large bodies eventually coalesce into dirty ice balls that get tugged by our planets and burn up, eventually. The planets clear orbits and thus are clearly inertially defined in their motion, since they are no longer colliding. Finally you have the bodies in which atomic conversion is a major character of the bodies visible appearance, at high enough energy these also emit gases. To our traveler these are the resources of space, so lets define these as such 1. Asteroids and Comets. Resources - Mass (Carbon, Oxygen, Hydrogen, Nickle, Silica, Aluminum): sub resources (metal for building, water for drinking or fuel cells, carbon for food or electronics, all for momentum), trivial amount of inertia, and transitory or impermanent destination. 2. Planets and Moons. - Inertia (as in they warp space), destinations, and the resources of #1. 3. Stars - Electromagnetism, Inertia, trivial emission of Gas and Plasma (as such also a source of electric charge) 4. Not 1 to 3 above - Quantum space - Non-zero rest energy of fields that permeate our universe (which of yet we are not fully aware or know how to exploit). So basically above we can define space as a list of virtual items, in this we can then rank them to our Space traveler. My ranking may shock but . . . A. [Quantum] space - this is the most important resource of space because it permits long distance travel and because its fields make it possible to establish travel strategies. The physical distance between destinations is in the >109 meters, traveling in drag affords speeds of 100s of meter per second, therefore matter just slows down the process. Matter also creates lots of other problems like gravitational collapses and complex body problems. B. Destinations (virtual and physical) - travelers will eventually need resources or a travel interest. C. Electromagnetic radiation - discussed below. Essentially EM is the purest source of energy, that is not to say it is the sole source of energy, but rest mass as an energy source has an investiment cost (in space this translates into mass). D. Inertially derived warping of space time - for the occasional Oberth effect. E. Mass - E = mc^2, p = m * v These are the resources what are their costs. A. Space - Not suitable for biota, no push-off mass, all* momentum must be derived within (*the status of the rf resonance cavity thruster goes undefined), energy required to reach space and return, energy taken by contamination within vacuum space. B. Destinations represent almost always a non-inertial logic, a dV required to reach them, we talk about space-time, we also have to consider dT. Destinations may have other problems like too much or too little of some other resource (Namely light). C. EM - heat dissipation with too much, energy conversion for use in propulsion and systems. D. Oberth masses - Friction or obstructions, space-time (see B). E. Mass - collection, landing, mining, conversion (not to mention cooling equipment) So basically we have a list of issues for our traveler. Breaking this down much of traveler concerns are non-inertial movements in space-time which require energy and for the most part momentum derived from mass ejection. The above is not the intent of the article, it simply breaking things down into abstractions that the next part can deal with. So what is the problem of traveling (not the traveler). If you are not going to something that cross the same space-time (in some relevant timescale) point dV needs to be applied somewhere. We derive dV Light - almost never used, but requires no mass (we have to assume at this point that the rf resonance cavity thruster is not this type of drive) Chemical - the fuel becomes the ejection mass - limited to bond breaking partial bond formation energy of the fuel. Basically at high temperature unfavorable bonds break the most stable reform as the cool. There is a finite limit on how much energy can be obtained from a chemical bond, it is defined in calories per mole and typically is in the form of O-O, H-H, N-O, N=O, C-C, C-H, C-N, C=C, C=N. Electrodynamic - the mass becomes energized by the input of energy and accelerates. (Ion, plasma, VASIMR, Hall effect, rf resonance*) Atomic - a source of heat is used to rarefy gas or liquid which then expands like chemical energy drive. We can see we need energy to produce light, we need to carry mass to produce chemical energy, we need to carry a nuclear reactor or we need to accelerate ions. Unless you want to carry all the energy with the craft there is a limitation of space, right now its solar power, (given the high mass issues with nuclear and cooling issues) Space gives effectively about 1N of thrust for every 233kg of solar panels (C). This gives a maximum 4.2 mm/s2 of acceleration (0.0004g), with that one needs about 233 meters of space. You can assume that a manned spacecraft this will be 10% of the mass so you are effectively limited to about 0.04g. I have created new ion drives and panels in the game to reflect this (HiPep design thrusters). The major problem is orbiting, this designed requires another source of accelation and is not suitable around low hv objects. Nuclear is worse, the reactors cost as much as the panels in terms of weight but much more in terms of cooling. if we argue that solar is kg per sqm then any means of reducing this improves the portability of the system. Modern age silicon lens are light weight and can focus light on a panel of much lower size and weight. This type of system works great in interplanetary flight, however only at a tangent to orbit, so inefficient transfers are not optimal unless the lens are placed on tracks that can move their positions. They also do not work well in non-inertial manuevers close to inertial bodies, this is because the incident angle shift with prograde motion. The mass of the ion drive is trivial (the most efficient drives of a few kilograms will easily consume all the energy we can currently produce), at 9000 dV the mass of the fuel becomes trivial (because you cant produce enough energy to eject it), the mass of energy production facility is just about everything. Find a way to lower the mass of energy production and Manned missions to (but not landing on) are possible.
  24. I have a proposal for a (really really)endgame engine that is a nuclear powered R.A.P.I.E.R in it`s open cycle it utilizes the nuclear reactor to heat and expand the atmosferic air to provide thrust,when clear from the atmosphere you would change to the closed cycle that uses the internal propelent like the Nerv engine. Well: It would be much overpowered? Yes. Even for a endgame engine? I guess not,it would be the game`s last engine. Why would you make such a engine? To make more dinamic SSTOs that can make a bit longer trips not using mk3 parts. So, what you guys think of this in the stock game? And if there`s a mod that have a engine like that let me know please.
  25. So, photons exert a tiny force when they reflect off of something. I was thinking about the EMDrive yesterday, and how it supposedly uses radiation pressure for thrust. Then I had this ridiculously funny and impractical idea of how the EMDrive is supposed to work, according to the physics we know. It would best be explained by a picture: It would use mirrors as fuel, and would leave a stream of mirrors in it's wake as it slowly gets pushed along. It's completely impractical, but would work. I thought it was a funny idea...
  • Create New...