Jump to content

Helpful 1.0 observations


Recommended Posts

Slashy, I think the maxThrust parameter was changed to be the vacuum thrust rather than the 1atm thrust as it was in 1.0. The Isp change in the aerospike is significant, though, that will reduce thrust everywhere in atmosphere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would suggest using this as the curve:

atmosphereCurve
{
key = 0 340 -50 -73.71224
key = 1 290 -21.23404 -21.23404
key = 5 230 -10.54119 -10.54119
key = 10 170 -13.59091 -13.59091
key = 20 0.001
}

The point of an aerospike is to be "nearly optimal" everywhere, for its chamber pressure. So since the Mammoth is the "bestest SL engine evar!" at 295, the aerospike is pretty darn good at 290. In vacuum, the best have 345 or 350, so the spike gets 340. So far so good.

But you're right that it looks like with the jump up in vacuum Isp (to account for ~things changing~) the curvature below 1 atm got wonky. So that fix restores what appears to be the intended curvature.

Edited by NathanKell
Link to post
Share on other sites
I would suggest using this as the curve:

atmosphereCurve
{
key = 0 340 -50 -73.71224
key = 1 290 -21.23404 -21.23404
key = 5 230 -10.54119 -10.54119
key = 10 170 -13.59091 -13.59091
key = 20 0.001
}

The point of an aerospike is to be "nearly optimal" everywhere, for its chamber pressure. So since the Mammoth is the "bestest SL engine evar!" at 295, the aerospike is pretty darn good at 290. In vacuum, the best have 345 or 350, so the spike gets 340. So far so good.

But you're right that it looks like with the jump up in vacuum Isp (to account for ~things changing~) the curvature below 1 atm got wonky. So that fix restores what appears to be the intended curvature.

What do you mean by "using that as the curve"?

Do you recommend replacing the .cfg atmosphere values with these numbers? If this is the "intended curve", then your best bet would be to include it in 1.03. And, of course, mention that you've changed it in the dev notes.

Best,

-Slashy

Edited by GoSlash27
Link to post
Share on other sites
I would suggest using this as the curve:

atmosphereCurve
{
key = 0 340 -50 -73.71224
key = 1 290 -21.23404 -21.23404
key = 5 230 -10.54119 -10.54119
key = 10 170 -13.59091 -13.59091
key = 20 0.001
}

The point of an aerospike is to be "nearly optimal" everywhere, for its chamber pressure. So since the Mammoth is the "bestest SL engine evar!" at 295, the aerospike is pretty darn good at 290. In vacuum, the best have 345 or 350, so the spike gets 340. So far so good.

But you're right that it looks like with the jump up in vacuum Isp (to account for ~things changing~) the curvature below 1 atm got wonky. So that fix restores what appears to be the intended curvature.

These adjustments to the aerospike's config file set the thrust value for the Aerospike at sea level on Eve as 121.5 kN. I haven't had a chance to test other altitudes yet.

Thanks NathanKell!

Happy landings!

Edited by Starhawk
Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anybody been having difficulties getting rocket in orbit in the latest patch?

In the previous version I had some rockets with optimal ascent, going ~2700 to ~3000 dV needed, and for 100k or more orbits. (as mentioned in previous posts)

Right now on my career I'm struggling to get my first orbit with a 3500 dV rocket. Also small variations in the ascent curve, means all or nothing huge differences in distance and altitude achieved.

Also noticing some weird behavior using fins, in the editor, if you tilt your rocket, the aero indicator shows a directional vector to the sides, makes sense if considering angle of attack with the up axis.

Anyway, sometimes with fins my craft tends to point to 45° angle, when the velocity vector catches up it flips another 45° again, really weird, half flipping but with fins.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Has anybody been having difficulties getting rocket in orbit in the latest patch?

In the previous version I had some rockets with optimal ascent, going ~2700 to ~3000 dV needed, and for 100k or more orbits. (as mentioned in previous posts)

Right now on my career I'm struggling to get my first orbit with a 3500 dV rocket. Also small variations in the ascent curve, means all or nothing huge differences in distance and altitude achieved.

Also noticing some weird behavior using fins, in the editor, if you tilt your rocket, the aero indicator shows a directional vector to the sides, makes sense if considering angle of attack with the up axis.

Anyway, sometimes with fins my craft tends to point to 45° angle, when the velocity vector catches up it flips another 45° again, really weird, half flipping but with fins.

The most recent update had significant ramifications to aerodynamic effects in the game. Many things, including delta-v to orbit, have changed significantly.

Happy landings!

Link to post
Share on other sites
The most recent update had significant ramifications to aerodynamic effects in the game. Many things, including delta-v to orbit, have changed significantly.

Happy landings!

Yeah, seem pretty significant changes indeed. It would be nice to mention it in the changelog.

The lower atmosphere seem heavier than ever, while flying a sausage with fins, regular reaction wheels barely wobble the ship.

We need additional helpful observations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is nothing mysterious about making an engine that will work on Eve with reasonably good performance; it just has to have a low expansion ratio. If Squad didn't give us one we can always engineer our own. For example, copy the LV-T45 and make the following changes to the config file:

title = EV-E45 "Adam" Liquid Fuel Engine

description = The EV-E45 engine is a low expansion ratio version of the popular LV-T45, designed specifically for use in the thick atmosphere of Eve.

maxThrust = 168.75

atmosphereCurve
{
key = 0 270
key = 1 260
key = 5 220
key = 25 0.001
}

It's not cheating because such an engine is entirely feasible. The trade off for having good high-pressure performance is lousy vacuum performance. We could also make Eve versions of other engines.

Edited by OhioBob
Link to post
Share on other sites

Key mappings

As mentioned above, some key mappings are mixed, staging vs docking mode, space key conflict and etc.

As my suspections you do have to re-assign most of the keys to your liking. Click to assign key, choose the relevant flight situation and then press the key.

Even if its already the same key, you need press to update for the situation. I had to do this will all keys to make sure, and now its working properly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Parts

LV-1 "Ant"



key = 0 315
[B] key = 1 85[/B]
key = 3 0.001

LV-1R "Spider"


key = 0 290
key = 1 260
key = 8 0.001

I get the intent, but you'd think it would be better for gameplay if they were nearly equivalent.

Compare and contrast to:

48-7S


key = 0 300
key = 1 270
key = 7 0.001

24-77


key = 0 290
key = 1 250
key = 7 0.001

Edited by FleshJeb
condensed entries
Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I can tell nobody's publicly pointed this out yet, so here's a tip regarding Science: The Tier 3 R&D Facility contains massive amounts (several hundred points) of nearly-free Science. The Tier 1 and Tier 2 R&D buildings each contain a "biome" for both R&D and for "R&D Main Building", which is good for getting a few extra points when you're just barely below what you need for that next node. The Tier 3 building is where it gets really exciting. So far I have discovered a total of 8 biomes:

- R&D (duh)

- R&D Main Building

- R&D Central Building (This is the one with the bridge)

- R&D Small Lab (This is the little shed you encounter when approaching from the direction of the Astronaut Complex)

- R&D Observatory

- R&D Wind Tunnel (That big dark gray tube turns out to be a wind tunnel, for those who didn't recognize it)

- R&D Tanks (Look for a cluster of, uh, tanks between the Central Building and the Wind Tunnel)

- R&D Corner Lab (In the easternmost corner, sporting a large radio tower)

You can easily harvest experiments from these areas by driving a rover or walking a Kerbal up against the side of the building. As long as your "craft" is touching the building in question, it counts as in that "biome", and as I mentioned you can literally collect hundreds of extra points by sponging up these areas. Here I collected 78 points in one run through only two experiments:

gv5f2aal.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
The "Wheesley" Basic Jet Engine thrust becomes very low at ~12km, can barely support flight.

Confirmed. Had .34 on intake air at 12km. Started to descend and power came back pretty quickly.

- - - Updated - - -

As far as I can tell nobody's publicly pointed this out yet, so here's a tip regarding Science: The Tier 3 R&D Facility contains massive amounts (several hundred points) of nearly-free Science. The Tier 1 and Tier 2 R&D buildings each contain a "biome" for both R&D and for "R&D Main Building", which is good for getting a few extra points when you're just barely below what you need for that next node. The Tier 3 building is where it gets really exciting. So far I have discovered a total of 8 biomes:

- R&D (duh)

- R&D Main Building

- R&D Central Building (This is the one with the bridge)

- R&D Small Lab (This is the little shed you encounter when approaching from the direction of the Astronaut Complex)

- R&D Observatory

- R&D Wind Tunnel (That big dark gray tube turns out to be a wind tunnel, for those who didn't recognize it)

- R&D Tanks (Look for a cluster of, uh, tanks between the Central Building and the Wind Tunnel)

- R&D Corner Lab (In the easternmost corner, sporting a large radio tower)

You can easily harvest experiments from these areas by driving a rover or walking a Kerbal up against the side of the building. As long as your "craft" is touching the building in question, it counts as in that "biome", and as I mentioned you can literally collect hundreds of extra points by sponging up these areas. Here I collected 78 points in one run through only two experiments:

http://i.imgur.com/gv5f2aal.png

Nice work!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another pro tip that as far as I can tell nobody else has mentioned:

The Mobile Processing Lab does not require the experiments from which it got its data to be present while performing research. So you can, say, do an EVA report, process it for data, and then delete the EVA report with no effect on the Science generation rate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just noticed the toggle action for speed brakes doesn't work from action menu. By default it is added to the Brakes action item, but if you remove it, it will add itself back once you launch or load.

Workaround if you don't want speed brakes on the Brakes action, add the Retract action to it. :-)

- - - Updated - - -

The "Wheesley" Basic Jet Engine thrust becomes very low at ~12km, can barely support flight.

This is a normal jet engine, and most real jets have a service ceiling of around 11000 m.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tested with KSP 1.0.2

TL/DR: Async flameouts are still an issue

More info on this:

some folks told me that my mod Intake Build Aid isn't obsolete with KSP 1.0 (other as I expected). So I built a test rig with some intakes and engines and different engine placement orders.

Test setup:

A single small intake to simulate low air for many engines.

Test 1:

Engines placed from the tank towards the end of the testrig, low throttle -> half the engines flame out - and the engines still run with the placement order (as in KSP 0.90 and before).

NXm2ruw.jpg

A bit more throttle -> as expected, the engines starve from the "end". Some amazing and very Kerbal ignition fail effects with these tests. Wouldn't be half as much fun otherwise.

MSssP1Y.jpg

Test 2:

Same setup, but I placed the engines from the far end towards the tank.

Low throttle:

50IvUwL.jpg

More throttle:

h1pp465.jpg

So we can safely assume that the resource mechanics for intakes did not change (much) and Intake Build Aid is indeed not obsolete. I'm going to merge TheDog's 1.0 patch (cheers again!) and release a 1.0.x compatible version "soon".

For SCIENCE :cool:

P.S.: I didn't even notice this even though I built some SSTOs. By not hanging around for long in the upper athmosphere as with KSP 0.90, most people also won't notice this. Rapiers mostly all switch at the same time before the air runs out. Still a nice little detail to know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Physics

From another thread..

See, I thought drag was going to be all about making sure that the front of your craft was pointy. Seems the back is just as important.

Very interesting stuff.

Happy landings!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just wanted to give an update supplementing Torham234's discovery about radiator fins - I took an LV-N powered craft from Kerbin directly to Laythe. Similar to Torham's, it had one motor and twenty-four fins, but mine were mini-deltas. It also had a couple outrigger tanks with airbrakes on them just in case.

I messed up my insertion so I wound up landing, but even on a Kerbin-to-Jool direct aerocapture profile, the engine didn't even generate an overheat bar, and the fins stayed green. The brakes did, even in stowed position, but the engine was fine.

Lesson learned: At least for default-difficulty reentry heating, Torham234's trick also lets you make reusable non-ablating heat shields.

Edited by Decent Weasel
Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...