Jump to content

[1.2 - 1.4] Real Scale Boosters, 0.16 (2018-03-12)


NecroBones
 Share

Recommended Posts

Posted:

 

0.3.2 (2016-02-01) - Alpha development.
 - Added 8 retrorockets to the Atlas V CCB.
    - updated sample rockets (propellant and staging).
    - Starts with realistic total 4.2 units (31.5 kg) propellant. Can be increased to 8 units.
 - Added missing "vessel type" info for the Atlas V and Delta IV upper stages.
 - Added F-1B engine variant (with "best guess" stats).
 - Added MM patch to add SMURFF exclusion to all RSB parts, if SMURFF is detected.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://windirstat.info

P.S.  Heading home from work now. I'll use a clean install to add RSS, RealFuels, RealPlume, and Real Scale Boosters, and give you some CFGs from that setup, with RO being optional. If you'd like something for that. I love this kind of CFG work to replicate real world inside KSP, for the record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry for firing off so many little updates. Just trying to get things into a good state before I go away for most of the week.

 

Posted:

 

0.3.3 (2016-02-01) - Alpha Development. 
 - Moved the STS External Tank's top attachment node to accomodate DIRECT-Jupiter adapters.
 - Added two variants of DIRECT-Jupiter adapter decouplers, 8.4m and 7.5m. Incomplete vehicle at this point.
 - Replaced solid propellant with plain ejection charge on CFLR pieces for Atlas V. (Known issue: ejects forward)
 - Enabled surface attachment on CFLR pieces for Atlas V.
 - Updated sample Atlas V rockets with CFLR changes.
 - Adjusted masses of the Atlas V interstages and Boattail.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Want to know how awesome NecroBones is? I sent him this PM and he immediately turned around and changed the mod. Just like <SNAP> that. (Maybe others of you would like to see some of these source links, so I have included the entire message.)
line2.jpg
TO: NecroBones

I checked the interstage masses and I think a boattail is 987 kg while the 500-series interstage is 1225 kg.

The interstage is 4 pieces that you merged into one, obviously to reduce part count. They are: CCB ISA 285 kg, C-ISA 600 kg, Canon ISA 340 kg, and ASA 182 kg. Together with the boattail they are 2212.

You probably made the model simpler for less RAM, but just in case... the 500 ISA has an inner ring that matches up with the base of the Centaur. You can see it on the first link. The canonical adapter and aft stub adapter are sunk down inside the larger interstage.

The CFLR is 137.5 kg per half.

Fairing halves for the 500 are: 1762 kg, 2001.5 kg, and 2189.5 kg. I was not aware they had solid motors for separation, and I did a lot of research. Did I miss that? Or were they added to help cope with game decoupling problems?

Sources:

http://www.goes-r.gov/spacesegment/launchvehicle.html

http://spaceflight101.com/spacerockets/atlas-v-551/

a5_500.jpg

Edited by Felbourn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also:

1) Is this in git? I could just clone and submit pull requests for things.

2) I think at one point ModuleDecouple was the only decoupler, and ModuleAnchoredDecoupler was added later as the new-and-improved-should-be-used decoupler? If so, RSB probably ought to switch to it?

Edited by Felbourn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry I keep posting one after another, it's just that my testing process uncovers one thing at a time and I am not patient enough to save them up. :)

The load reactor seems to be pointed backward. I think it needs this to compensate:

    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleAnchoredDecoupler
        ejectionForce = -200
        explosiveNodeID = bottom
    }

I am making all these changes locally and testing before posting, so I know this improves it for at least me.

I disabled the ModuleEngine on RSB_PLF_AtlasV500_1 to be more realistic, but it's a very heavy part so I had to increase the decoupler force a lot.

    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleAnchoredDecoupler
        ejectionForce = 3000
        explosiveNodeID = bottom
    }

Other fairings would need the same treatment, more or less depending on mass of course. Eventually I could test them all one by one.

Edited by Felbourn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm using RSS but not FAR which means I need to use Old School Fairings for this, and therefore had to make a CFG for it. The reason I had to weld the boattail into the ISA is that my mod does not properly compensate for the separate parts and this was easier to fix than to reprogram the mod. I can try compensating once I get more time.

GameData\RealScaleBoosters\Patches\RealScaleBoosters_OldSchoolFairings.cfg

@PART[RSB_PLF_AtlasV?00_?]:NEEDS[OSFairings]
{
	@description ^= :WARNING::
	@description ^= :Does not provide aerodynmic shielding in STOCK aerodynamics.::
	@MODULE[ModuleDecouple]
	{
		@name = ModuleFairingDecoupler
	}
}

@PART[RSBinterstageAtlasCentaur500]:NEEDS[OSFairings]
{
	@title = Atlas V 500 Interstage & Boattail
	@mass = 2.212
	!node_stack_fairing = DELETE
	node_stack_connect1 = 2.7, 4.25, 0.0,   -1.0, 0.0, 0.0,   2
	node_stack_connect2 = -2.7, 4.25, 0.0,   1.0, 0.0, 0.0,   2
	MODEL
	{
		model = RealScaleBoosters/Parts/Atlas/RSBatlasVboattail
		position = 0, 3.15, 0
	}	
}

!PART[RSBatlasVboattail]:NEEDS[OSFairings] {}

Oh... and I just noticed this now: 'aerodynmic' is in the description.

I have an initial RealPlume CFG for the parts I have been testing.

GameData\RealScaleBoosters\Patches\RealScaleBoosters_RealPlume.cfg

@PART[RSBengineRD180]:NEEDS[RealPlume]
{
	@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]
	{
	 	%powerEffectName = Kerolox-Lower
	}
	PLUME
	{
		name = Kerolox-Lower
		transformName = thrustTransform
		flarePosition = 0, 0, 0.5
		flareScale = 1.1
		plumePosition = 0, 0, 0.6
		plumeScale = 1
		energy = 1
		speed = 1
	}
}

@PART[RSBengineRL10A42]:NEEDS[RealPlume]
{
	@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]
	{
	 	%powerEffectName = Hydrolox-Upper
	}
	PLUME
	{
		name = Hydrolox-Upper
		transformName = thrustTransform
		flarePosition = 0, 0, 0.8
		flareScale = 1.3
		plumePosition = 0, 0, 1
		plumeScale = 2
		energy = 1
		speed = 1
	}
}

@PART[RSBtankAtlasVcore]:NEEDS[RealPlume]
{
	@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]
	{
	 	%powerEffectName = Solid-Lower
	}
	PLUME
	{
		name = Solid-Lower
		transformName = thrustTransform
		flarePosition = 0, -0.05, 0.05
		flareScale = 0.2
		plumePosition = 0, 0, 0.2
		plumeScale = 0.3
		energy = 1
		speed = 1
	}
}

@PART[RSBengineAtlasSRB]:NEEDS[RealPlume]
{
	@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]
	{
	 	%powerEffectName = Solid-Lower
	}
	PLUME
	{
		name = Solid-Lower
		transformName = thrustTransform
		flarePosition = 0, 0, -0.1
		flareScale = 0.9
		plumePosition = 0, 0, 0.5
		plumeScale = 1.5
		energy = 1
		speed = 1
	}
}

 I noticed the SRB decouplers have retros installed. I think that is friggin' awesome. They look amazing BTW. However, I think the default solid propellant should be 0 so that the decouplers default to "realism mode" yet still allow people to drag up the solid fuel to full and get them as retro-enabled decouplers, if wanted.

Edited by Felbourn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

RD-180 Isp might be a little low. I think they are 311.9 SL up to 338.3 vac (3059 Ns/kg to 3318 Ns/kg), Thrust 4152 kN.

RL10 is 4418 Ns/kg or 450.5 Isp vac, and Thrust 99.2 kN.

SRB thrust is low for AJ-62: 172200 kgf = 1688.7 kN

I have a first pass at the RealScaleBoosters_RealFuels.cfg including some SRB thrust curves.

@PART[RSBengineAtlasSRB]:NEEDS[RealFuels]
{
	!RESOURCE[SolidFuel] {}

	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleFuelTanks
		type = HTPB
		volume = 23140
		basemass = -1
	}

	@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]
	{
		@name = ModuleEnginesRF
	}

	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleEngineConfigs
		type = ModuleEnginesRF
		configuration = Standard
		CONFIG
		{
			name = Standard
			minThrust = 1688.7
			maxThrust = 1688.7
			PROPELLANT
			{
				name = HTPB
				ratio = 1
				DrawGauge = True
			}
			atmosphereCurve
			{
				key = 0 279.3
				key = 1 245.0
				key = 4 0.001
			}
			curveResource = HTPB
			thrustCurveUseTime = True
			thrustCurve
			{
				key =  0.0 0.01
				key =  1.0 0.91
				key =  1.3 0.93
				key =  3.0 0.93
				key =  8.0 0.99
				key = 18.0 0.99
				key = 20.0 0.98
				key = 24.0 0.80
				key = 40.0 0.50
				key = 44.0 0.51
				key = 75.0 0.75
				key = 80.0 0.71
				key = 83.0 0.63
				key = 86.0 0.15
				key = 90.0 0.04
				key = 95.0 0.01
			}
		}
	}
}

@PART[RSBengineRD180]:NEEDS[RealFuels]
{
	@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]
	{
		@name = ModuleEnginesRF
	}

	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleEngineConfigs
		type = ModuleEnginesRF
		configuration = Standard
		CONFIG
		{
			name = Standard
			PROPELLANT
			{
				name = Kerosene
				ratio = 338
				DrawGauge = true
			}
			PROPELLANT
			{
				name = LqdOxygen
				ratio = 662
			}
		}
	}
}

@PART[RSBtankAtlasVcore]:NEEDS[RealFuels]
{
	!RESOURCE[LiquidFuel] {}
	!RESOURCE[Oxidizer] {}
	@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]
	{
		@name = ModuleEnginesRF
	}
	@RESOURCE[SolidFuel]
	{
		@name = HTPB
		@amount = 17.26 // 8 * 8.42 lbs = 30.55 kg
		@maxAmount = 17.26
	}

	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleFuelTanks
		type = Cryogenic
		volume = 275146
		basemass = -1
		TANK 
		{
			name = Kerosene
			amount = 93000
			maxAmount = 93000
		}
		TANK 
		{
			name = LqdOxygen
			amount = 182146
			maxAmount = 182146
		}
	}

	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleEngineConfigs
		type = ModuleEnginesRF
		configuration = Standard
		CONFIG
		{
			name = Standard
			minThrust = 58.432 // 1642 lbf * 8 retros
			maxThrust = 58.432
			PROPELLANT
			{
				name = HTPB
				ratio = 1
				DrawGauge = True
			}
			atmosphereCurve
			{
				key = 0 262.9
				key = 1 240.0
				key = 4 0.001
			}
			curveResource = HTPB
			thrustCurveUseTime = True
			thrustCurve
			{
				key = 0.00 0.01
				key = 0.10 0.92
				key = 0.20 0.91
				key = 0.23 0.80
				key = 0.30 0.80
				key = 0.90 0.95
				key = 1.62 0.76
				key = 1.70 0.70
				key = 1.90 0.05
				key = 2.00 0.01			
			}
		}
	}
}

 

Edited by Felbourn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

7 hours ago, Felbourn said:

Also:

1) Is this in git? I could just clone and submit pull requests for things.

2) I think at one point ModuleDecouple was the only decoupler, and ModuleAnchoredDecoupler was added later as the new-and-improved-should-be-used decoupler? If so, RSB probably ought to switch to it?

1. Nope, I don't use Git. I have a local workflow that works well for me (and quickly).

2. It's possible. I haven't looked at the differences yet.

 

6 hours ago, Felbourn said:

Sorry I keep posting one after another, it's just that my testing process uncovers one thing at a time and I am not patient enough to save them up. :)

The load reactor seems to be pointed backward. I think it needs this to compensate:

    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleAnchoredDecoupler
        ejectionForce = -200
        explosiveNodeID = bottom
    }

I am making all these changes locally and testing before posting, so I know this improves it for at least me.

I disabled the ModuleEngine on RSB_PLF_AtlasV500_1 to be more realistic, but it's a very heavy part so I had to increase the decoupler force a lot.

    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleAnchoredDecoupler
        ejectionForce = 3000
        explosiveNodeID = bottom
    }

Other fairings would need the same treatment, more or less depending on mass of course. Eventually I could test them all one by one.

No worries, post as it comes up. It's what I do too. :)

The load reactor is actually pointed sideways, like many stock radial parts.... That is, the part is oriented correctly already but has a sideways attachment node. Some other stock radial parts are oriented such that the outward face is facing up, and the attachment face is aimed down. This is great for radial parts, but sucks for when you want to have things snap exactly in a specific place. Unfortunately the decoupler modules aren't really aware of the case I'm using, which will also affect the PLFs.

I'm inclined to keep the thrust vectors on them (and switch the CFLR back to this). But what I could also do to keep it from getting confused in RF and RO and so forth is maybe make my own ejection propellant (so that the density doesn't change)? It could just be called "EjectionCharge" or something. Anyone who's already built things will have to update rockets of course, but this is why we call it "alpha". ;)

 

 

6 hours ago, Felbourn said:

I'm using RSS but not FAR which means I need to use Old School Fairings for this, and therefore had to make a CFG for it. The reason I had to weld the boattail into the ISA is that my mod does not properly compensate for the separate parts and this was easier to fix than to reprogram the mod. I can try compensating once I get more time.

GameData\RealScaleBoosters\Patches\RealScaleBoosters_OldSchoolFairings.cfg

@PART[RSB_PLF_AtlasV?00_?]:NEEDS[OSFairings]
{
	@description ^= :WARNING::
	@description ^= :Does not provide aerodynmic shielding in STOCK aerodynamics.::
	@MODULE[ModuleDecouple]
	{
		@name = ModuleFairingDecoupler
	}
}

@PART[RSBinterstageAtlasCentaur500]:NEEDS[OSFairings]
{
	@title = Atlas V 500 Interstage & Boattail
	@mass = 2.212
	!node_stack_fairing = DELETE
	node_stack_connect1 = 2.7, 4.25, 0.0,   -1.0, 0.0, 0.0,   2
	node_stack_connect2 = -2.7, 4.25, 0.0,   1.0, 0.0, 0.0,   2
	MODEL
	{
		model = RealScaleBoosters/Parts/Atlas/RSBatlasVboattail
		position = 0, 3.15, 0
	}	
}

!PART[RSBatlasVboattail]:NEEDS[OSFairings] {}

Oh... and I just noticed this now: 'aerodynmic' is in the description.

I have an initial RealPlume CFG for the parts I have been testing.

GameData\RealScaleBoosters\Patches\RealScaleBoosters_RealPlume.cfg

@PART[RSBengineRD180]:NEEDS[RealPlume]
{
	@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]
	{
	 	%powerEffectName = Kerolox-Lower
	}
	PLUME
	{
		name = Kerolox-Lower
		transformName = thrustTransform
		flarePosition = 0, 0, 0.5
		flareScale = 1.1
		plumePosition = 0, 0, 0.6
		plumeScale = 1
		energy = 1
		speed = 1
	}
}

@PART[RSBengineRL10A42]:NEEDS[RealPlume]
{
	@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]
	{
	 	%powerEffectName = Hydrolox-Upper
	}
	PLUME
	{
		name = Hydrolox-Upper
		transformName = thrustTransform
		flarePosition = 0, 0, 0.8
		flareScale = 1.3
		plumePosition = 0, 0, 1
		plumeScale = 2
		energy = 1
		speed = 1
	}
}

@PART[RSBtankAtlasVcore]:NEEDS[RealPlume]
{
	@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]
	{
	 	%powerEffectName = Solid-Lower
	}
	PLUME
	{
		name = Solid-Lower
		transformName = thrustTransform
		flarePosition = 0, -0.05, 0.05
		flareScale = 0.2
		plumePosition = 0, 0, 0.2
		plumeScale = 0.3
		energy = 1
		speed = 1
	}
}

@PART[RSBengineAtlasSRB]:NEEDS[RealPlume]
{
	@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]
	{
	 	%powerEffectName = Solid-Lower
	}
	PLUME
	{
		name = Solid-Lower
		transformName = thrustTransform
		flarePosition = 0, 0, -0.1
		flareScale = 0.9
		plumePosition = 0, 0, 0.5
		plumeScale = 1.5
		energy = 1
		speed = 1
	}
}

 I noticed the SRB decouplers have retros installed. I think that is friggin' awesome. They look amazing BTW. However, I think the default solid propellant should be 0 so that the decouplers default to "realism mode" yet still allow people to drag up the solid fuel to full and get them as retro-enabled decouplers, if wanted.

For now I won't grab copies of the patches. I'd like to evaluate them when they're more complete. Defaulting to 0 on the decouplers is certainly possible. Right now the actual ejection charge is pretty low, but that could be buffed too.

 

4 hours ago, Felbourn said:

RD-180 Isp might be a little low. I think they are 311.9 SL up to 338.3 vac (3059 Ns/kg to 3318 Ns/kg), Thrust 4152 kN.

RL10 is 4418 Ns/kg or 450.5 Isp vac, and Thrust 99.2 kN.

SRB thrust is low for AJ-62: 172200 kgf = 1688.7 kN

I have a first pass at the RealScaleBoosters_RealFuels.cfg including some SRB thrust curves.

@PART[RSBengineAtlasSRB]:NEEDS[RealFuels]
{
	!RESOURCE[SolidFuel] {}

	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleFuelTanks
		type = HTPB
		volume = 23140
		basemass = -1
	}

	@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]
	{
		@name = ModuleEnginesRF
	}

	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleEngineConfigs
		type = ModuleEnginesRF
		configuration = Standard
		CONFIG
		{
			name = Standard
			minThrust = 1688.7
			maxThrust = 1688.7
			PROPELLANT
			{
				name = HTPB
				ratio = 1
				DrawGauge = True
			}
			atmosphereCurve
			{
				key = 0 279.3
				key = 1 245.0
				key = 4 0.001
			}
			curveResource = HTPB
			thrustCurveUseTime = True
			thrustCurve
			{
				key =  0.0 0.01
				key =  1.0 0.91
				key =  1.3 0.93
				key =  3.0 0.93
				key =  8.0 0.99
				key = 18.0 0.99
				key = 20.0 0.98
				key = 24.0 0.80
				key = 40.0 0.50
				key = 44.0 0.51
				key = 75.0 0.75
				key = 80.0 0.71
				key = 83.0 0.63
				key = 86.0 0.15
				key = 90.0 0.04
				key = 95.0 0.01
			}
		}
	}
}

@PART[RSBengineRD180]:NEEDS[RealFuels]
{
	@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]
	{
		@name = ModuleEnginesRF
	}

	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleEngineConfigs
		type = ModuleEnginesRF
		configuration = Standard
		CONFIG
		{
			name = Standard
			PROPELLANT
			{
				name = Kerosene
				ratio = 338
				DrawGauge = true
			}
			PROPELLANT
			{
				name = LqdOxygen
				ratio = 662
			}
		}
	}
}

@PART[RSBtankAtlasVcore]:NEEDS[RealFuels]
{
	!RESOURCE[LiquidFuel] {}
	!RESOURCE[Oxidizer] {}
	@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]
	{
		@name = ModuleEnginesRF
	}
	@RESOURCE[SolidFuel]
	{
		@name = HTPB
		@amount = 17.26 // 8 * 8.42 lbs = 30.55 kg
		@maxAmount = 17.26
	}

	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleFuelTanks
		type = Cryogenic
		volume = 275146
		basemass = -1
		TANK 
		{
			name = Kerosene
			amount = 93000
			maxAmount = 93000
		}
		TANK 
		{
			name = LqdOxygen
			amount = 182146
			maxAmount = 182146
		}
	}

	MODULE
	{
		name = ModuleEngineConfigs
		type = ModuleEnginesRF
		configuration = Standard
		CONFIG
		{
			name = Standard
			minThrust = 58.432 // 1642 lbf * 8 retros
			maxThrust = 58.432
			PROPELLANT
			{
				name = HTPB
				ratio = 1
				DrawGauge = True
			}
			atmosphereCurve
			{
				key = 0 262.9
				key = 1 240.0
				key = 4 0.001
			}
			curveResource = HTPB
			thrustCurveUseTime = True
			thrustCurve
			{
				key = 0.00 0.01
				key = 0.10 0.92
				key = 0.20 0.91
				key = 0.23 0.80
				key = 0.30 0.80
				key = 0.90 0.95
				key = 1.62 0.76
				key = 1.70 0.70
				key = 1.90 0.05
				key = 2.00 0.01			
			}
		}
	}
}

 

Not sure. The RD-180 used some numbers from wikipedia (I think), but that might not always be 100% right. Same deal with the RL10 engines; I grabbed different numbers based on the specific variants from a couple of websites, especially the nice little chart on wikipedia. I never got a sea level ISP for the RL10 family though, so right now they're at a stupidly conservative 200, but obviously I could set that higher.

 

When the numbers differ a little in a few places, it's hard to know which ones to trust most. :) The AJ-62, I went with the average thrust rather than peak thrust, and it's already set at 1690, but as the vacuum thrust (ISP will of course lower it at sea level). I'm willing to fudge numbers here and there, so rounding up on an average thrust seems reasonable (1690). If people want, I could set this closer to the peak thrust and let people thrust-limit it to get the correct burn time. It's a bit of a toss-up as to what makes more sense.

 

 

4 hours ago, Phineas Freak said:

@NecroBonesthis pack is fantastic! No, you are fantastic! Thank you for that :D.

@Felbournwill these patches be included with the RSB pack? I understand that Necrobones will have to make the decision but i am worried that some of these will clash with the RO configs (if someone has RO installed).

Thanks! Glad you're liking it, of course. ;)

 

Before deciding anything on the patches, we'll have to look everything over once it's more complete, and we see more of how the RO integration is working. We might want to set those patches to run only when RO isn't installed (perhaps RF without RO?). We'll have to discuss whether to roll it in, or make an optional config (such as in CKAN, a separate download), or what. I've been so focused on getting the parts made, I haven't been putting much thought into the compatibility patches yet.

 

If you look at the latest release's files, "Patches/RealScaleBoosters_Realism.txt" (it's a "txt" so it doesn't execute) has just the start of something I started to do for RF, but it's extremely barebones, and didn't have anything for engines, etc. Since RO is handling it separately, this file will probably not be needed.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I meant about the load reactor was the decoupler force was pointing in toward the Centaur. I had to reverse it after you removed the solid motor and it became noticable. Nothing else had to change about the part.

That AJ-62 thrust is at sea level. If you compare my number to yours I was only giving you a number off by 0.4 kN I think. The average vacuum thrust is lower, 126980 kgf which is 1245.2 kN. We can ignore that because I added a RF thrust curve, and as you said we should set the max at peak. I was just getting super precise. As I do. ><

Speaking of curves, I just wanted to give you initial copies of CFG if you wanted to review and test/or test them or something.

Yes, my stuff would conflict with RO in some cases and would need to be off in that case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK cool, no worries. I'll try out the ejection charge on the CFLR reversed. What I may do is retain some standard ejection charge, and also the thrust propellant, but default it to 0 or 50% or something.

 

Something I try to keep in mind while doing all of this is that some people will play with these parts without all the RO/RF/etc other mods, so it needs to be friendly in stock as well.

 

I'll probably get another patch out today at some point. I didn't intend to rapid-fire them like this, but since I'll be away, and I'm not sure how busy I'll be with work at any given moment before then, I've been trying to get fixes and tweaks out whenever a batch looks pretty good. ;)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Felbourn said:

Oh by the way, I use RSS and RF without using RO, so a patch file would still be appreciated by some.

Oh, of course. Ideally every sensible combination would be covered. We can't predict everything of course, but RF both with and without RO are probably used quite a lot. We'll get there. ;)

 

 

Edited by NecroBones
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did a little testing before work this morning... I think the RSBdecouplerRadial01 needs more decoupler force to deal with the high inert mass. (I turned off the retros to test the realism case. People who do use the retros won't notice the change much, so win win.)

    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleAnchoredDecoupler
        anchorName = anchor
        ejectionForce = 3000
        explosiveNodeID = srf
    }

 

19 minutes ago, NecroBones said:

OK cool, no worries. I'll try out the ejection charge on the CFLR reversed. What I may do is retain some standard ejection charge, and also the thrust propellant, but default it to 0 or 50% or something.

Something I try to keep in mind while doing all of this is that some people will play with these parts without all the RO/RF/etc other mods, so it needs to be friendly in stock as well.

 

The CLFR was working perfectly for me with that decoupler change I showed, even without a solid motor. I think adding a solid motor at 0% is a nice thing to do for people who don't want realism though. An option is better than no option as long as the default is realism.

The PLF was almost working perfectly for me at the value I posed too. It has the tiniest bit if pucker factor for 0.5 seconds and then it clears fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Felbourn said:

Did a little testing before work this morning... I think the RSBdecouplerRadial01 needs more decoupler force to deal with the high inert mass. (I turned off the retros to test the realism case. People who do use the retros won't notice the change much, so win win.)

...

The CLFR was working perfectly for me with that decoupler change I showed, even without a solid motor. I think adding a solid motor at 0% is a nice thing to do for people who don't want realism though. An option is better than no option as long as the default is realism.

The PLF was almost working perfectly for me at the value I posed too. It has the tiniest bit if pucker factor for 0.5 seconds and then it clears fine.

Yeah, I'll add some more ejection force. Maybe not quite so much, but I'll try a few values.

 

I tried reversing the direction on the CFLR and it did what I expected, it ejected aft, instead of outward. I didn't try the anchored module though. I'll try that next.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

---

OK, yeah I see how that's working. The "ModuleAnchoredDecoupler" does redirect the force based on the attachment direction better than "ModuleDecouple". But it needs those negative ejection forces because I designed the parts to attach on the right side of the vehicle instead of the left. Silly, but at least it works.

 

I'm re-tuning all of the ejection charges and thrusts on the PLFs and CFLR, and setting default propellants to 50% (so users can tune upward or downward, and it's obvious that they have that functionality). That should be a good start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just noticed this comment in the CCB while checking its values (which seemed to match my research otherwise)

    // 284,089 kg Capacity in 5kg units: 56,817
    // Should be LH and LOX
The CCB uses RP-1 for fuel.

Edited by Felbourn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Felbourn said:

Just noticed this comment in the CCB while checking its values (which seemed to match my research otherwise)

    // 284,089 kg Capacity in 5kg units: 56,817
    // Should be LH and LOX
The CCB uses RP-1 for fuel.

Yeah, copy/paste error. :) I'll silently fix that one. ;)

 

 

 

Edited by NecroBones
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NathanKell said:

The sea level Isp of a modern RL10 is...basically non-existent due to extreme flow separation. A nominal 10 or so would be fine IMO.

Yeah, that's a good point. Even so, 200 ISP (what they've been using at sea level) is low enough to be not very useful under most circumstances while low in the atmosphere. It still discourages using them on Eve. ;) I guess it's probably not that important.

 

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...