Jump to content

Devnote Tuesday: The experimentals Quest!

SQUAD

By SQUAD
in KSP1 The Daily Kerbal

 Share

Recommended Posts

The_Rocketeer

The_Rocketeer

Posted
Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, pandaman said:

@The_Rocketeer  looks like the full release will coincide nicely with your paternity leave.  Full marks for timing on that one :wink:.

Yeh, now I just well-muffled set of headphones and a deadbolt for the office door :D

Edited by The_Rocketeer
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JedTech

JedTech

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Alshain said:

Just out of curiosity, without a button how would you turn it on?

Not everything that happens needs a button. In my example, I would like to build a normal single stack rocket and not have it flop around like a wet spaghetti noodle.
I don't want to click a bunch of buttons to disable spaghetti noodles. I just want to never have spaghetti noodles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alshain

Alshain

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, JedTech said:

Not everything that happens needs a button. In my example, I would like to build a normal single stack rocket and not have it flop around like a wet spaghetti noodle.
I don't want to click a bunch of buttons to disable spaghetti noodles. I just want to never have spaghetti noodles.

 

But you aren't everybody.  Not everybody feels that we have spaghetti noodles, my rockets fly fine and I don't want joints so strong that they can't be broken if I build a bad rocket.  In my game, played by me, that is cheating and I will never use it.  You now have the option of using it in your game without ruining my game.

If you want it to default on, we can probably find a way to mod that.

If you don't want to mod it, feel free to click the second link in my signature and add your support.

Edited by Alshain
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Corona688

Corona688

Posted
Posted (edited)

I also had 'cannot deploy when stowed' once, on a solar panel attached to a can.

So I opened it then opened the solar panel.  That worked.

I probably shouldn't use cargo bays as structural elements if I can't deploy them when I absolutely have to.  Just have to plan ahead.

Edited by Corona688
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JedTech

JedTech

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Alshain said:

 

But you aren't everybody.  Not everybody feels that we have spaghetti noodles, my rockets fly fine and I don't want joints so strong that they can't be broken if I build a bad rocket.  In my game, played by me, that is cheating and I will never use it.  You now have the option of using it in your game without ruining my game.

But you aren't everybody.  Not everybody feels that we don't have spaghetti noodles, my rockets fly while bending to and fro, and I also don't want joints that can't be broken if I build a bad rocket.  In my game, played by me, that is cheating and I will never use it. I want rockets that break instead of flopping around.

Edited by JedTech
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alshain

Alshain

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, JedTech said:

But you aren't everybody.  Not everybody feels that we don't have spaghetti noodles, my rockets fly while bending to and fro, and I also don't want joints that can't be broken if I build a bad rocket.  In my game, played by me, that is cheating and I will never use it. Instead I want rockets that break instead of flopping around.

Exactly, so having the button give you the option to turn them on and me the option to turn them off.  The button is necessary and good.

Edited by Alshain
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NathanKell

NathanKell

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Laguna said:

That's also in keeping with it's partial Atlas LR-105 sustainer engine appearance.  It was the upper-stage engine on the Atlas, though it was started at the same time as the two LR-89 booster engines (because when the Atlas was being developed it was not known if a rocket engine could be started in space, so all engines were lit at launch).  It had much less thrust than the LR-89, so the new T45 should have less thrust and lower atmo ISP than the T30.

Correct.

It's also worth pointing out that the thrusts in the released parts don't quite match the image anyway.

Also, regarding upgrades, I said we had not used them ourselves yet, but that modders could. I did not say we never would.

 

Finally, regarding engine bells. Porkjet was very careful to maintain correct area ratios for all engines he redesigned. Area ratio (throat area vs exit area) determines whether an engine is vacuum-optimized or not (well, if it has a low chamber pressure it pretty much _can't_ not be vacuum optimized). Cherrypicking a Merlin 1DV is really not a good idea, given that it has an insanely large area ratio. Heck, even the SSME/RS-25, a sustainer engine optimized for mid-altitudes, has a high area ratio (in the 70s) because it has a very high chamber pressure. A vac-only engine with a low chamber pressure, well, you lose a tiny bit of Isp by not having an insane >100 area ratio, but not nearly as much.

Finally, recall that SPS was ~90kN with that giant nozzle, but it needed that giant nozzle for its 315s specific impulse because it was a low-efficiency pressure-fed engine. Pretty much all KSP engines, barring the LV-1 and 1R, are closed-cycle going by their Isps, and certainly the 909 and Poodle are. And for anyone who wonders about engines "buried" like them, well, I suggest you look into Blok E, Blok L, and Blok D, let alone Fregat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Temeter

Temeter

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, NathanKell said:

It's also worth pointing out that the thrusts in the released parts don't quite match the image anyway.

Also, regarding upgrades, I said we had not used them ourselves yet, but that modders could. I did not say we never would.

Btw, are the current engines stats and upgrades just something done on the quick, or do they at least currently point the rough direction how you're going to rebalance the engines? Because I like a lot of the stuff I'm seeing, even if it could use some fine-tuning in places.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Andem

Andem

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Alshain said:

Exactly, so having the button give you the option to turn them on and me the option to turn them off.  The button is necessary and good.

I really don't understand why you wouldn't accept this option in the LS discussion, but you will here. WHAT ARE YOUR SECRETS???

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
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...