Jump to content

[1.12.1] JNSQ [0.10.0] [23 Sept 2021]


Galileo
 Share

Recommended Posts

Having a great time with JNSQ, thanks @Galileo and friends for all your amazing work. Curious how I would go about using KSC Extended (or other KK packs) with this though?

Edited by TheRedTom
Ignore me, looking at the KSCE thread it appears it is being fixed asap
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Small bug/typo in celestialbodies.pdf. Gilly's solar day is listed as 16.669 hours when it is, in fact, 16.669 days. I think so, at least, because it's tidally locked.

EDIT:

I think I found another bug. Based on my calculations sheet, which agrees with all the OTHER solar bodies, Kerbin's SOLAR day is actually 1.003 days, whereas it's the Sidereal rotation period that is exactly 12 hours. Please let me know if this sounds wrong because my sheet is dumping out all the proper numbers for other bodies (at least they agree with celestialbodies.pdf), and I'm taking the rotationperiod number straight from the .cfg files!

EDIT2: continuing to go through the celestialbodies.pdf. My calcs say that Ike has 22.118 DAYS and 22.854 DAYS for it's SRP/Solar day, not hours. Once again, please correct if I'm off but those seem like typos to me.

Edited by Crixomix
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Crixomix said:

Kerbin's SOLAR day is actually 1.003 days, whereas it's the Sidereal rotation period that is exactly 12 hours.

That's incorrect, Kerbin's solar day is exactly 12 hours.  This is because Kerbin uses solarRotationPeriod = True, which makes rotationPeriod equal to the solar day.  Otherwise rotationPeriod equals the sidereal period.

Note that you don't see solarRotationPeriod = True in our Kerbin cfg, but it's set to true in the Kerbin template.  It is set the false for all other bodies.
 

Edited by OhioBob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, OhioBob said:

That's incorrect, Kerbin's solar day is exactly 12 hours.  This is because Kerbin uses solarRotationPeriod = True, which makes rotationPeriod equal to the solar day.  Otherwise rotationPeriod equals the sidereal period.

Note that you don't see solarRotationPeriod = True in our Kerbin cfg, but it's set to true in the Kerbin template.  It is set the false for all other bodies.
 

Ah. That makes sense. Thanks for the explanation. I figured Kerbin might be an exception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, OhioBob said:

BTW, @Crixomix, thanks for the corrections.  Much of that document was copy and paste, so its' easy to overlook changing a unit.  I've corrected the mistakes.  If you find any others, please let me know.

Will do. I'll probably fill in the rest of the bodies soon and then I can compare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I installed JNSQ in a clean KSP 1.8.1 via CKAN.  I added Final Frontier as one of the recommended mods.  The Player.log is giving me a lot of msgs similar to:

FF: cannot find image file 'F:/Steam/KSP 1.8.1 JNSQ/KSP_x64_Data/..\GameData\Nereid/FinalFrontier/Ribbons/Dak/FirstPlantFlag.png'

The .png file exists under KSP 1.8.1 JNSQ/GameData/Nereid/FinalFrontier/... as expected.  Why is KSP looking under KSP_x64_Data instead and understandably finding nothing?

Full Player.log here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Brigadier said:

I installed JNSQ in a clean KSP 1.8.1 via CKAN.  I added Final Frontier as one of the recommended mods.  The Player.log is giving me a lot of msgs similar to:

FF: cannot find image file 'F:/Steam/KSP 1.8.1 JNSQ/KSP_x64_Data/..\GameData\Nereid/FinalFrontier/Ribbons/Dak/FirstPlantFlag.png'

The .png file exists under KSP 1.8.1 JNSQ/GameData/Nereid/FinalFrontier/... as expected.  Why is KSP looking under KSP_x64_Data instead and understandably finding nothing?

Full Player.log here.

I had to download the ribbons separately and add them into the FF folder outside of CKAN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, eberkain said:

I had to download the ribbons separately and add them into the FF folder outside of CKAN

You mean you manually installed the images on the indicated path, in the proper path or through an new FF install?  There's no way a mod's resource files should be located on that path reported in my log and a mod shouldn't be looking there.

Might something be wrong with the way CKAN is installing FF as a JNSQ recommendation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brigadier said:

 

FF: cannot find image file 'F:/Steam/KSP 1.8.1 JNSQ/KSP_x64_Data/..\GameData\Nereid/FinalFrontier/Ribbons/Dak/FirstPlantFlag.png'

The .png file exists under KSP 1.8.1 JNSQ/GameData/Nereid/FinalFrontier/... as expected.  Why is KSP looking under KSP_x64_Data instead and understandably finding nothing?

In file paths, ".." means parent folder. It's starting from KSP_x64_Data because KSP is provided that path by Unity, then going to the parent folder (the root KSP install), then looking for GameData there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, HebaruSan said:

In file paths, ".." means parent folder. It's starting from KSP_x64_Data because KSP is provided that path by Unity, then going to the parent folder (the root KSP install), then looking for GameData there.

Doh, of course :P:confused::blush:.  You're absolutely correct and I didn't consider that.  Given that I'm currently trying to understand the filesystem library under MSVS C++, I'm a bit of a moron.

The question remains, then, why isn't KSP finding those pngs when Windows Explorer can?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Brigadier said:

The question remains, then, why isn't KSP finding those pngs when Windows Explorer can?

I don't use CKAN so I have no idea how it goes about installing JNSQ and Final Frontier.  But I do know that for a manual install, three things must happen:  (1) JNSQ must be installed, (2) Final Frontier must be installed, and (3) the Final Frontier ribbons must be installed from the "Optional Mods" folder of the JNSQ zip file.  Did you do the latter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, OhioBob said:

I don't use CKAN so I have no idea how it goes about installing JNSQ and Final Frontier.  But I do know that for a manual install, three things must happen:  (1) JNSQ must be installed, (2) Final Frontier must be installed, and (3) the Final Frontier ribbons must be installed from the "Optional Mods" folder of the JNSQ zip file.  Did you do the latter?

That would be a big 'no'.  Since I do use CKAN and JNSQ is available on CKAN (one hopes the installation works correctly), I checked the JNSQ folder in the CKAN cache.  The GameData folder in that zip does not contain an "Optional Mods" folder and neither does the GameData/JNSQ folder.

However, my JNSQ install does contain a GameData/Nereid/FinalFrontier folder which CKAN dutifully installed when I selected FF as a recommended or suggested (I can't recall which) mod for JNSQ.

I would suggest that this points to a problem with the Netkan file for JNSQ.

Ninja'd by @HebaruSan

Edited by Brigadier
Spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, fragtzack said:

While enjoyed the new JNSQ for the most part, having a big concern with balance.

Humans developed rockets primarily for earth size needs and other bodies were secondary considerations.

Almost all upper stage rockets in human history (that I am aware of) are a single stage design. This means that single upper stage has enough TWR and ISP to push the payload into a orbit once the first 1-2 stages got the rocket up to sufficient altitude. With JNSQ, every ship I make has to have a multi-stage upper stage with multiple engines unless the payload is  so minuscule as to be a pointless mission.

This concern is really only with the 1.5 engines, Terrier and Pug. There is probably issues with 1.875 and 2.5 also, dunno cause haven't progressed career enough.

These 1.5 enginees are severely underpowered , the underpower is not realistic and most important its not that fun to have to deal with the lack of balancing in this JNSQ design. While the 1.5 stage 1/2 stage engines were tweaked enough for JNSQ scales, the 1.5 upper stage engines are neglected and this neglect comes painfully through during a normal career mode play.

I'm sorry but I've played at this scale and I haven't experienced any issue with rocket engines being underpowered.  I've always been able to easily get substantial payloads to orbit using 2-stage rockets built from stock parts without modification.  And there's a wide enough assortment of engines for upper stages that I've never been unable to find one to suit my needs.  And JNSQ isn't the first time people have played at scales comparable to this.  3.2x and 2.5x scales have been used for years (using Sigma Dimensions) and I've never heard any complaints about it.  The only comments that I've ever heard is that the stock parts are very well balanced for this scale.  You are honestly the first person I know of who has ever said otherwise.

(edit)

Furthermore, JNSQ is a planet pack, not a parts mod.  We do slightly modify a couple of the 1.875-m MH engines, but we had very specific reasons for doing so (they are analogs of real life engines that are incapable doing the job they are intended to do at the larger scale).  But modifying those parts is an exception, not the rule.  It is not the job of JNSQ to rebalance parts, just as it isn't the job of Sigma Dimensions to change parts when it resizes a solar system.  What parts a player uses, how s/he uses them, and how they are modified is up to the player.
 

Edited by OhioBob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, OhioBob said:

"Optional Mods" folder of the JNSQ zip file.

14 hours ago, HebaruSan said:

That may be the problem, there is no such folder in the JNSQ zip file.

Looks like it's a separate ZIP:

https://github.com/Galileo88/JNSQ/releases/download/0.9.0/JNSQ_FinalFrontier.zip

We can add the ribbons to CKAN, but it will require some collaboration with the JNSQ team since the JNSQ entry uses a metanetkan.
Submitted for tracking:  https://github.com/Galileo88/JNSQ/issues/18

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fragtzack said:

The only was have been able to make reasonable upper stages is by making huge lower stages so big/expensive/many stages  that the ground speed velocity required to obtain orbit is mostly accomplished by the lower stages and not the final stage. I.E., need to be at least already going 2000m/s before starting final stage burn.

2 problems with so much dependency on lower stages to make up for the upper stage under powers:

 

1. The way I read flight plans of real rocket launches, the majority of the velocity gain is in the final stage.

2. Making huge, asapargus lower stages is very costly in $ in career modes.

Anyhow, maybe am designing something wrong. Would be interested in seeing other folks early career mode designs for orbiting 1.25Ton payloads with 1.5 rocket engines. No mechjeb use.

 

I'm afraid I just don't have that problem.  All my rockets designs look very similar to real life designs.  I never have to resort to huge lower stages or asparagus.  Ideally I like my first stage to have about 3 times the propellant and about 4 times the thrust of my second stage.*  Those ratios usually give me a pretty well balanced rocket, and they're not far off from real life.

* Is that is what you consider a huge/expensive lower stage?  Because if so, then your problem is flawed expectations.  The ratios I give are not huge, they're normal.

** Those ratios are also for 1/4 real scale (JNSQ).  At stock scale I want my first stage to have 2x the propellant and about 3x the thrust of the second stage.
 

Edited by OhioBob
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fragtzack said:

The only was have been able to make reasonable upper stages is by making huge lower stages so big/expensive/many stages  that the ground speed velocity required to obtain orbit is mostly accomplished by the lower stages and not the final stage. I.E., need to be at least already going 2000m/s before starting final stage burn.

2 problems with so much dependency on lower stages to make up for the upper stage under powers:

 

1. The way I read flight plans of real rocket launches, the majority of the velocity gain is in the final stage.

2. Making huge, asapargus lower stages is very costly in $ in career modes.

Anyhow, maybe am designing something wrong. Would be interested in seeing other folks early career mode designs for orbiting 1.25Ton payloads with 1.5 rocket engines. No mechjeb use.

 

What is the mass of the payload you are launching and what size rocket stack are you wanting to use?

Edited by eberkain
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...