Jump to content

[WIP] Nert's Dev Thread - Current: such nuke, wow


Nertea
 Share

Recommended Posts

Here's the AIM in action. 

ELnRmJf.png

In its above configuration it is helping hash out a concept of a unique sort of JNSQ Duna architecture. The idea is, rather than take a massive station-like vessel to Duna and lug resources and equipment back and forth, to take a lightweight crewed pod (launched atop a conventional rocket) and blast it out to Duna for relatively cheap, with surface and orbital infrastructure already in place for long 1.5 year crew rotations. The downside is that dV is still a little tight meaning I have to stick to a modified transfer window, but if done right I can get a crew of 4 to Duna in roughly 24 days. Still working to get the trip time down and payload up but it looks like I'm close to the sweet spot already.

Gv5Mweq.png

Testing went very well as you can imagine, no real issues. Though it did cause me to come to a similar conclusion as a few others - seems like one more anti-matter tank would come in handy to fill the gap between the ring tank and the next smallest tank available. Trying to fine tune the dV here was tricky, I ended up abusing Tweakscale on the ring tanks (please forgive me) because I needed 350 units of antimatter, and the two tanks to choose from held 50 units, or 2400 units. 

Also noticed that all of the engines with built-in fusion reactors do not throttle to meet power needs, unlike the standalone reactors. For instance I needed 25kW to power the ship's systems at idle but the reactor consumed resources as if it were providing its rated 100kW. Is this intentional?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ra4nd0m said:

Primary example (just count letters): термоядерный синтез means fusion in russian.  So I try to replace words with abbreviations or paraphrase something to make it shorter. Hardest part so far was Axial flow z-pinch. There are simply no russian language analouges for this thing so I had to come up with something to properly convey the meaning of this in russian. And this seriously affects  how fast I burn out.

 

An interesting challenge. I really appreciate your work though - even if I can't read it I'm sure other Russian speakers greatly appreciate it. 

 

1 hour ago, lemon cup said:

Here's the AIM in action. 

In its above configuration it is helping hash out a concept of a unique sort of JNSQ Duna architecture. The idea is, rather than take a massive station-like vessel to Duna and lug resources and equipment back and forth, to take a lightweight crewed pod (launched atop a conventional rocket) and blast it out to Duna for relatively cheap, with surface and orbital infrastructure already in place for long 1.5 year crew rotations. The downside is that dV is still a little tight meaning I have to stick to a modified transfer window, but if done right I can get a crew of 4 to Duna in roughly 24 days. Still working to get the trip time down and payload up but it looks like I'm close to the sweet spot already.

 

Testing went very well as you can imagine, no real issues. Though it did cause me to come to a similar conclusion as a few others - seems like one more anti-matter tank would come in handy to fill the gap between the ring tank and the next smallest tank available. Trying to fine tune the dV here was tricky, I ended up abusing Tweakscale on the ring tanks (please forgive me) because I needed 350 units of antimatter, and the two tanks to choose from held 50 units, or 2400 units. 

Nice! A very pretty ship.

1 hour ago, lemon cup said:

Also noticed that all of the engines with built-in fusion reactors do not throttle to meet power needs, unlike the standalone reactors. For instance I needed 25kW to power the ship's systems at idle but the reactor consumed resources as if it were providing its rated 100kW. Is this intentional?

Yes, it's intentional. Depending on the reactor, the minimum throttle is different. The AIM reactor is rated for 200kW and has a minimum throttle  of 50%, so you'll always see minimum 100 kW. The power reactors and the 'traditional' confinement reactors on engines have a 10% minimum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, ra4nd0m said:

[insert original reduced scope joke here].  Do not worry about it. I really enjoy these fancy futuristic engines. They are one of my favorite topics! The biggest problem in translating this stuff to russian is words length.

English does seem to have a higher information density when it comes to technical subjects. I've done some worth with writing localization code for web applications. For a given paragraph of text, English usually ends up being shorter in length than most other languages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sturmhauke said:

English does seem to have a higher information density when it comes to technical subjects. I've done some worth with writing localization code for web applications. For a given paragraph of text, English usually ends up being shorter in length than most other languages.

german is even denser IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I finally played with the afterburning mode on the Cascade. I think its safe to conclude the thing is absolutely insane. Nailing down a precise fuel mixture is proving a bit tricky so I opted for a slight surplus of fusion fuel. I can either run a reactor off of that (overkill for tank cooling) or have a slight buffer for reaction products mode if I run out of hydrogen mid-mission. Its only like 4,000 dV buffer but that's all you need to save a mission. Oh and I think I broke the embeds in my previous post while cleaning up my imgur so uh, RIP. Have a new album instead.

NPjiZbr.png

full album

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SpaceFace545 said:

Got to say the Frisbee is my favorite part in this pack partly due to its insane delta v and its self radiating capabilities but does anyone have any ideas on how to launch a 110 m long engine?

You don’t. Use extraplanetary launchpads or global construction to build it on orbit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:

Got to say the Frisbee is my favorite part in this pack partly due to its insane delta v and its self radiating capabilities but does anyone have any ideas on how to launch a 110 m long engine?

I'd pull Mark Thrimm and build a multi-body SSTO rocket around the engine using either 3.75m or even 5m cores. Something akin to what you can find in this video. Basically, you'll have your engine hanging down from the mounting point set between the launcher bodies (and strutted to it to avoid the whole thing from swinging around too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Captain Sierra said:

Not with that attitude. @SpaceFace545 it looks something like this: It ain't pretty but it works.

I was kinda thinking about ditching the fairings and opting for a puller rocket that has engines on the top, I'm thinking this could counteract the wobble associated with absurdly long and narrow rockets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:

I was kinda thinking about ditching the fairings and opting for a puller rocket that has engines on the top, I'm thinking this could counteract the wobble associated with absurdly long and narrow rockets.

KJR pretty much stabilized the stack when I launched it. My stack was only like 15 parts top to bottom too. The biggest spot I was worried about flexing was the interstage because I was using a step-down upper stage with clustered engines. I was coupling 7.5 meter cores to a 5 meter cluster mount and that sometimes doesn't like to stay rigid but KJR usually keeps it where its supposed to be. And of course @CDSlice is right in that puller config only helps if your rocket behaves like a noodle rather than a rocket. KJR of course fixes that.

I would dare say KJR is basically required when using this mod because absurdly long constructs (often punctuated with docking ports) are pretty normal for spacecraft which use these drives, especially the torches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wilhelm Kerman said:

Isn't the first release slated for before Christmas?

It probably would have been if it hadn't been for KSP 1.11...

5 hours ago, aeroeng14 said:

Woah. You mean we'll be able to attach them to rovers if it's a dozer version?!

You can put the other one on rovers too, just... bigger ones ;). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FFT 0.9.11 (RC1???)

  • Updated DynamicBatteryStorage to 2.2.1
  • Updated DeployableEngines to 1.2.3
  • Updated CryoTanks to 1.5.4
  • Updated SystemHeat to 0.3.0
  • Updated SpaceDust to 0.3.0
  • Updated Waterfall to 0.2.10
  • Marked mod for KSP 1.11
  • Added PK-DUST-XS Regolith Processing System: smaller bulldozer style He3 processor
  • Made gas scanner storeable as a cargo part
  • Moved Dirac to correct tech node
  • Reduced minimum throttle for Dirac reactor to 25% from 50%

 

It's worth mentioning that this might not work in older KSPs than 1.11, as I use some new API features in SystemHeat. Feedback welcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I've been thinking about science mode balance and I can say that there are some problems around it. The main problem is that Hammertong is on the same tech level as the torch drives and there is absoultely no point on using it. The only reason to pick fusion over Unified Field is Ouroborous. I think it can be partially fixed by allowing to unlock unified field only when both previous nodes are researched not one of them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ra4nd0m said:

So I've been thinking about science mode balance and I can say that there are some problems around it. The main problem is that Hammertong is on the same tech level as the torch drives and there is absoultely no point on using it. The only reason to pick fusion over Unified Field is Ouroborous. I think it can be partially fixed by allowing to unlock unified field only when both previous nodes are researched not one of them

All FFT does tech-tree-wise is place its parts into the existing nodes from CTT.  The arrangement and structure of those nodes is part of CTT, and changing that through a patch could easily cause problems for other mods that intend to use CTT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But the problem exists. This node is very far from the beginning. I know only one mod that uses nodes that are so far. And it is KSPI-E. Such change should not wreck havoc around mods. It is not that significant. After all this change would fit into "unified field theory"

 

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...