Jump to content

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


Nertea
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Starhelperdude said:

maybe move on to newer projects

Random idea: Somehow I feel an autodestruct mod would be nice. Some mechanism to blow things up in space or on ground. Why not push a big red button and make an old duna ground station blow up in really nice big fireworks with a nice mushroom cloud from an exploding NFE-Reactor instead of leaving debris all over the place? Somehow I feel a molten reactorcore should have more consequences than just having a powersupply stopping to work. (And yes, I know: Chernobyl and also Fukushima Daichi didn't blow up in a nuclear blast, but in an accumulation of H2/O2 gas mix - but KSP is just a game.)

Just a funny idea. :D Kerbals loooove fireworks. Or... at least I do...

Edited by Rakete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Rakete said:

Random idea: Somehow I feel an autodestruct mod would be nice. Some mechanism to blow things up in space or on ground. Why not push a big red button and make an old duna ground station blow up in really nice big fireworks with a nice mushroom cloud from an exploding NFE-Reactor instead of leaving debris all over the place? Somehow I feel a molten reactorcore should have more consequences than just having a powersupply stopping to work. (And yes, I know: Chernobyl and also Fukushima Daichi didn't blow up in a nuclear blast, but in an accumulation of H2/O2 gas mix - but KSP is just a game.)

Just a funny idea. :D Kerbals loooove fireworks. Or... at least I do...

There's actually a mod that does exactly this, and LGG has updated it to 1.12! 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Zelda said:

There's actually a mod that does exactly this, and LGG has updated it to 1.12! 

 

Didn't know this mod. Thx. Might consider to install this.

 

Anyways, I still think a molten reactor core of the NFE reactors should have some consequences for the ship. But that's just my two cents. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Greetings.
Are there any plans to correct the direction of the RCS in capsules from the NFSpacecraft?
The center of thrust of the PPD-1 is strongly displaced from the center of mass, which makes it difficult to use.
Mk3 (Crew Dragon) nozzles are directed in such a way that they make it very inconvenient to use this capsule separately without additional RCS modules.
Sadly. Cool details. But they are too inconvenient. I do not want to replace them with something, but I have to do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Space Kerbalisation Tech said:

random question, but are you planning to make more near future/far future mods?

 

Nope.

6 hours ago, Cochies said:

Greetings.
Are there any plans to correct the direction of the RCS in capsules from the NFSpacecraft?
The center of thrust of the PPD-1 is strongly displaced from the center of mass, which makes it difficult to use.
Mk3 (Crew Dragon) nozzles are directed in such a way that they make it very inconvenient to use this capsule separately without additional RCS modules.
Sadly. Cool details. But they are too inconvenient. I do not want to replace them with something, but I have to do it.

They are pretty fine. They provide fully balanced +/- Z translation as well as full rotation. It's not reasonable to expect them to provide balanced X/Y translation without additional thrusters because craft are varied in length and CofM. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Nertea said:

They are pretty fine. They provide fully balanced +/- Z translation as well as full rotation. It's not reasonable to expect them to provide balanced X/Y translation without additional thrusters because craft are varied in length and CofM. 

The main problem is not the balance in relation to the  CoM.
The problem is that if you balance the thrust with additional RCS blocks, then when moving along X-Y there is a strong  thrust along Z.
Perhaps you are right as an author, perhaps someone is using the capsule RCS as it is and he likes it. But in my experience of use, the simplest solution is to turn off the capsule RCS and place some other RCS blocks on their surface.
It looks terrible. But at least it somehow works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some random question: Some chance a revamp of the NF Aeronautics parts being on the agenda ? Somehow they look a bit... aged. and not as sexy as the rest of the NF mods. (not a priority, just a curios question)

Some random question 2: whats planned after the upcoming NFE-Update? I am really a fan of your great work! Your stuff makes KSP a whole better game. Really looking forward to the new NFE reactors.

Random idea: Somehow we could need some more high demanding energy sinks/consumers than only propulsion systems and converters. Some huge laser thingys or stuff like this. I'm not sure what to do with it, but having something to put all the energy in, except propulsion devices would be somehow nice... Some reason to put a nice big bad boy of reactor core in a spacestation in order to power something impressive, that's not an engine and only for stations. some big evil burning luminescent plasma experiment or something like this, that needs high amounts of energy for days or weeks. Maybe some nice idea of a nice evil futuristic (FFT) energy consumer comes up here. Or a wireless energy transfer dish to multiple vessels/ground stations, eg. by a big laser or microwave or fun stuff like that... (i'm kinda thinking of the james bond movie with hally berry) just an idea. 

Edited by Rakete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Rakete said:

Some random question: Some chance a revamp of the NF Aeronautics parts being on the agenda ? Somehow they look a bit... aged. and not as sexy as the rest of the NF mods. (not a priority, just a curios question)

Some random question 2: whats planned after the upcoming NFE-Update? I am really a fan of your great work! Your stuff makes KSP a whole better game. Really looking forward to the new NFE reactors.

Random idea: Somehow we could need some more high demanding energy sinks/consumers than only propulsion systems and converters. Some huge laser thingys or stuff like this. I'm not sure what to do with it, but having something to put all the energy in, except propulsion devices would be somehow nice... Some reason to put a nice big bad boy of reactor core in a spacestation in order to power something impressive, that's not an engine and only for stations. some big evil burning luminescent plasma experiment or something like this, that needs high amounts of energy for days or weeks. Maybe some nice idea of a nice evil futuristic (FFT) energy consumer comes up here. Or a wireless energy transfer dish to multiple vessels/ground stations, eg. by a big laser or microwave or fun stuff like that... (i'm kinda thinking of the james bond movie with hally berry) just an idea. 

An experiment is a great idea! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rakete said:

Random idea: Somehow we could need some more high demanding energy sinks/consumers than only propulsion systems and converters. Some huge laser thingys or stuff like this. I'm not sure what to do with it, but having something to put all the energy in, except propulsion devices would be somehow nice... Some reason to put a nice big bad boy of reactor core in a spacestation in order to power something impressive, that's not an engine and only for stations. some big evil burning luminescent plasma experiment or something like this, that needs high amounts of energy for days or weeks. Maybe some nice idea of a nice evil futuristic (FFT) energy consumer comes up here. Or a wireless energy transfer dish to multiple vessels/ground stations, eg. by a big laser or microwave or fun stuff like that... (i'm kinda thinking of the james bond movie with hally berry) just an idea. 

There is the antimatter factory in FFT that takes up a ton of energy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Cochies said:

The main problem is not the balance in relation to the  CoM.
The problem is that if you balance the thrust with additional RCS blocks, then when moving along X-Y there is a strong  thrust along Z.
Perhaps you are right as an author, perhaps someone is using the capsule RCS as it is and he likes it. But in my experience of use, the simplest solution is to turn off the capsule RCS and place some other RCS blocks on their surface.
It looks terrible. But at least it somehow works.

I didn't see this in testing 5 minutes ago. I put 4x quad blocks on an engine below the dragonesque capsule and teleported to orbit, translating in any direction caused no rotation with SAS on. Perhaps you can share a craft image that causes this?

7 hours ago, Rakete said:

Some random question: Some chance a revamp of the NF Aeronautics parts being on the agenda ? Somehow they look a bit... aged. and not as sexy as the rest of the NF mods. (not a priority, just a curios question)

Some random question 2: whats planned after the upcoming NFE-Update? I am really a fan of your great work! Your stuff makes KSP a whole better game. Really looking forward to the new NFE reactors.

Random idea: Somehow we could need some more high demanding energy sinks/consumers than only propulsion systems and converters. Some huge laser thingys or stuff like this. I'm not sure what to do with it, but having something to put all the energy in, except propulsion devices would be somehow nice... Some reason to put a nice big bad boy of reactor core in a spacestation in order to power something impressive, that's not an engine and only for stations. some big evil burning luminescent plasma experiment or something like this, that needs high amounts of energy for days or weeks. Maybe some nice idea of a nice evil futuristic (FFT) energy consumer comes up here. Or a wireless energy transfer dish to multiple vessels/ground stations, eg. by a big laser or microwave or fun stuff like that... (i'm kinda thinking of the james bond movie with hally berry) just an idea. 

Well I'm ramping down all KSP mod work these days and am unlikely to do any more content for any mods in the near future, so... that's what is planned. Will try to cleanup some bugs and stuff but that's it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Nertea said:

Well I'm ramping down all KSP mod work these days and am unlikely to do any more content for any mods in the near future, so... that's what is planned. Will try to cleanup some bugs and stuff but that's it. 

Makes sense, KSP2 maybe is right around the corner so any work now could just become irrelevant in several months. Their also may be something going on between you and that dev team so yeah 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, rocketman525 said:

One of the pictures in the near future launch vehicles album features the 3.75 M crew parts in a grey and yellow color game, similar to the hub max in the stock game. How is this color scheme accessed?

Many parts in SSPx mod have "metallic surface" variants. They are available in parts' PAW menu in VAB/hangar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, thank you @Nertea for all your great mods. It‘s really the end of an era. Thank you for all the things you gave to us. Maybe KSP2 is around the corner, maybe not. Who knows… Anyway, you made KSP a whole different game, at least for me. I hardly believe, that KSP2 will reach the quality (at least at release) and quantity of possibilities, which KSP 1 with all your mods did.

And if you get bored of retirement at some point and want to unexpectedly do another mod, we‘ll be right here to help in testing and debugging. Same goes for the rest of the ramping down period.

I don‘t agree, that your content might become irrelevant after the KSP2 release. I strongly believe that KSP 1 will have a longer life, than we all expect. Not all of us have strong machines, that will cope with KSP2 in terms of high part counts etc. if i have the choice between playing KSP2 with shiny new graphics (naaa, not so impressive right now) and only be able to basic crafts or have the choice to play KSP 1 with all the fantastic Nertea mods plus some visuals like EVE and Spectra and can do bigger complex things; than I would still continue to play KSP1 rather than KSP2. I don‘t expect KSP 2 to be much superior in terms of hardware munching and efficient coding. 

Edited by Rakete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SpaceFace545 said:

Their also may be something going on between you and that dev team so yeah 

I am curious. :o

32 minutes ago, Rakete said:

I strongly believe that KSP 1 will have a longer life, than we all expect. Not all of us have strong machines, that will cope with KSP2 in terms of high part counts etc.

I hold the opposite. It seems that the dev team has put a lot of effort into optimizing physics. KPS2 may perform better than KSP in low graphic setting on potato machine.

But if KSP2 disappoints everyone, then KSP will live forever.

Edited by Dr.Lxweei
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Nertea said:

I didn't see this in testing 5 minutes ago. I put 4x quad blocks on an engine below the dragonesque capsule and teleported to orbit, translating in any direction caused no rotation with SAS on. Perhaps you can share a craft image that causes this?

 

Lr-FVhfQuSU.jpg?size=1920x1080&quality=9

For example like this:
RCS are balanced.
I'm trying to shift to the right (red)
Stock RCS belt creates thrust to the right (green)
But the total thrust of the RCS capsule is directed not to the right, but to the right and forward (yellow)
Because of this, a completely unnecessary forward acceleration is created (blue).

Balancing the RCS so that its operation does not cause rotation is not difficult. But the extra thrust forward is very harmful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Cochies said:

 

For example like this:
RCS are balanced.
I'm trying to shift to the right (red)
Stock RCS belt creates thrust to the right (green)
But the total thrust of the RCS capsule is directed not to the right, but to the right and forward (yellow)
Because of this, a completely unnecessary forward acceleration is created (blue).

Balancing the RCS so that its operation does not cause rotation is not difficult. But the extra thrust forward is very harmful.

Thanks for clarifying, I'll look into this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Cochies said:

Lr-FVhfQuSU.jpg?size=1920x1080&quality=9

For example like this:
RCS are balanced.
I'm trying to shift to the right (red)
Stock RCS belt creates thrust to the right (green)
But the total thrust of the RCS capsule is directed not to the right, but to the right and forward (yellow)
Because of this, a completely unnecessary forward acceleration is created (blue).

Balancing the RCS so that its operation does not cause rotation is not difficult. But the extra thrust forward is very harmful.

The explanation is obvious. Look a the RCS exhaust angles. The part of the thrust in forward direction is an trigonometric function of the vector addition of both exhaust jets. In the shown screenshot the Z-components of both jets do not compensate, given that both exhaustjets of the capsule have identical thrust.

There are only two ways of fixing: correction of one of the two jet angles to mirror the other one OR adjust the strengh of the thrust to match the z-component of the other jet, resulting in other imbalances, I think.

Not an easy descision as changing the angle might not match the capsule model with its exhaust openings.

Edited by Rakete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, rocketman525 said:

One of the pictures in the near future launch vehicles album features the 3.75 M crew parts in a grey and yellow color game, similar to the hub max in the stock game. How is this color scheme accessed? 

when downloading SSPXR you'll see an extras folder, just copy in those.

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...