[1.12] Extraplanetary Launchpads v6.99.3

[Aedile]

First, why did you quote my whole and address only one point?

And that tank mass is critical. The mass of a tank is directly proportional to the volume of its contents for the same pressure. Delta-V is all about Isp and mass ratio.

You very much can know. The jumbo-64 holds 6400u. It is a 7.5m long cylinder of 2.5m diameter. If you assume the internal shape is a hemisphere-capped 5m long cylinder with walls of ~12.4mm (ie, internal diameter of ~2.4752m)*, then the internal volume is 32m³. That gives 200u/m³, or 5L/u. All of the X200 tanks, and the FL-T tanks follow the same pattern. Note that the tank thickness scales too, though not quite linearly.

* Yes, this omits the separator between LF and O. Just reduce the thickness of the walls (increase the internal diamter) by a small amount

I can't explain the engines (I haven't looked into them), but the tanks are easy: they're made of iron (density of 7.8t/m³, with ridiculously thick walls (10-13mm is way too much, even for aluminum)).

Tank is critical. However you try to put realism in ksp, while keeping its unrealistic assumptions.

You make the assumption that hydrogen tank is same as rp1 tank, or ox tank. Yes if you make 14 times bigger tank it will be much heavier. Tank design is very complicated matter, namely picking the wall thickness. The tank needs to withstand its own weight, obviously. Then it needs to withstand the weight of it's contents, as well as the GForces, deformation forces etc. I suppose you can figure out that 1500m3 of LH2 weighing only 100ton would need a thinner wall than 1500m3 rp1 weighing 1500tons. Well if we need to go that deep, thin solid wall, and pretty thick insulation. You apply the RL logic for the size, but ignore the RL logic of the tanks and engines. Both real and mod fuels have concept of the internal tanks actually having weight, but at least MF which I use, keep the ridiculous weight of the external tank shell. Then as you probably know, the ratio (by mass) H2 engines use is not 45/55.

Aaand there is the assumption, that units have anything to do with volume to begin with. Look at space shuttle tank - (the super light one) - 1/4th of volume is LOX, 6/7 of the weight. 3/4th is LH2 1/6th of the weight. The only thing to imply volume, is the property being called density - but then again, EC has density too.

And yet you quoted my one and only mention of "cheat" (where I used to word twice: once for stock). The part you missed was the density and thus the required tank size and thus tank mass. Stock tanks give a single stage a maximum (asymptotic) mass ratio of 9. The 1.3 factor between stock Isp vs realistic Isp for LF+O means that for realistic Isp, you'd need a mass ratio of ~17.4 (9^1.3) to get the same delta-v. I don't know at what pressure LHyd is stored (seems it may be 1 atmosphere, even, just very cold (20K)), but considering the need for insulation, getting a good mass ratio is challenging. Keeping things consistent, a mass ratio of 9 is unachievable (note: real tanks probably do get better than 9, but are not made of iron and certainly aren't 1cm thick).

As for the chemistry: Toss in carbon dioxide, or any other source of carbon, it matters not, and you can have your LiquidFuel with no quibbles from me (8H₂O + 12CO₂ + mucho energy -> C₁₂H₁₆* + 16O₂).

* Stoichiometric formula for RP-1.

I admit to never having played with KSPi. I've considered it, but I was told about the LiquidFuel=LHyd issue and decided against it. If that has changed, then yay.

Again, I'm not debating LF being LH2, just the fact that there is no benefit that KSPI treats it as such when producing it. Compared with stock there is no difference whatsoever. You get absolutely same fuel as stock. Only 60% of the water is usable, and water tanks are just as heavy. So absolutely 0 sense of bringing water to space and produce fuel there. The reason why CO2 is not used, is because it's available only 4 places.

Compared with kethane/karbonite - 60% of water useful, not every body has water. (only 4 actually have co2). You can actually scoop fuel from atmospheres which has it (which other than jool is almost nothing).

If we are talking about RL - like I said earlier - RL hydrolox tank 760 tons total, 26 tons empty. So well, lol

For some reason you insist that is cheaty, and the very same stock engines and tanks kspi uses should be 14 times bigger and heavier. I really don't follow the logic.

In case you haven't noticed, I've been helping people do so. EL doesn't care where or how you get the RocketParts, just that you have them. The same goes for any other resource the craft may need.

I know integration already exists. I know you are great guy, I'm not disputing that. I'm just pointing out a misconception. Relax

It's called financial independence: having more passive income than your expenses, though EL isn't passive income.

You can actually do that also on your launchpad or runway. So it's cheat. I don't do it, but I remember discussion of which is the most profitable part to produce..

Now you're pulling my leg.

• FAR: other than less drag and more lift, FAR actually makes things more difficult.
  
• Kerbal Alarm Clock: what, something to help watch a bouncing time display is cheating? Also, set the alarm too close to the event and you miss it while responding. Set it too far from the event and you still sit there watching the clock. And then there are complex fleet operations: using KAC isn't cheating; not using KAC is... madness?
  
• Precise Node: oh, yeah, it's "cheaty" being able to set a maneuver node that even MechJeb can't burn precisely.
  
• Kerbal Engineer: you still have to understand the information it gives you.
  
• Real Chutes: Uh, yeah, riiiiiiiiiight. Open chute at 100m (Kerbin) with stock chutes, land safely. Do the same with Real Chutes, sayonara.
  

Yes I am. I'm pointing out the subjectivity of "cheaty", and I know you'll find purists claiming that. I consider all those essential, if they are not there, I'll refuse to play

FAR will shave 1km/s to kirbin orbit and around 3km/s at eve. Makes lots of things harder, but 1km/s. ferram4 released KIDS for reason (great mod, if you set isp to vary thrust rather than fuel consumption)

Alarm clock - lets you manage interstellar empire, which in stock is nigh impossible. Also gives you transfer windows.

Precise node - lets you input numbers, making interplanetary transfers much easier. Also lets you increase the conics steps...

Kerbal engineer - helps you build really efficient craft. And not having that flight info is like driving a car blind.

Real chutes - well I admit I havent used stock chutes after the joint fixes, but before that they loved to rip your stuff apart. Also the drogues and drags are just godsend.

Actually, the only reason asparagus is "cheaty" is the infinite flow-rate of the fuel-lines. If flow rate issues could be overcome, NASA would be using asparagus staging. Actually, I seem to remember hearing about somebody (one of the private space companies?) experimenting with simple asparagus or maybe onion staging.

That is not the only, it's one of them. There are may differences with RL, I was talking in sense of other configurations in ksp.

KSP engines are heavy - you want that engine boosting, instead of playing dead weight, even if you use them under their isp.

KSP tanks are heavy - you want to drop them as soon as possible.

Edited September 8, 2014 by Aedile

[archont]

I'm having an issue with the smelter. When viewing the part in the VAB builder, it doesn't rotate like other parts. It scales

Here you can see the part as it exploded out of my menu. The part attaches and otherwise works fine once dragged out of the part selection window, but mousing over it causes this kind of behavior.

I have tons of mods but the smelters, all three of them, are the only parts to feature this weird behavior.

[taniwha]

archont: Yup, stock KSP bug. The simple fix is to install Kethane (or Karbonite and the patches for EL+Karbonite). The problem is 3 or more resources and no modules on a part. The lack of a module is caused by KethaneConverter not being available.

[archont]

Thanks taniwha, it's the first time I've encountered it. I reinstalled Karbonite and then the Karbonite-EPL conversion pack, the smelters work fine now.

[janiekh]

Is there actually a way to just have a endless amount of rocket parts, so you don't have to mine or get parts to the base everytime?

[dzikakulka]

Edit rocket workshop cfg, multiply rocket parts output, delete input metal/anything requirement (in converter module). That's like one of thousand ways

[janiekh]

Edit rocket workshop cfg, multiply rocket parts output, delete input metal/anything requirement (in converter module). That's like one of thousand ways

Thank you, but how i do this?

[forsaken1111]

Thank you, but how i do this?

Use text editor to open the .cfg file. Its not terribly difficult.

[janiekh]

Use text editor to open the .cfg file. Its not terribly difficult.

But what do i change to what?

[forsaken1111]

But what do i change to what?

You were already told what to change. The config has a module which controls what resources are required for a conversion so if you delete the 'metal' input requirement you will get a conversion that just makes rocket parts for free.

[janiekh]

I'm sorry, but i don't know what to do, this is what i can find, but then with more planets, or do i have the wrong file?

//These densities work on the assumption that 1m^3 holds 200u of resource.

RESOURCE_DEFINITION

{

name = RocketParts

density = 0.0025 // parts are very fluffy. 0.5t/m^3

unitCost = 5.0 // 2000/t

flowMode = ALL_VESSEL

transfer = PUMP

isTweakable = true

}

RESOURCE_DEFINITION

{

name = Metal

density = 0.039 // iron is 7.8t/m^3

unitCost = 71.2 // 800/t

flowMode = ALL_VESSEL

transfer = PUMP

isTweakable = true

}

[dzikakulka]

You want to change converter module (that's how original looks):

MODULE {
        name = KethaneConverter
        Label = RocketParts
        InputRates {
            Metal = 0.5
            //FIXME kerbal hours would be much better, but they're not a
            // resource.
            ElectricCharge = 10
        }
        OutputRatios {
            // I've seen as bad as 0.35 and better than 0.95. This seems like
            // a good compromise
            RocketParts = 0.7
            // Tiny scraps escape.
            ScrapMetal* = 0.2995
        }
    }

I'm not super familiar with that particular module but you'll figure it out - maybe deleting whole InputRates with latter brackets will work, maybe simple make 0.5 and 10 in there zero and give it a try. And multiply that 0.7 in OutputRatios so you produce as fast as you use them. Remember that you have to use the part you've edited and you still have to activate "converter".

And you should learn a little on how KSP handles parts, configs are easy to understand and give you amazing tweaking/modding possibilities even if you can't program/model/do anything related at all.

[janiekh]

Nvm guys, i've already found the right file,sorry, and thanks for the help

Edited September 4, 2014 by janiekh

[forsaken1111]

Nvm guys, i've already found the right file,sorry, and thanks for the help

Glad you found it. If you test it out and get a working config, consider sharing it in case others here are interested.

[janiekh]

Good idea, if i've tested it, and it works, i'll paste it here (how do i get it into 'code' like you did with the previous comment?)

EDIT: Thanks forsaken1111, and it won't be here today, the item didn't load (at the starting of the game when all items get loaded), so i'll do it some other time :\

Edited September 4, 2014 by janiekh

[forsaken1111]

Good idea, if i've tested it, and it works, i'll paste it here (how do i get it into 'code' like you did with the previous comment?)

Push "Reply with Quote" on his post to see the tag. It is

 and then [/code.] (without the period)

[monstah]

Put your smart kerbals where they will do the most good (e.g. the workshop) and your stupid kerbals where they will do the least harm (e.g. command pods).

Lol, you just described my workplace to perfection.

[elementalfx]

Hello guys I just installed this Mod but every time I start the game and hit OK to confirm progressive building it puts me to Mission control and then it crashes. I have no idea whats wrong. I am using latest KSP version on Steam.

[taniwha]

The game going into mission control is due to the click passing through the window and getting MC as well as the button.

The crash is something else entirely and I cannot do anything without your output_log.txt.l

[elementalfx]

Yep thanks for help. I found out its because of what you said. And crash problem was solved. It was other interfering mod that caused all the problems.

[passinglurker]

is it possible to use any old part as a launch pad assuming you set up the config file correctly or does it have to be something that is set up in unity like thrust transforms is for engines?

[taniwha]

First, I don'ty use Unity but that's actually irrelevant.

Yes, any old part will work (I used a dockotron sr for orbital construction development), but there is one problem: unless there is a special transform (check the orbital dock config for details), the default position at which a vessel will be placed is the origin of the part (usually its center of mass). However, that's what SpawnHeightOffset is for: shifting the position to just outside the part (the base of the vessel will be placed there). Check the config file for launchpad2.

[passinglurker]

First, I don'ty use Unity but that's actually irrelevant.

Yes, any old part will work (I used a dockotron sr for orbital construction development), but there is one problem: unless there is a special transform (check the orbital dock config for details), the default position at which a vessel will be placed is the origin of the part (usually its center of mass). However, that's what SpawnHeightOffset is for: shifting the position to just outside the part (the base of the vessel will be placed there). Check the config file for launchpad2.

Thank you for the response I've been debating putting this on my latest save cause I wasn't keen on the launch pad models this nugget of knowledge should help change that. Is there a way to limit the size of craft that a launch pad can spawn? say if I wanted to use an ISX space dock, or a hanger mod hangar and I didn't want everything to explode if I accidentally made a craft that was too wide.

[taniwha]

No, there's no way to limit craft size. EL doesn't do any size checks at all, just mass, and that's for build times and resource costs. That said, the feature I'm currently working on will need size checks to figure out placement, so such may be possible in the future.

In the meantime, read "The Dog Who Wouldn't Be" by Farley Mowat, particularly chapter 10, "The Cruise of the Coot".

[Kiel Eire]

Is there a way to enable resource use after primarily disabling it? I've tried uninstalling, launching, then re-installing to no avail. Any config file I can edit?

Thanks.