HGR 1.875m parts R&D Thread [Mod reboot in progress] (First Dev build now available)

[Whirligig Girl]

I don't disagree with you here, but it isn't the only thing to consider.

This works for FASA, because it is aiming to fit the stock part sizes. For a mod like HGR wich is trying to introduce an all new diameter, it feels weird that the first craft* would be essentially 2.5m.

*craft as in the way the soyjuice lets you build something "like" a real life counterpart, but can be used however you want.

I don't see why an adapter like the current one couldn't be used. That doesn't make the pod feel like it needs a whole new set of sized parts. To me it's more like the pod is a stopgap between two sizes and the adapter could be considered a part of the pod itself. People can already do what they want with the current Radish, I frequently use it with both 1.25 and 1.875 parts in the early career.

I would definitely include an adapter similar to the current one, auto shrouds don't play well with FAR and reentry and don't take up any less memory anyway. It could even be designed to be flipped over and used to taper the SM down to 1.25 this time. Two sizes of SM is an interesting idea and might be possible, but I'd only pull the trigger on the larger size if It could be mapped to the same texture space as the "standard" one, because I don't want to do the texture work for two service modules and it would take up more memory. I'm mostly sure I could do it, but don't want to promise anything this early.

Thanks for all the input so far everyone, I appreciate the brainstorming.

Whenever I used a Radish in the old HGR, it was almost always a 2.5m spacecraft because it didn't look good on either 1.875m or 1.25m parts. Making a mercury pod using the Mk1 pod and using a re-entry pack that's 0.625m doesn't make the craft a 0.625m craft. And KSP users almost always use 1.25m tanks under it even if they could go down or up. The utility of the radish would be greatly expanded by allowing you to go directly to 1.875m or to use an adapter fuel tank to make a service module for replica craft.

Then there's just the fact both the Apollo service module and the Titan Rockets were silver, so the Rockomax tanks fit them best as a rocket stage. That's pretty minor, but perhaps at least a tad bit relevant.

[passinglurker]

please don't make the radish its own oddball size that needs an adapter. To me that makes it feel more like a kit craft(like the KSO) than space legos(like spaceplaneplus) because it'll look out of place if its used without its specific adapter part

[Orionkermin]

please don't make the radish its own oddball size that needs an adapter. To me that makes it feel more like a kit craft(like the KSO) than space legos(like spaceplaneplus) because it'll look out of place if its used without its specific adapter part

I can certainly see why you feel that way, the single adapter doesn't make it feel that way to me, but I do understand why it would to others. It's become a tough call and I think that no matter what there's going to be some members of the community that don't like it. I'm trying my best to find a way to make the most amount of people happy.

There is an option that I don't think has been brought up and I might as well throw it out there. I could roll the Radish and

Javascript is disabled. View full album

into one thing. A 1.25m pod with a 1.25m-1.875m service module. Biggest issue is a cramped IVA and the pod would be somewhat tiny. The whole thing would still be made from scratch and would still use the new style of SM I plan to use. (Hollow, no fuel/engines/etc.) It's at least something else to consider, I guess.

[Pulsar]

Look like It's still large enough for 2 kerbal.

I like that idea.

[theonegalen]

I've seen Gemini spacecraft. Not quite as cramped as Mercury, but still a much smaller space than I would normally like to spend two weeks with another person in.

The Radish was one of the first parts mods I ever downloaded though, and I really like the way it was. I like the idea of a high-endurance two-Kerb capsule that would be legit to take on longer-term missions.

Edited January 31, 2015 by theonegalen

[Taki117]

I like the idea of integrating the Radish and Corvus together, To be honest though, I never really use the Radish at all.

[DevL]

Don't underestimate the value of having what's intended to be a single craft in pieces that can be reused and combined with other parts. Having the Radish go from 1.25m at the top 1.875m at the bottom would work for me, given the scale and the fact that it should contain 2 kerbonauts. Having a separate 1.875m service module just means it can, with a generic 1.875m -> 1.25m or 2.5m adapter be used with other pods. Mixing and matching is one of the great strengths and joys of playing KSP.

[Hyratel]

is there a plan to roll up a Community Tech Tree patch for this? CTT strips tree node assignments for all parts so they're only available with an explicit assignment. (this apparently avoids problems with redesigned nodes)

[Orionkermin]

is there a plan to roll up a Community Tech Tree patch for this? CTT strips tree node assignments for all parts so they're only available with an explicit assignment. (this apparently avoids problems with redesigned nodes)

I'm certainly not against the idea. I am however, pretty unfamiliar with CTT's layout and balance. Maybe this will be something that gets added after the reboot is finished and I can look into it with the whole part range in mind. Or possibly a helpful community member will make one at some point. I'll make a note on it so I don't forget down the line.

[Orionkermin]

Finally got an engine in game. Sorry for the lack of updating recently, I've been a bit stumped with the engines lately and things kept not really coming out in a way I was happy with.

Unfortunately, I'm going to have to drop the whole "optional" boatail idea. it just costs too much time from me and too much memory from the game. (Basically doubles the memory usage of engines) Really sorry guys, I did try a lot and it just sort of wasted a lot of time. At least they won't have fussy nodes and i can just concentrate on actually getting parts made and get this mod moving forward again.

Anyways, this is the new-new G90. (Now the FG-90) It's based mostly on the centaur upper stage, and obviously is now a two nozzle engine. There's a couple more images in the album.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[regex]

Definitely appreciate you trying, Orionkerman! The G90 looks pretty good, nice texturing work.

[Pulsar]

As someone who used G90 at first stage of angara style rocket. It's a bit weird to see it become a two nozzle engine, but good job on your work.

Well, I could use the stock revamp skipper instead.

Anyway, what is your plan for balancing your engines?

[Orionkermin]

Definitely appreciate you trying, Orionkerman! The G90 looks pretty good, nice texturing work.

Thanks.

As someone who used G90 at first stage of angara style rocket. It's a bit weird to see it become a two nozzle engine, but good job on your work.

Well, I could use the stock revamp skipper instead.

Anyway, what is your plan for balancing your engines?

I knew it would be a little bit breaking to change the engine to a dual nozzle set up and while I feel bad about that I still think it was for the best. Engines like the the centaur's aren't something that is really seen out of realism mods, so it was more fun and interesting to work on. One thing to keep in mind too is that I'm making sure to keep the reboot compatible with the original version, so you could always just keep the old G90 as well if you wanted.

Balance will be difficult. I'm hoping to find some kind of middle ground between the stock 1.25 and 2.5 engines. I'll be using KER to get some readouts to make sure things don't end up overpowered.

[DGatsby]

That's a nice engine!

[John Nowak]

I ran into something slightly odd -- the Leek orbital module no longer seems to work as a probe core. I've re-installed HGR since, with no luck. What might cause that to happen?

[Whirligig Girl]

Thanks.

I knew it would be a little bit breaking to change the engine to a dual nozzle set up and while I feel bad about that I still think it was for the best. Engines like the the centaur's aren't something that is really seen out of realism mods, so it was more fun and interesting to work on. One thing to keep in mind too is that I'm making sure to keep the reboot compatible with the original version, so you could always just keep the old G90 as well if you wanted.

Balance will be difficult. I'm hoping to find some kind of middle ground between the stock 1.25 and 2.5 engines. I'll be using KER to get some readouts to make sure things don't end up overpowered.

Considering that 2.5m parts ought to be more advanced, I think the balance should be a little closer to 1.25m.

[Orionkermin]

I ran into something slightly odd -- the Leek orbital module no longer seems to work as a probe core. I've re-installed HGR since, with no luck. What might cause that to happen?

Any chance you're playing with remote tech? If so it might not be configured to work for that mod. Just a guess off the top of my head.

Considering that 2.5m parts ought to be more advanced, I think the balance should be a little closer to 1.25m.

I don't think that bigger engines should also be more efficient... That just incentivizes bigger rockets over smaller ones, look at how many people feel that KR-2L is overpowered. The engines should all work well with the diameter of tanks that they are designed to lift. What's the point of having a 1.875m engine for example if it's just better to use a 2.5m one instead? I think the balance should be that these engines are good at working with 1.875m tanks and less good at working with the other diameters than their own engines. (With a reasonably sized rocket of course)

[John Nowak]

Any chance you're playing with remote tech? If so it might not be configured to work for that mod. Just a guess off the top of my head.

No, I'm afraid no. I'm using Antenna Range, but that was working fine with it before. I'll have to do more research; I suspect that this might have been caused by an upgrade to an unrelated mod.

Many thanks for your work on this mod, incidentally. I'm playing with some informal house rules about habitability, and the orbital modules have been lifesavers.

I originally installed the mod for the Radish, because Gemini does not get enough love. The new crew character classes emphasize the need for a two-kerbal pod: pilot and scientist to maximize return.

However, to my mind the 1.875 engines and tanks are a godsend. They just "feel" right, somehow - struggle into orbit with 1.25, then start building serious launch vehicles reminiscent of Atlas and Titan before the 2.5m Saturnian heavy lifters. They appear just at the right part of the tech tree.

[Orionkermin]

No, I'm afraid no. I'm using Antenna Range, but that was working fine with it before. I'll have to do more research; I suspect that this might have been caused by an upgrade to an unrelated mod.

Many thanks for your work on this mod, incidentally. I'm playing with some informal house rules about habitability, and the orbital modules have been lifesavers.

I originally installed the mod for the Radish, because Gemini does not get enough love. The new crew character classes emphasize the need for a two-kerbal pod: pilot and scientist to maximize return.

However, to my mind the 1.875 engines and tanks are a godsend. They just "feel" right, somehow - struggle into orbit with 1.25, then start building serious launch vehicles reminiscent of Atlas and Titan before the 2.5m Saturnian heavy lifters. They appear just at the right part of the tech tree.

Thanks, I'm glad you like them. I always felt the jump between 1.25m and 2.5m was too big and awkward for my taste. Now 1.25 feels a bit small for manned flight when I play.

The Leek was still working correctly for me when I loaded it up with no other mods installed. So, I'm not sure what could be causing it sorry!

[John Nowak]

The Leek was still working correctly for me when I loaded it up with no other mods installed. So, I'm not sure what could be causing it sorry!

Weird! It was working, and then it stopped.

Well, it's not worth a lot of time looking into; I can always slap on an Octo Probecore. Thanks very much for checking!

[nothingSpecial]

I'm looking forward for this revamp and also I want to ask (for the future).

Will Spud capsule get a revamped version? If so, will it still be a 1.25-size 0.625-nodes capsule? Because right now it's not very appropriate for recreating Vostok mission without using other mods for launcher rocket.

[Orionkermin]

I'm looking forward for this revamp and also I want to ask (for the future).

Will Spud capsule get a revamped version? If so, will it still be a 1.25-size 0.625-nodes capsule? Because right now it's not very appropriate for recreating Vostok mission without using other mods for launcher rocket.

Well I have two different thoughts on the spud.

1: remake the pod and supporting parts in way that's similar to the way it's currently implemented. And branch it off into its own mini mod as it isn't really a 1.875m part set and is likely more fitting being on its own.

2: I could turn it into a 1.875m pod with 1.25 nodes. This is closer to the scale of actual Vostok and LK, but it might be strange having such a big pod only carry one Kerbal. This would be a big change and might upset a largish portion of the user base however.

These are just my initial thoughts

[nothingSpecial]

Well, you can set up a poll to ask users. And as it currently supposed to be mix between landing can and command pod, and stock 1-kerballed command pod is larger than 1.25 with 1.25 nodes, the size is not a very big issue. It would be only a little bit bigger compensating with a little bit higher crash tolerance or whatever.

[Orionkermin]

Well, you can set up a poll to ask users. And as it currently supposed to be mix between landing can and command pod, and stock 1-kerballed command pod is larger than 1.25 with 1.25 nodes, the size is not a very big issue. It would be only a little bit bigger compensating with a little bit higher crash tolerance or whatever.

Now that I've had more time to think about it, if I enlarged it I would probably do a 0.625 top and 1.25 bottom node. The good thing about making it bigger is that there is potential to make an alternate "voskhod" version by using some creative model welding and an alternative IVA set up.

Out of curiosity why do you feel the original doesn't work for Vostok missions using the parts in HGR? Just too small?

[nothingSpecial]

First of all, yeah, too small for HGR R-7-alike launcher.

But second - I was not satisfied with the service compartment. The de-orbit engine ends up being either too big - too much fuel in too long service compartment - or too small with 0.625 engine. I have once resized Spud to 1.875, put some procedural conical tank and clipped inside it an upper-stage 1.875 engine and got nice-looking Vostok, then replaced it with Onion and probe part and used that as Voskhod.

Then Voskhod crashed into terrain and killed Jeb and Bill. But that's the other story.