[1.12.X] Tantares - Stockalike Soyuz and MIR [26.0][18.12.2023][Soyuz Revamp Again]

[Niemand303]

What do people think of this? It has some use, but in my opinion, ruins the look of the engine a bit (And I'm not really for multiple parts alternative)

I personally think that a part like this would be nice, but on this engine, as the nozzles are too close and the ring around it looks too empty. But, still, would be nice if there was more clearance between the node and engines (I personally faced same problems in my shuttle service module).

[Niemand303]

Also, noticed a small bug: Capella core has negative cost.

[Lack]

ATV Rear Tunnel.

So they can now be daisy-chained.

Eh, might want to break out the struts though, once connected.

What do people think of this? It has some use, but in my opinion, ruins the look of the engine a bit (And I'm not really for multiple parts alternative)

I like the concept, but I see what you mean. Could use one of the docking port textures for the rear tunnel, rather than the fuel-tank top, perhaps.

Not to be rude, I really love Lack's work on SXT (and I'm personally thankful to him for helping me with Blender and Unity), but the engines on its N1 are kinda unbalanced, so I'd recommend the one from NovaPunch2 pack.

In terms of ratios between mass, ISP and thrust, they are balanced (That's all done with excel). Although things like added weight for gimballing (or lack of, there of) and absolute values are open to more interpretation, especially since the stock engines offer no real standard in that department. What sorts of adjustments would you suggest?

[wasmic]

In terms of ratios between mass, ISP and thrust, they are balanced (That's all done with excel). Although things like added weight for gimballing (or lack of, there of) and absolute values are open to more interpretation, especially since the stock engines offer no real standard in that department. What sorts of adjustments would you suggest?

I think the first stage engine might be slightly too powerful, and the third stage engine is either not powerful enough or way too powerful, depending on which one of them you use.

[Beale]

Also, noticed a small bug: Capella core has negative cost.

Will fix.

Edit: seems fine on my end, strange.

I think it can be useful, and the engine look good also with the docking port.

Not a fan of the ability to daisy chain ATVs. You should never need to if you've planned your space station out properly.

I personally think that a part like this would be nice, but on this engine, as the nozzles are too close and the ring around it looks too empty. But, still, would be nice if there was more clearance between the node and engines (I personally faced same problems in my shuttle service module).

I like the concept, but I see what you mean. Could use one of the docking port textures for the rear tunnel, rather than the fuel-tank top, perhaps.

I did revise it slightly, but overall I think I'll return to how it was (Probably release an "alt" model.

Thanks for all the feedback guys!

In terms of ratios between mass, ISP and thrust, they are balanced (That's all done with excel). Although things like added weight for gimballing (or lack of, there of) and absolute values are open to more interpretation, especially since the stock engines offer no real standard in that department. What sorts of adjustments would you suggest?

I've used the SXT N1 to death! I have a quite a poor eye for balance, but in my opinion it is perfect the way it is.

Love SXT, keep the good work!

1 More Misc. Part

The XeEU-01 Xenon Compressor will allow you to extract atmospheric Xenon.

Supply with Electric and IntakeAir and it will produce around 20 units of Xenon a day.

What's the point? Well, not much, but:

• Xenon recovers for a good price, leave this thing running and timewarp a few weeks, you can make a little thousands to get your bankrupt space agency back on its feet (That's why I made it).
  
• I suppose you could use this in some kind of rover, but the engine will consume much faster that Xenon can be extracted.
  

I also make it so the CASTOR engine isn't so lonely in its MISC folder.

Edited September 15, 2014 by Beale

[Niemand303]

In terms of ratios between mass, ISP and thrust, they are balanced (That's all done with excel). Although things like added weight for gimballing (or lack of, there of) and absolute values are open to more interpretation, especially since the stock engines offer no real standard in that department. What sorts of adjustments would you suggest?

Well, actually, I found second a bit not in line with the power of the first stage. I often had the situation when first stage offers TWR about 1.8-2, but second one had TWR of 1.1-1.3. Third one (the less powerful one) was about 1.6, so, I guess, it is fine on higher altitudes, but might cause difficulties midair. I usually tweak the second engine config and I find the pack really awesome by all means (hooray to nice models and hooray to RAM economy! ).

[Niemand303]

Edit: seems fine on my end, strange.

I guess, it's my pack bug or KerbalEngineer one. Configs are fine too. Well, I guess it's some kind of magic. Anyway, I'm a sandbox-only player.

[Lack]

I did revise it slightly, but overall I think I'll return to how it was (Probably release an "alt" model.

Thanks for all the feedback guys!

Now I rather like the look of that, it's functional while being fairly inconspicuous.

I've used the SXT N1 to death! I have a quite a poor eye for balance, but in my opinion it is perfect the way it is.

Love SXT, keep the good work!

Thanks!

Also @Niemand,wasmic

I'd been trying to work out a fairly consistent profile mathematically, but things have a tendency to go awry. It might just require a straight up 'fudging'. I also made a new 3.75m to 2.5m BlockV-like tank a little while ago; that has a much lower mass, which makes the third-stage engine a bit more competitive.

I'll go through my vague and rambling reasoning for the stats (or more precisely, what I can work out again now). Filled with plenty of holes, but it might be useful when I get round to thinking about any rebalancing.

The real-life N-1 Block-A (30xNK-15) has roughly 1.5x more thrust than the real-life Saturn V (5xF-1). Which I wanted to reflect, but it does depend on what you'd consider the 'stock equivalent' of the F-1.

(Multiplication factors in the graphs are of the cell to the left)

About 5k thrust should be just about enough to just about lift a reasonable N-1like craft, however...

The Block-B is uses the NK-15V; the NK-15V is slightly more powerful than the NK-15, I think about x1.05 the thrust. But the Block-B only has 8 of these. Although in SXT I dropped down the number of engine blocks a bit to 26, so using that, the Block-B engine have about x0.32 of the thrust of the Block-A.

For the Block-B you'll probably want something along the lines of 2.5-3k thrust to have a TWR >1.

For the Block-V

The Block-V would probably want ~1k thrust to be at >1 TWR; but since it's a third stage engine, you can get away with much less depending on your ascent curve.

So that's the vague reasoning for the differences in stats between the stages/a structure to work out fresh stats from. I made adjustments and the likes along the way, and probably forgot to carry the 1 more than a few times (Also worth noting I was playing with 6.4x Kerbin at the time).

My current stats:

BlockA - 7800kN

BlockB - 2400kN

BlockV - 460kN

Normally I find my first stage has a TWR of 1.8-2, the second about 1ish, the third normally <1. But yeah, it likely does need some tweaking and thinks like fuel-tank size will need checking again.

Beale, If you'd like to mess with the balance yourself, you could distribute your own config/stats for the SXT N1-like parts.

Edited September 15, 2014 by Lack

[Reichtangle]

Beale, I don't think the sound for the capella engine fits it. I think it should have the sound of the LV-1.

[Niemand303]

Normally I find my first stage has TWR of 1.8-2, the second about 1ish, the third normally <1. But yeah, it likely does need some tweaking and thinks like fuel-tank size will need checking again.

Oh, I see the point. Nice calculations, BTW. I love lots of numbers as an engineer.

So, maybe tweaking fuel tanks will help. I'll check it as soon as possible. Anyway, the pack is great! Thanks for the job!

[Beale]

Model{} Based Proton lower stage.

Bit of a WIP, but should give people a fair idea.

Will use inbuilt engines, the same as the 2.5m NasaMission

engine.

Using modular engines isn't really possible, due to the 6 "cores" being less than 1.25m in diameter.

The bottom, no nozzles yet.

@Lack, thanks for the numbers! I reckon I'll be able to use that spreadsheet method to balance this

Edited September 16, 2014 by Beale

[Percebob]

Looks really nice, I'm guessing it's only re-used textures ?

[Beale]

Looks really nice, I'm guessing it's only re-used textures ?

Thanks! & Yup

The benefit here is that the part comes in at <50kB GameData size, where a custom 1024x1024 texture + Normal map would be around 2.5mB minimum.

Of course when 64-Bit Kerbal Space Program is mature, I'll probably make custom ones.

[ZodiaK]

It's good to use the stock textures, even when 64x is stable. 64x won't be a magical cpu-unfrier, so reducing size wherever possible is still essential.

hope I didn't sound like reichtangle there

[The14th]

Thanks! & Yup

The benefit here is that the part comes in at <50kB GameData size, where a custom 1024x1024 texture + Normal map would be around 2.5mB minimum.

[Darth Lazarus]

beale ... thats a sweet locking Proton firststage .. can i marry you ?

[Beale]

For which I'm deeply grateful. My KSP install is creaking at the seems as it is!

It's good to use the stock textures, even when 64x is stable. 64x won't be a magical cpu-unfrier, so reducing size wherever possible is still essential.

Glad to see people are open to the idea

Nozzles...

[Niemand303]

I'd been trying to work out a fairly consistent profile mathematically, but things have a tendency to go awry. It might just require a straight up 'fudging'. I also made a new 3.75m to 2.5m BlockV-like tank a little while ago; that has a much lower mass, which makes the third-stage engine a bit more competitive.

I assume you know it, but I made a small tip for rescaling fuel tanks. When you know original mass and diameter and the desired diameter, you can calculate the required mass, thus the thrust required to keep same TWR as IRL. You use the square-cube law to calculate the required total geometric volume, but it hardly works for the dry mass, as the "part" consists of two separate materials with different densities. I was taught one trick on my engineering courses for this case: tank dry mass is scaled not by the cube law, but by square one if the wall thickness is small relatively to the radius. I may have made a mistake in English grammar on the explanation pic, as it's not my first language, but I hope everything is readable:

Edited September 16, 2014 by Niemand303

[Niemand303]

Nozzles...

http://puu.sh/bBB90/069c5f3f8c.jpg

Looks awesome! Will you make only launchers for your ship or will go straight for Soviet rocket modules?

Edited September 16, 2014 by Niemand303

[biohazard15]

That is a SWEET Proton!

One big question that I have is TWR, though. I play with NEAR+DRE combo, and it means that any launcher with start TWR >2 is basically useless (not to say dangerous). Ideally, it should be around 1.5-1.7.

I guess that you aim at the three-stage design, with payload being Salyut (or other heavy thing) to LKO, or smaller things + Block-D to KSO. With FAR\NEAR, you need a lot less dV to reach orbit, so the rocket will be basically overpowered. A simple example: pre-NEAR launcher is able to put 15 tons to LKO. Same launcher with NEAR is able to put 25 tons to LKO. Maybe two versions, one for stock, and one for FAR\NEAR?

[Nori]

That is a SWEET Proton!

One big question that I have is TWR, though. I play with NEAR+DRE combo, and it means that any launcher with start TWR >2 is basically useless (not to say dangerous). Ideally, it should be around 1.5-1.7.

I guess that you aim at the three-stage design, with payload being Salyut (or other heavy thing) to LKO, or smaller things + Block-D to KSO. With FAR\NEAR, you need a lot less dV to reach orbit, so the rocket will be basically overpowered. A simple example: pre-NEAR launcher is able to put 15 tons to LKO. Same launcher with NEAR is able to put 25 tons to LKO. Maybe two versions, one for stock, and one for FAR\NEAR?

Just use the thrust limiter or throttle down. Or am I missing something in your request? I frequently use engines with TWR over 2 in FAR and I just throttle down a bit. Once you get up a ways that higher TWR is actually nice.

I would argue that he should balance around stock and people with FAR should really be using KIDS to re-balance difficulty.

[Beale]

beale ... thats a sweet locking Proton firststage .. can i marry you ?

You can marry the rocket!

I assume you know it, but I made a small tip for rescaling fuel tanks. When you know original mass and diameter and the desired diameter, you can calculate the required mass, thus the thrust required to keep same TWR as IRL. You use the square-cube law to calculate the required total geometric volume, but it hardly works for the dry mass, as the "part" consists of two separate materials with different densities. I was taught one trick on my engineering courses for this case: tank dry mass is scaled not by the cube law, but by square one if the wall thickness is small relatively to the radius. I may have made a mistake in English grammar on the explanation pic, as it's not my first language, but I hope everything is readable:

http://cs618827.vk.me/v618827511/23e13/5YNxOrL8eZM.jpg

Not my first language either!

Eh, I was a bit... crap in some of my engineering classes (plus I'm about 4 years out of practise)

But that explanation pic seems pretty straightforward, I'll see if I can digitize it!

Thanks a ton for making it, should be really handy when I'm working the stats!

Looks awesome! Will you make only launchers for your ship or will go straight for Soviet rocket modules?

Initially just for the existing craft, but hopefully extend the "range" incorporating different upper stages (like your Block D) and setups for most anything I suppose.

That is a SWEET Proton!

One big question that I have is TWR, though. I play with NEAR+DRE combo, and it means that any launcher with start TWR >2 is basically useless (not to say dangerous). Ideally, it should be around 1.5-1.7.

I guess that you aim at the three-stage design, with payload being Salyut (or other heavy thing) to LKO, or smaller things + Block-D to KSO. With FAR\NEAR, you need a lot less dV to reach orbit, so the rocket will be basically overpowered. A simple example: pre-NEAR launcher is able to put 15 tons to LKO. Same launcher with NEAR is able to put 25 tons to LKO. Maybe two versions, one for stock, and one for FAR\NEAR?

I've recently jumped into NEAR myself (combine with already DRE) so I see what you mean, my crude Soyuz Rocket mockup I made earlier would reach pretty dangerous témperatures (1000€+) on ascent. Through module manager scripts I could add two separate versions, actually you're raising some good points here, I'll have to see what works when I get it in game.

I would argue that he should balance around stock and people with FAR should really be using KIDS to re-balance difficulty.

This would also be a pretty workable solution

Edited September 16, 2014 by Beale

[Niemand303]

Initially just for the existing craft, but hopefully extend the "range" incorporating different upper stages (like your Block D) and setups for most anything I suppose.

That would be really-really awesome! I always wanted to experiment with this, like, building R-7 using R-36 as solid boosters instead of liquid ones etc. And about that Block D, after I optimize the mesh, I would be glad if you incorporate it in your mod as a part! The current mesh has a couple of non-critical issues (especially, high polygons count and inverted normals on some strut elements), which I am going to fix this week.

And this is going to be my next thing to build with your parts, the Lunar Orbital Complex rev 2009-2011, one of the variants of future Orbital Station on the Moon orbit.

Edited September 16, 2014 by Niemand303

[Beale]

That would be really-really awesome! I always wanted to experiment with this, like, building R-7 using R-36 as solid boosters instead of liquid ones etc. And about that Block D, after I optimize the mesh, I would be glad if you incorporate it in your mod as a part! The current mesh has a couple of non-critical issues (especially, high polygons count and inverted normals on some strut elements), which I am going to fix this week.

And this is going to be my next thing to build with your parts, the Lunar Orbital Complex rev 2009-2011, one of the variants of future Orbital Station on the Moon orbit.

http://cs618827.vk.me/v618827511/23a74/XEwI4O5-BAI.jpg

Sounds good!

That's a pretty cool station. It looks Salyut based? (Or at least a similar shape...)

ALV Booster.

Well, not much to show actually, but it's in game.

title        = ALV Block Booster
manufacturer = TLV
description  = troppo

maxThrust = 2500

	atmosphereCurve
 	{
   	 key = 0 360
  	 key = 1 320
 	}

RESOURCE
{
 name = LiquidFuel
 amount = 2880
 maxAmount = 2880
}

RESOURCE
{
 name = Oxidizer
 amount = 3520
 maxAmount = 3520
}

Using very very placeholder stats and totally wrong FX...

Will need to do the maths... Once all the parts are made.

Edited September 16, 2014 by Beale

[Darth Lazarus]

some nu,bers from my stock Proton:

payload: 18 tons max load , sadly a 4 ton fairingcover

friststage

thrust: 2490kN (6x200 + 6x215, all clipped to 6 nozzles showing)

TWR: 1.4

second stage

thrust: 800 kN (4x200)

TWR: around 1.2

thirdstage:

thrust: 231kN (1x215 + 4x4)

TWR: 0.8

flightprofil is good, speed don't gets bigger then terminal velocity in air under 10 kilometers heigh, secondstage has enough thrust on firing to not loose any velocity. thrid stage burntime is longer compared to second and first stage, but it's only for orbital insertion

i hope this somehow helps to get an idea about thrust and TWR for your Proton Beale. an other help woulöd be to look at the bobcat Proton...