Jump to content

[1.1] RLA Stockalike 13.4 [25 Apr]


Recommended Posts

JJ0dye1.png

Parts to fill stock niches, including 0.625m LFO engines and tanks, a full suite of monopropellant engines ranging from 2.5m to sub-0.625m, brand new 0.625m SRBs, 0.625m high efficiency engines using LiquidFuel, Monopropellant or Xenon, a number of new probe cores with varied specialisations and shapes, more ways to produce electricity, a range of RCS blocks both large and small, and structural parts to glue it all together with.

[snip]

 

Changelog

Spoiler

13.4

  • Switched main agency flag filetypes to DDS
  • Added search tags
  • Added some missing bulkheadPriofiles
  • Increased 1.25m Linear Aerospike gimbal range to 5
  • Changed 1.25m Linear Aerospike gimbal to only function in one axis (plus roll)
  • Reduced 0.625m LFO vacuum engine thrust from 6.5 to 5.5

13.3

  • Fixed model file for <0.625m LFO engine

13.2

  • Updated Part Test module to 1.0.5 standards
  • Switched applicable engine emissives to use FXModuleAnimateThrottle
  • Added core heat module to MMRTG
  • Standardised decoupler crossfeed setting
  • Switched ion engine particle FX to use the stock one, removed redundant custom FX
  • Increased 0.625m LFO vacuum engine heat generation
  • Adjusted meshes of various engines to fix shading issues and improve nozzle interiors
  • Tweaked diffuse/specular of some engines (nothing major)

Thanks

A big thankyou to @ArcFurnace, @blowfish, @BobCat, @Borklund, @CardBoardBoxProcessor, @Devo, @EndlessWaves, @Initar, @Kerbas_ad_astra, @MaverickSawyer, @NecroBones, @Overlocker, @passinglurker, @PDCWolf, @Plur303, @Porkjet, @Streetwind, @Tiberion and @TicTacToe! for forum posts, general assistance, testing and balance suggestions. Without you all this pack wouldn't be as good as it is.

Previous Versions

If you want access to any older versions for whatever reason, some older versions are available below. If you're looking for any other version, leave me a note and I'll hook you up.

License

80x15.png
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Edited by Vanamonde
Link to post
Share on other sites
hooray! this is one of my favorite packs I'm glad to see you are still kicking hoojiwana :D

Still alive and well!

You're back! Woohoo!

And with some awesome new toys!

Hopefully they're interesting new toys.

Yay! It's back! Those new parts are pretty cool

I hope you like them.

Just a heads up - in the mp_small and mp_sr directories under engines, there are duplicate parts methinks

You installed over an older version of Stockalike then. The warnings about v10 being incompatible are for exactly this reason.

Edited by hoojiwana
I should not be allowed near computers at this hour
Link to post
Share on other sites
Still alive and well!

Hopefully they're interesting new toys.

I hope you like them.

You installed over an older version of Stockalike then. The warnings about v10 being incompatible are for exactly this reason.

Fresh install on mostly fresh KSP... There are a couple other parts that appear as quasi-duplicates as well: MP-45 monopropellant engine, cormorant MP engine, and Albatross, I think, have two versions of the same size, one of which has no name/description. I unzipped the file NOT into a KSP directory and there are still duplicates there. Notepad++ search for RLA_mp_small and you'll see one of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fresh install on mostly fresh KSP... There are a couple other parts that appear as quasi-duplicates as well: MP-45 monopropellant engine, cormorant MP engine, and Albatross, I think, have two versions of the same size, one of which has no name/description. I unzipped the file NOT into a KSP directory and there are still duplicates there. Notepad++ search for RLA_mp_small and you'll see one of them.

You're quite right it seems! My KSP install doesn't have those duplicates but the folder I was using as a go-between seemed to have older folder structure still in it. Links updated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally tried today :), nice sets of parts.

I just wonder why keeping the name for monopropellant tank (ie "RCS tank"), why not cut this link down for good and just call them monop. tank ?

Especially you've add quite a bunch of monop. engines.

Also, radial attachment point are great, putting them as decoupler would be awesome (decouple node = node attach point). I have thought creating some x2, x3 -> x8 or even more array of them with arms which can be decoupled (to remove fuel tank which may feed an engine in the center for example).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Noo.. the linear aerospike.. my favourite engine.. :( (no way I'm deleting that). Also yeah, why remove the radial jet? I liked that as well..

Also what sucks is that my vital Duna comms network has RLA parts on it.. Bleh. I suppose I could Hyperedit new ones in and pretend it was like that all along.. Yes, I'll do that. Downloading!

EDIT: Oh cool, I still have the parts. For some reason, I thought the part names would have changed and my network would be deleted. Nothing to worry about, everything's fine and dandy and I finally managed to fully Explore Duna :D

Edited by ObsessedWithKSP
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great stuff, finally more stockalike ions and hybrid engines! You should probably think about releasing your own branch of small command pods/probe cores, your balancing looks quite good!

I was wondering why my new ions eat through a tank in seconds... that asl isp hurts :)

Also, RV-50 Linear RCS port is identical to Place-Anywhere 7 Linear RCS port (stock), I don't know if it's intentional.

Edited by dzikakulka
Link to post
Share on other sites

The part name PB-ION2 has already been taken by KSPX. How about PB-ION-X or something?

I have a part request. Could you make a larger Vernor Engine 4-way and 4-way 45 degree?

Edited by GregroxMun
Link to post
Share on other sites
Why was the radial jet removed?
Also yeah, why remove the radial jet? I liked that as well..

I didn't feel it was up to scratch with the rest of the parts, and I didn't have much interest in updating it. I'm not super into the aircraft side of KSP, and there's other stockalike aircraft part packs by people who are more interested in those things.

I just wonder why keeping the name for monopropellant tank (ie "RCS tank"), why not cut this link down for good and just call them monop. tank ?

Especially you've add quite a bunch of monop. engines.

Also, radial attachment point are great, putting them as decoupler would be awesome (decouple node = node attach point). I have thought creating some x2, x3 -> x8 or even more array of them with arms which can be decoupled (to remove fuel tank which may feed an engine in the center for example).

Thanks for pointing out the tank names! Changing them over as I type this.

Noo.. the linear aerospike.. my favourite engine.. :( (no way I'm deleting that).

Also what sucks is that my vital Duna comms network has RLA parts on it.. Bleh. I suppose I could Hyperedit new ones in and pretend it was like that all along.. Yes, I'll do that. Downloading!

EDIT: Oh cool, I still have the parts. For some reason, I thought the part names would have changed and my network would be deleted. Nothing to worry about, everything's fine and dandy and I finally managed to fully Explore Duna :D

The Cutter will return in v11 with better art and hopefully better stats. On the part names, I think most of them are the same as in 0.9.4, but due to things like new models being longer and those few parts that have different names, I gave a blanket warning about installing and craft files. Better to have people be prepared beforehand than to install and find the game removes their favourite space station or something.

Great stuff, finally more stockalike ions and hybrid engines! You should probably think about releasing your own branch of small command pods/probe cores, your balancing looks quite good!

I was wondering why my new ions eat through a tank in seconds... that asl isp hurts :)

Also, RV-50 Linear RCS port is identical to Place-Anywhere 7 Linear RCS port (stock), I don't know if it's intentional.

Well v11 might have something probe-core related, I'll see if my idea works before committing to saying it's guaranteed! You do have to be careful with those electric engines, they will utterly eat your Xenon/Monopropellant if you use them in denser atmospheres. And yes the RV-50 is now basically the same as the Linear 7, the reasoning is that when the parts used to have mass the linear was the same as the RCS block, and that didn't seem right. Since the balancing scheme now has RCS blocks being massless for some silly reason, the RV-50 is mostly just a cosmetic item. While on this train of thought, there's a number of parts that may seem flat out better or worse than stock parts because the stock parts just plain aren't balanced. So in order to have parts that have interesting variation in order to make the player think about what he wants to do, I had to ignore some stock parts when balancing. The best example of this is the 48-7S, which is an utterly ridiculous engine that is so overpowered as to be boring, there is no thought put into deciding if you want it or not.

Just finished taking it for a spin its a blast so far, but on the subject of balance does anyone else find it odd that a lot of the early game probe sized parts are an order of magnitude cheaper than the 1.25 parts?

The costs for 0.625m parts are one of those things I'm having to figure out by myself, the stock price scheme for those seems a little strange. For example; the LV-1 costs more than the 48-7S, and the small LFO tanks cost a crazy amount for how little they contain.

The part name PB-ION2 has already been taken by KSPX. How about PB-ION-X or something?

I have a part request. Could you make a larger Vernor Engine 4-way and 4-way 45 degree?

The Vernor LFO RCS seems a bit strange to me, a bit useless. And the RCS module doesn't seem to handle multiple resources for multi-nozzle RCS blocks properly, so even if I wanted to add them it wouldn't work! Good point on the name of the ION2, it'll be changed right about nowish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the 0.625 meter Monopropellant engine needs a considerable amount more thrust (At least enough to lift a LanderCan Mk2, Four sphere tanks of Monoprop, and one docking port on the Mun) and the 1.25 meter engine less Isp. (Change to around 380).

This is based around my attempt at an Apollo-Style lander with "Hypergolic" Propellants. The ascent stage didn't have enough thrust to lift off from the Mun, but the descent stage (One default RCStank of fuel with the 1.25 monoprop engine) had way too much fuel.

There is also a considerable excess of fuel in the CSM, but the CSM had way more fuel and thrust than was needed for it's mission. Unfortunately this transforms into an Apollo-style vehicle where the CSM can land by itself and return to Kerbin. Decreasing the Isp to 395 seconds may fix this.

LFO-RCS would be useful for very very large spaceships where roll and translation control is needed, so you don't have to put on a metric crap-tonne of Monopropellant thrusters on it, and you can use your main fuel.

Edited by GregroxMun
Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...