K.Yeon

[1.3.0] OPT Space Plane v2.0.1 - updated 29/07/2017

Recommended Posts

I think it makes sense for engines to be a little OP, as top-of-the-tech-tree futuristic affairs... That said, right now I can slap two ARIEs on an SSTO and point straight up to space, which might be a little over the top.

The Dark Engine is known to be overpowered -- see the OP. If you mess around with the configs and find a more balanced solution, I'm sure that would be very welcome.

And the linear aerospike engine is more efficient in atmosphere than in vacuum for me. O-o 400+ vs 390. Idk if this is expected. Feels kind of OP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that seems odd to me...

I've had trouble building my latest SSTO in that the turboramjets burn my vertical stabilizers off, and when they switch modes everything explodes... I think I wrote more truth than I knew when I wrote the descriptions for the next update.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And the linear aerospike engine is more efficient in atmosphere than in vacuum for me. O-o 400+ vs 390. Idk if this is expected. Feels kind of OP.

Realistically, that aerospike's Isp curve should look something like this:

ASL: 390

Vac: 392

Quick config edit if you know what to change.

Definitely some balancing to do but still fun to play with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it makes sense for engines to be a little OP, as top-of-the-tech-tree futuristic affairs... That said, right now I can slap two ARIEs on an SSTO and point straight up to space, which might be a little over the top.

The Dark Engine is known to be overpowered -- see the OP. If you mess around with the configs and find a more balanced solution, I'm sure that would be very welcome.

That may be true for the Dark Engine, but the ARIE is an air-augmented Rocket, that is pretty old technology. The russians had one of these on one of their first ICBM's. And the ISP and Thrust of such an Engine is related to how much air it has, which is related to height AND speed. Sadly that can't be modelled with stock engine module, but I would still change it to something like: Pressure: 1 - ISP:1500 , Pressure:0 - ISP: 380 and no middle value, that would get rid of the ISP3000 spike at 7km height. And thrust is not so easy, should be high in atmo and normal in space, but that can't be expressed through the velocity, so I would set a fixed value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That may be true for the Dark Engine, but the ARIE is an air-augmented Rocket, that is pretty old technology. The russians had one of these on one of their first ICBM's. And the ISP and Thrust of such an Engine is related to how much air it has, which is related to height AND speed. Sadly that can't be modelled with stock engine module, but I would still change it to something like: Pressure: 1 - ISP:1500 , Pressure:0 - ISP: 380 and no middle value, that would get rid of the ISP3000 spike at 7km height. And thrust is not so easy, should be high in atmo and normal in space, but that can't be expressed through the velocity, so I would set a fixed value.

The OPT engines doesn't use stock engine modules though, it uses something like this:

 MODULE    {
name = ModuleEnginesFX
thrustVectorTransformName = thrustTransform
runningEffectName = powersmoke
FlameoutEffectName = flameout
directThrottleEffectName = throttleControlledFlame
engageEffectName = engage
exhaustDamage = True
ignitionThreshold = 0.01
minThrust = 0
maxThrust = 290
heatProduction = 450
useEngineResponseTime = True
engineAccelerationSpeed = 0.55
engineDecelerationSpeed = 1
useVelocityCurve = True
PROPELLANT
{
name = LiquidFuel
ratio = 0.9
DrawGauge = True
}
PROPELLANT
{
name = Oxidizer
ratio = 1.1
}
atmosphereCurve
{
key = 0 370
key = 0.1 2300
key = 1 1500
}
velocityCurve
{
key = 0 0.8 0 0
key = 500 1 0 0
key = 1000 1.2 0 0
key = 3000 0.8 0 0


}

}

It has both an atmospheric curve and velocity curve to account for height and speed. Prob need some playing around to find a more balanced curve.

On the topic of DarkEngine, I think we can balance it by simply introducing a new resource called dark goo that is extremely expensive, and required it to be used as fuel to run the engine.

Edited by RainDreamer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The OPT engines doesn't use stock engine modules though, it uses something like this:

...

It has both an atmospheric curve and velocity curve to account for height and speed. Prob need some playing around to find a more balanced curve.

Both ModuleEngines and ModuleEnginesFX are stock. The stock jets implement both an atmosphereCurve modulating Isp and a velocityCurve modulating thrust. Not that those two give anything close to a reasonable picture of how actual jets operate...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The OPT engines doesn't use stock engine modules though, it uses something like this:


name = ModuleEnginesFX
thrustVectorTransformName = thrustTransform
runningEffectName = powersmoke
FlameoutEffectName = flameout
directThrottleEffectName = throttleControlledFlame
engageEffectName = engage
exhaustDamage = True
ignitionThreshold = 0.01
minThrust = 0
maxThrust = 290
heatProduction = 450
useEngineResponseTime = True
engineAccelerationSpeed = 0.55
engineDecelerationSpeed = 1
useVelocityCurve = True
PROPELLANT
{
name = LiquidFuel
ratio = 0.9
DrawGauge = True
}
PROPELLANT
{
name = Oxidizer
ratio = 1.1
}
atmosphereCurve
{
key = 0 370
key = 0.1 2300
key = 1 1500
}
velocityCurve
{
key = 0 0.8 0 0
key = 500 1 0 0
key = 1000 1.2 0 0
key = 3000 0.8 0 0


}

}
 MODULE    {

It has both an atmospheric curve and velocity curve to account for height and speed. Prob need some playing around to find a more balanced curve.

On the topic of DarkEngine, I think we can balance it by simply introducing a new resource called dark goo that is extremely expensive, and required it to be used as fuel to run the engine.

That is a stock engine module. With a very stock-like jet configuration

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one am in the camp of people who don't want K.Yeons engine design standpoint to be changed. You want to balance these engines, for what exactly? They are meant to get the big boys into orbit, the 100+ ton crafts and more. Chances are when you put those on a craft that is barely bigger than a fighter, the engine will be way overpowered for that purpose. That is to be expected. But these engines are meant for K.Yeons parts so that you don't have to stick a ridiculous amount of them onto the craft which then can barely limp into orbit. Instead these are powerful enough to make the ride smooth. I am very happy with my 125 ton craft, powered by 4 ramjets and 4 ARIEs which has a TWR of over 3. That means the weight of the craft could probably be trippled without trouble and the ride would still be possible without much of a problem. My craft burns 2/3 of a huge amount of fuel to get into orbit and that is a fair trade off. There are enough "balanced" engines to choose from. Let the OPT engines be powerful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed the Dark Goo Engine doesn't have a sound for the engine. I was thinking it needs a death scream like sound for when the engines are active. Perhaps something like this HERE but more engine like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They are meant to get the big boys into orbit, the 100+ ton crafts and more. Chances are when you put those on a craft that is barely bigger than a fighter, the engine will be way overpowered for that purpose.

About the engines, Flashblade pretty much said what i wish to say xD; powerful engines = less parts = more streamlined aircraft

And the Dark Engine is pretty over powered so i will remove it from career mode unless i find a suitable tech tree..

And i saw in the poll wings are most requested. Since squad is going to release a set of larger wings, i only made a few wing parts:

sRKo47d.png

But they currently have a huge problem! the wings relies on FAR controllable surface modules, but the control surfaces behaves as if they are at middle of the wing instead of at the end. When i disable the controlsurface, and attach a standalone control surface to the wing, then it works perfectly fine... I'd be grateful if anyone can help me solve this problem xd heres the download link for these not working well wings https://www./?lqtjzja56v3vh96

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let the OPT engines be powerful.

For me personally, I like to have an overall balance across many mods, so that all of them are viable choices for their purposes, and i like to use them all equally. If one type engine overpowers above all others across all situations, that balance is broken. And it feels kind of cheap to powerhouse through design challenges that way.

That said, I am not asking K.Yeon to balance it to my taste, that would be unreasonable. I will just mess with the config myself and find a point that I like for my personal uses. :)

Edited by RainDreamer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey K.Yeon, I still very much appreciate your work. I have a plea to make though!

Don't ditch the parts you've made! Especially the cargobay which had an integrated ramp plus its middlepiece. I have a few suggestions to make for you regarding those things.

For reference, check this video out:

I scaled up the parts from your earlier release, which now can accomodate 4x MKS kolony modules or a single large Kontainer from the FTT pack. Your parts are really beautiful and functional, and I believe they can get really good if you'd consider making them in such a way that the JT parts can be mounted underneath the standard J-parts, with integrated landing gear also. At the end of the video I use the current incarnation of your gear as actual landing gear for a 200 ton ship. I really think you should consider reworking these parts to this size, and keep older parts like the cargohold which I've placed right behind the cockpit, as it's brilliant for heavy rovers like the ASET rover.

I really believe that you could do something cool, fuselage-wise, with a fuselage that can be placed underneath the standard J series, and perhaps even more efficient at accomodating large cargo. I'll demonstrate this soon for you :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But they currently have a huge problem! the wings relies on FAR controllable surface modules, but the control surfaces behaves as if they are at middle of the wing instead of at the end. When i disable the controlsurface, and attach a standalone control surface to the wing, then it works perfectly fine... I'd be grateful if anyone can help me solve this problem xd heres the download link for these not working well wings

Hi K.Yeon,

The problem for you is this line:

nonSideAttach = 0 // 0 for canard-like / normal wing pieces, 1 for ctrlsurfaces attached to the back of other wing parts

If you put 0, it's going to act as if the whole wing is the control surface, except you've specified the amount of surface area so it acts like the control surface is in the middle of the wing. Just replace the 0 with a 1 and it should work right.

Regards,

DKnight54

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For reference, check this video out:

I really believe that you could do something cool, fuselage-wise, with a fuselage that can be placed underneath the standard J series, and perhaps even more efficient at accomodating large cargo. I'll demonstrate this soon for you :)

SlimJim that is very stunning looking ship! the way you integrate parts and build ship is amazing! i will really consider a new fuselage type after i saw the video, ill get some models of the idea as soon as i fix this wing :\ thanks for the idea:D

Hi K.Yeon,

The problem for you is this line:

nonSideAttach = 0 // 0 for canard-like / normal wing pieces, 1 for ctrlsurfaces attached to the back of other wing parts

If you put 0, it's going to act as if the whole wing is the control surface, except you've specified the amount of surface area so it acts like the control surface is in the middle of the wing. Just replace the 0 with a 1 and it should work right.

Regards,

DKnight54

Thanks Dknight, i tried it just then but it doesn't seems to fix the wing still... i mean, if i deactivate control surface of the wing, then add a stock control surface the wing behaves much better. Now, even with nonSideAttach set to 1 it still feels like something is not right...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Dknight, i tried it just then but it doesn't seems to fix the wing still... i mean, if i deactivate control surface of the wing, then add a stock control surface the wing behaves much better. Now, even with nonSideAttach set to 1 it still feels like something is not right...

I think the FAR values are messed up. For some reason, the center of lift is show as far behind the actual wings.

LhoG4oI.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all let me congratulate you K.Yeon on creating these awesome new parts and engines. All my grievances with engines are gone now. I didn’t even dislike your ARIE concept from the last version. It only needed balancing in the resource consumption department or better thrust. That being said I love your new Turboramjets and how you incorporated that concept into them. One suggestion I would like to make, though I don’t know if it is possible to be done. The automatic mode toggling should probably be either triggered by altitude when sufficient SPA is available or by the emergence of SPA. Having it switch when the normal air runs out isn’t really a good way to go about this.

While building with your parts I came to understand though why nobody has created your drop bay concept yet. Because of the top and bottom bay doors the drop cargo bay is really structurally weak. When I put two of those in succession of each other on my 100+ ton craft or a cargo bay and a docking port a visible crack at the top can be seen on the runway, even while using the Joint Reinforcement mod, which makes things VERY wobbly under FAR conditions. Struting isn’t really an option either because the doors need to move. So I think you should look into strengthening the connection of the drop cargo bay and the docking port as well.

That being said I created my finest SSTO with your parts. I present to you the Stardancer.

f7jio31.png?1

I really love this bird. It goes into orbit like a true champ, absolutely steady with hardly any deviation in course and it is so beautifully powerful while doing so. I’m kinda scared of loosing her when you update the mod again, because this is the absolute finest version of her yet. It uses your parts, B9, aviation lights and the new B9 procedural wings which look like they have been created with you mod in mind.

As far as I am concerned your parts should be the stock mk3 parts and not the ones we got because they look like a true upgrade of the mk2 parts. I really dislike how the official mk3 parts are basically a carbon copy of an earth space shuttle. They should look a bit more unique.

That brings me to your mk2 adaptor, I don’ really ever like the look of it because the mk2 connection is not in the center. I think a craft build with that part would look a lot better with the connector centered but that might just be me.

Finally I would like to make a request. As you can see in the picture of the Stardancer I am still using your IS-AA experimental cockpit which to me looks the best of the I cockpits. A few others have said that they prefer this cockpit so since you seem to be unwilling to support it anymore would you allow me to upload a version that works with your current version of the mod to my drop box? I would provide the necessary FAR config and all the the part files and configs. Currently it still supports your old IVA. If you want that removed I would put it on placeholder like with your other cockpits.

Wow that was a long post. :D

Keep it up K.Yeon, can’t wait to see what you come up with next.

P.S One more thing, you need to work on the placement of the Turboramjets. Without the new rotation and offset tools placing these like this would have been completely impossible ;)

Edited by Flashblade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say, I'd like to see that IS-AA cockpit come back. Maybe it could be an atmospheric flight specialised control pod (so no heat shielding and stuff?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow that was a long post. :D

Keep it up K.Yeon, can’t wait to see what you come up with next.

Thanks Flashblade!!

With this release, im actually pretty happy with how the overall part turned out except for some minor texture problems. So i am sure i wont be deleting any parts from now on!

The cargobay node is currently 3, like: node_stack_top = 0.0, 2, 0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 3 <----

maybe change the 3 to or 5 will help the nodes to be stronger.

About the old cockpit, i disliked it not because how it looks; i designed it with long forward windows because i thought it would allow you in IVA see the runway better, but it didnt Dx, i didnt know so many people actually liked it, so i will add that to the next update aswell ( remodel and new textures)

If you are wondering what im working on, i was working on the IVAs and wing parts, but i kind of hit a deadend... ill either have to wait ferram help me or ksp v1 and see whats the new wing parts are like.

So today i started working on K parts, the cockpit is inspired by Avatar's valkyrie xD is my favorate spaceplane after all haha i hope it turns out flyable and good looking...

uFHX1QK.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your parts continue to look great! Please dont kill any of them.

Really great stuff, keep it up. Fantastic mod.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks Flashblade!!

With this release, im actually pretty happy with how the overall part turned out except for some minor texture problems. So i am sure i wont be deleting any parts from now on!

The cargobay node is currently 3, like: node_stack_top = 0.0, 2, 0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 3 <----

maybe change the 3 to or 5 will help the nodes to be stronger.

About the old cockpit, i disliked it not because how it looks; i designed it with long forward windows because i thought it would allow you in IVA see the runway better, but it didnt Dx, i didnt know so many people actually liked it, so i will add that to the next update aswell ( remodel and new textures)

If you are wondering what im working on, i was working on the IVAs and wing parts, but i kind of hit a deadend... ill either have to wait ferram help me or ksp v1 and see whats the new wing parts are like.

So today i started working on K parts, the cockpit is inspired by Avatar's valkyrie xD is my favorate spaceplane after all haha i hope it turns out flyable and good looking...

http://i.imgur.com/uFHX1QK.png

I am glad to see that cockpit return to official status. I guess everybody else has to wait for that to happen then. :cool: As for your wings I know they are the part that has been voted for the most but my opinion and some others opinion as well is that static wings should be removed from the game anyway. They only clutter up the memory a lot where a procedural part can fit all the roles and make way better performance possible.

Your K cockpit looks great so far, but doesn't it look like the Valkyrie a bit too much? Maybe change it up a bit to make it look more like an OPT part and not an Avatar part.

Oh and some thing about the engines I forgot to say in my previous post. Don't remove the Dark Engine from the career tech-tree. Just put it on a unique node which is really costs a whole lot of science. I really chuckled at the idea that mystery goo could be processed into Dark Goo. That is such a Kerbal thing, great thinking K.Yeon.

And I don't think anyone has ever done that but I really enjoy your engine sound design. They have a great sci-fi vibe to them. :cool:

Edited by Flashblade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Flashblade regarding the look of the new cockpit. You should keep doing your own thing, don't worry about trying to copy anything from Avatar. :) Your design style is awesome, people should be trying to copy YOU! ;)

Seriously, when that gigantic bag of money lands in my lap and I start my own space program, I'm hiring K. Yeon to design all of my air- and spacecraft. Lol.

Keep up the great work, sir. I look forward to the next awesome parts release from OPT.

:D

P. S. I would like to request a replacement for the cargo ramp part, I'm still in need of a way to easily drive rovers onto and off of a ship. Thanks! :)

Edited by Neutrinovore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you plan on adding airbrakes? I feel they're really missing from the stock game and would help a lot during landing (especially with FAR, where almost every landing attempt ends up with me crashing into the runway at 200 m/s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you plan on adding airbrakes? I feel they're really missing from the stock game and would help a lot during landing (especially with FAR, where almost every landing attempt ends up with me crashing into the runway at 200 m/s.

The game already has a type of airbrake. You can add a control surface to the trailing edge of the wing inboard of the aileron and designate it as a spoiler via the right-click menu. It activates when you use the brakes.

Share this post


Link to post
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.