NecroBones

[1.4.1] Fuel Tanks Plus 2.0.2 (2018-03-14)

Recommended Posts

I have been a KW fanboy for a long time but with 0.90 I thought it was time for a change So I opted for your SpaceY found it lacking in some areas so got MRS as well, after picking up 0-Point too I was starting to feel I need no more then you go and drop Colour coded and now this which just works so well with the rest.

Man you have made KSP 0.90 play and look a whole lot nicer thank you BTW your memory footprint is nice a low too good work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could specify for each size, which .cfg/.mu-pair's design matches the "stock" CCC?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have been a KW fanboy for a long time but with 0.90 I thought it was time for a change So I opted for your SpaceY found it lacking in some areas so got MRS as well, after picking up 0-Point too I was starting to feel I need no more then you go and drop Colour coded and now this which just works so well with the rest.

Man you have made KSP 0.90 play and look a whole lot nicer thank you BTW your memory footprint is nice a low too good work.

Thanks, glad you're enjoy it. :)

Could specify for each size, which .cfg/.mu-pair's design matches the "stock" CCC?

Not quite sure what you're asking. You mean, which one matches the look of the CCC tanks? That would just be the "white" version at each diameter. They're just named for the color (plus some cryptic dimensional data).

EDIT: Oh yeah, and the "orange" one too of course. :)

Edited by NecroBones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

0.625 m tanks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone having issues with nose cones having extra oxidizer left when fuel runs out? When MechJeb is in play, this breaks the auto staging. Tanks seem to be fine, but a couple of the cones (at least the ones I've tried) don't drain at the same rate or have more oxidizer than fuel (ratio wise).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
0.625 m tanks?

Possibly. :)

Anyone having issues with nose cones having extra oxidizer left when fuel runs out? When MechJeb is in play, this breaks the auto staging. Tanks seem to be fine, but a couple of the cones (at least the ones I've tried) don't drain at the same rate or have more oxidizer than fuel (ratio wise).

Ack! I wish I saw this before uploading today's update. Yes, it looks like the oxidizer amounts are incorrect. I'll fix that and put out a fix ASAP.

- - - Updated - - -

Alright, updates posted:


0.2.1 (2015-01-28) - Beta fixes
- Removed excess oxidizer from fueled nose cones.

0.2 (2015-01-28) - More tanks!
- Added three 1.25m tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Several mods add longer 0.625m tanks, but none of them with quality that approaches NecroBonesy quality. I am sold on FTP if you add 0.625m to this and CCC too (red, right?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was featured in kottabos games

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This was featured in kottabos games

Awesome, thanks for the link! I'll go post it in the OP.

- - - Updated - - -

0.625 m tanks?

Now that I made an Oscar-B in Color Coded Canisters, I'd say this is pretty much assured now. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had some time today to actually work on the 0.625m tanks. The textures were pretty simple, so the work went quickly.

KSP%202015-02-01%2016-20-06-87.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now everyone can play with the smaller tanks if they wish:


0.3 (2015-02-02) - Beta, more tanks
- Added three 0.625m tanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Had some time today to actually work on the 0.625m tanks. The textures were pretty simple, so the work went quickly.

http://www.necrobones.net/screenshots/KSP/KSP%202015-02-01%2016-20-06-87.jpg

  1. The nose cones don't have bottom caps.
  2. The 1.25m tanks display their end caps in the menu, preventing benefit from the color coding.
  3. Tank names are confusing. FTP shouldn't be a manufacturer. This scheme would make it easy to understand which one matches stock too:
    • Oscar-Juno Fuel Tank
    • Oscar-100 Fuel Tank (but see points 5 and 6 below)
    • Oscar-Vanguard Fuel Tank
    • FL-T1200 Redstone Fuel Tank
    • FL-T1200 Soyuz Fuel Tank
    • FL-T1200 Fuel Tank (you can put a note about looking like Vega in the description text, if you want)
    • Rockomax Antares-96 Fuel Tank
    • Rockomax Atlas-96 Fuel Tank
    • Rockomax Delta-96 Fuel Tank
    • Rockomax Jumbo-96 Fuel Tank
    • Kerbodyne Arianne-21600 Tank
    • Kerbodyne S3-21600 Tank (you can put a note about looking like Falcon in the description text, if you want)
    • Kerbodyne Titan-21600 Tank

[*]Nose cone names should match tank names:

  • Rockomax Antares Nose Cone Fuel Tank
  • Rockomax Atlas Nose Cone Fuel Tank
  • Rockomax Delta Nose Cone Fuel Tank
  • Rockomax Jumbo Nose Cone Fuel Tank
  • Kerbodyne Arianne Nose Cone Tank
  • Kerbodyne S3 Nose Cone Tank (you can put a note about looking like Falcon in the description text, if you want)
  • Kerbodyne Titan Nose Cone Tank

[*]I think you should let all the current 0.625m tanks be 101.6 (eight times an Oscar-B), not 100.0, and provide the stock-looking one (not the Juno and Vanguard designs) in several sizes, called Oscar-(2 × Size ÷ Oscar-B)'th letter of the alphabet:

  • Oscar-D Fuel Tank (twice an Oscar-B, i.e. 25.5)
  • Oscar-H Fuel Tank (four times an Oscar-B, i.e. 50.8)
  • Oscar-P Fuel Tank (eight times an Oscar-B, i.e. 101.6)

[*]But really, if 0.625m had a normal stock selection of tanks, Oscar-H would have been the tallest one, and FTP should only supply an Oscar-L (six times an Oscar-B, 1.5 × Oscar-H, i.e. 76.2).

[*]I also think we could use smaller-than-smallest stock tanks in the sizes where they are missing; 0.625 and 3.75:

  • Oscar-A Fuel Tank (half an Oscar-B)
  • Kerbodyne S3-1800 Tank (half an S3-3600)

[*]I have an idea about the design of Oscar tanks. Since no other tanks exist, you can take more freedom. I imagine just using the inner tank for structure, with a steel-squares-ring top and bottom for inter-tank.

  • Oscar-A: Just a single row of Oscar-B tiles
  • Oscar-D: Insert two rows worth of end-dome-red between the top and bottom rows of Oscar-B's tiles. Let the vertical bars continue over the red tank.
  • Oscar-H: Insert six rows worth of tiles with vertical re-bars, and a single horizontal bar in the center.
  • Oscar-L (if chosen): Insert 10 rows worth of tiles with vertical re-bars, and two horizontal bars distributed throughout the red.
  • Oscar-P (if chosen): Insert 14 rows worth of tiles with vertical re-bars, and three horizontal bars distributed throughout the red.

[TABLE=width: 500, align: center]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]Oscar-A[/TD]

[TD=align: center]Oscar-D[/TD]

[TD=align: center]Oscar-H[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]lF3jbFx.png[/TD]

[TD=align: center]IDJ7hTq.png[/TD]

[TD=align: center]I6iD98l.png[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The nose cones don't have bottom caps.

Yeah, that's something I didn't think to do. I can work on that.

The 1.25m tanks display their end caps in the menu, preventing benefit from the color coding.

Woops! I'll fix that.

Tank names are confusing. FTP shouldn't be a manufacturer. This scheme would make it easy to understand which one matches stock too:

  • Oscar-Juno Fuel Tank
  • Oscar-100 Fuel Tank (but see points 5 and 6 below)
  • Oscar-Vanguard Fuel Tank
  • FL-T1200 Redstone Fuel Tank
  • FL-T1200 Soyuz Fuel Tank
  • FL-T1200 Fuel Tank (you can put a note about looking like Vega in the description text, if you want)
  • Rockomax Antares-96 Fuel Tank
  • Rockomax Atlas-96 Fuel Tank
  • Rockomax Delta-96 Fuel Tank
  • Rockomax Jumbo-96 Fuel Tank
  • Kerbodyne Arianne-21600 Tank
  • Kerbodyne S3-21600 Tank (you can put a note about looking like Falcon in the description text, if you want)
  • Kerbodyne Titan-21600 Tank

Nose cone names should match tank names:

  • Rockomax Antares Nose Cone Fuel Tank
  • Rockomax Atlas Nose Cone Fuel Tank
  • Rockomax Delta Nose Cone Fuel Tank
  • Rockomax Jumbo Nose Cone Fuel Tank
  • Kerbodyne Arianne Nose Cone Tank
  • Kerbodyne S3 Nose Cone Tank (you can put a note about looking like Falcon in the description text, if you want)
  • Kerbodyne Titan Nose Cone Tank

That's a bit of a judgement call. One nice thing about setting them to their own manufacturer is that you can find them via the manufacturer tab in the VAB. But this works too. I'll think on it.

I think you should let all the current 0.625m tanks be 101.6 (eight times an Oscar-B), not 100.0, and provide the stock-looking one (not the Juno and Vanguard designs) in several sizes, called Oscar-(2 × Size ÷ Oscar-B)'th letter of the alphabet:

  • Oscar-D Fuel Tank (twice an Oscar-B, i.e. 25.5)
  • Oscar-H Fuel Tank (four times an Oscar-B, i.e. 50.8)
  • Oscar-P Fuel Tank (eight times an Oscar-B, i.e. 101.6)

[*]But really, if 0.625m had a normal stock selection of tanks, Oscar-H would have been the tallest one, and FTP should only supply an Oscar-L (six times an Oscar-B, 1.5 × Oscar-H, i.e. 76.2).

[*]I also think we could use smaller-than-smallest stock tanks in the sizes where they are missing; 0.625 and 3.75:

  • Oscar-A Fuel Tank (half an Oscar-B)
  • Kerbodyne S3-1800 Tank (half an S3-3600)

Actually, I worked from the opposite direction. Since the Oscar-B has a terrible wet/dry mass ratio, I worked backward from the FL-T400 instead (same height, half diameter, thus 25% of the fuel capacity). It's not a multiple of the Oscar-B but rather a fraction of the 1.25m tanks.

Some half sizes might be cool. I'll think on that too.

[*]I have an idea about the design of Oscar tanks. Since no other tanks exist, you can take more freedom. I imagine just using the inner tank for structure, with a steel-squares-ring top and bottom for inter-tank.

  • Oscar-A: Just a single row of Oscar-B tiles
  • Oscar-D: Insert two rows worth of end-dome-red between the top and bottom rows of Oscar-B's tiles. Let the vertical bars continue over the red tank.
  • Oscar-H: Insert six rows worth of tiles with vertical re-bars, and a single horizontal bar in the center.
  • Oscar-L (if chosen): Insert 10 rows worth of tiles with vertical re-bars, and two horizontal bars distributed throughout the red.
  • Oscar-P (if chosen): Insert 14 rows worth of tiles with vertical re-bars, and three horizontal bars distributed throughout the red.

[TABLE=width: 500, align: center]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]Oscar-A[/TD]

[TD=align: center]Oscar-D[/TD]

[TD=align: center]Oscar-H[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]http://i.imgur.com/lF3jbFx.png[/TD]

[TD=align: center]http://i.imgur.com/IDJ7hTq.png[/TD]

[TD=align: center]http://i.imgur.com/I6iD98l.png[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

Some good design ideas. I'll think about how many different ones might be nice to have here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a bit of a judgement call. One nice thing about setting them to their own manufacturer is that you can find them via the manufacturer tab in the VAB. But this works too. I'll think on it.

Actually, we can probably have the best of both worlds. They can be named with the various stock manufacturers, but have "Fuel Tanks Plus" in the manufacturer's field. In the descriptions, it can refer to cooperation between those companies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I worked from the opposite direction. Since the Oscar-B has a terrible wet/dry mass ratio, I worked backward from the FL-T400 instead (same height, half diameter, thus 25% of the fuel capacity). It's not a multiple of the Oscar-B but rather a fraction of the 1.25m tanks.

I had another thought on this as well. I'll likely leave the existing tanks with their sizes/capacities/mass ratios. However, for in-between Oscars, I could see gradually ramping the mass ratio from one size to the next, so they properly fill the continuum. Hmm... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Some good design ideas. I'll think about how many different ones might be nice to have here.
I didn't mean to add another design, but as a replacement for the current Oscar-100 stock-alike. I think it looks too much like a stack of 3 stretched Oscar-Bs.

- - - Updated - - -

I had another thought on this as well. I'll likely leave the existing tanks with their sizes/capacities/mass ratios. However, for in-between Oscars, I could see gradually ramping the mass ratio from one size to the next, so they properly fill the continuum. Hmm... :)

Makes a lot of sense.

Edited by NBZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I didn't mean to add another design, but as a replacement for the current Oscar-100 stock-alike. I think it looks too much like a stack of 3 stretched Oscar-Bs.

No worries, I sometimes concatenate my thoughts on it. I'll circle back on it, but my temptation is to have one that's entirely grey at that length, even if intermediate sizes have exposed red. But that doesn't mean it has to stay a "stretched Oscar" look precisely.

I'll probably circle back on the 0.625m lineup once I get caught up on the SpaceY tank-cones and fairings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But that doesn't mean it has to stay a "stretched Oscar" look precisely.

Alternatively, you could use my scheme, but just place sides' red with gray, leaving only ends red.

I'll probably circle back on the 0.625m lineup once I get caught up on the SpaceY tank-cones and fairings.

Yeah, and don't forget your dream of refreshing the 3.75m cluster...

No rush. Your pace on all these mods is very impressive, considering that you probably have to manage both real life and occasional light saber duels...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alternatively, you could use my scheme, but just place sides' red with gray, leaving only ends red.

You mean like exposed inner tanks in grey, and longer spacing of the horizontal rims?

Yeah, and don't forget your dream of refreshing the 3.75m cluster...

No rush. Your pace on all these mods is very impressive, considering that you probably have to manage both real life

Yeah, I almost forgot about that. It's a lower priority after getting the color-coded overlays working. That one might take some time, once I get around to looking at it.

My modding pace is slowing down a bit, but I'm still trying to keep going. Thanks for the compliment in any case. :)

and occasional light saber duels...

LOL. You have no idea. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You mean like exposed inner tanks in grey, and longer spacing of the horizontal rims?

Yes, but if you just space out the rims, it will look like a stretched Oscar-B. That's why I suggest regular-sized tiles top and bottom, and very few rings in the middle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, but if you just space out the rims, it will look like a stretched Oscar-B. That's why I suggest regular-sized tiles top and bottom, and very few rings in the middle.

Tried an experiment, and I think it looks pretty good. I took out all of the rings, except the nearest to the ends, and moved those closer to the ends as you suggested. Also reduced the red caps to 3 segments instead of 5, by taking out two seams.

The image is full of JPG artifacts, but here's a link to the PNG: http://ksp.necrobones.com/images/screenshots/KSP%202015-02-04%2009-28-52-83.png

KSP%202015-02-04%2009-28-52-83.jpg

Edited by NecroBones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  1. I think you should let all the current 0.625m tanks be 101.6 (eight times an Oscar-B), not 100.0, and provide the stock-looking one (not the Juno and Vanguard designs) in several sizes, called Oscar-(2 × Size ÷ Oscar-B)'th letter of the alphabet:
    • Oscar-D Fuel Tank (twice an Oscar-B, i.e. 25.5)
    • Oscar-H Fuel Tank (four times an Oscar-B, i.e. 50.8)
    • Oscar-P Fuel Tank (eight times an Oscar-B, i.e. 101.6)

[*]But really, if 0.625m had a normal stock selection of tanks, Oscar-H would have been the tallest one, and FTP should only supply an Oscar-L (six times an Oscar-B, 1.5 × Oscar-H, i.e. 76.2).

[*]I also think we could use smaller-than-smallest stock tanks in the sizes where they are missing; 0.625 and 3.75:

  • Oscar-A Fuel Tank (half an Oscar-B)
  • Kerbodyne S3-1800 Tank (half an S3-3600)

[*]I have an idea about the design of Oscar tanks. Since no other tanks exist, you can take more freedom. I imagine just using the inner tank for structure, with a steel-squares-ring top and bottom for inter-tank.

  • Oscar-A: Just a single row of Oscar-B tiles
  • Oscar-D: Insert two rows worth of end-dome-red between the top and bottom rows of Oscar-B's tiles. Let the vertical bars continue over the red tank.
  • Oscar-H: Insert six rows worth of tiles with vertical re-bars, and a single horizontal bar in the center.
  • Oscar-L (if chosen): Insert 10 rows worth of tiles with vertical re-bars, and two horizontal bars distributed throughout the red.
  • Oscar-P (if chosen): Insert 14 rows worth of tiles with vertical re-bars, and three horizontal bars distributed throughout the red.

[TABLE=width: 500, align: center]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]Oscar-A[/TD]

[TD=align: center]Oscar-D[/TD]

[TD=align: center]Oscar-H[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD=align: center]http://i.imgur.com/lF3jbFx.png[/TD]

[TD=align: center]http://i.imgur.com/IDJ7hTq.png[/TD]

[TD=align: center]http://i.imgur.com/I6iD98l.png[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

I'm trying to think which lettering scheme is better, going with a straight Letter = 2^X, or just sequential. Sequential is probably easier for most people to understand, plus the fuel values may not work out to nice multiples since I'm thinking of gradually ramping the fuel/mass/length ratios between the "poor" ratio of the Oscar-B toward the "good" ratio of the larger tanks.

Here's a table of proposed values:

[table]

[tr][td]Name[/td][td]DryMass[/td][td]Height[/td][td]LF[/td][td]LOX[/td][td]DM/H[/td][td]LOX/DM[/td][td]LOX/H[/td][/tr]

[tr][td]Oscar-A[/td][td]0.007[/td][td]0.175[/td][td]2.7[/td][td]3.3[/td][td]0.04[/td][td]471.43[/td][td]18.857[/td][/tr]

[tr][td]Oscar-B[/td][td]0.015[/td][td]0.3485[/td][td]5.735*[/td][td]7[/td][td]0.043[/td][td]466.66[/td][td]20.086[/td][/tr]

[tr][td]Oscar-C[/td][td]0.0275[/td][td]0.70[/td][td]13.5[/td][td]16.5[/td][td]0.0393[/td][td]600[/td][td]23.571[/td][/tr]

[tr][td]Oscar-D[/td][td]0.0475[/td][td]1.35[/td][td]27[/td][td]33[/td][td]0.0352[/td][td]694.74[/td][td]24.444[/td][/tr]

[tr][td]Oscar-100[/td][td]0.0625[/td][td]1.875[/td][td]45[/td][td]55[/td][td]0.0333[/td][td]880[/td][td]29.333[/td][/tr]

[/table]

* The stock Oscar-B's Liquid Fuel value isn't correct, and should leave a little LF left over when the LOX runs out. I never noticed before. "7 * (9/11)" should give this number as non-terminating 5.727272727272...

The Oscar-B and "Oscar-100" are the existing values. The others are proposed new ones to spread some of the ratios in between, etc.

Share this post


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.