Starbuckminsterfullerton

Wow, I was just on KerbalStuff and thought "Hey, the forum thread is a version behind!", but you literally updated in the time it took me to go from here to there! Looks like a good update, and you guys always do the most professional-looking dl links. Can I ask how you softened the atmosphere transitions? Just curious:)

A lot of these things can already be done: -There are already some crew tube sections complete with lights -Do you really need that many capacitors? -I know not everyone does, but I use RTG decay so having a built in one that can't be replaced seems unhelpful, and there is already a battery/monoprop truss. -The existing adapter can just be placed on an existing cylindrical one. -Decouplers have fewer applications unless you're building lifter rockets out of girders, and one-way docking ports can usually cover anything else. -I do get the radial thing, but is it possible to radially attach the tanks, rotate them parallel, and then offset-tool them to the proper spacing? That said, I love these girders, and you can't have too many variants. I for one would rather see a 1.25m edition. Nothing fancy, just the structural one. I should probably just rescale that myself though. Edit: as far as RCS ports go, I feel like I remember Nertea saying he left the RCS transforms in place in case he ever decided to add them, in which case it might just take a .cfg edit.

Hoddd You could always re-write the configs on your end, there's only six engines. All the information you need is in the patch, just copy in the new atmosphere curve, rename the propellants and sub in the new ratios. How did you get your numbers? I posted a .cfg that does the same thing here a while ago, but mine only accounts for proportion, not mass, and it bugs me. What would it look like for straight Hydrogen?

Hey Roverdude, I'm working on an engine that functions not unlike the Karbonite Jets in that it uses a resource, say IntakeAtm, instead of IntakeAir since it doesn't require Oxygen. I want to make sure everything is CRP compatible, but I've hunted through the resource spreadsheet and couldn't find the one Karbonite uses. (used to be ScoopedAir but I know it changed.) Is there an Intake-any-atmosphere resource in the CRP that I should use?

Wow, I'm out for two days and look what I miss! Nice job on the update, new static radiators are great for atmospheric things and the conductors perfectly solve my heat-pipe clearance problem.

So I'm planning to use the lookat FX constraint to keep a piston/cylinder pair lined up, which I think might be the most common application. I mostly know what to do .cfg wise, but I need some Unity guidance... What point will Unity use as the pivot for the rotator? Which end of the object will point at the target? Is there anything else I need to setup under the hood in Unity to make this possible? Thanks for all the help you guys have given me so far, I promise I'll have a mod to show for it soon.

You may be right Bones, but I remember there being a "checkOxygen = true" or something like that in the definition that I can't find now, but there is a way to do this, I remember because I made a resource just like that, just give me time to find it. Edit: Found it! This is definitely possible! So here's the deal, the resource definition just sets the physical parameters for a nameable fluid resource, like density and pumpability. The actual use/behavior of the resource comes from somewhere else. In this case, it's the intake itself that makes intake air behave like intake air. Here is a thread that explains air intake function. So in your case you want to do two things: define a new resource, and create a new intake. Make the resource the same as IntakeAir, just with a different name. Pick one of the stock intakes, find the resourceintake module, and replace IntakeAir with yourResourceName, and then set checkForOxygen to false rename the resource storage module below it too.

I like this, those tanks look like one fuel tanks anyway. You can always use a stock tank of just oxidizer. This sounds like a good solution, reduce the mass penalty of extra tankage only when using hydrogen!

You did it! Hadn't seen the developed insulator textures yet, they look great.

I'm honestly just glad that there is now such wide support for a Hydrogen/Kerosene/LOx fuel paradigm. Thanks so much for making it happen. As far as I can tell there are only two ways to fix the tankage problem: higher capacity or higher density, and we've already fudged the density and aren't messing with it anymore. To me it doesn't make sense to alter the capacity for one fuel type but not another, so I think all the tanks could use a bit more, but since this isn't the CryoRockets thread where this usually happens, there are some other options open. I would say that the NFP tanks are of a sufficiently different construction to warrant different properties than the stock ones, and since the problem mostly occurs with LH2-only NTR vessels it might help to up their capacity only. it's already pretty high though. Oh, and nuclear thermal engines do start to care if they are burning oxidizer... it starts to oxidize the engine!

What does 30% larger mean for the cargo bay internals? would a 3m part fit now? They look great, although the cockpit seems kinda long. I hope that doesn't mean you have to redo the IVA, they're so much work...

Interesting, I've been wondering how possible this would be for a while. I never thought to look for unused modules, I was gonna try and push animateGeneric to the limits. Well done figuring it out!

Nah. The best way to accomplish this is with the stock fairing module. Add a radial attach point ala AIES and only render the base if the node is used. No reason to use a plugin if it can already be done automatically by existing facilities. That said, I might be one of the few that thinks we don't need baseless engines. Fuel tanks look worse when you can see their insides, the actuator pistons and turbopumps would just be hanging out there, and a giant engine stuck on a tiny fuel tank should look wrong. Those of you going for historical appearance have the offset tool, the rest of you have stack extenders, you'll be fine.

I thought that after launchpad smoke and touchdown dust effects there was nothing more I could want. I was wrong, this looks great! Is the color in any way affected by which exhaust FX the engine is running?

Since you are eventually going to rewrite that patch to include some more stuff, I thought I'd draw your attention to this MM patch in the Atomic Age thread. Maybe you already thought to do it that way, but it's still cleverer than mine since it handles new engines without additional edits. I like the 2x heat production, it seems to me that the cure for pseudo-radiators is just upping reactor heat and radiator emission until radiators are the only things capable of handling that level of production.

Wow, that's much cleverer than my way. I think Nertea is planning to include a patch for these engines with the next release of NFP, I'll show him this one. Also, Taurus has an NTR? Coool...

Does it not apply to every transform with the same name?

Switchable is a nice addition, will keep people from complaining about ruining their ssto's and whatnot. As far as LANTR's go, you're pretty much just hucking LOx into the exhaust stream, so any ratio below whatever you are using for a stoichio mix should be fine. And yeah, with that fuel tank I think you now hold the honor of largest balls in the modding scene.

NFP is only setup to affect the stock LV-N right now, (and I think KSPX and the Kommitz nukes.) It seems that a patch for Atomic Age doesn't exist, so I'll get right on it.

The planets' pictures by the descriptions look really professional! I don't think you really need a table of contents, but it sure is fancy.

You're right, I hadn't even thought about the save-breaking (I start over every update). I honestly think they could just add the missing one, there's room for both and I think the old one would still have a role to play.

That's interesting how KSP uses volume instead of surface area. Are you just going to handicap the radiators that are over-estimated accordingly? As long as it performs like you want in the end and the emmissives look right and allI suppose it doesn't really matter how accurate the area is. Propulsion seems good to go, and thermal is indeed looking pretty good, so I'd say if you feel ready you're set!

The landing gear on the top left was supposedly going to replace the old one as the smallest retractable, but it's nowhere in game. I don't have a problem with the old gear, but it'd be nice to have one that matches the new set and has the ability to steer alongside it. What happened to this third gear?

I think the problem isn't a performance one, it's just a visual thing. It's nice to have radiators that look like they're doing something, and it helps tell you if you have the right amount. It's fine if they run cool, but then we'd never get to see the Nertea's beautiful emmissives. That and it doesn't make much sense for the half meter conformal to do as much work as the on meter one.

Just a quick note because maybe you already noticed, but 1.25m Argon tank No. 3 is missing a description. The new NFP tank set looks great by the way, even though I already said so about the dev renders.