Jump to content

blowfish

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,559

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by blowfish

  1. blowfish
    It's because they try to find intake modules by name rather than by type. Has to be fixed on their end.
  2. blowfish
    Unforutnately, camlost has not been around to update the Kerbalstuff page. Version 2.0.4 was for KSP 0.90, so it's not surprising that you were having issues. The B9 port is not 100% done, but most of the big stuff has been changed. If you're on KSP 1.0.4, it's much more functional than the 5.2.8 release.
  3. blowfish
    You appear to have some stuff that hasn't existed for several versions of AJE. I recommend deleting your entire AJE folder and re-downloading version 2.4.1 from Github. Also, for B9 use on 1.0.4, you should use the maintenance port linked in my signature. Not everything has been updated yet but most things have been.
  4. blowfish
    Okay, something weird is going on here. AdmiralTigerclaw, could you post your ModuleManager.ConfigCache (located inside GameData) after loading the game with B9 installed?
  5. blowfish
    What I meant about mass was that you should ignore the tank volume and just look at the resource mass - I don't remember if there's a way to do it in stock, but KER and RCS Build aid will definitely show you the mass of fuel you have, since AJE calculates fuel consumption in terms of mass rather than volume (it shouldn't matter under RF but just trying to eliminate all possible variables). Depending on the variant, it looks like the 737 carries 15-20t of fuel, and the F-15 carries 6.1t. FHV is tuned in order to get the correct static SFC (thrust per unit fuel flow). The way AJE is set up currently, it has to account for incomplete burning and heat loss through the walls of the engine, which are not modeled. Additionally, the FHV specified in the cfg won't matter for any engine that has drySFC set - in that case the engine fitting routine sets it automatically. The engine simulator also hasn't been updated in months. B9 shouldn't be interfering at all - none of the parameters used by stock engines are used by AJE.
  6. blowfish
    Go to the main page and click "download repository" on the right side of the page.
  7. blowfish
    Of course, but a major point to consider here is that CryoEngines has pretty definite lower/upper stage segregation, so I don't think averaging the Isp of all the engines is valid for an engine like the Penguin which is clearly not designed to be used at sea level. CryoEngines seems pretty well balanced against stock given the tank volume and TWR trade off, so I don't think it's necessary to try and re-do that balance.
  8. blowfish
    CryoEngines gives its engines pretty realistic Isp for hydrolox engines. For an upper/vacuum stage like the Penguin, this would be somewhere in the 440-460s range.
  9. blowfish
    You will need DRE if you want this. RealHeat by itself will make Kerbin re-entry pretty boring.
  10. blowfish
    I don't see a problem, but how is it different from the still-available 5.2.8 release?
  11. blowfish
    1) Are you using RF? If not, you need to look at fuel mass rather than volume. Probably better to do this even with RF 2) Does it have the same amount of thrust as the real one? If you've got more thrust then it's going to go through fuel faster.
  12. blowfish
    RO configs are usually managed by the RO people. Doesn't look like there is one.
  13. blowfish
    The reason it has to be changed if that the RealFuels engine module (and all SolverEngines-derived modules) derive from ModuleEnginesFX which can't display regular ModuleEngines style effects.
  14. blowfish
    Well, I have some idea what the "correct" shape is. All the faces except the front are probably fine. The front should probably look like an open tube, whereas now the drag cube rendering will see the back face inside the intake. Still, to make that work I would have to modify the model, re-import it into KSP, then grab the relevant part of the automatically generated drag cube. This is a lot of work though, and I'd rather not do it until I know it's correct.
  15. blowfish
    I have no knowledge of the exact algorithm KSP uses to generate drag cubes (and it's definitely non-trivial). Even if I did, what shape would they be generated from? KSP generates the cubes base don the model as they appear in-game, so what is the "correct" shape to generate the cube from?
  16. blowfish
    Some do, some don't. Not sure about the Heavy Moa specifically.
  17. blowfish
    Just a general update on the state of things. In the interest of getting an actual release out, bac9's new Mk1/Mk2 parts will probably wait for the next one, and I'd like to take more time to make sure the part switch plugin is working 100%. Other than that, here are the things that are a must-do before a release: Add HX hangar covers and add give HX hangars proper drag cubes. Currently working on this. Update fuselage parts to match stock temperature rules. This is a huge task so any help would be greatly appreciated. Known issues that I don't know how to address (and thus will not be fixed in the next release unless someone else figures out how to fix them): FSairbrake is broken, and airbrakes don't appear to cooperate with the way airbrakes are done in 1.0+. Some have reported that intakes have weird drag behavior. They may require custom drag cubes, but I have no idea what those cubes would be generated from. Stuff I'd like to do eventually but isn't blocking for the next release: Add ModuleAnimateEmissive and update engine configs to give better engine emissives
  18. blowfish
    I think every planet needs an entry in the FAR config file, specifying viscosity and reference temp. Not 100% sure though.
  19. blowfish
    That is, in general, very annoying to do because it requires working through the isentropic flow calculations. When you have to work through hundreds of engine configs (what RF has to deal with), then it becomes a significant barrier. In writing both configs and code for AJE I have come to the conclusion that the simpler it is to specify engine parameters, the better. If you can calculate something and store it, do so in KSP rather than forcing the user to do it.
  20. blowfish
    Refer to equations 6 and 9 here. If you have the exit pressure you can solve for exit Mach number, and from there solve for expansion ratio. The issue I have with this is that exit pressure is typically not known for real engines, whereas expansion ratio is often given. If you specify the expansion ratio, you can still solve for exit pressure as I mentioned above.
  21. blowfish
    The issue I have is that you specify throat area, nozzle area, and exit pressure, whereas one of those three is determinate knowing the other two. If you allow all three to be specified, there's nothing forcing them to be consistent with each other.
  22. blowfish
    I can't find any specific mention of stack nodes in there. One way to actually test it would be to try a nose cone stack vs surface attached to the front.
  23. blowfish
    FAR does account for sweep, yes. What sweep is ideal depends on how fast you are flying - swept wings are really only advantageous in transonic and supersonic flight.
  24. blowfish
    What do you mean by slanting?
  25. blowfish
    1 - correct that it affects area ruling, but it has no effect on the lift/drag properties of the wing itself. 4 - neither FAR nor AJE calculate how much of the intake is exposed, so yes, you'll get the full area regardless
×
×
  • Create New...