RedParadize

@Daishi If I may ask, could you add the thing that allow player to control the limit of the animation? If you do that, and maybe push the deployment limit all the way to 90deg down. We could actually use the panel as makeshift ramp or place a real ramp inside.

That will make a wonderful equipment drop pod. Maybe even for rover if empty.

Hi @Shadowmage In my last play trough couple weeks ago, I noticed a bug when using your tank (any kind). When stacked right next to a in line cargo bay, it prevent it to shield stuff when closed. I also get a drag miscalculation when using your tank with regular module, when sstu tanks are on top its like if they only partially shield the bottom part. If I understand correctly it have to do with tanks bulkheadProfiles not matching cargo and other part size. Because of that, reentering a rocket become very difficult and accurate landing is impossible. If I finish working early, I will try do reproduce this in your latest build.

If you are still looking for 50+ kerbal module. SSTU have that, all of them are very nicely modeled and add the possibility to built them in space. IN SPACE! Look for the inflatable ring. Folded, their weight is low, to deploy them you need to bring the necessary material (think furniture etc). Nice mechanic.

@Shadowmage The new shader and tanks are truly magnificent. My compliment. If you are still working on the tanks, I would suggest adding some piping, cable and relay box on the tanks top/bottom that link to the main frame. It might be too much work but the option to have 2,4 or 8 tanks around the frame would be nice. Imagine how awesome it would look with instrument, legs and other stuff filling the vacant space. I kinda stopped playing KSP for a while. I feel I done most of what the game was allowing. But looking at your stuff make me want to play again. I am gonna go hunt for some mission pack... I wish there was a SpaceX mission pack or something.

You guys watch too much anime movie.

Hi @mrsolarsail I know the comment is one year old, but do you think @FreeThinker suggestion would be doable?

@Nertea Do you think it would be complicated to add a sound when capacitor are charging?Some kind of a "woooouuUUUIIIIII" whisper that get loud at the end.

I hope I modders do not get that impression from me. I do ask allot of stuff.

@Bottle Rocketeer 500 There is quite allot of Orion/SLS on the market already. On the other end, the post-kerbin, radiation, glowing reputation are fairly original I think.

@toric5 I always have found the atomic website highly amusing. I am not quite sure we can call what described as a thermocouples. Regardless, if I look at the proposed spaceship it is powered by a SP-100 reactor, strangely enough, Nertea two smallest reactors look like it. SP-100 is rated at 10 kWe to 100 kWe. Looks like its not as magical as I trough it was... +1 for Nertea and you!

Hi @Nertea About the Z-P and tokamak: It does not sound right to power these thing with solar panel, I would rather having them being lighter and need a bigger reactor or maybe reducing their heat generation. Realistically none of these option make sense. A Z-P would be slow, power drunk, heavy and hot like a nuclear cooker that it is. Still, invoking super strong material or superconductor that do not heat under electric currents sound less suspicious than a inexplicable reduction in energy requirement. Even if in reality its just as wrong, it sound a bit less wrong. Just my grain of salt. Anyways, one day, we might end up convincing the laws of the universe that they do not need to be so picky.

@Nertea Started to play with AM drive. I really wish we had on rail acceleration... I can't play with trust that low. How do you manage 1h long burn? I hate to suggest, but a extra AM torus tank of smaller diameter. Heavier than the original but containing more. 50 or 5000 is rather limiting. Edit: Oh, and antimatter canalized fission engine is a weird concept. Its like having a steam train with fusion as a propellant!

@Nertea I see, make sense. Then you might want to reduce the amount of Ablative that is burned. As it is it get depleted before the pellet of the biggest drum. As far as I know ablative can't be replaced, so its a single use engine. It make it a much less attractive than most of the others.

@Nertea It seem a bit weird to have a Magnetic nozzle before a a ablative one. Whats the rationale behind this?

Indeed, but I suspect that if it would be released as a separated mod, some modder might pick it up. It only lack advertisement.

@Nertea Humm... I do not know how they position against each other in the tech tree, the ablative appear before the Z-P right? Right now the ablative is much better on every aspect. If I had to balance them against each other and give them a specific character, ablative should be more massive but generate much less heat and require less energy, since it burn ablative armor as well you should probably nerf its ISP by half, right now its insanely good. With the weight of their radiator, Ablative should still be more massive than the Z-P by quite allot. If you where to buff Z-P fusion trust to +- 250kN and reduce its weight to say 18t. it should give a edge to the Z-P at the cost of volume and complexity. That would also put it on top of Z-P Fission. For the last of the pellet engine, the ICFE, I do not know what to do with it, technically its the Z-P fusion successor right? It's model look very light in comparison. I would suggest making it lighter, with a slightly better TWR. Then I think it should be equivalent to the Z-P fusion in term of Heat / ISP x Trust ratio, maybe slightly higher. To do that you might have to nerf it ISP quite allot. As a result, player could do much lighter ship for the same dV and acceleration. What way it would be good, without being as good as Mirror Fusion and rendering Z-P obsolete. The tokamak is great, is it just before the mirror fusion and after the ICFE? If yes its heat generation is about the same for the 500kN version of the mirror fusion, while being much lighter, kinda negate its ISP advantage. It could be right as it is, but it make the 500kN variant of the mirror more or less useless. And btw, once launched, mechJeb say mirror fusion has 342kN of trust instand of the 500kN. ( can we mirror fusion stats in the part info interactive menu?)

@Shadowmage Your the king! as always. Now, if you could release your tool to everyone it would be awesome. I want to be able to repaint these nuclear reactor with orange stripe before Nertea release his radiation mod. Otherwise Jeb will die from radiation sickness for sure, don't you have any compassion for Jeb?

@Nertea Glowing reputation... That's brilliant! If you ask me, these are the kind of mod I am really looking for. Anything that would refresh KSP gameplay. ( if only we add on rail acceleration...) Some other note I did't post yesterday: I believe cost will play a big role in balancing these engines end their fuel. I do use HeatControl, obviously! That big fixed radiator panel look so good. But as it is, these engine require a extra 10 - 40 tons of radiator. If you include the power source as well the full package is in the 20t - 100t range. That's without fuel. This is something to consider I think. Maybe a way to balance them would be to compare each full package against each other. I will look into that tonight. Maybe it would be good to exaggerate the fundamental difference between them, stereotyping them without breaking realism too much. It would give character to each of them. The Z-P Fission is fine. The way I look at it, it's right in the middle of all the others, it's the benchmark. In the last iteration I ended up reducing its heat production a bit. It was more a question of aesthetics than anything else, but if you are looking of a buff that might do. Its a indirect buff, less radiator mean less mass for the full package. As for Z-P Fusion, you will need more mass reduction than that. I would definitively increase trust too. As for the gasdynamic mirror. Its OP and its fine, its the end of the tree. If you are looking for a nerf, I think you should increase its power requirement allot. Adding a full fledged 8t reactor on top of the already massive engine+radiator package will not kill it. It have the trust.

I do not think NSWR should not be at the end of the fission tree. Its a comparatively simple design, excluding high heat resistance materials (but , Z-pinch need them too). Anyway, what's not so simple is its fuel and its storage. I would suggest making the current highly enriched fuel more expensive and almost impossible to produce in situ. Maybe find a way to make it hard to handle. That plus the incoming radiation should adequately nerf it without killing it. That's a subject for another topic, but that engine would most likely be illegal in earth low orbit. If a fully packed reservoir crashing on earth would be catastrophic. Maybe there is some balancing effect to get from that. BTW why not making it bimodal? Having another mode that use a less enriched or cheaper isotope.

I can do at least that for you. First, I have to specify that I do not currently use a modded techtree and everything is under nuclear in stock. I did read a bit about some of these engine but my comment will be done mostly from a gameplay perspective. I listed them in the order i think they should appear in a tech tree: Fission/Fusion engine: Nuclear salt water Engine: One of my favorite. Its light, relatively inexpensive, no electric requirement, the easiest to operate, have a good TWR and its ISP is decent. Given all that, most case scenario its far more efficient than all other fusion and fission engine. Extremely flexible in its usage and great for lander... until radiation is implemented. Z-pinch fission Engine: Average compared to other FFT engine. Quite massive but deliver allot for its mass and cost. For moderate playload it can give a decent TWR, for larger playload its lower ISP start to show and trust become too low for my taste. Z-pinch fusion Engine: I think Z-pinch fusion is under performing compared to both Internal Confinement fusion and even Z-pinch fission. Z-pinch fission is cheaper to buy and operate, its TWR make it much more attractive so why go fusion? I believe most of the other mode of propulsion are better. As for my personal taste, it is one of the engine that grid trough my patience beyond playability. Ablative Internal Confinement Engine: If you exclude cost, its better than Z-pinch fission. Otherwise its more or less on par with it as you can achieve the same dV cost wise. Again it lack a bit of TWR for my taste. Tokamak Fusion Engine: Considering 95% of its fuel can be collected with a scoop. Its a attractive engine. Trust is lacking when carrying the mandatory reactor and any significant playload. I would rate it just under Nuclear salt water as its less flexible and compact. Inertial Internal confinement Engine: Impressive ISP. But TWR is abyssal, even more when you consider the amount of radiator that thing need. Mirror Cell Fusion Engine: The holy grail of the fusion engine. It have the trust, the ISP, coupled with a scoop, a large amount of D/He3 and just enough LH2, a good 2g can be maintained for every burn any mission would require. The only downside is its massive heat issue. And the weird thing: Metallic Hydrogen Engine: Interesting engine, but probably limited in its usage as there is no way to produce MH SITU yet. Classical nuclear engine are superior, until radiation obviously. In a career game, I could defitively see myself using only NSW until I get the MCF. Depending on the gap in science point, I might use the Z-P fission or tokamak. I will review the antimatter engine tomorrow, but so far they don't seem to justify the upgrade, none are clearly superior to the MCF engine.

Hi @Nertea I would not want to take up too much of your time. I am trying to do a MM patch for your engine and I was wondering if you would tell me how to patch the various length of the mirror-cell fusion. More specifically: how to patch each and every LENGTHCONFIGURATION. If you are curious, its not because I think their balance are off. Its just because some of them have too little trust for my patience while others require too much radiator for my sense of aesthetics. Personal stuff basically... Thanks in advance.

(I'am at work, some of the following may be inaccurate) You need to have some of it. A factory produce it at very slow rate and at start you do not have any. In VAB, if you look at the bottom right, one of the icon should show you how much you have exactly. If I remember correctly, you can setup how much antimatter you want to lunch from there.

@trias702 @Nertea Looks like I can make your craft work. I do not think we having the same issue here, but maybe. Try to have the throttle up a bit up when you activate the engine or it will flame out. It does not seem to work with fusion-mirror-25-1, but maybe there is a link...

I will try. Edit: looks like I have the same issues that I have with fusion-mirror-25-1... So I can't tell.