Jump to content

RedParadize

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    866

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by RedParadize

  1. RedParadize
    Hi Nertea fusion-mirror-25-1 have a typo error in one of its ModuleEnginesFX module. the LqdHe3 "PROPELLANT" is inside LqdDeuterium propellant brackets. Even if fix it. The engine keep shutting down and start charging again for some obscure reason. Its the first time I see a tri-propellant engine, but it doesn't seem to be the source of the error. As other engines (fusion-inertial) work just fine, I am amusing there is not conflict with my other mods... Otherwise, nice stuff! Is there any hope to get some kind of FFT engine working in atmo? I could use one of your nuclear one, but I know you are planning to kill all my kerbal with radiation in a near/far future. I am wondering if there is any hope to save them.
  2. RedParadize
    Damn, how far you need to go?
  3. RedParadize
    Why would you want the stock engine anyway. SSTU have a wider variety than stock. They are also nicer!
  4. RedParadize
    Told you! I do not mess with other mod unless they offer unique content. Like all Nertea stuff exept the tank, plane stuff, specific command pod (the always awesome ASET Pod)... That kind of stuff. Because of that, I spend very few times worrying about balance. And KSP run much more smoothly.
  5. RedParadize
    That question sounds famillar!
  6. RedParadize
    I do not use it much, it tend to induce inaccuracy.
  7. RedParadize
    9 min burn? Kill me!
  8. RedParadize
    I have a patch for all RL-10. On my side it was not oriented toward realism, but for ingame balance (as well as my patience). SSTU naming convention allow you to pick all RL-10 and modifying them all at once.
  9. RedParadize
    With SSTU, you wont need 103 mods... Trust me. Edit: In term of balance, SSTU is supreme. Given its mechanic and structure, its pretty easy to massively edit all part. You can rebalance all its part with a single patch. I find that part really frustrating when I work with too many mods.
  10. RedParadize
    @Jimbodiah Nice stuff! where did you found those legs?
  11. RedParadize
    @hraban ESLIS is really nice and does the job perfectly when it come to carry kerbal around. But the lack of cargo bay mean I have to mount the expensive science instrument on the exterior. I am not complaining, I am aware that what I am looking for is very specific. IXV model have all the attribute i need to customize it to what I want, the central cargo bay will make it easy to balance it. I can add RCS, legs and engine.
  12. RedParadize
    @WellHahaha, most likely! The thing is its the part that is the closest to what I want: A mini ITS that can SSTO on duna and two stage on Kerbin. Land/take off verticaly, re-enter like a plane but without wings. (wings make it difficult to land vertically and are mostly useless in space. All that with a cargo bay large enough to put a crew module in it, so you can have it manned or not! I will post some picture when I will be done with it, maybe @hraban will like it! edit: is it me or there is no RCS in the nose?
  13. RedParadize
    I have a bug to report: Your rubicube.dll seem to broken. Can you fix it?
  14. RedParadize
    @hraban Thank you soo much! And yes, why two doors when you can have a single one. On my side, I will upscale it until I can fit a lander can in it. Basically, it can be manned if I want or be used for experiment or else! I will probably also fit landing legs and engines and land it vertically. Kinda like the ITS but smaller. In that format, it might end up being my single stage Duna lander.
  15. RedParadize
    Didn't realise it was that small... Still, I like the cargo bay + lifting body concept. Wings only matter if you want to land horizontally... Could it be bigger?
  16. RedParadize
    I would take that!
  17. RedParadize
    @Stevie_D I really like the space bus concept. If one day you decide to expand its family, like one with no cockpit, cargo bay, larger variant. It would make me happy.
  18. RedParadize
    Stock scale is too small, real scale is too buggy... So I do something similar to you but on top of 6.4 scale. If at some point you wish to try that I can provide a mass patch of SSTU.
  19. RedParadize
    Yeah, Its on my wish list as well. I had a setup allowing me to do that quite a while ago, but it required 2 part per radial booster. I would prefer a single part to be able to mount radial booster using KIS
  20. RedParadize
    Nice stuff! Will download for sure. Question about the spacebus: is it like a mini SpaceX ITS? I would take that. Forget it I will take it all!
  21. RedParadize
    I also use upside down MUS for its RCS, sadly it sometimes create weird inverted lift during reentry, and I still have to figure out a way around this. @Shadowmage If you end up integrating top/bottom RCS option to other tanks it would be awesome. You can add that to my 3 miles long wish list...
  22. RedParadize
    Integrated RCS would be nice. Alternatively, a procedural ring with configurable RCS around it would also do the job.
  23. RedParadize
    @Shadowmage That explain everything, thank you!
  24. RedParadize
    @Shadowmage Ok I ran some test without my personal patch. First of, sorry if I wasted your time, your graphic show you put much more trough into this than me. Sorry again (I am Canadian, can't resist to say sorry... sorry about that!) look like I was using lightweight tanks for the LFO. I didn't realize I changed it as that's what I use 95% of the time. Obviously that make a huge difference since Lightweight and ZeroBoiloff are the two extreme in term of weight. I didn't ran with massless engine as you did, nor did I calculated everything as you did, its definitively the way to go, but I preferred to use ingame engine in my test as its what I will end up building my rocket with after all. So I put a single RS-25 (5.75t) vs 5 Merlin-1d (5.5t total), Close in mass but not equal, but Merlin-1d is not top LFO ISP but have a huge TWR bonus. I adjusted dV using only diameter and a tad of V.scale: LFO Lightweight Merlin-1d (5.5t total) Isp=320 Playload Tankage mass Fuel mass Total Mass delta V 20t+5.5t 2.848t 27.318t 53.692t 2001 20t+5.5t 10.493t 93.279t 129.299t 4011 20t+5.5t 47.293t 420.383t 493.202t 6003 HLOX ZeroBoiloff RS-25 (5.75t) Isp=452 Playload Tankage mass Fuel mass Total Mass delta V 20t+5.75t 5.352t 17.842t 48.970t 2008 20t+5.75t 20.320t 67.736t 113.832t 4007 20t+5.75t 162.565t 541.883t 730.224t 6007 Most case scenario everything is as it should, but looks like at some point between 4k and 6k dV LFO become better. Now that I see this, I am starting to believe its actually the lightweight tank that is op. Note that with regular tank for LFO the total mass would be 1287t for 6000dV. Problem is, lightweight tank actually exist and as you mention ZeroBoiloff do not. The need for super high dV without staging is limited to reusable interplanetary tugs, so its not that much of a issue. On my personal patch, I will probably end up buffing Low/Zero Boiloff a bit and nerf lightweight tank max temp and collision resistance allot. Here is my test rig craft text file. All tanks setup are included. Yellow=2000dV Orange=4000dV Red=6000dV and the blue tank is the test weight.
  25. RedParadize
    I will do that tonight or somewhere this weekend. I will also make sure I have nothing interfering, I have allot of custom stuff and patch...
×
×
  • Create New...