Svm420

[quote name='Luxius']You're saying I'm unwittingly breaking realism by putting 0% structure into my tank? That this is merely something I shouldn't touch if I want realism? So ... why can I adjust it in RO? Wouldn't it be possible to hard-code this number? No criticism of RO, just trying to make sure I understand your statement correctly. Please see the "relevant link" and the answer below on that page. I am specifically trying not to discuss ullage motors, I'm sure I understand the concept of those. There was no question regarding the motors that generate G-forces to force the liquids to the nozzle for the engine ... blahblahblah. All questions were regarding the [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ullage_%28wine%29"]ullage[/URL] in the tank needed to control/guide the gaseous vapours inside the tank as far as possible away from the engine. Again, see the link at the bottom in above post. If you merely filled the tank to the limit, all those gasses in the fuel would be, I assume, diluted into the fuel mix, and you don't want ANY vapours in the engine AT ALL. Pressure is nice, but if you OVER-pressure the fuel inside the tank, you essentially capture all the bubbles like it's done in Coca-Cola. /Luxius Edit: To put it in another way, if you want to push the liquids to the "bottom", this actually means you reactively want to push the gasses to the "top". If the tank is filled to the top with no ullage space, there is nowhere the gasses can be pushed to. The "ullage space" in the tank in [URL="http://i.stack.imgur.com/khS7e.jpg"]this picture[/URL] would be the "gaseous hydrogen" part.[/QUOTE] It won't break realism, it just isn't realistic. It is allowed so that you could in theory simulate tanks with different dry masses as I am sure not every tank in the world throughout history had the same dry mass though they are probably very close.. Sure you could argue that they could make a limit to prevent unrealistic dry masses, but it's a single player game no one stops you from cheating in any number of ways. Pressure has no effect on ullage in microgravity. I really don't get what you're getting at the mod handles free space in the tank due to fuel being used, so you need not worry if you have enough room for the gases. That is an abstraction done for the sake of simplicity and gameplay. I think you are overthinking it.

[quote name='Commander Zoom']Your voice does have meaning... but perhaps not the one you intend. You and everyone else who is speaking out against this change because you are emotionally invested in your sub-community are demonstrating its necessity. They don't [I]want[/I] you to be this invested - because it ends up causing problems, for them, for you, for other forum users. I'm proud of some of my accomplishments in this game. I've documented them, been complimented for some of them, and taken what I consider to be prudent steps to preserve and back them up. But if despite all that, I were to lose everything but the memories... it would hurt, but I would go on with my life. Because I have to, and have before, in the face of similar losses (HD crashes, games and forums closing up forever, etc). Nothing lasts forever. In ten years, you may not even be playing anymore, or remember the people who you counted as your best forum buds. In a hundred, you and everyone you know will likely be dead. Understand and accept the ephemerality of experience, and treasure what you have, while you have it. Because it [I]will[/I] go away, or be taken from you. To be human, to be mortal, is to experience loss.[/QUOTE] Finally someone who can think :D

[quote name='Luxius']I've searched a great deal for the answer to this question, but it seems it hasn't been raised? If so, please excuse me bringing up the question again: There's been numerous discussions regarding the [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ullage_motor"]ullage motor[/URL], what it does and why it does it, but I can't seem to find any interest in the ullage space in fuel tanks. But I was wondering why a new procedural tank defaulted @ 84% space used for fuels the first time I built a rocket in Realism Overhaul (with RP-0). I've simply adjusted this to 100% at all times, not knowing if it had any relevant consequences. Does RO take tank ullage into consideration? If so, are the numbers adjusted accordingly for each type of fuel mix or should I simply expect a flat 16% usage for gasses and such (which seems a bit much compared to the numbers I've read elsewhere on the subject)? Also, if ullage in tanks are simulated in RO, how does pressurized tanks and cryo affect this? Please bear in mind, I am not a professional rocket scientist, I am merely trying to understand these concepts as an amateur geek - so don't hold back if I need be corrected in my observations! Thank you! /Luxius last edit: still don't get what this post is about? Well, as I understand it, the fuel tank NEEDS to have room at the top, so you as an engineer can control where the gaseous fuels will be gathering - cause there will always be some percentage of your fuel going from liquid to gas and back to liquid (due to entropy, quantum laws and other physics I won't exaggerate my knowledge about). Feel free to correct this observation! Relevant link: [URL]http://space.stackexchange.com/questions/4434/how-much-potential-volume-in-a-rockets-tank-is-actually-used-for-fuel[/URL][/QUOTE] The percent you are talking about is not free space in the tank it is the structre of the tank. The walls and other components that make up the tank itself. You putting it to 100% mean you have no tank just fuel. Not real at all. No tank type effect ullage AFAIK just the types of fuel that can be stored and whether there is insulation on the tanks. I don't really understand what you are talking about ullage motors. So please clarify if that was a question.

Newest cockpit looks good! Maybe a 2 man inline pit?

[quote name='jrodriguez']Yes, I don't want to make it better but to scale it maintaining a realistic ec consumption / power ratio.[/QUOTE] Hmm well did the change you made to 3000 make any difference? [code] TWEAKSCALEEXPONENTS { name = ModuleEnginesAJERotor rpm = -1 r = 1 weight = 2 power = 2 } [/code] That the exponents for a rotor. So if a prop work similarly you would have to scale the whole thing by 3.3 to get the power you want. Then you need to reduce rpms by the 1/3 since the exponent for that is the inverse of the scale factor. No idea what r is maybe radius? Also weight is going to be multiplied by 3.3^2 so 10 time the weight. Not sure how to handle gear ratio.Other than that those changes should keep it proportioned I think assuming the fuel efficiency, BSFC, stays the same.

[quote name='jrodriguez']I know it is going to be hard..but right now FAR is saying that I'm green for Mars flying between 1km-4km and 0.9 match ( I have quite big wings!) The thing is I need to know if it is possible to tweak a electric prop to have more power. (Tweakscale is not working with these engines, at least in RO)[/QUOTE] Do you want to fly no matter what? I would figure if you are using AJE, FAR and real Mar instead of Duna you would want it realistic as possible otherwise might as well just use cheats. So why try and make the engine better should be? Well thats my 2c GL can't really offer any advice as I don't know what changes you would need.

[quote name='Van Disaster']Could do, unless it reads/you assign symmetrical pairs or it balances the remaining engines to manage.[/QUOTE] How is that different than throttling all the engines down anyway :huh:

[quote name='davidy12']And I saw the CSM a couple pages back, but he didn't say he'd make it.[/QUOTE] So what? He know you want it there is no more purpose in saying you do now other than to be a pest :rolleyes:

[quote name='Van Disaster']MJ has a throttledown to protect engines from excess heat - is there something that will do this on a per-engine basis via thrust limiting? much like Davon or TCA do for orientation.[/QUOTE] Wouldn't that lead to an imbalance in thrust?

[quote name='davidy12']Shadow, just seeing that Saturn Replica makes me crave for a stockalike apollo. PLZ!!! Make that CSM of yours reality :D[/QUOTE] He gets that you want it. You have posted that you do more times than anyone would care to count. Drop it and let him do his thing. OK show some respect to the author.

[quote name='jrodriguez']Hi all, I need some advice. I'm designing an airplane for Mars. I would like to circumnavigate Mars with a couple of Kerbals so I think the only option that I have is to use electric propellers (and nuclear reactors to recharge batteries) I have been testing the AJE e50 but I need something much more powerful! I did some tweaks to the ElectricProperllers.cfg to set 3000hp just to check if it makes any difference. Thanks[/QUOTE] You are going to have a bad time Mars atmosphere is so thin flight is nearly impossible. You will need a ton of lift vs weight or a ton of speed.

[quote name='HomoPrintus']Nope, it's still for 1.0.5 and doesn't work in my 1.0.4 (I can't see any chutes at all, even stock)[/QUOTE] Look harder ;)

Honestly reading more of this thread I see now how some take it way [B]TOO[/B] seriously, and where that would create problems. WOW :confused:

[quote name='DuoDex']Considering that this has been technically breaking of the rules since Day 1, I think it's high time it's deleted. An old, old quote from vexx32 I still like to pull out whenever this issue is raised [/QUOTE] Thank you for that. Feel nice to have an actual explanation instead of, it was bad and that all you need to know.

Gratz on the release looks really good. Looking forward to you making ASET ivas! :D

[quote name='KasperVld']'thou shallt not roleplay' rule. [/QUOTE] Why is that even a rule? Seem to go against the community aspect of forums :huh:. Haven't been around long, so maybe there is some history to that rule I don't know about.

[quote name='pozine']I don't know if this is intended or not, but when I press Alt+E, the EVE GUI doesn't appears. Only mod installed : RSS[/QUOTE] Intended Alt+0 in the new one

Is there any Q readout?

[removed link to defunct website]

[quote name='Interplanet Janet']Maybe you could merge Trans-Keptunian and OPM? :\[/QUOTE] Why when you can use them together yourself. Don't like the mod make a better one yourself

[quote name='NathanKell']RftS is de^H^Hpining, so that's about it, yeah. (But stay tuned)[/QUOTE] Will you be able to replicate your Vulcan TRJ in the latest AJE?

[quote name='m4v']I don't use RealFuels and I'm not super thrilled in having a look. Eventually I will but don't hold your breath.[/QUOTE] Thank for the update!

[quote name='seanmcdougall']Yes, I am hoping to push out an update within the next week. Unfortunately I haven't had a lot of time to tend to my mods recently. While this should continue to mostly work with KSP 1.0.5, the EVA navball is now stock so it's interfering a bit with mine. In particular, my hooks into the RCS and SAS indicators no longer work. I also notice that the stock navball moves relative to the camera instead of relative to the direction the Kerbal is facing. Personally I like my way better :-) If it's not too much of a pain I might try and restore my behaviour and make it a configurable option. At a minimum though, I'll fix the indicators. Stay tuned![/QUOTE] Please do try I agree with you yours is better.

[quote name='pellinor']small dev update: * don't force early setup when getmodulecost is called. This should fix a crash with tweakscale and mft/realfuels.[/quote] omg yiiiiiiiiiiiis :D :D :D :D ty ty ty!!!!

Awesome to hear!