Buster Charlie

On a slightly related note about alternative mountain launchpads, I was reading on the real life possibility of Project Orion type rockets, and pretty much the best way to control irradiation and other side effects would be to launch from near the poles, apparently the magnetic poles would help control any lingering radiation, and you have the benefit from being away from civilization anyway, in case you had to do a launch abort and detonate the payload to avoid them from falling into the wrong hands (not a issue in KSP). So maybe for the project Orion Mod you'd want a special launchpad in high latitudes, that thing has so much delta-v that launching from a weird inclination isn't really a big deal.

From a gameplay mechanic, the runway is a launchpad, because as far as I'm aware you can launch rockets from the runway, and you can launch aircraft (albeit possibly short lived) from the rocket launch pad. Sorry I typed most of this on my phone so it's not expressed the best way. I was just saying If you did a space gun, instead of it being a pure craft, because of the potential length it should probably be handled as a KSC building, and the bonus of that is it's capabilities and cast can progress at a rate to keep it from being 'easy mode'. SO if the first tier cost 12,000,000 and the second tier cost 125,000,000 and the third tier was 5,000,000,000 or whatever then that would make sure people fully explore the fun of traditional rockets, before they could just fire a supply mission on a ballistic course to Duna. I really like the electromagnetic orbiter, but either it would have to be in geostationary orbit, or you'd have to have an easy or automatic way to synchronize it's orbit with your projectile. Also, IIRC planets are not movable in this game, just asteroids. So in theory if you could tie the KSC build upgrade mechanic to actually inserting a new planet... Then in theory Tier 3 of the space gun could spawn a new 'planet' in geostationary orbit at the right phase angle for space gun intercept at that altitude (Since it would be rather high up). The planet could be very small and basically be a place to stick your orbital magnetic circularizing device. And I guess you would have to make it so if any object enters it's SOI then it gives it a enough boost to circularize it's orbit somehow. I agree, but being that this would be a mod, it would fit in with say USI or other colonization mods, or anything with life support or in space launchpads. That's why I acknowledge it should be a very expensive end game goal, not something you unload right away. But I asked it here because I just wanted peoples thoughts on how 'realistic' it was as a concept, I know nobody has done it on earth (although there have been some 'scale model' attempts), but I'm just curious how close to reality it is vs how much is just science fiction. But I like also to discuss how it would fit into KSP as a game too!

I don't know how this stuff works with github, I didn't want to liquid anyone off ;(

I wanted to drive around KSC with the rover but was unable to load crew into the packrat rover seats. Since I had the Take Command Mod I figured i'd check out it's config file. I added this line to it's config and it appears to work @PART[PackRat_Seat]:FOR[TakeCommand] { CrewCapacity = 1 MODULE { name = TakeCommand minimumCrew = 1 } INTERNAL { name = GenericSpace1 } } Not sure if this is something you can add to your PackRat_Seat part to make it compatable out of the box, or if this is something that has to be added on the TakeCommand Mods end. EIther way I figured i'd ask because I love both these mods and would love to see them work together without users needed to edit configs.

Now that you mention it, it's beyond what I ever could dream of doing, but it would be neat to integrate it with the trajectories mod, if you required all payloads to fit inside a cargo pod, and you know it won't have any maneuvering during its atmospheric flight, then I figure it would be pretty easy to use that mod to calculate an escape trajectory out of the atmosphere. The way I would do it, if I had the ability, would basically treat it like a 3rd lahnchpad, give it 3 tiers of upgradeability and make it an endgame money sink so that players who pretty much unlocked everything else have an expensive project to build. I think building in the water facing east from the KSC word be best since it's close enough you could do a access building on the shoreline, but the vehicle would spawn loaded in the gun, which is located under water and angled upward. Tier one could have a fixed charge and angle, suitable only for 1.25m payloads that can handle super high g loads and heat because the gun is small and has to accelerate faster. Suitable for launching raw resources into Low orbit with a booster or maybe a carefully tuned sub booster on a timer, something very primitive and simple to survive launch. Tier 2 could be maybe 2.5m payloads or just heavier 1.25m, and this would have a longer barrel and allow for slower accelleration, and maybe simple angle adjustment or power adjustment. Tier 3 would be even larger payload, and full maneuver node placement, so as you mentioned you could launch a supply payload directly on an intercept course with no booster stage, just whatever landing provisions you need. I'm thinking hardened supply pods for colonies.

I recall from the first successful space x landing podcast that they had a dummy load to balance the 11 orbsats. So in that spirit could you make a dummy payload that is very inexpensive and the same format factor? I don't know if you can use the code from that procedural dummy testing weight mod.

I did see one interesting light gas gun idea which involved a long floating underwater gun under water so they could change the angle of launch. From a game play standpoint, I think it would be interesting to basically have a launch sled as a root object, and treat it like a fairing base. Anything you launch would have to attach to the launch sled object and fit within a fixed fairing envelope. As you said you'd need a rocket stage of some sort to complete the orbit so maybe this would still be worth looking into as a first stage replacement. As far as heat and shielding, maybe the gun is only designed to get the launch sled above 32k, at which point it sheds it's fairing and air brakes away from the ship itself (optional parachutes for stage recovery? ) Dowsnide would be the payload would need to withstand launch get forces and fit within a fixed size envelope. Plus side is it would provide a fast and reliable way to get the payload to 32k? Edit: I suppose one could make a launch clamp like part that provides a single impulse of thrust to the sled part, maubergine borrow the code from the orion nuclear engine but make it one shot and insanely powerful. The realism issue is these guns would tend to be longer than is practical to render in game. Although part of me would really like to see a portable nuclear powered space cannon you could assemble on low gravity moons and such. That might be and bit more practical, and maybe you'd be able to you use KAS to build it in sections

I'd suggest this as a mod but I'm not even sure how realistic this is. There is a nice mountain range near KSC, if you had a nice big nuclear reactor and plenty of energy... how realistic would it be to launch non God sensitive cargo into orbit using electromagnetic acceleration? I realize you'd be talking about hypersonic speeds near sea level, so as a offshoot how about just an initial boost with SRB providing sustaining thrust and orbital circulation?

That's kinda my point, they've updated some parts as they bring new artists on board? So if we just try to copy what's in game, we might be copying styles or features that squad is trying to phase out, which in turn makes our mods out of date. If anyone with an artistic eye wants to write an unofficial community guide, be my guest!

While I love the detail and realism of some of the mods I've downloaded, I always feel there is a stark contrast between some mods and the stock parts. I really enjoy when some mod authors try and keep in the style of KSP, but also have noticed that style has evolved over the versions, and some stock assets may yet be updated in the future. Maybe such a thing exists and I am ignorant of it, but I'd love to see an official style guide, similar to say the stuff valve releases for team fortress 2, covering certain design philosophies and art direction choices and guidelines. Maybe some technical stuff regarding poly counts, texture size and density, and related info. Squad is not a large company, I feel like without the mods people have made for free KSP would feel very empty compared to the vast amount of parts available now. I'd like to see more parts mods that integrate seamlessly with the stock asthetic, I think an official style guide would help with that, although let's face it people have done some great work without it.

I love this mod, but I'm having a hell of a time getting it to work the way I'd like it sometimes. I know a lot is unknown about ksp 1.1 up overhaul, but do you think there is a chance a future version might have in game editing, similar to how the stock custom filters work but where you could select modules or bulkheads or whatever to filter against. I wouldn't even object to a text box for manually entering it if there was a way to see real-time updates or at least being able to switch out of the vab and switch back for updates. And being able to manually tag parts with custom bulkheads if the mod maker didn't account for it, in game, wold be amazing. In the same sense that the filters are fairly general to envelope multiple mods, it would be very nice to be able to blacklist or Whitelist a specific part into or out of a category even if it doesn't automatically filter it. Sometimes a category works for 99% of parts but just one part can sometimes not work. For example the DERP escape pod ends up automatically being put in categories that don't make any sense but I'm sure make sense at a code level. If we ever do get more subcategories, Id love to see bulkhead profiles more intergrated. I know you can now click engage sorting, but for stuff like fuel tanks, the size of the tank is always a consideration in addition to the fuel itself.

I just want to say, just reading the topic title makes me want squad to release battlestar kalactica as an official DLC in which you have to manage a fleet of fleeing kerbal colonist as they evade the murderous kylon fleet that chases them across the stars...

Sounds great, really love the attention to detail and I like how you're dedicated to giving space reactors their own special love. When I first got into ksp and mods, it's really not so cutaneous dry if you want something more reliable than solar and a lot of batteries or a fuel cell. So it's very cool that new players will have a easy time to aquire reactors right away with this mod.

Okay, I think i see where you are going, never used interstellar, but you're using the separate reactor / heat exchange /generator model vs a all in one uranium powered electric generator model? So you'll balance this against the other mods by making the reactors more powerful, at the expense of requiring extra electric generator module attached? Do these reactors have a safety shutdown if the core temp reaches a threshold? I'm coming from a different experience but im happy if your mod can bridge the gap and provide a unified framework for people who use different mods.

I haven't been able to get an answer ths, if I have solar power and a reactor, is thee a way to make the reactor throttle down if the solar is supplying enough power?

For something like USI, it's reactors are probably balanced against its utiltities, but I haven't really compared the different mods.

On the note or tweakscale, USI had a full range of reactors already, near future electrical has five sizes but I'm not certain what their stats are. If I understand the core of this mod would be the interstellar reactors but with a unified core and size selection. So having said that, unless the balance between mods is completely different, in which case I guess you could just use cost or technology tree to justify the difference, how will you handle a bunch of reactors with the same size and similar stats? If I could make a suggestion, I like how with mods I can use the right click menu to toggle between cargo containers or fuel tank visual styles. Now I know they're texture swaps vs model swaps. But since this is being written to use module manager to deal with stuff, i know module manager can have dependencies as triggers. So if you have 3 solid core reactors with the 2.5m size range, would you keep them all as separate parts with tweaked stats, or just make them one part with a VAB selectable model swap? Also, although it would not look as visually intereating, is there a possibility for a sealed rector module for simplifying ship building? Ino other words, instead of a raw reactor you need to put in a cargo bay, interstage, fairing, or other housing, a complete modular version encased in a protective housing (so it may look like say a hitchhiker can) with radiators integrated into the protective housing suitable to cool the unit. In other words, a plug and play rocker stack reactor. Maybe it would even be a right click menu option, but it would add to the weight and the cost of the reactor, and maybe as a downside it can't run as hot/efficient due ton the protective housing or needing to use more of its power output for self cooling. But this would be ideal for building a low parts count deployable reactor module for a space station or even a landable version for a mun base. I'd be willing to chip in a model if you think the idea has merit.

Thanks for the explanation, can't wait to see this mod developed firther, it sounds like you've put a lot of thought and care into it.

Can I just say it seems silly for a solid core reactor to have around a third less heat tolerance than light weight aerodynamic parts? Or is this a core heat vs skin temp issue? Because when I see 1600k catastrophic failure temp for a vessel specifically designed to contain high heat, but KSP has fuselages and other parts that are rated for 2000k, 2400k, 2600k, etc I say what? I mean the NERV is rated for 2,500, and I seem to recall reading it was rated at 4000k in the past. Ps would it be possible to have a slideor check mark in the right click menu to add extra shielding, increasing weight but also increasing heat tolerance.

I just want to do thank you for doing this. I belive IRL nuclear rockets are the logical next step and have been frustrated by their politically motivated neglect. I'm glad to see mods and squad in make them got ksp, but I'm sure like you have noticed, in a non uniform manner. I want lots of choices and design options, but I want them to be balanced an have some coherence. So again. Than you for your time and effort.

My 2 cents. I agree with the sentiment of the near future mods, right now fusion reactors are still pretty much sci-fi, so I'd like a option to omit them. Secondly, I buff my LV-N because I don't think they should be made unrealistically weak just to give chemical rockets more utility, will there be a way to edit the configuration file to tweak all the engines, maybe using a simple multiplier? Third, while some of the engines with reactors or lox afterburners, and straight up closed loop reactors should generate heat, is it really that realistic for a NTR to generate that much heat whend their whole method of operation is to throw out the hot gas as fast as possible. So if your engine is essentially a solid core that is being continously doused with liquid hydrogen, and throwing the heated gas iverboard, isn't that in effect going to keep the engine itself from heating up the rest of the ship?

Might I suggest a good compromise on the speed issue would be the mod requires calibration on a per vehicle/planet basis? For example you need to drive the rover for one minute in a straight line for it to find the max speed with the current cargo load, and maybe it can also use this time to calculate energy usage over time. This would not only set a realistic max speed, but would account for nuclear powered rovers (with mods) which may have a near limitless run-time, vs solar powered rovers with limited battery reserve. Then save these constants into the ship save profile and use them to calculate how long it will take to reach it's destination, and maybe a fixed percentage extra time per planet to simulate how rough it's terrain is.

Well I'll have to try your mod and see how it treats the nuclear rocket (am at work and just saw it today and didn't see mention of engines) but what I was referring to is when active these engines shouldn't irradiate anything in the "shadow" of their footprint, so unless a ship has them mounted tractor style it shouldn't be a hazard, however it would be a hazard to kerb also on eva, or another ship or station when docking.

I thought of this in the past also. To keep the parts cost and drag down, it would be ideal to have a system like KIS made stock, and the science Bay could have inventory space which you drag and drop experiments into. Once you add experiments and launch the vessel, you wouldn't open it like a KIS container, you would just get various science options based on the contents. For visual flare, the science Bay could have some model swapping for antennas, booms, sensors, etc that could deplot based on the experiment, but all of this would count as one object. I had also wanted something similar for a basic utilities container which you could store, monopropellant, electric charge, and maybe one other resource in various ratios and amounts to provide basic utilities to a probe or command pod without it looking like a jumble of parts. Bonus points for integrated heat sheild, parachutes, or floats.

Any chance to include non shadow shielded radiation from nuclear rocket engines like nerve or the project orion mod?