Raptor831

Did I really miss the Vernor engine? Sorry guys. Yeah, SpaceHungryMan if you want to submit the pull request with Starwaster's version of that, it would be great. Thanks jerb for noticing.

Ok, made some updated to the repo. New SXT engines are there (should be 4 new ones: two based on Vanguard, one solid kick motor, and the aerospike), and someone submitted some of the KSOS engines for use on the webapp. Whoever made the submissions, thanks! You can go to the repository to download those. I'll be setting up a proper release in the next few days, so there will be a proper .zip download and anyone using CKAN can get it as well.

I know that feeling. And yes, the new FTmN engines should work.

I don't believe FreeThinker's pull request went through properly. IIRC, I submitted a PR right after FreeThinker's was supposed to be in there and I didn't notice it. I just checked again, and there's nothing in the list from FreeThinker. PR's are a bit confusing the first time, so it's quite likely that it just didn't get through to the right repo. EDIT: For reference, here's the list of accepted pull requests on the main repo: https://github.com/NathanKell/ModularFuelSystem/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aclosed

@Northstar1989: I read over that PDF you linked twice, and I can't see a single piece of info on mass ratios of the fuel/oxidizer that says 4:1. I see MR = 3 on a few places, and I see O2 and H2 injections being 1:1. Anything else, I can't seem to find. The config was originally written by Starwaster (if we're talking about the stock clone, and not Porkjet's newer LANTR), and I assume he didn't pull that number from nowhere. I just don't know where to dig this up, since Google is failing me. :shrug: This is all above my pay grade, so I went to Atomic Rockets to pull data. Looks like the listing for LANTR (link) is pretty much where the config is at. According to the numbers, if my math is correct (since Isp isn't given but exhaust velocity is): IspV in NTR mode = 940s IspV in LOX mode = 647s If that's the case, the vacuum Isp of both modes is just about dead on. And to top it off, the thrust increase from NTR to LOX (111 kN to 303 kN) is an increase of 2.7 times, which is exactly what Atomic Rockets comes out with. So, given that I'd trust Atomic Rockets to be accurate, I wouldn't change the numbers. If anything, I'd fudge the thrust down a bit, since AR's numbers are 67kN/189kN for NTR/LOX modes, but I'll take the assumption that you could scale up the thrust with a bigger reactor and keeping the TWR near the same. As for IspSL, there are a ton of variables for that, not just atmospheric pressure. Again, I assume Starwaster pulled the numbers from some source, I just can't find anything good about LANTR on Google at the moment. So, we'll keep those for now. As to the TL scaling, that's completely out of my hands. The RealFuels code dictates that, so you're unfortunately at the mercy of NathanKell to update the mod before any changes come about. The only alternative is to just make a TL8 (which exists for NTRs) LANTR or NTR with the given numbers. Heck, hit the webapp and plug stuff in and copy the resulting config out to test away with. If you come up with a good engine, let me know and I can include something in the config. RE: Nightmare fuels - I don't use them because I don't know what the heck they'd be used for. The example with MON3 stands: none of the major sources seem to differentiate between MON* and N2O4, so I can't find anything good for it. Other than arbitrarily saying "this set uses MON3" and "this set uses MON5", there's nothing really to work from. I suppose I could do that, but I'd have to decide which "groups" get what mixture. I don't remove them because I don't want to interfere at all with RealFuels proper. That's not the intent of the config set. I'm already doing enough damage with the stinkin' catch-all config, I really don't want to try and support altering the fuel list. It shouldn't be that big of a deal, 90% of the time I use the autofill options anyway. It's not like you couldn't write a config to just remove them from your own install either. I'm just not going to do that for this config due to the support problems it would cause. As to why they are there: because they are real fuels. It's really for the RO config set, IMO, so that different engines can use the proper fuels they were designed for. Others are there for nice what-ifs that you couldn't (or shouldn't) test in real life, like the flourine/chlorine mix. I don't plan on tossing in a fuel mix just because it's there. Almost all of the engines I know of use kerolox, hydrolox, or hydrazine-derivative/N204-derivative. There's a few methalox engines coming, and the Russians used some scary stuff (i.e. UDMH/IRFNA). Other than that, there's solid fuels and some monopropellants (helium, HTP, etc). All of those mixtures have at least one example in the configs. Granted, you'd probably need 64-bit KSP on Linux to even load all of the engines, but you get to pick what mods you use. Which leads me to RE: Extra Configs - The reason I picked those is because, well, that's what I use. Selfish, probably, but I initially wanted to keep the mod-list to a minimum for that particular project. But, I can probably expand it anyway. I used to use NovaPunch a ton in my rockets. The only thing that bugs me is the artwork; NP just doesn't look right to me when compared with KW, AIES, and even stock. NP also felt a bit more powerful than they should be to me. I kept coming back to particular engines to use every time because I couldn't beat the performance with anything else. And as for types, KW, NP, FASA, and SXT have J2 engines, and even the 5-engine layout used for the Saturn V. (Ok, FASA doesn't have it, but you can make it) I like variety, so I make them all a bit different in my configs. FASA I try and keep closest to "real life" because it's explicitly trying to model real engines in KSP. The KW Wildcat XR is essentially the back-end of the S-IV stage (which obviously is a J2), but it's not specifically the J2. If anything, they've all ripped off real engines. (the Ariane engine in KW?!?) Unfortunately, since I don't use NP, I can't really test any upgraded versions at this point. I'd be happy to add some uprated engines, certainly. If you want to set up some configs on the webapp using the original engines as a base, use the new submit function to send them to me. Just leave a note here or something letting me know which ones you've sent. The above goes for anyone as well. I won't say I'll use everything, but I'd certainly appreciate some suggestions.

I'm going to just go with this for now. I'll try and add something a little less broad later, but it will fix the problem. Also, some good news! I've added the ability to submit new engines and tweaked engines directly to me from the webapp. So, if you add an engine from an unsupported mod, it can be added to the webapp quickly. Previously, I'd need to manually create the engine in my app and figure out what values were entered to get the config. This way, I can keep the app up to date without spending a lot of time on it. At the bottom of the engine page, you'll see a submit button. Click that when you're done, and I'll be alerted and be able to add them to the app. Do note, this does not replace submitting a pull request on GitHub. Thanks to all who have helped me out with new engines (especially Tantares...), I really appreciate the help. And some more good news. I've added SRB thrust curves to the options when we're setting up solid motor mixture configs. So, you should be able to create up to 7 different curves for your SRBs and select them like a fuel mixture in the VAB/SPH. I haven't fully tested this one yet, so if you want to hit the webapp (http://bit.ly/rfstockalike) and run some tests, it'd help out. There are 6 curves (plus the "stock" non-curve) you can choose from. I'd like to thank Felbourn for creating the config-ready data for these curves. For visual reference, curves are here: http://www.braeunig.us/space/pics/fig1-14.gif They should be described within the options, as well. All curves will start at half thrust, and quickly ramp up to full. At the end of the burn, you'll have 1% thrust for the last 1% of your fuel load. So you'll have to stage them away prior to them burning out, but that should make them a bit easier to clear from your craft. The curves are not final, so if you have suggestions, please let me know. EDIT: Err, the curves aren't working at the moment. If you try it, make sure to add "curveResource = SolidFuel". I forgot it in the webapp. It'll be fixed soon, though.

So, quick question: is it possible to use the RealPlume configs without RO? And if so, how much of a pain is it going to be? I like HotRockets, but it bugs me that they don't react to ambient pressure/vacuum (especially because SmokeScreen can do that). I think I could probably just pull the appropriate folders out of the RO install and run those, but I wanted to see if I was forgetting anything.

Well, yes, but KSPI really needs an engine config if it's going to overwrite fuels after the fact. I really don't have the knowledge on KSPI and/or the systems it aims to simulate (much less the extra time) to figure out appropriate configs and numbers for it. The normal chemical engines (like the aluminum-hybrid and the methalox engines) are easy enough, but stuff like the MPD engines or the fusion drive are way above my pay grade. I could just add a :NEEDS[!WarpPlugin] to the fuel override, but only a handful of engines need the block. Doing it that way would nullify the catch-all for every engine in the game if KSPI is installed. I could add those specific engines to a config that adds the LiquidFuel back in, but that amounts to doing a KSPI config outright anyway. If any of you have some bright ideas I can try, I'm all ears. The only alternative that I can see is to add a RFStockalike-specific tag that gets checked for in these catch-alls, that when present prevents the override from happening. Essentially, the catch-all would pass over the part with this flag. Thoughts?

Sites like astronautix.com generally give the F/O ratio on whatever engine you're looking up. Generally, I'll do a Google search for a specific engine (say "RL-10 rocket engine" or "RD-180 rocket engine" or something). Either Wikipedia (which has been pretty accurate so far) or astronautix.com come up most often, and they usually have the numbers you need. Also, might be useful to Google the rocket the engine is used on (say "Centaur upper stage rocket" or "Russian Proton rocket"), since many engines are tied to the rocket they were used on. Research takes a while, especially if you have an obscure engine. But, if you know the fuels and the mass ratio, you can derive the flow rates in volume for KSP. It's a bit of a pain to do it manually, but there are two tools that can help. NathanKell has a XLS file that he used to generate a bunch of engines for his RftS thread/pack, which will get you everything you need to get configs out. If you don't like spreadsheets, I made an online tool for generating configs based on the XLS here: http://bit.ly/rfstockalike Both of them will do the messy math for you and give you some cues as to what numbers are appropriate. At the end you'll get usable engine configs to add to your own ModuleManager config.

Well, that's odd because in the KSPI part file, it uses LiquidFuel. (ref: https://github.com/FractalUK/KSPInterstellar/blob/master/GameData/WarpPlugin/Parts/Engines/MPD/part0.cfg#L153) Anything that has a ModuleEngine* module that uses LiquidFuel gets changed to Kerosene with the catch-all. So unfortunately, the MPD thruster gets switched. I don't use KSPI, so I don't remember exactly what it's original state works like. But, if it actually breaks, you can write a specific config for it and it will not use the catch-all.

Only procedural wing I know of that can carry fuels is B9's, and those already have the "passive" heatshield (and a darn good one at that). You might be able to get away with just adding the AblativeShielding to the tank definition(s) via ModuleManager. Or create a new one and add it to the typeAvailable in the wing part. Yes, it's normal. The engines in RF are set up very carefully (both in configs and in the plugin code), and having them use TweakScale would throw all kinds of craziness into the mix.

RealFuels deals with the resources specifically, I just use them. And yes, there are a bunch I don't use. For example: MON* is essentially N2O4. By definition, MON3 is a 97% N2O4/3% Nitric Oxide mix. So, for all practical purposes, you can call it N2O4. Plus, I've only ever found 1 engine in my research that has been noted to use MON3 (or any MON*). And all of the scary, nightmare fuels I'd rather not even touch. And, frankly, there's no real tradeoff to use any of these fuels since toxicity isn't really modeled. Do note, however, that I do use Ethanol75 on the FASA Redstone engine, the SXT Black Arrow engines, and the LV-T30 engine. That mix got some love in the last few updates. Also, methalox got into a few engines; specifically, SpaceY ones. I'm working on a set of extra configs that will take existing engines and either rescale them for another size, or be an upgrade of the engine. This is especially helpful to people with a ton of part mods who can't get a lot of the engines (like me ). But, also adds some alternate engines into the pot. And while we're here, does anyone have some suggestions? Any holes in their engine list they need filled? I'm hopefully going to limit this to Stock/NASAMission, FASA, KW, and SXT engines. Possibly AIES. That'll give enough variety but doesn't break the bank mod-wise. I've already got upgraded F1 and J2 in FASA (thrust/Isp bumps), and a smaller KW SPS engine.

There is a way to do this, I just worked it out the other day. You can do something like this: @PART[*]:HAS[@MODULE[REGO_ModuleResourceConverter]] { @MODULE[REGO_ModuleResourceConverter],* { @RecipeOutputs ^= :LiquidFuel:UDMH: @RecipeOutputs ^= :Oxidizer:N2O4: } } That should change all LiquidFuel to UDMH and all Oxidizer to N2O4 in any Regolith converter output. It's not pretty, really, but it'll do. More details here: https://github.com/sarbian/ModuleManager/wiki/Module-Manager-Syntax (specifically the regular expression parts) That said, sticking with LiquidFuel and Oxidizer is probably a good thing. One negative about RealFuels is that to use it, every part (especially engines and fuel tanks) needs to be configured to use it properly. You can't just pop in a brand new mod's engines and expect them to work. Using LF/O is one way to at least keep a semblance of compatibility with new mods or ones that you haven't supported officially yet. EDIT: ...which is pretty much what you just said, now that I re-read it.

Hey, can't wait to see the new launch sites!

Modders also have to deal with the thing called "real life", just as we all do. It's still just a game about little green dudes launching crazy rockets. Also, this particular mod is a courtesy, more than anything. You could recreate it by downloading the constituent parts (RSS, 6.4x configs, EVE) and making all the tweaks yourself (extra configs, EVE tweaks, RemoteTech stuff, etc). This is an attempt to make it a little easier to dive in, since doing all that takes a bit of time. Let everyone know if it works for you, so others can follow if they have the same issue.

Holy crap! That's probably big enough that either the code is running into some rounding issues, or it may not be possible to have that much fuel burn that quickly without melting the KSC.

In the Kethane/RealFuels config I set up, conservation of mass is respected (or at least honored...). You just end up having to translate from volume => mass => moles, do your reaction, and figure your moles => mass => volume. The one thing KSP doesn't have out of the box is molar mass, which you need to do that on the fly. Density is a bit easier to use, which is probably why the devs chose that value to store in the resource nodes.

Huzzah! I think I have all the pods working with built-in MFTs with appropriate resources (including ElectricCharge for RPM usage). The FusTek Resupply Pod (which is unmanned) needs its own config, but other than that, you should have editable tanks in all pods with pre-filled hydrazine in place of MonoPropellant, pre-filled ElectricCharge, and pre-filled TACLS resources (if you have that installed). All of this without having to edit any other files in another mod. For those keeping score, all I'm doing is some well-timed edits. If you know what modules appear at specific times in MM's run, you can manipulate what other configs are actually editing and/or removing. You can download this from the repo (link in the OP). I'd like to have a few of you test this before I do another release, just to make sure I'm not missing anything. This Fuel_Conversion.cfg is the biggest MM thing I've had to deal with. (Special shout out to sippyfrog who is the original author on the conversion file! Thanks again!)

Cool. Thanks for the effort. I'll get back to this properly once I can get the Stockalike stuff to my liking.

Make sure everything is up to date. RF has some issues with tanks not wanting to delete properly. It's also usually safer to do the tanks within the tank GUI, and not the right-click menu. It's not game breaking, you just have to abide by some house rules. That part of the config will actually be gone in the next update. I've got it updated to the point of pulling MonoProp and ElectricCharge and placing them in tanks from the start. Just have to fix the TACLS, B9, and SDHI issues. (SDHI hijacks the Mk1-2 pod with static LS resources, so we'd have to knock that out too)

Normally I get 30-60 seconds as my minimum burn times. I'm usually in the range of 1.25-2.5m SRBs though, so if you have some massive 5+ meter SRBs, I'm not sure. Also, you generally don't adjust max thrust directly, you adjust it by burn times and solid fuel amounts. Or at least I do. Logs might be helpful or maybe screenshots to see what's up.

@Nerezza: I'm working on that exact problem, and came to the same conclusion. I'm just exploring any way I can get around not having to rename any files... B9 Aerospace also has a conflict with TACLS out of the box. Hopefully, I can figure something out. Might have to pull the Fuel_Conversion.cfg file out of the /RealFuels/ folder and stick it in the /GameData/ and rename it zzzFuel_Conversion.cfg or something to make sure it runs at the very end, and rebuild everything you need. Also, thanks for the troubleshooting help. Tellion: I haven't had any RPM issues (Mac OS X Yosemite, 32-bit KSP), so I'm a little stumped. Stockalike shouldn't even be touching anything to do with RPM, so I'm not sure what could be conflicting. The only difference I see is you're running 64-bit, but the Linux version is stable. I haven't studied your logs yet, so once I get a chance I'll look over those. I'm not great at reading them, honestly, but maybe something will jump out!

RSS needs to be installed before 6.4x does. Once RSS is up, you need to remove the .obj files from the PluginData folder within the RSS folder, and then install 6.4x. You also don't need the RSS textures with 6.4x, since it uses the stock textures. I don't think having them will cause issues, but they'll waste RAM if they are there. First time you load, it'll generate those .obj files (which will take a long time, maybe 20 minutes). The OP of the 6.4x thread hasn't been updated with new install instructions, sorry. If you're installing 64K, then the install is different, so refer to that thread for install instructions.

There was only one file that I found that was affected in RealFuels. Looks like it's already been taken care of in the repository, so you can download from there.

Hydrazine needs a ServiceModule or RCS tank. Normal Default tanks don't carry it.