Raptor831

I've just updated the OP with the new config. Try that and see where you end up. The last engine in the file is your bimodal NTR from the Copernicus pack, so look there if you start tweaking. The newest RF and newest PP should work just fine with this config. The conditional is essentially a future-proof suggested to me by swamp_ig. Basically, in the future it will tie those configs with this stockalike setup to prevent double edits. And it shouldn't affect anything at this point, because the FOR condition is just an information flag to MM (if I understand correctly). NEEDS is the "You have to have this folder/mod" one. As long as there's only one RF engine config, you should be good. Well, most of my info is from Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Astronautica. I trust them enough to make reasoned estimations. May have to look at that site, though. For everyone, the new config and XLS are up. I've adjusted the solid motors to better reflect accurate weights of the casings (i.e. I read the instructions, so the dry-mass was increased). Also, I've added a new engine or two from the listed mods like the new SuperDracos from LazTek. Lastly for the config, I've updated the fuel/oxidizer types to match the spreadsheet (with RLA moved to the 'UK' section). If you've got current missions those engines should be ok since the info is stored in the persistence file, but you might want to make a backup of your saves just to be safe. You have been warned! The XLS has some new goodies, like the ability to choose ModuleEngines or ModuleEnginesFX (some engines can choke if it's the wrong one and you have certain mods, like HotRockets! installed), and to set up multi-modal rockets (i.e. bimodal NTRs). It was tested with bi-modals, but as long as RF can handle tri-modal, it won't stop you. YMMV. As always, let me know if you find errors/bugs or if you have suggestions.

Does the RF "stock" bimodal NTR work for you? I may have to download that particular part and test with it, since I don't use that pack currently. Also, I do have a new config coming with that engine (along with a bunch of other tweaks), so I may just need to release that finally. I'll try to do that tonight after work.

Yeah, looks like the folder got missed when it was packaged. BTW, love these parts. I can actually use the Mk2 stock pieces now.

Double checked the original config again, and you are correct. Didn't realize he set up the engine that way. You should be able to duplicate the changes to the first half to apply to the second half using MM's indexing. So, replicate the @MODULE node and put @MODULE[ModuleEngineFX],1 on the first and @MODULE[ModuleEngineFX],2 on the second. It should "work" for now. I'll have to check it out and see if there's a nice way to accommodate that in the XLS. Can't say that I've seen two different engines within the same part before. Thanks for the insight. I'm certainly no expert in these matters, so I appreciate the feedback. I read NathanKell stating that in his Reaching for the Stars alternate history he'd kept the UK using non-toxic fuels, so I was avoiding that given that MonoPropellant is generally assumed to be Hydrazine. Sounds like I had RLA in the best spot anyway, though.

Wow! Just found a link to this thread (thanks Nathan!) and followed this to the Eyes Turned Skyward wiki. Very cool. Would love to see some of that ingame.

There should only be 1 mode/half for the aerospike. Sounds like it's using both the ModuleEngines and ModuleEnginesFX. In the config, change the @MODULE[ModuleEngines] to @MODULE[ModuleEngineFX] for that particular engine and let me know if it works properly.

Shameless plug: You could use the stockalike RF config I'm working on, and you'll get realistic engines at kerbal sizes. (link: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/81239-Stockalike-RF-Engine-Configs) I'd definitely have NovaPunch or SXT (or even FASA engines) though, as the 5m engines will help when you're slinging larger payloads. You could also swipe the XLS from that thread and roll your own configs (as regex mentioned) and tune to your liking. If you do that, let me know how it goes.

Wanted to post an update on progress with regards to fuel types. Here's the "companies" I've broken everything down into: *NOTE: I goofed on the Nitric Acid and have it incorrectly labeled as NO2. Basically, I took some real space agencies/companies and looked at their rockets to see which fuels they commonly use. I checked Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Astronautica mostly for my specifics. The fuel/oxidizer ratios are based on what was already in the XLS to begin with as a standard, actual engine ratios, or a list of fuel/oxidizer combinations with their ideal ratio listed (then edited in line with other engines). For which mods get put into which category, I just picked them based on what I thought was a best fit. So, KOSMOS is a Russian-type, AIES is an ESA-type, HGR is a Chinese-type, etc. SXT is kind of in the middle, since it does both NASA-type parts and Russian-type parts. I dropped that in the Russian category because FASA has most of the space race era covered for NASA, and I was leaning toward variety. The only glaring problem is that I can't find a mod to fit the "UK"-style of non-toxic only fuels. I originally had RLA there, but that has so many monopropellant engines that it didn't make sense to me. I really wanted to include as many fuel types as possible (which is partially why I added a Methane/LOX mixture to the "SpaceX" category), so not using Kerosene/HTP is bugging me, even if it is/was rarely used. I would have used some MON* oxidizers as well, but I didn't find any solid data about its use and Astronautica apparently just calls it N2O4 anyway (ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSLV vs http://www.astronautix.com/engines/pslv4.htm ). All that said, please do leave any comments/suggestions you might have about this. I'm also wondering on "monopropellant" engines (RLA and Space Shuttle Engine mod's OMS engines) whether to default the mixtures to Hydrazine, HTP, and some MMH(UDMH)/N2O4 mix. Which would relegate the stock MonoPropellant to RCS systems entirely, unless you get the RO configs for RCS and ModuleRCSFX.

I set wrap = false, and the sun no longer shines through Kerbin, and the solar panels behave as expected (i.e. no power generated on the darkside). Sounds like you found it.

Ok, sounds good. I can say that visually the sun only comes through after a certain height (I believe), though I didn't notice what height it was exactly. Practically, the panels drink juice no matter where they are. In any case, thanks for sharing the config! I don't really want to go full-on RSS/RO, but with RF and FAR stock Kerbin is almost too easy to reach orbit on. This fits the bill perfectly.

I seem to be having an issue with the 6.4 scaled Kerbin system. RSS works just fine with the default config, but when I have the 6.4 scale config loaded with the appropriate .obj files (from the download and re-generated) the sun goes right through Kerbin. Both visually and for solar panel tracking. It can be midnight at the launch site and I'm still in "Direct Sunlight" according to the panel. Did I install the config incorrectly, or could something else be off? Let me know if you need logs.

Personally, the abundance of fuel types isn't a burden, it's more variety in my rockets. I like the idea of having to manage those decisions, like which engine to use, from which "company", and with which fuels to use. True, stuff like toxicity isn't really modeled, and rocket engines aren't built to use multiple fuel types, but I like the fact that I feel like a "real" rocket engineer when building my rockets. SpaceX uses Kerolox for both the 1st and 2nd stage on the Falcon 9, so let's use that. Space Shuttle used Hydrolox for the whole trip, let's check that out. I'm planning on doing some actual research (maybe this weekend) about what fuel types different agencies use and seeing if I can overlay that onto my configs. If enough people would like the RF-lite fuel choices, I can try to swing up an XLS/config for the engines.

I'll look into the RAPIER. For jet engines, you can just switch the LiquidFuel to Kerosene and it'll work fine. Alternatively, go download Advanced Jet Engine (which does a much better job simulating jets/SABREs) which will take care of it all. Each "company" at the moment has its own fuel mixtures, though everyone pretty much uses Kerolox, Hydrolox, MMH/N2O4, or UDMH/N2O4. A few items from FASA use their historical type. I had been pondering other fuel types but haven't looked at what would be appropriate. I figure AIES would be an ESA-ish company. KOSMOS/BobCat's Russian Pack would be (obviously) Russian analogs. Most of the other packs are American in nature (FASA, KW, NovaPunch, SXT, LazTek). I might try to come up with a list of "companies" and their set of preferred fuels and post it here to see what everyone thinks. PS - I think I've got the bi-modal engine option fixed up in the XLS, so the next update will allow you to set up bi-modal engines if you want. Might be able to cook up something for RAPIERs/SABREs as well...

Not a problem. If you have any suggestions, please do let me know.

It appears that adding type = ModuleEnginesFX did the trick. Worked as expected then.

The quick way to fix this is to just add the TAC LS resources to the tank definition, and adjust the volume of the tank in the part. Say, something like this: @TANK_DEFINITION[FusTekResupply_RearSection]:NEEDS[TacLifeSupport] { %TANK[Water] { %amount = 0.0 %maxAmount = 0.0 %utilization = 1 %mass = 0.000016 } %TANK[WasteWater] { %amount = 0.0 %maxAmount = 0.0 %utilization = 1 %mass = 0.000016 } %TANK[Food] { %amount = 0.0 %maxAmount = 0.0 %utilization = 1 %mass = 0.000016 } %TANK[Waste] { %amount = 0.0 %maxAmount = 0.0 %utilization = 1 %mass = 0.000016 } %TANK[Oxygen] { %amount = 0.0 %maxAmount = 0.0 %utilization = 798 %mass = 0.000016 %note = (pressurized) } %TANK[CarbonDioxide] { %amount = 0.0 %maxAmount = 0.0 %utilization = 49 %mass = 0.000016 %note = (pressurized) } } And in the part MM config, change the tank addition to something like this: MODULE { name = ModuleFuelTanks volume = 320 type = FusTekResupply_RearSection } Won't separate the part into pressurized/unpressurized sections, but it does get the job done. Also, you can set the max amount of any one resource in the tank definition to mimic two sections. The utilization numbers may need to be tweaked for TAC LS numbers, as those are based off of 1 unit = 1 liter and TAC currently uses the 1 unit = 1 kerbal-day-ration. But they'll be close enough to make it feel right, I think.

Does the ModuleHybridEngines work with ModuleEngineFX? I'm doing a proof-of-concept on getting bi-modal NTRs into the XLS for the stockalike configs, and I can't seem to make it work. I even ran through the standard RF bi-modal LV-N line by line to compare, and the only thing of note I noticed that was different was the ModuleEngineFX. In-game none of the RF menus work, but the part hover lists the current (correct) fuel config and the correct modes. Also, logfile spams this error when the engine is attached in the VAB: (Filename: Line: -1) NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object at RealFuels.ModuleEngineConfigs.SetThrust () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at RealFuels.ModuleHybridEngine.FixedUpdate () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 It's certainly possible I'm just doing it wrong, so please let me know if that is the case. Here's the applicable part of the config: @PART[ltby5000]:FOR[RealFuels_StockEngines] //LtBY 12K { @mass = 0.2 @maxTemp = 2828 @MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX] { @maxThrust = 12 @heatProduction = 291 @atmosphereCurve { @key,0 = 0 960 @key,1 = 1 429 } !PROPELLANT[LiquidFuel] {} !PROPELLANT[Oxidizer] {} !PROPELLANT[MonoPropellant] {} PROPELLANT { name = LiquidH2 ratio = 100 DrawGauge = True } } MODULE { name = ModuleHybridEngine techLevel = 7 origTechLevel = 7 engineType = N origMass = 0.2 configuration = LiquidH2 modded = false runningEffectName = run_ltby thrustVectorTransformName = exhaust exhaustDamage = True ignitionThreshold = 0.1 CONFIG { name = LiquidH2 maxThrust = 12 heatProduction = 291 PROPELLANT { name = LiquidH2 ratio = 1 DrawGauge = True } PROPELLANT { name = nuclearFuel ratio = 0.00000000001 } IspSL = 1 IspV = 1 throttle = 0 ModuleEngineIgnitor { name = ModuleEngineIgnitor ignitionsAvailable = 0 autoIgnitionTemperature = 800 ignitorType = Electric useUllageSimulation = true IGNITOR_RESOURCE { name = ElectricCharge amount = 0.12 } } } CONFIG { name = LiquidH2+LiquidOxygen maxThrust = 98.4 heatProduction = 291 runningEffectName = run_ltby thrustVectorTransformName = exhaust exhaustDamage = True ignitionThreshold = 0.1 PROPELLANT { name = LiquidH2 ratio = 1 DrawGauge = True } PROPELLANT { name = nuclearFuel ratio = 0.00000000001 } IspSL = 0.6941 IspV = 0.6941 throttle = 0 ModuleEngineIgnitor { name = ModuleEngineIgnitor ignitionsAvailable = 0 autoIgnitionTemperature = 800 ignitorType = Electric useUllageSimulation = true IGNITOR_RESOURCE { name = ElectricCharge amount = 0.12 } } } } !MODULE[ModuleEngineIgnitor] {} MODULE { name = ModuleEngineIgnitor ignitionsAvailable = -1 autoIgnitionTemperature = 800 ignitorType = Electric useUllageSimulation = true IGNITOR_RESOURCE { name = ElectricCharge amount = 0.12 } } !MODULE[ModuleAlternator] {} !MODULE[ModuleGenerator] {} !RESOURCE[nuclearFuel] {} !RESOURCE[nuclearWaste] {} MODULE { name = ModuleAlternator OUTPUT_RESOURCE { name = nuclearFuel rate = -0.000000000000000001 } OUTPUT_RESOURCE { name = nuclearWaste rate = 0.000000000000000001 } OUTPUT_RESOURCE { name = ElectricCharge rate = 0.6 } } MODULE { name = ModuleGenerator isAlwaysActive = true OUTPUT_RESOURCE { name = ElectricCharge rate = 0.3 } OUTPUT_RESOURCE { name = nuclearWaste rate = 0.000000000000000001 } INPUT_RESOURCE { name = nuclearFuel rate = 0.000000000000000001 } } RESOURCE { name = nuclearFuel amount = 1 maxAmount = 1 } RESOURCE { name = nuclearWaste amount = 0 maxAmount = 1 } }

That's something I can add to the config. I'm working on a way to add bi-modal engines to the XLS to automate the process, so I'll update the configs once that happens. In the meantime, you can swipe the Real Fuels engine configs from the RSS version of the Copernicus pack. Be sure you've got the latest version of Real Fuels. Go to the last posts in that thread to get the latest bugfix version (6.1) and, as swamp_ig mentioned a few posts ago, it should fix it.

TweakScale would be a good candidate to check. I honestly don't know how that one works, so I can't say for sure. Can you check and/or post the player_log file for any errors? Might help you narrow down the search.

I noticed that after the fact. Always helps if I, ya know, read the instructions beforehand. :facepalm: Which is my experience as well.

Just for reference, here's a list of the non-part mods I'm using, and the config should work fine with: FAR, DRE, TAC Life Support, RF (obviously), HotRockets (and Smokescreen), AJE, Procedural Fairings/Wings/Parts, Firespitter (dll), KAS, RealChute, ScanSAT, MechJeb, Infernal Robotics, Space Shuttle Engines by dtobi. Part packs shouldn't be an issue unless they come with custom plugins.

Try this: go into the config and remove any line that says "dedicated = true". You can search-and-replace it with TextEdit or Notepad. If you've got both the config from today and RF 6.1 it shouldn't be the reason, but I'll double check on my end.

Specifically, any mods that might touch the engine configs. The Stockalike config should add the appropriate nuclear fuels to the NTRs, but if for some reason another mod with MM configs removes it, then it would be dead in the water. If there are any errors in the log, those might be helpful too. And that's a bummer about your internet. I was without landline internet for 2.5 months (had to build the infrastructure to get cable internet out here), so I know what it's like!

I've updated the config and the XLS to include the M1 and RL-10 from the FASA beta release, and the G-120 from the HGR beta. In addition, I've re-instated the dedicated = true line for all engine/tank combos (SRBs and parts like FASA's Centaur or SXT's LEM ascent/descent stages). This should match the tanks to the fuel type for the engine automatically. This does require Real Fuels v6.x, so please update that as well. @Shad0wCatcher: I double checked the config on my end, and the NTRs seem to work fine. I test fired all of the FTmN engines, the STX NTRs, and the stock LV-N, and they all worked for me and had proper (i.e. scaled to size) nuclearFuel amounts. Try this latest config with RF 6.x and see if that helps. If you're still having trouble, what other mods do you have running?

I assumed (incorrectly) that the number I was seeing in the XLS was going directly into the EI config. Because I don't use EI I didn't realize it before, but you only get multiple ignitions if you use hypergolic fuels on non-vacuum engines (or at least you're supposed to). I've made some tweaks in the configs to ensure some engines always have multiple ignitions, including the KR-2L. Mostly, anything that is a J2 or supposed to be a J2-type-clone, since that's something everyone expects to be restartable. I haven't posted it yet, as I want to test the new FASA beta-release engines in my configs and check a few other things. New version should be up tomorrow, if all goes well.