Behemot

It depends on your staging: I prefer to at the very most, get to Kerbin orbit with preceding stages and than while out of atmosphere, take use of the NERVs as it has best fuel efficiency so it is also lighter to actually get into space. However, the smallest usable punch for such ~50ton load (that includes the engines and fuel) seems to be about 3 of them as maneuvering around gets slightly painful with less of them. Getting any reasonable acceleration takes too much time…with 4 NERVs, accelerating to close Mun encounter with clockwise orbit takes about 2,5 minutes real-time burn. With just 2 engines that would be (considering the lower weight) something like 4,5 minutes. If I'd try to endevour for going into deep space with this, I could let it run on the background and go to do something else However that is nice idea with the decoupling of the engines. It is true that fuel crossfeed works nice for some time now (I still remember when you had to put the fuel pipes over pretty much every adapter and so, these days I have not used single piece of fuel piping for years) so that may actually work very well. I can already see use for some other adapters than just TVR-400L Stack Quad-Adapter. Actually, another suggestion for devs comes right from this: I see pretty much no coupling adapters from Extra Large (Kerbodyne), 3.75m parts to anything else (rather than the Kerbodyne ADTP-2-3 tank), are there going to be some in some of the next releases? If not, possibly you can think about that? Some bi, tripple and quad Rockomaxx adapters come to mind right away, and, obviously, also quintiple, sextuple, septuple (at least) small (1.25) sized attachment nodes. When at that, just making larger nuclear engine would also be nice, lol.

DStaal: You do, just got whacked by experimental small tank when loading some of my ancient ships, one of the Mk3 removed ones I believe (replaced by FT-400 or FT-800 LF variant).

I only use it rarely on Kerbin to collect some science, but will likely make some of that for some fun on other objects with atmosphere, si it may come in handy Don't need it right away so I'll just research it later, np.

Right you are! I got the LF unlocked (and now removed) and the RF (LFO) not yeat reasearched, it is the "Experimental Aerodynamics" node.

Could that actually be the problem? That I have the LFO Mk3 Fuselage and it has been removed, so it conflicts and makes the rocket fual variant Mk Fuselage disappear? Looky:

Got this: Kerbal Space Program\GameData\Squad\Parts\FuelTank\mk3Fuselage In MM cache: UrlConfig { name = mk3FuselageLFO_25 type = PART parentUrl = Squad/Parts/FuelTank/mk3Fuselage/LFO_25 PART { name = mk3FuselageLFO_25 module = Part author = Porkjet rescaleFactor = 1.0 node_stack_top = 0.0, 1.25, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 3 node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -1.25, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0, 3 node_attach = 1.63, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1 TechRequired = experimentalAerodynamics entryCost = 21000 cost = 2500 category = FuelTank subcategory = 0 title = Mk3 Rocket Fuel Fuselage Short manufacturer = C7 Aerospace Division description = A compact fuel tank for when the rest of your craft is taken up by cargo bays! attachRules = 1,1,1,1,0 mass = 1.79 dragModelType = default maximum_drag = 0.2 minimum_drag = 0.3 angularDrag = 1 crashTolerance = 50 maxTemp = 2700 emissiveConstant = 0.87 fuelCrossFeed = True bulkheadProfiles = srf, mk3 breakingForce = 300 breakingTorque = 300 tags = fueltank ?lfo liquid oxidizer propellant tank MODEL { model = Squad/Parts/FuelTank/mk3Fuselage/LFO_25 } MODULE { name = ModuleSimpleFuelSwitch } MODULE { name = ModuleSwitchableResources resourcesId = liquid_fuel_oxidizer displayName = LFO selectorFieldName = Fuel Type isDefault = true RESOURCE { name = LiquidFuel amount = 1125 maxAmount = 1125 } RESOURCE { name = Oxidizer amount = 1375 maxAmount = 1375 } } MODULE { name = ModuleSwitchableResources resourcesId = liquid_fuel_only displayName = LF selectorFieldName = Fuel Type RESOURCE { name = LiquidFuel amount = 2500 maxAmount = 2500 } } } } However, nothing in the game (not in space plane hangar either), can I upload an image here around it somewhere? There is at least one existing tank in the game on my Mun space station which fortunatelly have not disappeared or bursted into flames. But I can not see any such part in the part menu in the hangar editor.

I totaly understand the duplicit parts, the short fuselage are the same so sure. What I mean are the large ones, what's the name…ah, here: Mk3 Liquid Fuel Fuselage Short, Mk3 Liquid Fuel Fuselage, Mk3 Liquid Fuel Fuselage Long. I would understand if you removed these three, but I can not find the Mk3 Rocket Fuel Fuselage either, I mean, the whole family is gone. But this Mk3 thing has different shape and thus also different volume than Rockomaxx tanks. They are not the same parts! Kinda miss those. I do not want the duplicit parts - just these Mk3 Fuselage tanks…

Thank you sir for the mod, makes many things much easier. I do however have a question…why are the Mk 3 tanks removed? They may have the same volume, but slightly different shape than Rockomaxx, so…

Since we don't really have an idea what is the idea behind the nuclear engines in KSP, I don't think so Besides, they do not differentiate hydrogen, kerosine, hydrazine or anything else, it's all just liquid fuel/oxidiser, the one and only. Although having the remote fuel tank near the launch pad suggest it may be hydrogen, but who knows. As for the engines themselves, I think that weighting 3 tons and only producing 60 kN is trade-off just enough. On the contrary, limited offer of tanks at the moment does not allow full use of them, or at least not really an elegant one. It can move 50ton vehicle just about enough in space using four of them, but the engines themselves than weight 12 tons of that. So far I am using the medium Mk3 tank and 2,5m capsule directly on top of it, but a combination of small Rockomaxx tanks plus the adapter would likely yield the same effect (due to better aerodynamic shape, not being so bulky etc.). Tonka Crash: thanks for the tip! that solves it for now…hopefully devs will implement this in at least some partial form, I think this is pretty much basic stuff you would expect so as such, it should get in the game sooner or later

Hello world I often use atomic engines in KSP but it seems the offer of liquid fuel (only) tanks is still kinda limited in KSP. Dragging totaly useless oxidizer all the way who knows where is not really a good idea when you have no use for it, on the other hand with only a couple of existing tanks ships tend to get unnecessarilly large and bulky. So what would especially help would be Mk3 to 2.5m Adapter liquid-fuel only variant. Or possibly even converting Rockomaxx tanks to liquid-fuel only variants as well, together with Kerbodyne ADTP-2-3.

Kdo jeÅ¡tÄ› nevidÄ›l, pÃ…â„¢ihÃ…â„¢eju si polívÄÂiÄÂku - recenze http://diit.cz/clanek/kerbal-space-program-ksp-recenze

Reactor s c

Přesně u těch předpokládám, že to tak zůstane. Znaj ironii?

You opening first space gas station there?

Been experimenting with monster booster using SuperJet engines, they are way more effective than liquid fuel engines…and besides that, driving around Mun with Jebediah

You may see. Private company (besides Russia) is now the cosmic leader and private companies are mostly the best way to organise things. You already heard how much cheaper they can get stuff into space than all these bloody (multi)national agencies?

This thing stull holds together…more or less You have to launch it by the time engines get 90 kN thrust otherwise they will provide so much force it will tear apart. But the whole thread is more like about the fact there actually exists possibility to not only use jet engines for shuttles, but actually for boosting rockets up to 21 km altitude, as a first stage, much more efficient than liquid engines. I am feeding ten engines per fuel can here… http://www.hwworld.cz/files/Test.craft

Vo co Å¡lo se starou diskusí? Jinak je v plánu nÄ›jaká oficiální ÄÂeÅ¡tina, abych se případnÄ› pÃ…â„¢idal? Pokud ne, mám v plánu je s tím oslovit, že by se to zaÄÂalo pÃ…â„¢ekládat a v nÄ›jaké pozdÄ›jší verzi tÃ…â„¢eba pÃ…â„¢ihodilo do možností instalace ÄÂi tak. Navíc u každé vÄ›ci na wiki je uveden oficiální text ze hry, takže o to rychleji se to dá dÄ›lat aÃ…Â¥ už se to objeví prvnÄ› kdekoli.

OK, things get messy with 21 engines but that's problem of the upper part, I am still experimenting with the rover itself, now it is attached in the middle of the upper part. But it did not lose structural integrity in the test flight though Got almost 3,9 MN maximum thrust and still plenty of fuel left… Can I remove that later? I just don't want it to mess my savegames…can copy the game folder to somewhere else and experiment though.

This is the most hardcore version so far with 18 SuperJet engines. It still has some fuel left in 3 tanks when engines drop off because lack of air. Weight is somewhat over 80 tons but I can get thrust way over 2 MN and speed exceeding 600 mps at 21 kilometers Those 3 solid boosters can get me to 100 km altitude and those three liquid fuel engines are enough to accelerate to orbital speed. The rest has about 30 tons and can get to Mun surface. Still tweaking how to spare enough fuel to get me back But I only need to spare maybe 100 units or so. Using atomic engine is not that much better over some of the other more efficient engines as you have to carry over 2 tons (= to acelerate them, deccelare them etc., especialy landing costs much fuel when Mun is pulling you down) the whole trip where other engines weight fraction of that.

I just though I'll share this with you as even the guy who showed me KSP was not aware of this possibility. I have been experimenting with rocket boosting using jet engines and I think it is the best solution in there, way more effective even than liquid fuel engines. I just buiilt ordnary long baby using stack-tricoupler. As the very first stage, there are three jet-fuel cans with 12 TurboJet engines alltogether. The fuel lasts long enough till 20 km where is not air enough to run the jet engines any more. This baby was able to give me aprox. 1,4 MN initial force (after running for aprox. 10 seconds before you release docking clamps) with more than 2 MN and 600 mps speed at 21 kilometers. This all weights just 80 tons and I still carry three bloody long solid boosters which will take me from 20 kilometers above. Ordinary rocket with liquid fuel engines of similar performance I've built so far started with more than 150 tons! Can share images if you want but it does not really matter how your rocket looks like, the engines are important This is all with basic modules, no modifications even needed. if there are some advanced jet engines out there (haven't looked yet), than this would be even better.

Yeah I've tried modelating on new vehicle just for sure and noticed that…OK, I can probably send new tanker, but having only one dock at station will hurt future usability… So maybe a small hack… There are those fancy orientation parameters in save file, I think it should help to switch one or two numbers, right?

It seems that my Orbital 1 station has broken one port and thinks something is still attached so I cannot dock to either of it's two ports with the tanker. Here are images, both prots are facing same way, I can see black and yellow stripes on the wheel. Any way how to fix that?