[1.12.x] Cryogenic Engines: Liquid Hydrogen and Methane Rockets! (August 13, 2024)

[Nertea]

Here's version 0.4.3

• Marked for KSP 1.2.1
• Updated MM to 2.7.4
• Updated CRP to 0.6.3
• KPBS ISRU now produces LH2 (thanks Wyzard256)

[Dazpoet]

I feel compelled to use these not only because they're fun to use but also due to the amazing plumes (hoping that's the right word for what comes out of the engine)

[Stratickus]

On 11/16/2016 at 8:28 PM, Rodger said:

@Stratickus I got it working, It seems like it was a MM order thing:

Thanks, seems to be working fine.

Cheers,

[Falcon Coupe]

I held off using this mod for a while because I didn't want to have to deal with a new fuel type, but I do really like the engines.

One request though, is it possible to have the liquid hydrogen fuel available in procedural tanks? Or am I better asking in the procedural parts thread?

[blowfish]

1 hour ago, Falcon Coupe said:

I held off using this mod for a while because I didn't want to have to deal with a new fuel type, but I do really like the engines.

One request though, is it possible to have the liquid hydrogen fuel available in procedural tanks? Or am I better asking in the procedural parts thread?

I'm confused.  The Procedural Parts mod comes with procedural tank parts, and is probably the most known mod that includes them.  Are you referring to a different mod?

Edited November 21, 2016 by blowfish

[Falcon Coupe]

5 hours ago, blowfish said:

I'm confused.  The Procedural Parts mod comes with procedural tank parts, and is probably the most known mod that includes them.  Are you referring to a different mod?

Sorry, I do use Procedural Parts. what I would like is to be able to fuel switch them to be able to fill them with Liquid Hydrogen instead of just the stock Liquid Fuel and Oxidiser.

[blowfish]

5 hours ago, Falcon Coupe said:

Sorry, I do use Procedural Parts. what I would like is to be able to fuel switch them to be able to fill them with Liquid Hydrogen instead of just the stock Liquid Fuel and Oxidiser.

There is a patch which should allow cryogenic tanks on procedural tanks.  If it's not working, then it's a bug.  Could you please do the following?

• In your GameData folder, delete ModuleManager.ConfigCache
• Start KSP and wait for it to get to the menu screen
• Find KSP.log (in your KSP root folder) and GameData/ModuleManager.ConfigCache and upload them somewhere we can see.

If you can provide that information, we should be able to debug the issue.

Edited November 21, 2016 by blowfish

[Benji13]

Could you please add a mk2 hydrogen tank? You know, for SSTO's? Also, can someone please explain the case for and against with these engines. I understand that they have higher isp and lower twr that chemical rockets but I don't understand the whole 'more tank volume mass size fuel weight stuff garble burp'. Thanks,

Benji13. 

[Nertea]

6 hours ago, Benji13 said:

Could you please add a mk2 hydrogen tank? You know, for SSTO's? Also, can someone please explain the case for and against with these engines. I understand that they have higher isp and lower twr that chemical rockets but I don't understand the whole 'more tank volume mass size fuel weight stuff garble burp'. Thanks,

Benji13. 

There's literally dozens of posts in this thread talking about this. from one page ago there's this:

There's also already a mk2 tank. The fuel switcher should apply the patch to the stock LFO ones by default. 

[Falcon Coupe]

On 22/11/2016 at 2:22 AM, blowfish said:

There is a patch which should allow cryogenic tanks on procedural tanks.  If it's not working, then it's a bug.  Could you please do the following?

• In your GameData folder, delete ModuleManager.ConfigCache
• Start KSP and wait for it to get to the menu screen
• Find KSP.log (in your KSP root folder) and GameData/ModuleManager.ConfigCache and upload them somewhere we can see.

If you can provide that information, we should be able to debug the issue.

I've followed your instructions and here are the two files:

https://1drv.ms/u/s!Al3Ro6d6syEAtHyoVUHtgAV4jvyK

https://1drv.ms/u/s!Al3Ro6d6syEAtH3RQ_EoOscTXzMp

I hope this helps, thanks heaps!

[blowfish]

5 minutes ago, Falcon Coupe said:

I've followed your instructions and here are the two files:

https://1drv.ms/u/s!Al3Ro6d6syEAtHyoVUHtgAV4jvyK

https://1drv.ms/u/s!Al3Ro6d6syEAtH3RQ_EoOscTXzMp

I hope this helps, thanks heaps!

I see the issue.  @Nertea In this patch, it should be checking for Procedural Parts and NOT Modular Fuel tanks: https://github.com/ChrisAdderley/CryoTanks/blob/master/GameData/CryoTanks/Patches/CryoTanksProceduralFuelTanks.cfg#L4

So it should be @PART[procedural*Liquid]:NEEDS[ProceduralParts&!ModularFuelTanks&!RealFuels]:FOR[CryoTanks]

Although the ProceduralParts part isn't strictly necessary because procedural*Liquid should really only match procedural tanks anyway

Edited November 24, 2016 by blowfish

[Falcon Coupe]

13 minutes ago, blowfish said:

I see the issue.  @Nertea In this patch, it should be checking for Procedural Parts and NOT Modular Fuel tanks: https://github.com/ChrisAdderley/CryoTanks/blob/master/GameData/CryoTanks/Patches/CryoTanksProceduralFuelTanks.cfg#L4

So it should be @PART[procedural*Liquid]:NEEDS[ProceduralParts&!ModularFuelTanks&!RealFuels]:FOR[CryoTanks]

I just tested this fix myself and can verify that it works! Thanks heaps!

[rebel-1]

Hi! How to make stock fuel tanks(with interstellar fuel switch mod) was cooling as cryogenic tanks, and hydrogen not boiloff?

If i added "CoolingCost = 0.08" to this section in CryoTanksFuelTankSwitcher.cfg file?

MODULE
    {
        name =  ModuleCryoTank
        FuelName = LqdHydrogen
        // in % per hr
        BoiloffRate = 0.05
    }

Or is it done differently?

[Jashin]

Hi @Nertea !

There seems to be a slight issue with the compatibility patches between Mark IV Spaceplane and Cryogenic Tanks : each time I boot up KSP and ModuleManager kicks in, I'm getting some errors in the log and in the ModuleManager text box.

Here's the excerpt from the log showing all 10 errors: I'm not savvy enough with MM to actually understand much of this unfortunately.

http://pastebin.com/1V73yYQq

It doesn't seem very important, but it's still an error so I figured I'd let you know.

[Nertea]

On 11/24/2016 at 1:04 AM, blowfish said:

I see the issue.  @Nertea In this patch, it should be checking for Procedural Parts and NOT Modular Fuel tanks: https://github.com/ChrisAdderley/CryoTanks/blob/master/GameData/CryoTanks/Patches/CryoTanksProceduralFuelTanks.cfg#L4

So it should be @PART[procedural*Liquid]:NEEDS[ProceduralParts&!ModularFuelTanks&!RealFuels]:FOR[CryoTanks]

Although the ProceduralParts part isn't strictly necessary because procedural*Liquid should really only match procedural tanks anyway

Occupational hazard of ingesting user-provided patches I guess. Logged.

On 11/24/2016 at 2:44 AM, rebel-1 said:

Hi! How to make stock fuel tanks(with interstellar fuel switch mod) was cooling as cryogenic tanks, and hydrogen not boiloff?

If i added "CoolingCost = 0.08" to this section in CryoTanksFuelTankSwitcher.cfg file?

MODULE
    {
        name =  ModuleCryoTank
        FuelName = LqdHydrogen
        // in % per hr
        BoiloffRate = 0.05
    }

Or is it done differently?

That should work.

16 hours ago, Jashin said:

Hi @Nertea !

There seems to be a slight issue with the compatibility patches between Mark IV Spaceplane and Cryogenic Tanks : each time I boot up KSP and ModuleManager kicks in, I'm getting some errors in the log and in the ModuleManager text box.

Here's the excerpt from the log showing all 10 errors: I'm not savvy enough with MM to actually understand much of this unfortunately.

http://pastebin.com/1V73yYQq

It doesn't seem very important, but it's still an error so I figured I'd let you know.

Known issue, won't have any effect on the game. 

[Jashin]

Cool, nevermind then, and thanks a lot for your wonderful mods

[Stratickus]

On 8/27/2016 at 9:16 PM, Stratickus said:

Not sure if its a bug, but the Volcano does not have a description for me other than "Plume configured by RealPlume." All of the rest of the cryo/NFT engines have descriptions. Some with the real plume comment, some without. Could be other mods I have, but the only part that I have found that is affected is the Volcano.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/v2qtjmch8erlevd/20160827211132_1.jpg?dl=0

Pretty minor, but the Volcano still does not have a description. I checked the config file and it is blank, so not a conflict with something else or some sort of formatting error.

Cheers,

[fireball]

Is there a way to get *only* the fuel switching mod without the extra tanks and features? I would simply like to use the 2.5m-to-Mk. 3 fuselage adapter with double liquid fuel for my asteroid scout mission.

Oh also, when changing the fuel type, does it keep the same numbers (e.g. will I get 2500 fuel together like with the Short Fuselage)?

Edited November 28, 2016 by fireball

[rebel-1]

I have install "Near Future Construction" mod. But "octo-truss" structures fuel variants do not have hydrogen and hydrogen/oxidizer fuel option. How add this to?

[Esquire42]

Working on 1.2.1 modded career and figured I'd show off @Nertea's awesome custom plume. Reason to download alone.

[VikingStormtrooper]

Now that KSP 1.2.2 is available, I have tested CryoEngines for KSP 1.2.1 on it; even if the loading screen message says that CryoEngines is no longer compatible with version 1.2.2, it seems that the mod is perfectly working. At least, I did not experience any issue.

If I am right, CryoEngines for KSP 1.2.2 may be just a minor revision.

[Montieth]

Should the 2.5 Meter Tunguska Engine have a lower thrust than the Volcano which is half the size? 

[blowfish]

7 minutes ago, Montieth said:

Should the 2.5 Meter Tunguska Engine have a lower thrust than the Volcano which is half the size? 

Haven't looked at the exact numbers but that sounds reasonable to me.  The Tunguska is an upper stage engine that uses a very large nozzle to get good I_sp.  The Volcano is a lower stage lifter that would need a smaller nozzle to work at sea level.

[MaxL_1023]

The turbo-machinery for each is about the same size - the nozzle and support structure makes up most of the size difference. It is also a balance trade-off between thrust and efficiency. If the upper stage engines were more powerful there would be little reason to use the lifter engines - it would be better to use the upper stage engines as ground-lit sustainers and strap some soilds on to get you off the ground.  Atmospheric pressure drops off fast enough that (at least in RSS scale games) it is often better to use a Vacuum engine quite low in the atmosphere - they often exceed the performance of lifter engines by 10,000m or so. Dirt-cheap SRBs can get you that high in under a minute.

[Montieth]

Ahh, that makes sense. I hadn't realized it was an upper stage motor.