[1.0.5] Behemoth Aerospace Engineering Large Parts v1.3.5 (2015-11-15)

[greystork]

Temeter, I just checked the 5m (yellow) 'Penguin' tanks, and they seem to work as intended. However, what you describe could occur if you try to decouple the tanks before they are empty; they are not designed for that. Although they have built-in decouplers and sepratrons, those are only strong enough to facilitate a clean separation when the tanks have been emptied.

Edit: If you can narrow things down to a problem with BAELP, let me know and I will try to resolve it.

Edited June 3, 2015 by greystork

[Temeter]

Thanks for looking, but i've got the real issue: Interstellar fuel switch. The mod was applied to the penguins and removed the solid fuel.

I'm not sure why the decoupling sometimes worked better or worse (i assume it was minimal clipping during seperation), but all these issues are nullified by working sepratrons. They work indeed perfectly.

So should I just stop using the fuel switch or is there a way to make an excemption?

[greystork]

So should I just stop using the fuel switch or is there a way to make an excemption?

I will have to do a bit of research into that mod to see if there is anything I can do to remedy the problem. In the mean time, perhaps using actual sepratrons could be a quick fix? Or, if you're the crafty type, go into GameData/BAE/TRD5LFO4/BAEdecoupledradialtank5mLFO4.cfg and find where it says 'ejectionForce = 50', then change that to 100 and see what happens.

Edit: If you copied the FireSpitter folder from the ZIP file to your GameData folder, it is likely that FSFuelSwitch is conflicting with InterstellarFuelSwitch. If removing the FireSpitter folder helps, let me know and I'll include a reference to the InterstellarFuelSwitch module in my config files, so the multi-fuel tanks will still work.

Edited June 3, 2015 by greystork

[Overlocker]

Any chance that you can make Size 4, 5 and 6 Fairings? Of course with the color tiers, and I know there's procedural fairings out there, but because this is a stockalike mod it can use the stock fairings system, like SpaceY does with its 5m fairing.

[Life on Europa]

success! got the mod to work on my current career mod.

i moved the mod to a different folder,and change the path of the folder in every cfg part,and it worked like a charm!

[Temeter]

I will have to do a bit of research into that mod to see if there is anything I can do to remedy the problem. In the mean time, perhaps using actual sepratrons could be a quick fix? Or, if you're the crafty type, go into GameData/BAE/TRD5LFO4/BAEdecoupledradialtank5mLFO4.cfg and find where it says 'ejectionForce = 50', then change that to 100 and see what happens.

Edit: If you copied the FireSpitter folder from the ZIP file to your GameData folder, it is likely that FSFuelSwitch is conflicting with InterstellarFuelSwitch. If removing the FireSpitter folder helps, let me know and I'll include a reference to the InterstellarFuelSwitch module in my config files, so the multi-fuel tanks will still work.

I didn't need to copy the firespitter folder, already had the mod installed (still did it to make sure, no changes). Removing the folder doesn't help, penguins still only contain LFO. Another issue with the Interstellar Fuel Switch is that some mods require it, e.g. the cryo engine mod.

Till now it's using sepratrons or modifying the decouplerforce. edit: Doubling decouplerforce also doesn't work reliable. Guess even empty tanks need a heavy kick.

Edited June 3, 2015 by Temeter

[greystork]

Any chance that you can make Size 4, 5 and 6 Fairings?

It is beginning to sound like I will have to look into that for the next update...

success! got the mod to work on my current career mod.

i moved the mod to a different folder,and change the path of the folder in every cfg part,and it worked like a charm!

Wow. I have no idea why that works, but I'm glad you managed to figure out a solution!

- - - Updated - - -

I didn't need to copy the firespitter folder, already had the mod installed (still did it to make sure, no changes). Removing the folder doesn't help, penguins still only contain LFO. Another issue with the Interstellar Fuel Switch is that some mods require it, e.g. the cryo engine mod.

Till now it's using sepratrons or modifying the decouplerforce. edit: Doubling decouplerforce also doesn't work reliable. Guess even empty tanks need a heavy kick.

Yeah, since FSFuelSwitch doesn't do this, it sounds like it's a bug specific to InterstellarFuelSwitch. Since I don't reference that anywhere, it would seem to be a general problem with it. I wonder if the SpaceY aerodynamic decouplers suffer from the same problem (built-in sepratrons disabled) with IFS. In any case, I can't fix it.

[Temeter]

Yeah, since FSFuelSwitch doesn't do this, it sounds like it's a bug specific to InterstellarFuelSwitch. Since I don't reference that anywhere, it would seem to be a general problem with it. I wonder if the SpaceY aerodynamic decouplers suffer from the same problem (built-in sepratrons disabled) with IFS. In any case, I can't fix it.

Alright, i'll ask in the interstellar thread. Again thanks for the help and this fantastic mod!

- - - Updated - - -

Oooooooh, problem solved itself. I missed the new interstellar version just 2 days ago (relied on the very recent cryoengine-version because of the needed config), and it fixed exactly the issue we're talking about:

Released on 2015-06-01

All resources that are not mentioned in resourceNames are now automatically ignored when switching tanks (which means resourcesToIgnore has become obsolete)

It doesn't touch the solidfuel, even though it allows to switch around fuel.

Edited June 3, 2015 by Temeter

[greystork]

We got a new interstellar version just now, and it seems like it fixed exactly the issue we're talking about:

He he, after all this. Good deal! And you're welcome.

[Overlocker]

Oh, huge fairings nice! Now I can launch a Starlifter from FTT in ONE PIECE PROPERLY (In a kerbal way of course)

[Temeter]

Earlier checking the depencies would be the first thing to do, now i've got more knowledge and rather waste almost two hours playing around with files and taking up your time.

Yeah, I just better not think about this too hard, thanks again. xD

[greystork]

Now I can launch a Starlifter from FTT in ONE PIECE PROPERLY (In a kerbal way of course)

http://i.imgur.com/T2kkV0m.png

NICE!

Yeah, I just better not think about this too hard, thanks again. xD

No worries, mate!

[Wolf Baginski]

OK, initial tests went well (Sandbox Mode). Using KSP v1.0.2 I can put 200 tonnes into a 100km orbit and then land the booster back near KSC without breaking anything, using a single 10m stage that seemed grossly overpowered. Short and fat is definitely more stable.

The landing legs in the SpaceY mod are too short to be useful. Have I missed something, or would landing legs be something to suggest for the wish-list?

Another option would be a shorter engine with a bigger Isp difference between atmosphere and vacuum.

Finally, and I shall have to check on this, a very short 10m tank, with radial-mounted engines, might be a start on landing large payloads on Mun and Minmus. There are adaptor plates for multiple small engines that may fit with Tweakscale and, inverted, mount a small return vehicle with several science/crew/service modules at 2.5m size. Hmm, some sort of "pancake" lander could do some interesting things, and the Kerbals can be very unsubtle.

(Where's the IVA with furry dice as a zero-gravity indicator?)

[greystork]

I can put 200 tonnes into a 100km orbit and then land the booster back near KSC without breaking anything, using a single 10m stage that seemed grossly overpowered.

Consider that you spent almost 2500 tonnes of fuel in doing so. Also, if you are going for strict realism, Real Solar System will give you more of a challenge, with its higher atmosphere.

Have I missed something, or would landing legs be something to suggest for the wish-list?

Noted.

Another option would be a shorter engine with a bigger Isp difference between atmosphere and vacuum.

Try SpaceY's R5 engine on a tweakscaled, multiplying thrust plate.

Hmm, some sort of "pancake" lander could do some interesting things, and the Kerbals can be very unsubtle.

Well, I'd try the T10LFO05 tank for that. Or, if you want really flat, perhaps a low-profile 10m to 7.5m fuel-filled adapter?

(Where's the IVA with furry dice as a zero-gravity indicator?)

A 10m command module? Don't forget the zero-g mopeds for kerbonauts to get around, in there!

[greystork]

After much consideration and testing, I've decided to update the engine ISP curves to make engines less powerful at sea level and a lot less fuel efficient in general. I have based the figures for the new ISP curves on test flights with what I'd consider reasonable payloads. I have not touched the thrust figures at all, but because ISP has a great impact on resultant thrust in the atmosphere, the effective payload you will be able to lift from the ground has decreased and so has the amount of delta-V at your overall disposal.

The changes will probably not make the die-hard realism fans happy. It may even make some of those who were enjoying the extra power a bit less enthusiastic about this mod. In my effort to balance the parts to be truly stock-alike, I hope I at least made everyone equally unhappy.

[Wolf Baginski]

Well, I'd try the T10LFO05 tank for that. Or, if you want really flat, perhaps a low-profile 10m to 7.5m fuel-filled adapter?

It sort of works, but you get hit by the square-cube law. The perimeter of the tank barely has enough room to get enough landing legs and radial rockets on but my test rig managed a landed mass of 125 tonnes on Kerbin. The base diameter helps with landing on slopes, but the re-entry heating goes on for an awkwardly long time. The heat-shield doesn't get hot enough to ablate but the hot-gas flow fried the parachutes. The braking effect would have been small, but the engines ran out of fuel just above the ground.

Yeah, this sort of OTT Kerbalism does burn a lot of fuel, but the overall mass-ratio is going to be crazy-high without staging.

(One of the spectacular ideas out in the real-world is the Russian use of rockets to augment the parachutes for heavy equipment. It lets them air-drop tank-like things. The trim-changes as they leave the aircraft must be exciting.)

[riocrokite]

great stuff! subscribed

[Temeter]

After much consideration and testing, I've decided to update the engine ISP curves to make engines less powerful at sea level and a lot less fuel efficient in general. I have based the figures for the new ISP curves on test flights with what I'd consider reasonable payloads. I have not touched the thrust figures at all, but because ISP has a great impact on resultant thrust in the atmosphere, the effective payload you will be able to lift from the ground has decreased and so has the amount of delta-V at your overall disposal.

The changes will probably not make the die-hard realism fans happy. It may even make some of those who were enjoying the extra power a bit less enthusiastic about this mod. In my effort to balance the parts to be truly stock-alike, I hope I at least made everyone equally unhappy.

I wonder. Wouldn't that make single core rockets a lot harder to create? I honestly don't think stock is very well balanced in this regard. Even now stock favors using a bunch of 2.5m rockets to using a single 3.75m rocket, design/efficiency wise, and even more so ecnomically (aerodynamics hardly make a difference). KW Rocketry follows the stock formula, and their 5m engines perform even worse, being less costefficient in 90% of all cases. I did not test the behemoth engines for economics (lol), but i assume the will continue the trend of large rockets being worse and worse if they're balanced to stock.

Mind this is not just economically, but also design-wise: Large engines need to have huge thrust margins to be effective. Even heavy single core KWR rockets are often hard to create because of lacking thrust, and that's despite their largest engine creating 11kn of thrust. Beside being a lot more expensive, it's often just not enough thrust without a bunch of boosters, especially with the new ISP calculation.

Again, that's ofc a stock thing too. Imo KSP just isn't very well balanced in regards to super-heavy rockets. The 3.75m rockets do not feel to me like a continual, well scaled development, but rather a late-game tech with additional difficulty. Especially with the one being a pure high atmo/space-engine, and the other not supporting staging.

Well, I think it might be best to wait for 1.0.3. There was some more engine-rebalancing announced.

Btw, on a more general note: Some of the engine costs seem to be borked. I could see why the efficient Ajax costs a bit more than the boss, but it's rather weird how the double Ajax is the cheapest engine of the pack.

Edited June 4, 2015 by Temeter

[greystork]

Btw, on a more general note: Some of the engine costs seem to be borked. I could see why the efficient Ajax costs a bit more than the boss, but it's rather weird how the double Ajax is the cheapest engine of the pack.

Ah, something for the next update, thanks for pointing that out. Next update will hopefully be in a day or two, when I'm done with creating the procedural fairings.

[Temeter]

Ah, something for the next update, thanks for pointing that out. Next update will hopefully be in a day or two, when I'm done with creating the procedural fairings.

Fairings already coming? Awesome!

[Nothalogh]

Next update will hopefully be in a day or two, when I'm done with creating the procedural fairings.

You should probably separate the fairings into their own mod, as many already use e-dog's procedural fairings.

Necro Bones did this with his fairings and rocket parts, it makes things more manageable.

[greystork]

You should probably separate the fairings into their own mod, as many already use e-dog's procedural fairings.

Necro Bones did this with his fairings and rocket parts, it makes things more manageable.

Thanks for the suggestion, but I don't think I want to go down that road. Then I should also parcel out all the 5m parts, since many have already installed SpaceY Lifters. I think, on average, it is most convenient for people to just download everything in one single package and be done with it.

[Temeter]

I'd say so too (my mod folder is already huge^^'). Otherwise you can just manually remove the parts (cfgs), which I assume you did already with the stock fairings if they bother you.

Edited June 5, 2015 by Temeter

[greystork]

Procedural fairings are up! I also included a set of nose cones, just for the heck of it.

Enjoy!

[Overlocker]

Finally, huge procedural fairings! And also fueled Nose Cones, I love this stockalike pack as much as NearFuture packs and Necrobones ones