[1.7-1.9] SMURFF: Simple Module adjUstments for Real-ish Fuel-mass Fractions 1.9.1 (02019 Nov 12)

[Bowman]

Hey!

Thanks for your update.

Unfortunally I'm getting still the 3 errors while loading mentioned aboce. Besides that it seems like the ISP of the engines didn't change. Is this intentional?

[Kerbas_ad_astra]

Only SRBs get an improvement to their Isp.  As for the errors, be sure that you have installed the patch out of the Extras folder -- that you've copied it into your GameData folder.

[Joshua42]

Just a quick heads up...CKAN install doesn't include the Procedural Ore Tank fix in the Extras folder even though it states that SMURRF version is 1.5.4.

[Templar Knight]

So has anyone tried to use this mod with the new 1.2 update, and if so does it work? 

[Kerbas_ad_astra]

It should work as-is, but CryoTanks has changed its standard mass ratio for cryogenic LH2 tanks, so I will adjust a couple of numbers and make a new release Soon^TM.  (I was waiting for that and Kopernicus to release for 1.2 before making this a priority.)

Edit: I think CryoTanks has one more balancing quirk to shake out, then I'll see about updating.

Edited October 22, 2016 by Kerbas_ad_astra

[Kerbas_ad_astra]

Now that CryoTanks is fully rebalanced, I've got a proper KSP 1.2 release of SMURFF.

SMURFF v1.5.5 (Snow Miser):

• Updated CryoTanks patch to adapt to rebalance.
• Because the corresponding version of CryoTanks was released for KSP 1.2, this version and later versions are not compatible with KSP 1.1.2 or 1.1.3.

[Gojira1000]

4 hours ago, Kerbas_ad_astra said:

Now that CryoTanks is fully rebalanced, I've got a proper KSP 1.2 release of SMURFF.

SMURFF v1.5.5 (Snow Miser):

• Updated CryoTanks patch to adapt to rebalance.
• Because the corresponding version of CryoTanks was released for KSP 1.2, this version and later versions are not compatible with KSP 1.1.2 or 1.1.3.

You are my hero

[Devilman]

Just tried this today as had often planned to get into an RSS playthrough but didn't really get on with RP-0 / RO. Unfortunately I'm also getting 3 errors from SMURFF.cfg on startup. Not sure whether this is directly connected to those errors or just a function of the reduction in mass but... Mk1 Command Pod ends up with rediculously powerful reactionwheels, to the point where it can roll itself across the ground at silly speeds. (or rotate the craft fast enough to break it apart lol)

Edited October 31, 2016 by Devilman

[Kerbas_ad_astra]

You probably have Procedural Parts installed.  The procedural ore tank has a config peculiarity -- a resource is defined without any capacity.  It's literally the only part I've ever seen that does this, so I've balked at adding a whole set of logic checks to SMURFF proper for the sake of one part, but there's a patch in the "Extras" folder that sneaks in ahead of SMURFF to add a resource capacity.  Install that somewhere in your GameData folder and you should be fine.

SMURFF doesn't touch reaction wheels, but reducing the mass would increase their relative effectiveness.  Maybe I should add a patch to reduce RW torque in command pods.

[Devilman]

2 hours ago, Kerbas_ad_astra said:

You probably have Procedural Parts installed.  The procedural ore tank has a config peculiarity -- a resource is defined without any capacity.  It's literally the only part I've ever seen that does this, so I've balked at adding a whole set of logic checks to SMURFF proper for the sake of one part, but there's a patch in the "Extras" folder that sneaks in ahead of SMURFF to add a resource capacity.  Install that somewhere in your GameData folder and you should be fine.

SMURFF doesn't touch reaction wheels, but reducing the mass would increase their relative effectiveness.  Maybe I should add a patch to reduce RW torque in command pods.

Aaah yes, I do have Procedural Parts installed, could well be the source of the 3 errors on startup.  With regard to reaction wheels, It sounds like a good idea to lower RW torque by 50% so it stays inline with the mass reduction.

Also it's worth noting again as someone else mentioned earlier... the CKAN release does not have the "extra's" folder in it with said patches, just a heads-up.

 

Edited October 31, 2016 by Devilman

[RoboRay]

I think decreasing reaction wheel torque in proportion to the mass reduction is pretty reasonable.

[AlphaKerman]

Looks like this is a great mod!

BTW, does this work with most mods (i use SSTU and Bluedog)? 

 

[Kerbas_ad_astra]

It's meant to work with any stockalike part mod (i.e. stock partmodules only), so Bluedog should be okay.  However, SSTU uses a custom fuel-switching module that I don't have any patches for.  Its parts will most likely still work if you use SMURFF, but they will be heavier than their counterparts from stock and stockalike mods.

[AlphaKerman]

Thanks. I've installed and it's working flawlessly! 

Edited November 15, 2016 by AlphaKerman

[LexvA]

Hi there!

This mod seems amazing, being able to play KSP at an accessible difficulty while being able to enjoy nice and big (real) planets!

Just one quick question: Is Smurff compatible with KSP 1.2.2? I expect it is, but checking just to be sure

[Kerbas_ad_astra]

It should be, although I haven't tried it yet.  There are also a few more mods I'm working on patches for (Mark IV Spaceplanes use a fuel-switch module which requires some special attention to get patched).

[Benoit Hage]

@Kerbas_ad_astra

Hello.

I have a question about "tanklever", "enginelever", and "podlever". If I wanted to have the same overpowered parts as in stock but in the RSS world. Should I changed the value 1 in .cfg into 1.5ish? If the stock parts are more the less 64% the size of their real counterparts, would it be right to make: 1/0.64=1.5625 and change the value in the .cfg?

Or I'm just messing things up?

Thanks in advance.

[Kerbas_ad_astra]

Could you please clarify what you're trying to do?  I'm not sure how stock parts are "overpowered".  They're significantly heavier than real-world rocket parts with similar performance.

[Benoit Hage]

2 hours ago, Kerbas_ad_astra said:

Could you please clarify what you're trying to do?  I'm not sure how stock parts are "overpowered".  They're significantly heavier than real-world rocket parts with similar performance.

Sure! I would like to play RSS with stock only parts. It feels to me that in stock KSP, you can quite easily lift 10t+ in orbit with 2.5m parts only. While with SMURFF, it's quasi impossible ( with default mechjeb settings for its ascent profile ). I would like the stock part performances in the RSS.

In other words, I want the rocket I build in stock to be able to be in RSS and have a more the less same "potential". As in if my stock craft can reach Kerbin geosynchro, i'd like it to reach Earth geosynchro as well. 

 

Edited December 25, 2016 by Benoit Hage
trying to be clearer...

[Kerbas_ad_astra]

FYI, stock parts aren't overpowered, it's Kerbin that's undersized.  3.5 km/s to orbit vs. 9.5.  SMURFF improves part performance to match the (real-world) aerospace state-of-the-art and reduces the required rocket mass from 70x payload mass with stock parts to 25-35x (as is the case with real rockets).

However, if you want to get that down to 7x (the typical rocket mass in stock), by my calculations you should try setting tankLever to 4 or 4.5.  The pod lever should not be set higher than 1, as it might lead to negative part masses.  I'm not sure about engineLever, but it should be fine to leave it at 1, since the total rocket mass will be smaller and the thrust buff won't need increasing.

Be advised that putting any lever above one will void your warranty.  I understand that KSP's joint strength system has changed quite a bit in the 1.2.x series, but in the past it has been known to depend on part mass, among other things, so having tanks that are paper-light when they're empty may cause structural problems, and your vehicles' CGs may move surprisingly far as fuel is drained, which may cause stability issues.

[mcfunk0017]

On 12/15/2016 at 4:16 PM, Kerbas_ad_astra said:

It should be, although I haven't tried it yet.  There are also a few more mods I'm working on patches for (Mark IV Spaceplanes use a fuel-switch module which requires some special attention to get patched).

I'm not sure it is, at least not in concert with the real scale boosters mod.  The wet and dry masses in the VAB for the Saturn IB stock from RSB are identical with and without the smurff mod installed on 1.2.2.  I dug into this after I had problems getting a LV into orbit in RSS that I had been using a lot successfully in 1.1.3 RSS.

There are quite a few compatibility errors on the loading screen, too.  I can dig into those, too...

[Kerbas_ad_astra]

1 hour ago, mcfunk0017 said:

The wet and dry masses in the VAB for the Saturn IB stock from RSB are identical with and without the smurff mod installed on 1.2.2.

That's working as intended -- the RSB parts are already set to the appropriate values from the real rockets they're based on, so they set a flag that tells SMURFF to ignore them.

[mcfunk0017]

5 hours ago, Kerbas_ad_astra said:

That's working as intended -- the RSB parts are already set to the appropriate values from the real rockets they're based on, so they set a flag that tells SMURFF to ignore them.

Okay, that's fair.  If something changed from 1.1.3, where do you think that would be?  

There's a 37.5kg difference in total mass between the stock RSB SaturnIB with RSS+RSB+SMURFF in 1.1.3 and 1.2.2.

I compared most of the relevant cfg files in the RSB folder and didn't find any differences mass-wise for the Saturn IB parts.

[Kerbas_ad_astra]

No idea.  The only change I made in SMURFF from 1.1.3 to 1.2.x was to adapt to some changes in CryoTanks, and I see that RSB uses liquid fuel for all of its parts (including stages that used LH2, I assume to reduce dependencies).

Maybe something in your payload got its mass rebalanced?  Also, I can't see how 37.5 kg would make a difference to 19 or 21 tons (payload capacity of the Saturn IB), but maybe something about drag changed, if you've got something exposed and not under a fairing.

I've only just gotten my main 1.2.2 install finally stood up, so I haven't spent hardly any time in RSS since KSP 1.1.3, but I think it's clear that whatever's changed is out of SMURFF's hands.  If we're to continue debugging, it should probably go in another thread, and we'd need at minimum a modlist, an image of what you're trying to launch, and what Kerbal Engineer thinks of it.

[mcfunk0017]

5 hours ago, Kerbas_ad_astra said:

No idea.  The only change I made in SMURFF from 1.1.3 to 1.2.x was to adapt to some changes in CryoTanks, and I see that RSB uses liquid fuel for all of its parts (including stages that used LH2, I assume to reduce dependencies).

Maybe something in your payload got its mass rebalanced?  Also, I can't see how 37.5 kg would make a difference to 19 or 21 tons (payload capacity of the Saturn IB), but maybe something about drag changed, if you've got something exposed and not under a fairing.

I've only just gotten my main 1.2.2 install finally stood up, so I haven't spent hardly any time in RSS since KSP 1.1.3, but I think it's clear that whatever's changed is out of SMURFF's hands.  If we're to continue debugging, it should probably go in another thread, and we'd need at minimum a modlist, an image of what you're trying to launch, and what Kerbal Engineer thinks of it.

That's fine, I don't intend to derail the thread.  Thanks for the feedback.  I'll do some more digging on my own before bringing anything up directly, but it sounds like the issue isn't in smurff regardless.