parts [1.12.x] 'Project Orion' Nuclear Pulse Engine

[damerell]

8 hours ago, panarchist said:

I'm using RemoteTech also, and considering having the ship on "automatic" with everyone in freeze, but communication delay at Cercani is more than one Kerbal day, and honestly I don't know how well RemoteTech handles that scenario, so there will likely be at least 2 Kerbals awake during the mission.

RemoteTech would handle it, but you'd have to give the order to thaw a kerbal and then very carefully time-accelerate away that day. What I'd suggest is a kOS script lurking which will unthaw one when the correct conditions are met, which would be instantaneous.

[panarchist]

51 minutes ago, damerell said:

RemoteTech would handle it, but you'd have to give the order to thaw a kerbal and then very carefully time-accelerate away that day. What I'd suggest is a kOS script lurking which will unthaw one when the correct conditions are met, which would be instantaneous.

Or I could just let KSP run for 24 hours (mostly) unattended.  The kOS script is a great idea - I need to see how big a performance hit adding kOS would be - I had issues with that in the past due to the number of mods I typically run, and 64-bit has made that worse. (meaning it lets me run a LOT more mods)  That's a subject for another thread, though - thanks for the advice, I will try that out.

Cercani is 7.5 Billion km from Kerbol, just under 7 hours for light to travel, and requiring one seriously long burn of the Orion to cover in a "reasonable" length of time.  The other issue I have is that the Klark doesn't really have any fine-grained control over acceleration - I think I'm going to need to put on a secondary propulsion system of some kind for small accelerations since a single NPU-500 gets it going a bit faster than "docking" speed, and doesn't really allow any precision maneuvering.  A prior version had a pretty monstrous SAS system, but not really anything good in terms of RCS.

Edited May 19, 2016 by panarchist

[autumnalequinox]

Simple CTT patch for the Orion!  Helps fill out the later nuclear propulsion part of the tree.  Simply create a cfg in folder.

// USI Orion
@PART[USI_MEDUSA]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
	@TechRequired = exoticNuclearPropulsion
}
@PART[USI_ORION]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
	@TechRequired = expNuclearPropulsion 
}
@PART[USI_ORIONTank]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
	@TechRequired = expNuclearPropulsion
}

 

[DStaal]

10 hours ago, autumnalequinox said:

Simple CTT patch for the Orion!  Helps fill out the later nuclear propulsion part of the tree.  Simply create a cfg in folder.

// USI Orion
@PART[USI_MEDUSA]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
	@TechRequired = exoticNuclearPropulsion
}
@PART[USI_ORION]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
	@TechRequired = expNuclearPropulsion 
}
@PART[USI_ORIONTank]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
	@TechRequired = expNuclearPropulsion
}

 

The one problem with this is that the Orion isn't exotic.  The tech is fairly pedestrian - you could make a good argument that it should be in the starting node.  It's never been deployed because the idea of launching something by setting off lots and lots of nuclear bombs raises all kinds of 'is this a good idea' issues - but the actual technology required is fairly simple.  We probably could have built one before the end of WWII, if we'd thought of it.

It makes for an odd balance in KSP - it's a drive that's never been implemented, has a monster thrust-to-weight ratio, and a decent ISP, but it's actually simpler to build than many of our current rocket engines.  It just has side effects.

[autumnalequinox]

On 5/22/2016 at 4:25 AM, DStaal said:

The one problem with this is that the Orion isn't exotic.  The tech is fairly pedestrian - you could make a good argument that it should be in the starting node.  It's never been deployed because the idea of launching something by setting off lots and lots of nuclear bombs raises all kinds of 'is this a good idea' issues - but the actual technology required is fairly simple.  We probably could have built one before the end of WWII, if we'd thought of it.

It makes for an odd balance in KSP - it's a drive that's never been implemented, has a monster thrust-to-weight ratio, and a decent ISP, but it's actually simpler to build than many of our current rocket engines.  It just has side effects.

I know.  It's actually a remarkably feasible tech.  Trust me I've studied the hell out of it.  Sometimes I wish instead of all the upper atmospheric nuclear testing we had simply launched two of those babies (would have produced same fallout levels).  

This is just for game balance.  It's a personal config, just in case anyone wants to use it and save 5 minutes.

(oh and it is a bit exotic as far as KSP goes  )

[RoverDude]

tbh, I would have the Orion as one of your first nuclear engines within CTT.

[Domfluff]

Any time I've considered Orion within a Career save, it's always been the price tag that's made me balk at it - the commitment that's required to launch the thing means that the return on investment has to be significant, which means making a larger spacecraft (closed loop life support, many years of hab time), which makes it bigger and more expensive, etc. etc.

I forget how expensive the last reference mission I strung together was, but it was at least 8 million funds.

To me that suggests that it's about right - it's accessible technology, but the caveat is the will to do it, and the risk if anything goes wrong. Pranging it on the side of an asteroid does horrible things to your no-claims bonus.

Clearly it's easy to grind funds in KSP if you really want to, but it does take effort and time to do so. Mining valuable resources is similar.

[magnemoe]

2 hours ago, Domfluff said:

Any time I've considered Orion within a Career save, it's always been the price tag that's made me balk at it - the commitment that's required to launch the thing means that the return on investment has to be significant, which means making a larger spacecraft (closed loop life support, many years of hab time), which makes it bigger and more expensive, etc. etc.

I forget how expensive the last reference mission I strung together was, but it was at least 8 million funds.

To me that suggests that it's about right - it's accessible technology, but the caveat is the will to do it, and the risk if anything goes wrong. Pranging it on the side of an asteroid does horrible things to your no-claims bonus.

Clearly it's easy to grind funds in KSP if you really want to, but it does take effort and time to do so. Mining valuable resources is similar.

Back in 1.02 I had an Orion in Career, worked pretty well, yes its expensive, think it was 2 million for an Duna or Gilly mission, however it did more than go break even if you collected contracts. Main problem was assemble payloads who was large enough to make this cost effective while holding together during the heavy trust and also not creating an slideshow 

[dakhr]

Hi

Thanks for the mod,i love this engines ,but they are dangerous in use, sometimes upon loading ,ship get strange acceleration which dislocates parts on it ,or whole thing start wobbling then explodes, or ship gets mysterious rotation which could not be stopped (I have joints reinforcement mod installed ,doesn't help). This effects are 10 times more pronounced in medusa model than in Orion ,which makes Medusa completely useless at the moment.

[magnemoe]

On 24.5.2016 at 2:28 AM, dakhr said:

Hi

Thanks for the mod,i love this engines ,but they are dangerous in use, sometimes upon loading ,ship get strange acceleration which dislocates parts on it ,or whole thing start wobbling then explodes, or ship gets mysterious rotation which could not be stopped (I have joints reinforcement mod installed ,doesn't help). This effects are 10 times more pronounced in medusa model than in Orion ,which makes Medusa completely useless at the moment.

I had this problem with current version back in 1.04, an previous version worked well. 
This version don't looks like have any problem but I will test more

[magnemoe]

On 24.5.2016 at 2:28 AM, dakhr said:

Hi

Thanks for the mod,i love this engines ,but they are dangerous in use, sometimes upon loading ,ship get strange acceleration which dislocates parts on it ,or whole thing start wobbling then explodes, or ship gets mysterious rotation which could not be stopped (I have joints reinforcement mod installed ,doesn't help). This effects are 10 times more pronounced in medusa model than in Orion ,which makes Medusa completely useless at the moment.

The medusa gives an 5 g spike on load for me then extended. This is likely to depend on ship and payload.
However this is extended, if you redraw the parachute the jolt is less than 2g.
Might be an idea to couple switch to chemical secondary engines to puls with toggle parachute extend, the pulse is for the 30k- 30 m/s burns you use chemical for fine turning. 

 

[craigmt1]

I seem to be getting the same issue as a lot of people in this thread and I can't seem to find an answer.  I get sound, but .1kn thrust and no fuel flow.  Any ideas?

[damerell]

20 minutes ago, craigmt1 said:

I seem to be getting the same issue as a lot of people in this thread and I can't seem to find an answer.  I get sound, but .1kn thrust and no fuel flow.  Any ideas?

Well, answer the questions they always get asked - how did you install it, and what did GameData look like when you were done, and what happens if you try in an otherwise bare KSP install?

[RoverDude]

49 minutes ago, craigmt1 said:

I seem to be getting the same issue as a lot of people in this thread and I can't seem to find an answer.  I get sound, but .1kn thrust and no fuel flow.  Any ideas?

This is 100% caused by a bad install.  Screenshot of your GameData folder please.  Even better, install KSP-AVC and show me the mod list and versions it generates.

[craigmt1]

Here's my current GameData folder, everything was installed using CKAN: 

[dakhr]

On ‎30‎/‎05‎/‎2016 at 7:00 PM, magnemoe said:

The medusa gives an 5 g spike on load for me then extended. This is likely to depend on ship and payload.
However this is extended, if you redraw the parachute the jolt is less than 2g.
Might be an idea to couple switch to chemical secondary engines to puls with toggle parachute extend, the pulse is for the 30k- 30 m/s burns you use chemical for fine turning. 

 

Thanks for the answer, I use dual propulsion anyway orion/medusa for acceleration/de acceleration and other engines to fine tune  manoeuvres.  I've  tested this: I load ship with medusa  retraced engine shut off, I tried different ship configurations ,all over again I'm getting the same result: when I extending it ,whole thing separates and explodes !

PS KSP version 1.1.2. Orion is quite stable at the moment , sometimes I only get things ,like slight trajectory change ,orbit change upon loading etc (engine switched off when loading)

Edited June 2, 2016 by dakhr
Addenum

[damerell]

7 hours ago, craigmt1 said:

Here's my current GameData folder, everything was installed using CKAN:

And I suggested already trying installing on a bare KSP; or if you read back, you'll find the suggestion of trying a manual install if CKAN fails (or vice versa). So, try that?

[magnemoe]

5 hours ago, dakhr said:

Thanks for the answer, I use dual propulsion anyway orion/medusa for acceleration/de acceleration and other engines to fine tune  manoeuvres.  I've  tested this: I load ship with medusa  retraced engine shut off, I tried different ship configurations ,all over again I'm getting the same result: when I extending it ,whole thing separates and explodes !

PS KSP version 1.1.2. Orion is quite stable at the moment , sometimes I only get things ,like slight trajectory change ,orbit change upon loading etc (engine switched off when loading)

Having dual propulsion is pretty required as the pulse engine is not for accurate burns. Always nice to have fuel tanks anyway as this ships will usually carry bases or other ships and its better to store fuel internally The Orion is coolest however I prefer the medusa as its has an farly constant acceleration and the pulling makes it easier to bring lots of stuff. 

[magnemoe]

An weird issue here with the medusa, on deploy I get an 4g shock and around 26 m/s trust with the NPU-250 charge, this gives 2g trust with empty ship. With an NPU-500 charge I get 2g trust with empty ship but weirder an 8g shock on deployment, also gains me around 60 m/s trust, this breaks the ship with an sizable payload in rear. 
This shock only happens on first time deployment on load however why is it dependent on charge size? I thought it was an effect of the change of center of gravity. 
Knowing that its dependent on charge might make it easier to fix.

Have to do some savegame edit to set ship 2 too NPU-250

Tested this again, and the poor ship don't even survive the 2g acceleration from the NPU-250, the base weight 48 ton. ship 211 ton.

This is a bit weird as back in 1.05 the medusa was my preferred interplanetary plant, and the design was much like this except the side stacks.
Now it breaks between the MK3 passanger compartment and the cargo bay. 

Edited June 9, 2016 by magnemoe

[Whirligig Girl]

It would be quite nice to have some actual explosion sounds or more realistic explosion effects. Realistically, in the vacuum at least, they would just be very bright white flashes.

 

EDIT: Apparently it does have explosion sounds and I have installed it incorrectly. Sorry about that.

Edited June 20, 2016 by GregroxMun

[WaYa]

Since kerbalstuff is gone is there a mirror or another place to get this mod from?

[RocketSquid]

Yeah, it would be nice to be able to use this again.

[Andem]

55 minutes ago, RocketSquid said:

Yeah, it would be nice to be able to use this again.

 

On 6/10/2016 at 5:22 AM, WaYa said:

Since kerbalstuff is gone is there a mirror or another place to get this mod from?

Ask and ye shall recieve.

https://github.com/BobPalmer/NuclearRockets/releases

Taken from page 16.

[WaYa]

38 minutes ago, Andem said:

 

Ask and ye shall recieve.

https://github.com/BobPalmer/NuclearRockets/releases

Taken from page 16.

Thank you, I must have missed it when I looked through the last few pages looking for the post with a link.

[TheRagingIrishman]

@RoverDude Two things. First could you set something up so that using mks parts you could build nukes in space to refuel your ship? Also you should replace the KerbalStuff link in the OP with https://github.com/BobPalmer/NuclearRockets/releases. Thanks for all of your awesome mods and keep up the good work.