[1.3.1] Prakasa Aeroworks

[awfulhumanbeing]

Great job! The interiors are quite good, and a hypersonic Mk3 extension is what I've always wanted.

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

On 6/15/2016 at 3:18 AM, awfulhumanbeing said:

Great job! The interiors are quite good, and a hypersonic Mk3 extension is what I've always wanted.

Thanks. I'm surprised so many people like the mk3, frankly I didn't think it came out all that well. I may do another.

Nuclear Hybrid Rockets in action, complete with custom atmospheric (based on nitrogen/oxygen emission colors) and space (based on hydrogen emission colors) effects

Edited June 23, 2016 by Balto-the-Wolf-Dog

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

0.5.0 Released, see release thread for details.

[Stone Blue]

Nice!!... I look forward to seeing my son's excitement this weekend when he tries out the new update...

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

17 hours ago, Stone Blue said:

Nice!!... I look forward to seeing my son's excitement this weekend when he tries out the new update...

Can't tell you how good it feels to know people look forward to me releasing Prakasa. Glad I could be of service.

[Weinsen]

Got to say, i loved your modules! I was missing this kind of cockpit for future missions for exploration!

One thing i'm worried tho, are they like stock friendly?

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

12 hours ago, Weinsen said:

Got to say, i loved your modules! I was missing this kind of cockpit for future missions for exploration!

One thing i'm worried tho, are they like stock friendly?

In terms of Aesthetic? The exterior texture reference for most of the post -Sadhaka pods is the 1.25m jet fuel fuselage.  They should actually mesh pretty nicely.

[Weinsen]

I mean in terms of weight, TWR, power, fuel consumption. 

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

4 hours ago, Weinsen said:

I mean in terms of weight, TWR, power, fuel consumption. 

I generally work with powerful, comparatively heavy engines to avoid clustering. In general TWR is somewhat better (usually for balance reasons, physical as opposed to gameplay) but everything save the small scramjet is physically very large. Power consumption for reaction wheels etc is scaled directly off stock cockpits and engine ISPs are scaled off similar stock engines. Neither the ion nor nuclear engines provide greater ISP than stock options¹, though the ions provide considerably higher thrust (about as much as you would get from a similarly sized cluster). The nuclear turbines have fairly substantial thrust in atmospheric mode and are slightly more powerful than stock NERVAs in space.

^{1. Though the ISP is the same, the nuclear turbine TWR is slightly better than the stock nerva and the ion TTW is significantly better, though not unreasonable. The ion performance is better than you would get for clustering as it saves you the weight of your mounting method; otherwise it's relatively similar.} 

 

I wouldn't really count anything vastly op, though the nuclear turbines might need a bit of an atmospheric thrust nerf depending on how people feel about them. Most are designed simply to avoid spaceplanes with huge numbers of engines grouped to operate in different regimes on the way to and in space, hence high thrust, versatility, and weight in most cases. They're balanced with stock aerodynamics though, so if you use FAR and are good at designing sleek aircraft you'll find them more powerful than you would otherwise. This is particularly evident in the high bypass cycle of the hybrid SCRAM, which is near the edge of its operating envelope before the SCRAMjet can be enabled under normal aerodynamics but makes very short work of it in a well-designed FAR craft.

[Climberfx]

Very pretty design you have sir

Cheers!

[Weinsen]

6 hours ago, Balto-the-Wolf-Dog said:

I generally work with powerful, comparatively heavy engines to avoid clustering. In general TWR is somewhat better (usually for balance reasons, physical as opposed to gameplay) but everything save the small scramjet is physically very large. Power consumption for reaction wheels etc is scaled directly off stock cockpits and engine ISPs are scaled off similar stock engines. Neither the ion nor nuclear engines provide greater ISP than stock options¹, though the ions provide considerably higher thrust (about as much as you would get from a similarly sized cluster). The nuclear turbines have fairly substantial thrust in atmospheric mode and are slightly more powerful than stock NERVAs in space.

^{1. Though the ISP is the same, the nuclear turbine TWR is slightly better than the stock nerva and the ion TTW is significantly better, though not unreasonable. The ion performance is better than you would get for clustering as it saves you the weight of your mounting method; otherwise it's relatively similar.} 

 

I wouldn't really count anything vastly op, though the nuclear turbines might need a bit of an atmospheric thrust nerf depending on how people feel about them. Most are designed simply to avoid spaceplanes with huge numbers of engines grouped to operate in different regimes on the way to and in space, hence high thrust, versatility, and weight in most cases. They're balanced with stock aerodynamics though, so if you use FAR and are good at designing sleek aircraft you'll find them more powerful than you would otherwise. This is particularly evident in the high bypass cycle of the hybrid SCRAM, which is near the edge of its operating envelope before the SCRAMjet can be enabled under normal aerodynamics but makes very short work of it in a well-designed FAR craft.

Wow, that's a nice answer, thank you for replying! That was exactly what i was interested.

Again, just to make sure, i really loved it.
The mod is really well done, and such effort on IVA's, that's a gem

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

32 minutes ago, Weinsen said:

Wow, that's a nice answer, thank you for replying! That was exactly what i was interested.

Again, just to make sure, i really loved it.
The mod is really well done, and such effort on IVA's, that's a gem

Glad you're enjoying it. Currently planning a few additions to atmospheric aircraft, namely a bladeless fan inspired propeller because there are plenty of regular propellers (and propellers have to be animated)

[Titan 3000]

Not to be picky but from my research your SCRAM engines are conceptually and in some ways performance wise really good representations of ramjets. To contrast with a more realistic scram-jet would only ignite at about mach 4/5 or 1400/1700 m/s where yours activate around mach 1.2~ or 400 m/s. Realisticly you could rename them as ramjets to be more accurate. However that is just me being picky do what you want just an FYI.

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

On 7/9/2016 at 11:18 PM, Titan 3000 said:

Not to be picky but from my research your SCRAM engines are conceptually and in some ways performance wise really good representations of ramjets. To contrast with a more realistic scram-jet would only ignite at about mach 4/5 or 1400/1700 m/s where yours activate around mach 1.2~ or 400 m/s. Realisticly you could rename them as ramjets to be more accurate. However that is just me being picky do what you want just an FYI.

I dropped them to lower speeds out of gameplay pragmatism. The engines are designed to avoid much clustering of other engines, so I broadened the performance envelope and chalked it up to "lol technological advancements"  to save the collocation of regular turbines, bipropellant rockets, and SCRAMjets that would otherwise be necessary to make them practical. My design cue for performance was the Orbiter XR-2 mod from back in the day, but a lot of the usefulness of realistic numbers is lost due to Kerbin's obscenely low required velocity for stable orbit at minimum altitudes. Fuel savings for more realistic performance numbers is significant when employed against Earth realistic velocities (against which such an engine could be making up thousands of meters per second towards the intended orbital velocity) but relatively limited in a kerbin environment when the speed range between ignition and the engine's work being done is <1000 m/s.

mach 5 -> mach 23 as opposed to mach 5 - > mach 7.5

I'd rename them, but their performance envelope strikes me as more believable against SCRAM numbers than RAM numbers, given said mach 7 viability.

 

In short, Kerbin is small and I like not having lots of engines. 

[Titan 3000]

5 hours ago, Balto-the-Wolf-Dog said:

In short, Kerbin is small and I like not having lots of engines. 

I know what you mean. I have a plane with two of your 1.25 m ramjets with realistic ignition scram-jet from Mk2 expansion and going into orbit is pretty much a major problem when accelerating. I need to try it out in a realistically scaled earth instead of Kerbin to see how it performs there as well as if mach 12 really is the speed for max thrust.

Thanks for the explanation of why the naming scheme.

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

Dhyana 

 

[Tokamak]

Wow... how have I not seen this mod before. Your modelling is WONDERFUL. 

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

On 7/30/2016 at 0:40 AM, Tokamak said:

Wow... how have I not seen this mod before. Your modelling is WONDERFUL. 

Glad you like it. Now, a question:

Pregnant snake adapter - Y/N?

 

Update: Pregnant Snake Adapter to be included as a separate part and thus optional. This means that it needs some love though.

So what goes inside the PSA? I can't come up with a functional purpose to base my interior decorating on.

Edited August 22, 2016 by Balto-the-Wolf-Dog

[SpaceCommanderNemo]

12 hours ago, Balto-the-Wolf-Dog said:

 

So what goes inside the PSA? I can't come up with a functional purpose to base my interior decorating on.

Definitely looks like cargo ramp/hold to me.

Oh, I've got it... Keep the top half for crew/fuel/etc but make the belly a service bay. Mad props if it could lower parallel to the fuselage, for a missile/gun bay or service hatch.

[steedcrugeon]

the PSA screams Multimode utility space to me. maybe have switchable meshes to swap between say; pressurised cargo hold, combined passenger and supplies (thinking additional life support stuff with Habitation modifier if you use that sort of thing) or a command/operations room (with RemoteTech relay functionality? that sort of thing).

In other words "so much room for activities!"

Edited September 5, 2016 by steedcrugeon
typos

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

I'm not totally happy with how extreme the neck angle is, but that's what the Pregnant Snake Adapter is for.

[steedcrugeon]

it's coming along nicely! the other screenshots in the release thread are very appetizing.

I've finished a possible Community Tech Tree patch; see the quote below.

Quote

//Fuel Tanks
@PART[PrakXeS1]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @TechRequired = fuelSystems
}
@PART[PrakLXS1]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @TechRequired = fuelSystems
}
@PART[PrakLX]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @TechRequired = advFuelSystems
}
@PART[PrakXe]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @TechRequired = advFuelSystems
}

//Power Generation
@PART[prakGenerator]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @TechRequired = highTechElectricalSystems
}

//Command
@PART[ViaktarPod]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @TechRequired = simpleCommandModules
}
@PART[AkashePod]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @TechRequired = simpleCommandModules
}
@PART[AsimaPodS2]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @TechRequired = HeavyCommandModules
}
@PART[Dekhana]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @TechRequired = specializedCommandModules
}
@PART[NagaPod]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @TechRequired = heavyCommandModules
}
@PART[KalpanPod]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @TechRequired = advFlightControls
}
@PART[SadhakPod]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @TechRequired = heavyCommandModules
}

//Engines
@PART[VivekeeIon]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @TechRequired = advIonPropulsion
}
@PART[SaavadhanIon]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @TechRequired = advGriddedThrusters
}
@PART[DohanKshayNuclearHybrid]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @TechRequired = improvedNuclearPropulsion
}
@PART[SashaktKshayNuclearHybrid]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @TechRequired = advNuclearPropulsion
}

//Aerodynamics
@PART[AeroEngineHousing]:NEEDS[CommunityTechTree]
{
    @TechRequired = heavyAerodynamics
}
 

 

Edited September 10, 2016 by steedcrugeon
tweaked with config file

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

On 9/8/2016 at 3:05 PM, steedcrugeon said:

it's coming along nicely! the other screenshots in the release thread are very appetizing.

I've finished a possible Community Tech Tree patch; see the quote below.

 

Thanks.

 

Meanwhile, stepping up from the slapdash Ankhen bookshelf with actual fully-modeled book props:

 

Edited September 15, 2016 by Balto-the-Wolf-Dog

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

Not enough variety as it is. Crowd-sourcing more book designs:

Front cover, spine, back cover Reference

 

Template

It might be a little difficult to tell where the spine is exactly. Unfortunately I'd have to use .psd to send a layered version, which isn't great for comparability.

Side note: Any program's hue slider should have an easy time changing the cover color. Recommend also shifting the contrast if it washes out. Text usually looks best through a color burn or luminosity filter (which help it pick up the texture behind it) but a simple opacity will do. 

 

Sorry for the double post, but I'd like to draw attention to the idea so I can get a few cover designs rather than wait until someone finds it and delay the whole project over that.

[Balto-the-Wolf-Dog]

Flight deck of Raksha, a more industrial mk3 to compliment Dhyana's upmarket styling