[1.12.x] Near Future Technologies (September 6)

[Nertea]

4 hours ago, thomash said:

Thanks guys.  Since there is no forum link on the Spacedock download page and the discussion page that I originally found was closed last week, I figured I'd come here.  I think I've found the right page now. 

I believe the release thread is linked in both the first and the last post of the WIP thread. Glad you've found the correct place though. 

1 hour ago, juanml82 said:

I was trying to pick up NFP engines for nuclear electric ships yesterday and I've finally decided to make a comparison spreadsheet: basically, how much punch you can get for every given nuclear reactor. So instead of trying different combinations in the VAB and picking up the electric engines from a list in the VAB also filtered to include the cryogenic or monoprop ones (filter extensions/NFT category), I can just go straight to the engines I want. This spreadsheet has the max amount of engines you can fully power with each reactor, how much vacuum thrust you get with those engines and the reactor+radiators+engines total TWR (specially useful for nuclear-electric landers, and pretty much the reason I made the spreadsheet), plus of course the ISP. A few caveats:

I'm comparing the engines assembled with each reactor, but only if the particular reactor can power the engine at full throttle. In other words, this comparison is for nuclear electric ships where you just toggle the reactor & radiators on, point towards the maneuver node and press Z. No solar panels for additional power, no capacitors, no trickle charging batteries. For instance, the GW3 Triplet (100 EC/s) could be paired with the Kerbopower reactor (60 EC/s) and either run at 60% throttle or capacitors could be added to provide the 40 remaining EC/s for shorter burns. That's not included, the GW3 doesn't show up in the Kerbopower comparison at all (on second thoughts, I should have included either partial throttle or a TWR calculation with the mass of enough capacitors for a 10 seconds burn).

I've also added the stock Dawn and the MK2 Expansion ion engine to the spreadsheet

I've included the nuclear reactors from KPBS and MK2 expansion, but not the ones from MKS, as I don't currently have it installed. If someone wants to add them, it's just a matter of copying the existing template and replacing the weight and EC production with those of the MKS reactors (plus whatever radiators are needed to cool them)

For the Kerbopower, Garnet and the KBPS and MK2-E reactors, I've picked the stock radiators to cool them. The KBPS and maybe the MK2-E reactor should probably get better TWR numbers with the Heat Control mod radiators, as they do heat a lot (specially the KBPS radiator). For the heavier NFE reactors, I've used non-graphite radiators from Heat Control, since they produce a lot of heat. I've picked the non-graphite because they are earlier in the tech tree, so the TWR numbers would work best for people still unlocking the tech tree.

The Inductor, Scintillator and Repulsor all have variable isp: by giving them extra power, their isp can be increased. I've only included the base values in this spreadsheet

But for the Vasimir engines I included three values: one at 0% efficiency (more thrust, less isp), one at 50% and another at 100% (less thrust, more isp), and calculated all three values for both argon and xenon modes.

I've added two variants of FL-T100 + fuel cell array combos: one with one fuel cell, the other with four fuel cell. They don't really hold their own against nuclear reactors (and they shouldn't)

I guess that with the mass, TWR and the isp values someone could add them to any of the optimal rocket calculations, but I don't know which are the equations used for that, so that's not included

Finally, here's the spreadsheet

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AFlhwNe4LCb53UXWUNCosT0biLrFmLQm-J5pAa07jhE/edit?usp=sharing

Nice work! Also worth mentioning that the total performance of any reactor is directly related to the radiator technology type, with better technology providing better heat removed per ton. The stock radiators are the worst, the 'High Temperature' Heat Control radiators are in the middle and the Graphite are the best. In addition, there is scaling with reactor size and tech level such that larger reactors get better power generated/heat generated ratios. I've been trying to write up some better user stuff in the wiki so you might find that helpful.

[Nertea]

@Boamere, @Einarr, I had a look at the model last night, the transforms are all centered around the part origin. Can you provide more detail (the screenshot linked is super low res). 

[OldMold]

Hey, just want to say thank you for all of your mods! They have been staples of my games for years, and bring incredible depth and fun to the game. It's been a blast seeing how your skill has grown over all this time!

[Boamere]

On 4/5/2019 at 7:28 PM, Nertea said:

@Boamere, @Einarr, I had a look at the model last night, the transforms are all centered around the part origin. Can you provide more detail (the screenshot linked is super low res). 

Here's a higher res image

Spoiler

I re-installed the mod manually and it's still occuring, only with the two turboprops as well.

Something strange I found is that if I set reverse thrust, the thrust is centred again but only on that engine, the other one doesn't show.

Edited April 6, 2019 by Boamere

[Nertea]

6 hours ago, Boamere said:

Here's a higher res image

  Hide contents

I re-installed the mod manually and it's still occuring, only with the two turboprops as well.

Something strange I found is that if I set reverse thrust, the thrust is centred again but only on that engine, the other one doesn't show.

Interesting, there might be a bug with KerbalActuators handling multiple thrustTransforms then. I'll further investigate when I have time.

Edited April 7, 2019 by Nertea

[Einarr]

Yes, the new screenshot shows it well. A shame really, as the Corkscrew is rather fuel efficient otherwise.

[Nertea]

@Einarr, @Boamere, I confirmed that KerbalActuators needs some fixes to support the multiple ThrustTransforms used on these parts. How this went undiscovered for so long (probably almost 18 months) I'm not entirely sure. I guess nobody really uses these parts :P. Don't have a full ETA on the fix but it's not very hard to do, just needs some testing. 

[Nertea]

Let me also toss in some more progress updates. I've kinda been all over the place in what I'm working on because frankly, redos are not exciting. However, progress is being made.

In NF Construction, progress goes slowly - updating all the fuel tanks in the trusses to match with the changes in NFP, and getting around to prototyping new gold foil tanks for LH2, which will also affect work on CryoTanks soon. 

These are pretty nice because they are 90% procedural and don't require hand-drawing of foil normals like the ones in Restock. They suffer in other ways but this seems like a good direction to take. 

In NF Solar, I've made good progress on the redone Trio (and by extension, Solo):

The new extension mechanism is more realistic, compact, and mechanically detailed. It should be more obvious these are ISS-derived panels now.

In addition, a new fairly large blanket array, which will likely replace the OKEB-125 based on the MegaROSA array concepts. Pain in the butt to animate though. I'd intended this tech to sit on a new version of a super-large array in the 250kW range, but that might get nixed as it was very frustrating to work on. 

Lastly, finished up the two last super-advanced rigid arrays, they're the only ones in the mod that will retain the Concentrator moniker and will have cells probably based on the SCARLET array or something similar. 

Starting the unwrap process for all these now, which is going to be nontrivial. 

Edited April 8, 2019 by Nertea

[Boamere]

8 hours ago, Nertea said:

@Einarr, @Boamere, I confirmed that KerbalActuators needs some fixes to support the multiple ThrustTransforms used on these parts. How this went undiscovered for so long (probably almost 18 months) I'm not entirely sure. I guess nobody really uses these parts :P. Don't have a full ETA on the fix but it's not very hard to do, just needs some testing. 

Hahaha wow, that is a long time. 

Thanks for your hard work dude, looking forward to all these mod updates; definitely my favourite selection of mods ever

[Nertea]

Some points on 1.7 updates for the suite:

• NF Propulsion will get updated early next week once I have had time to verify functionality
• NF Electrical will get updated early next week once I have had time to verify functionality
• NF Construction will NOT get updated until the renovations are complete (eta ~ 2-3 weeks)
• NF Solar will NOT get updated until the renovations are complete (eta 3-4 weeks)
• NF Spacecraft will get updated early next week once I have had time to verify functionality
• NF Launch Vehicles will get updated early next week once I have had time to verify functionality (renovations are too far out to wait for)
• NF Aeronautics will get updated in lockstep with the next Kerbal Actuators update (eta unknown)

[panarchist]

2 minutes ago, Nertea said:

Some points on 1.7 updates for the suite:

• NF Propulsion will get updated early next week once I have had time to verify functionality
• NF Electrical will get updated early next week once I have had time to verify functionality
• NF Construction will NOT get updated until the renovations are complete (eta ~ 2-3 weeks)
• NF Solar will NOT get updated until the renovations are complete (eta 3-4 weeks)
• NF Spacecraft will get updated early next week once I have had time to verify functionality
• NF Launch Vehicles will get updated early next week once I have had time to verify functionality (renovations are too far out to wait for)
• NF Aeronautics will get updated in lockstep with the next Kerbal Actuators update (eta unknown)

Thanks for taking the time to let everyone know. Your continued efforts to maintain and improve this suite of mods is greatly appreciated and amazing as always. Also, LOVE the procedural tank foil - those gold tanks are looking incredible.

[Barzon]

@Nertea, what will be in the NF Spacecraft update?

[Nertea]

A cursory test of 1.7 wrt any changes, plus balance adjustments to the RCS blocks. 

[Barzon]

Thanks! 

[Zah]

@Nertea I have a sort of silly request, but -- could you possibly add engine ThrustTransforms to the bottom thrusters in the RQ5 Heavy RCS Blocks to turn them into RCS/OMS (similar to the SpaceY OMS)?
I'm quite fond of their shape (I did modify the texture quite a bit) and use them in a reusable capsule concept (this is heavily modded xD), but the SpaceY shape wouldn't do it here:

I know I can "Fore by Throttle" but it makes for awkward dv calculations considering they're my main "engines".

Edited April 13, 2019 by Zah

[smotheredrun]

On 4/8/2019 at 1:16 PM, Nertea said:

Let me also toss in some more progress updates. I've kinda been all over the place in what I'm working on because frankly, redos are not exciting. However, progress is being made.

In NF Construction, progress goes slowly - updating all the fuel tanks in the trusses to match with the changes in NFP, and getting around to prototyping new gold foil tanks for LH2, which will also affect work on CryoTanks soon. 

These are pretty nice because they are 90% procedural and don't require hand-drawing of foil normals like the ones in Restock. They suffer in other ways but this seems like a good direction to take. 

In NF Solar, I've made good progress on the redone Trio (and by extension, Solo):

The new extension mechanism is more realistic, compact, and mechanically detailed. It should be more obvious these are ISS-derived panels now.

In addition, a new fairly large blanket array, which will likely replace the OKEB-125 based on the MegaROSA array concepts. Pain in the butt to animate though. I'd intended this tech to sit on a new version of a super-large array in the 250kW range, but that might get nixed as it was very frustrating to work on. 

Lastly, finished up the two last super-advanced rigid arrays, they're the only ones in the mod that will retain the Concentrator moniker and will have cells probably based on the SCARLET array or something similar. 

Starting the unwrap process for all these now, which is going to be nontrivial. 

So cool!

[Electr0ninja]

That new tank sure looks awesome.

[Barzon]

Would it be possible for the small circular panel to be made to fit a 3.125m Orion capsule?

[Nertea]

On 4/12/2019 at 7:41 PM, Zah said:

@Nertea I have a sort of silly request, but -- could you possibly add engine ThrustTransforms to the bottom thrusters in the RQ5 Heavy RCS Blocks to turn them into RCS/OMS (similar to the SpaceY OMS)?
I'm quite fond of their shape (I did modify the texture quite a bit) and use them in a reusable capsule concept (this is heavily modded xD), but the SpaceY shape wouldn't do it here:

I know I can "Fore by Throttle" but it makes for awkward dv calculations considering they're my main "engines".

I can add the appropriate transforms in the next update, but I won't be adding actual engine modules.

5 hours ago, Barzon Kerman said:

Would it be possible for the small circular panel to be made to fit a 3.125m Orion capsule?

I don't do requests for parts unless I'm already planning them. That being said, there's already a small circular panel, what's wrong with that?

[Guest]

I think he wants a size adjustment on the existing one. IIRC, it looks good on a 2.5m Orion, but for 3.125m it's a bit too small. I wouldn't mind it being scaled up, but I don't have a problem with its current size, either.

[Barzon]

Yeah, thats what I was meaning. Could it even just be a variant, which is just a larger version of the small one? Because if sized up to fit a 3.125m Orion, it sticks out really far, and ofcouse if I clip it in, they wont be able to deploy?

[lordcirth]

13 minutes ago, Barzon Kerman said:

Yeah, thats what I was meaning. Could it even just be a variant, which is just a larger version of the small one? Because if sized up to fit a 3.125m Orion, it sticks out really far, and ofcouse if I clip it in, they wont be able to deploy?

Does Tweakscale not work?

[Barzon]

It does work, but for it to be correct, I would have to clip the panels into the Service Module, which is unrealistic, and may prevent them from deploying

[Zah]

2 hours ago, Nertea said:

I can add the appropriate transforms in the next update, but I won't be adding actual engine modules.

Sweet! I can do the rest myself (:
Your mods are the backbone of my space program, thanks so much! 

[Nertea]

4 hours ago, Barzon Kerman said:

Yeah, thats what I was meaning. Could it even just be a variant, which is just a larger version of the small one? Because if sized up to fit a 3.125m Orion, it sticks out really far, and ofcouse if I clip it in, they wont be able to deploy?

Nah that's a lot of work for basically no gain.

Well I was going to deploy some mods, but turns out CurseForge hasn't stuck the 1.7 tag on yet, breaking the ability to deploy there for me. Will have to wait a bit for me to either fix my stuff to handle that or for them to edit a tiny metadata field.