Jump to content

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

Nertea

By Nertea
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

They were very much not excess parts, but Nertea thought they looked dated. TBH, I liked them better than cluttered ReStock monoprop tanks, but Nertea didn't like the idea of even doing a pure white texture variant for the mono tanks (despite that being a thing in MH), nevermind a smooth skin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Krzeszny

Krzeszny

Posted
Posted
On 11/7/2019 at 9:05 PM, Nertea said:

Generally half lives are ~10 Kerbal years, so in 10 years you'll lose 50% power. By default an 'easy mode' is implemented which stops RTGs from dropping below 10% power. 

In general installing this will give you a more differentiated power experience.

You would lose the advantage/disadvantage trade space between Argon and Xenon, I don't think it makes things harder or easier, it just gives you fewer options. Argon is still used by some engines under this patch, the HETs are the only things that are changed.

In general installing this will get all the engines using blue glowy plumes.

This makes the monoprop engines that are added use LFO instead. This was added because a previous (really, really old) version of the mod shipped massively OP LFO engines. When I replaced them with different models, with lower performance and monoprop fuels, some people were angry. I don't think the LFO patch is well balanced.

Can you add the information about these patches to the OP and possibly the CKAN descriptions? This would be so that new users know why they should or shouldn't install those patches.

I still don't understand why anyone would want to use the Xenon patch if it only removes a few possibilities, and whether current users should use the LFO patch at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
steve_v

steve_v

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Nertea said:

lolno that was really not true.

Only by your exacting standards, maker of pretty things. :P
From a player perspective, and compared to the stock offerings of the time (sans ReStock), they were glorious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RandomKerbal

RandomKerbal

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, DStaal said:

There was a discussion on it before it happened - it should be here a few (or a few dozen) pages back.  Basically:

1. Nertea didn't like the look anymore.

2. They were mostly excess parts.

3. Restock/Restock+ have similar parts.

4. They mostly weren't all that useful, or used.

Nertea, please add them back (or something similar to them, holds a lot of MP)!

1. I used and like MP engines very much.

2. They were vital and certainly not excess.

3. I don't actually used Restock (I don like the restock engines, that's it)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hemeac

hemeac

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, RandomKerbal said:

Nertea, please add them back (or something similar to them, holds a lot of MP)!

1. I used and like MP engines very much.

2. They were vital and certainly not excess.

3. I don't actually used Restock (I don like the restock engines, that's it)

@RandomKerbal Here's a patch which will restore them.  Patching will only be a temporary solution as Nertea or any asset creator who soft deprecates parts will remove them in future updates, so if you want to use them in future updates, make them part of a personal parts folder.  As my math books used to say though, "this is an exercise left to the reader."

 

Spoiler 

@PART[monoprop-tank-*]:NEEDS[NearFutureSpacecraft]
{
	@description = #$RESOURCE[MonoPropellant]/maxAmount$ units of MonoPropellant can be stored in this tank! Cool.
	@TechHidden = False
	@category = FuelTank
}

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Incarnation of Chaos

Incarnation of Chaos

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, steve_v said:

They're not gone, they're just hidden. Unhiding them again with Modulemanager is trivial.

Golden rule of KSP: parts never die. They're just missing in action.

Even if they aren't even included in a current version you can just pull them from a previous version and make a frankenstein install. (And be responsible for any potential issues with said install). 

It's one of my favorite things about KSP modding xD

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DerekL1963

DerekL1963

Posted
Posted
49 minutes ago, Nertea said:

I am not really certain why you all think that something I removed from the mod over 2 years ago would come back. 

Because regardless of the medium, die hard fans will always remaing die hard fans!  :)  :)

I still miss your old station parts....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NiL

NiL

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, Nertea said:

why you all think that something I removed from the mod over 2 years ago would come back. 

We do not think, we're hoping, because they're cool and useful for those who do not use LFO patch for NFS. Current Monoprop tanks are too short for some purposes, and I personally ended up modifying .cfgs for CryoTanks to add Monoprop variant to all tanks. If you don't quite want to see them in the mod, maybe you could make an optional unlocking patch? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Roger Workman

Roger Workman

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, NiL said:

We do not think, we're hoping, because they're cool and useful for those who do not use LFO patch for NFS. Current Monoprop tanks are too short for some purposes, and I personally ended up modifying .cfgs for CryoTanks to add Monoprop variant to all tanks. If you don't quite want to see them in the mod, maybe you could make an optional unlocking patch? 

I agree. The hull textures are way better looking than those of most other thanks (and especially the MP tanks) in my eyes, so thank you @hemeac for sharing that patch.

However, what I originally wanted to ask: Is there a patch to make the NFLV engines burn LH2, similar to the extra patch included for the Restock engines?

I tried to make sense of what is written in said patch in order to come up with one myself, however that appears to lie beyond my capabilities. Some advice would be greatly appreciated :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Krzeszny

Krzeszny

Posted
Posted (edited)

I've just noticed something weird. None of the 11 engines from NF Launch Vehicles show up in the stock spawn list, Filter by Function > Engines.
When I filter by manufacturer and select NearFutureLaunchVehicles, they all show up (and more - there's a LV-T60-SV 'Eagle' duplicate, so there are 11+1 engines). They're also shown in community filters (in all engines > all parts/rockets).

About the engines themselves, the models are really nice. However, many are too similar to stock engines in terms of performance and just make the spawn list too big. I know, complaining about too many cool parts in a mod is a bit weird.

 

I have a few concerns about the balance and role-design of the engines, including internal balance/realism:

  1. LV-T85 'Kite' costs the same as KR-74 'Lynx' and has practically the same thrust, but somehow Lynx has 20 more vacuum ISP and 5 more sea level ISP, 50% more gimballing range and 50 Newtons more thrust.
    Furthermore, Kite clearly looks like a sea level engine based on its nozzle and 325 vacuum ISP seems like a bit too much.
  2. Lynx costs almost as mich as a stock Rhino while having half the thrust, and yet the nozzle is the same size as Rhino's.
  3. They're all wildly overpriced - in stock you'd get at least a twice as powerful engine for the price of a Post-Kerbin Mining Operation (from NearFutureLV) engine.
    With ReStock+ the difference gets huge. Compare ReStock+'s Corgi with NFLV' Osprey:
    • Both have 355 vacuum ISP.
    • Osprey has 33% more thrust than Corgi.
    • Osprey costs 500% as much as Corgi.
      The engines in Stock get more expensive with thrust, not with ISP (mostly).
  4. Eaglet has 350 ISP with a not-so-optimal bell nozzle (and no plumbing whatsoever), and even though it's about as bit as Sphinx, it has 4 times more thrust??? One way to improve the model without rebalancing the stats would be to convert it to an expansion-deflection bell.
  5. to be continued

On a sidenote, I feel like Kite and Osprey (and Eaglet mentioned above) could use some more plumbing, especially for nozzle cooling.

If you're looking for inspiration, check out not only expansion-deflection nozzles, but also double-bell nozzles. I haven't seen any in KSP mods yet.

Edited by Krzeszny
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hemeac

hemeac

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, Krzeszny said:

I've just noticed something weird. None of the 11 engines from NF Launch Vehicles show up in the stock spawn list, Filter by Function > Engines.
When I filter by manufacturer and select NearFutureLaunchVehicles, they all show up (and more - there's a LV-T60-SV 'Eagle' duplicate, so there are 11+1 engines). They're also shown in community filters (in all engines > all parts/rockets).

About the engines themselves, the models are really nice. However, many are too similar to stock engines in terms of performance and just make the spawn list too big. I know, complaining about too many cool parts in a mod is a bit weird.

 

I have a few concerns about the balance and role-design of the engines, including internal balance/realism:

  1. LV-T85 'Kite' costs the same as KR-74 'Lynx' and has practically the same thrust, but somehow Lynx has 20 more vacuum ISP and 5 more sea level ISP, 50% more gimballing range and 50 Newtons more thrust.
    Furthermore, Kite clearly looks like a sea level engine based on its nozzle and 325 vacuum ISP seems like a bit too much.
  2. Lynx costs almost as mich as a stock Rhino while having half the thrust, and yet the nozzle is the same size as Rhino's.
  3. They're all wildly overpriced - in stock you'd get at least a twice as powerful engine for the price of a Post-Kerbin Mining Operation (from NearFutureLV) engine.
    With ReStock+ the difference gets huge. Compare ReStock+'s Corgi with NFLV' Osprey:
    • Both have 355 vacuum ISP.
    • Osprey has 33% more thrust than Corgi.
    • Osprey costs 500% as much as Corgi.
      The engines in Stock get more expensive with thrust, not with ISP (mostly).
  4. Eaglet has 350 ISP with a not-so-optimal bell nozzle (and no plumbing whatsoever), and even though it's about as bit as Sphinx, it has 4 times more thrust??? One way to improve the model without rebalancing the stats would be to convert it to an expansion-deflection bell.
  5. to be continued

On a sidenote, I feel like Kite and Osprey (and Eaglet mentioned above) could use some more plumbing, especially for nozzle cooling.

If you're looking for inspiration, check out not only expansion-deflection nozzles, but also double-bell nozzles. I haven't seen any in KSP mods yet.

@Krzeszny, The Kite, Eaglet, Buzzard and Osprey engines are deprecated since the 2.0 release in April which is why they don't appear in the VAB.  I haven't had any issues with the replacement engines showing up either in the Tech Tree or in the VAB.  Here's the list for reference:
 

  • KS-1E 'Goldfish' Liquid Fuel Engine: Micro booster engine based on RocketLab Rutherford. 0.625m and Compact variants.
  • KS-1M 'Otter' Liquid Fuel Engine: Tiny booster engine based on Merlin 1D. 0.625m, Boattail and Compact variants.
  • KS-10AJ 'Walrus' Liquid Fuel Engine: Small booster engine based on AR-1. 1.25m, Boattail and Compact variants.
  • KS-107 'Porpoise' Liquid Fuel Engine: Medium booster engine based on TR-107. 1.875m, Boattail and Compact variants.
  • KS-160 'Orca' Liquid Fuel Engine: Large booster engine based on Space Transportation Booster Engine study. 2.5m, Boattail and Compact variants.
  • KS-600AJ 'Manatee' Liquid Fuel Engine: Huge booster engine based on AR-1 cluster. 3.75m only.
  • KR-1E-V 'Angora' Liquid Fuel Engine: Tiny sustainer engine based on Rutherford Vacuum. 0.625m, Boattail and Compact variants.
  • KR-1M-V 'Sphinx' Liquid Fuel Engine: Small sustainer engine based on Merlin 1D Vacuum. 1.25m, Boattail and Compact variants.
  • KR-74 'Lynx' Liquid Fuel Engine: Medium sustainer engine based on RD-704. 1.875m, Boattail and Compact variants.
  • KR-84 'Ocelot' Liquid Fuel Engine: Large sustainer engine based on RS-84. 2.5m, Boattail and Compact variants.
  • KR-701 'Cougar' Liquid Fuel Engine: Huge sustainer engine based on RD-701. 3.75m, Boattail and Compact variants.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hemeac

hemeac

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Roger Workman said:

I agree. The hull textures are way better looking than those of most other thanks (and especially the MP tanks) in my eyes, so thank you @hemeac for sharing that patch.

However, what I originally wanted to ask: Is there a patch to make the NFLV engines burn LH2, similar to the extra patch included for the Restock engines?

I tried to make sense of what is written in said patch in order to come up with one myself, however that appears to lie beyond my capabilities. Some advice would be greatly appreciated :D

Glad that patch was helpful.  There isn't a patch for NFLV.  Nertea modelled the current batch off of Kerlox engines, so I would guess a LH2 patch is out of scope.  The patches in Cryogenics only converted engines that were based off LH2 engines.  If that is not a concern to you, I've posted a general guideline, on how you can create LH2 patches.  I don't think there is any "automagic" way to convert and have them balanced, so I think the approach will require individual testing for what works for you.  Plumes will still work, but will technically be incorrect as this won't convert the effects to appear as hydrolox flames.

Spoiler 

@PART[insertpartnamehere]:AFTER[NearFutureLaunchVehicles]
{
  @mass = 2.09 // If you want to change the mass of the engine, here is where you would do it
  @MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX]
  {
    @maxThrust = 250 // This is the thrust in kN in a Vacuum.  Thrust at sea level Kerbin is based on the atmosphere curve, specifically the relative efficiency of the engine at sea level compared to the vacuum.  Thus in this example, thrust at sea level would be 120/465 = 25.8% the level in a vacuum, or 64.5 kN
    @PROPELLANT[LiquidFuel] // This changes LiquidFuel to LqdHydrogen and modifies the fuel ratio to be in balance with other cryogenic engines
    {
      @name = LqdHydrogen
      @ratio = 1.5
    }
    @PROPELLANT[Oxidizer]
    {
      @ratio = 0.1
    }
    !atmosphereCurve {} // This deletes the existing atmosphereCurve
	// This is a general curve that is similar to what is in place in Nertea's cryogenic engines.  Looking at those specifically may be a better reference than the extra Restock patch atmosphereCurve's.  Those look to be unbalanced in very dense atmospheres.
    atmosphereCurve
    {
      key = 0 465 // The first number references the pressure (in this vacuum), the second references the specific impulse of the engine
      key = 1 120
      key = 4 85
	  key = 12 10 // It is generally good practice to have a very low specific impulse at high pressures
    }
  }
}

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coyotesfrontier

coyotesfrontier

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, hemeac said:

Glad that patch was helpful.  There isn't a patch for NFLV.  Nertea modelled the current batch off of Kerlox engines, so I would guess a LH2 patch is out of scope.  The patches in Cryogenics only converted engines that were based off LH2 engines.  If that is not a concern to you, I've posted a general guideline, on how you can create LH2 patches.  I don't think there is any "automagic" way to convert and have them balanced, so I think the approach will require individual testing for what works for you.  Plumes will still work, but will technically be incorrect as this won't convert the effects to appear as hydrolox flames.

  Reveal hidden contents 


@PART[insertpartnamehere]:AFTER[NearFutureLaunchVehicles]
{
  @mass = 2.09 // If you want to change the mass of the engine, here is where you would do it
  @MODULE[ModuleEnginesFX]
  {
    @maxThrust = 250 // This is the thrust in kN in a Vacuum.  Thrust at sea level Kerbin is based on the atmosphere curve, specifically the relative efficiency of the engine at sea level compared to the vacuum.  Thus in this example, thrust at sea level would be 120/465 = 25.8% the level in a vacuum, or 64.5 kN
    @PROPELLANT[LiquidFuel] // This changes LiquidFuel to LqdHydrogen and modifies the fuel ratio to be in balance with other cryogenic engines
    {
      @name = LqdHydrogen
      @ratio = 1.5
    }
    @PROPELLANT[Oxidizer]
    {
      @ratio = 0.1
    }
    !atmosphereCurve {} // This deletes the existing atmosphereCurve
	// This is a general curve that is similar to what is in place in Nertea's cryogenic engines.  Looking at those specifically may be a better reference than the extra Restock patch atmosphereCurve's.  Those look to be unbalanced in very dense atmospheres.
    atmosphereCurve
    {
      key = 0 465 // The first number references the pressure (in this vacuum), the second references the specific impulse of the engine
      key = 1 120
      key = 4 85
	  key = 12 10 // It is generally good practice to have a very low specific impulse at high pressures
    }
  }
}

 

 

You mean LCH4 (Liquid Methane)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hemeac

hemeac

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, coyotesfrontier said:

You mean LCH4 (Liquid Methane)?

I meant the CryoEnginesRestock patch in Cryogenic Engines as that is what I assumed Roger Workman was referring to "NFLV engines burn LH2, similar to the extra patch included for the Restock engines".  The NearFutureMethalox patch in NFLV is outdated in that it converts the deprecated NFLV engines, which I believe may have been based on methalox engines.  One could use a related approach in that case except to change the propellants to:

 

Spoiler 

@PROPELLANT[LiquidFuel]
    {
      @name = LqdMethane
      @ratio = 3
    }
    @PROPELLANT[Oxidizer]
    {
      @ratio = 1
    }
}

 

I can make the patches easily enough, but I am not an expert on how to balance the engines for a good gameplay experience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JadeOfMaar

JadeOfMaar

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, hemeac said:

I can make the patches easily enough, but I am not an expert on how to balance the engines for a good gameplay experience.

You could take a page from my work on Tundra Exploration. That said, the engine patch is a bit dated, requiring CryoTanksMethalox or Rational Resources to be present, and doesn't allow you to change the propellant mix in-game, and doesn't simply multiply all thrust and Isp by a given factor. The RCS patch is perfect, however. Like what I did for NF Proplusion's RCS, on someone's request on Discord.

bt597bE.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hemeac

hemeac

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, coyotesfrontier said:

Ah sorry, I got confused

If I wasn't in the middle of writing some personal patches, I would have no clue.  There's a lot of parts and patches that do a lot of things.

 

15 minutes ago, JadeOfMaar said:

You could take a page from my work on Tundra Exploration. That said, the engine patch is a bit dated, requiring CryoTanksMethalox or Rational Resources to be present, and doesn't allow you to change the propellant mix in-game, and doesn't simply multiply all thrust and Isp by a given factor. The RCS patch is perfect, however. Like what I did for NF Proplusion's RCS, on someone's request on Discord.

bt597bE.jpg

Thanks for the tip, will take a look :-)  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coyotesfrontier

coyotesfrontier

Posted
Posted (edited)

Speaking of patches, I've created a variation on the patch that turns the ReStock engines into cryogenic ones. Instead of just converting them from LFO to LH2/O, it adds an LH2/O alternate mode instead, preventing you from losing out on the engine's stock functions (For example, with the original patch, the 3.75m size class no longer has any LFO engines. With this, the engines retain their LFO abilities but now can also optionally burn LH2/O). The patch has RealPlume compatibility, but no compatibility for the Skiff's ReStockPlus equivalent, the Caravel:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jIzI05qojgHedQLhj7HNhxakCi7cEnBM/view?usp=sharing

License is public domain, not sure if licenses are required for simple patches

Edited by coyotesfrontier
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...