Kerbalized SpaceX

[selfish_meme]

Quote

First, Musk posted an artist's illustration he called "Moon Base Alpha" depicting SpaceX's Interplanetary Transport Vehicles (ITVs) at what appears to be base on the moon. Gray round domes in the distance offer a hint of habitation areas for astronauts while the Earth shines in the sky overhead. A second image, which Musk captioned "Mars City," shows an illustration of just that: a glass-domed city on Mars with SpaceX's giant ITV colony ships bathed in brilliant spotlights. 

Just found out those images come from an artists impression that Elon liked, and has possibly used on the SpaceX site.

The most confusing thing about the official SpaceX videos is the Booster is shown landing in a crib and also with legs! Mind is racing on how to implement that with my own stock build

Spoiler

 

Edited March 23, 2018 by selfish_meme

[harrisjosh2711]

35 minutes ago, selfish_meme said:

Just found out those images come from an artists impression that Elon liked, and has possibly used on the SpaceX site

My whole argument concerning the those outer flanges is nobody truly knows what the BFR looks like as it might not even be out the conceptual phase. That likely is something what it will look like, I guess it depends on its actual design. I cant imagine where else you would put the legs, you wouldn't want them any closer to the engines. When people start claiming "like the real BFR" I get into arguments because as far as I know we only have a fuel tank design for a real BFR. Next week when some artist conceptualizes his rendition it will look a little cooler and all of a sudden that will be the new "real BFR". On a positive note I'm sure things are advancing along a lot faster now that most of the R&D resources are geared towards the raptor and BFR after the success of the Falcon Heavy I doubt we will see a BFR flight in 2019 like Elon says but hey it doesn't hurt to dream huh? Elon has certainly already proved that much to us.

Edited March 23, 2018 by harrisjosh2711

[eskimo22]

22 hours ago, harrisjosh2711 said:

@selfish_meme It might look heated up in here but were just passionate folk arguing what we believe. Me and @eskimo22frequently go back and forth like this but we keep it civil. He's so picky he needs to make his own BFR though..... I kid.

I did build my own BFR, but it's a set of STL files, for 3d printing

Edited March 23, 2018 by eskimo22

[eskimo22]

BFR RCS thrusters might use glow-plugs, like in a diesel engine, as opposed to spark ignition. Glow-plugs would be tougher and more reliable than spark ignition. The raptor engine won't be using TEA-TEB because using TEA-TEB limits the number of ignitions to the size of the TEA-TEB tank (ie, why the falcon heavy center core crashed, not enough TEA-TEB). Imagine if the center core had 80 people on it and crashed because it ran out of ignition fuel, that would not happen with electric ignition (spark/glow-plug). Stoves, grills, blowtorches, BBQ lighters all use spark ignition to ignite flammable gas and are very reliable (I have never had my blowtorch fail to ignite). not taking about the mod, I'm talking about the real BFR and raptor engine.

Edited March 24, 2018 by eskimo22

[harrisjosh2711]

20 minutes ago, eskimo22 said:

BFR RCS thrusters might use glow-plugs, like in a diesel engine, as opposed to spark ignition. Glow-plugs would be tougher and more reliable than spark ignition. The raptor engine won't be using TEA-TEB because using TEA-TEB limits the number of ignitions to the size of the TEA-TEB tank (ie, why the falcon heavy center core crashed, not enough TEA-TEB). Imagine if the center core had 80 people on it and crashed because it ran out of ignition fuel, that would not happen with electric ignition (spark/glow-plug). Stoves, grills, blowtorches, BBQ lighters all use spark ignition to ignite flammable gas and are very reliable (I have never had my blowtorch fail to ignite). not taking about the mod, I'm talking about the real BFR and raptor engine.

Ur still on that? What you are saying makes sense for a blowtorch. I have already provided you with info pertaining to the reliability and use of flames to light rocket engines provided in a video from an aerospace engineer. If you watched the video and learned anything from it is on you. You keep making all these claims about a piece of a equipment that doesn’t exist, you cite zero evidence, and keep raving on about how your blow tourch is some how like some thing that has lots of power, travels in space, vibrates excessively, and needs to light up something traveling hypersonic speeds in atmosphere. Cite some legit evidence from spaceX themselves or go over to the spacex forums and argue with someone over there. This information is only serving to make people more dumb.

[eskimo22]

46 minutes ago, harrisjosh2711 said:

Ur still on that? What you are saying makes sense for a blowtorch. I have already provided you with info pertaining to the reliability and use of flames to light rocket engines provided in a video from an aerospace engineer. If you watched the video and learned anything from it is on you. You keep making all these claims about a piece of a equipment that doesn’t exist, you cite zero evidence, and keep raving on about how your blow tourch is some how like some thing that has lots of power, travels in space, vibrates excessively, and needs to light up something traveling hypersonic speeds in atmosphere. Cite some legit evidence from spaceX themselves or go over to the spacex forums and argue with someone over there. This information is only serving to make people more dumb.

I'm just speculating about the RCS

 https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/10/its-propulsion-evolution-raptor-engine/ source for spark ignition of the raptor engine

Edited March 24, 2018 by eskimo22

[harrisjosh2711]

1 hour ago, eskimo22 said:

I'm just speculating about the RCS

 https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/10/its-propulsion-evolution-raptor-engine/ source for spark ignition of the raptor engine

The article is from 2016 but seems like the most reliable source outside spaceX. The article states " Additionally, it will eliminate the TEA-TEB hypergolic cartridges currently used by Merlin engines. Instead, Raptor has implemented a new spark ignition system that, at least theoretically, would allow for unlimited re-ignitions.". Perhaps you are correct about the engines. This is why you cite your source and don't try to start explaining things with a blow torch. It appears from the story SpaceX is remaining somewhat tight lipped about how they will be lighting the engine, as the author didn't know much about it, which is understandable considering they have very strong competitors in a very early an undeveloped market. As to your "speculation" with the RCS, I thought you were saying it was a fact.

[eskimo22]

2 minutes ago, harrisjosh2711 said:

The article is from 2016 but seems like the most reliable source outside spaceX. The article states " Additionally, it will eliminate the TEA-TEB hypergolic cartridges currently used by Merlin engines. Instead, Raptor has implemented a new spark ignition system that, at least theoretically, would allow for unlimited re-ignitions.". Perhaps you are correct about the engines. This is why you cite your source and don't try to start explaining things with a blow torch. It appears from the story SpaceX is remaining somewhat tight lipped about how they will be lighting the engine, as the author didn't know much about it, which is understandable considering they have very strong competitors in a very early an undeveloped market. As to your "speculation" with the RCS, I thought you were saying it was a fact.

sry about that, should have specified.

[JoshTheCoward]

Beautiful Mod than you so much! I am playing this in RSS/RO any idea what the cfgs would be for that?

[harrisjosh2711]

1 hour ago, JoshTheCoward said:

Beautiful Mod than you so much! I am playing this in RSS/RO any idea what the cfgs would be for that?

No, I was working on some recently but haven't gotten around to finishing them. If RSS/RO comes to 1.4.x I will finish them. I'm skeptical it will though I think I seen something about one of their people saying that performance is worse in 1.4 so they weren't worried about it. Of which I must point out, that person is out their mind. I can build a 500+ parts ship in 1.4 with mods and my clock in the green. 1.3 my clock was yellow with 50 parts probably.

[RaiderMan]

so performance is better in 1.4.x?

[harrisjosh2711]

1 hour ago, RaiderMan said:

so performance is better in 1.4.x?

For me, way better. This base right here has about 1500 parts sitting in its immediate vicinity. I'm on EVA and the clock is consistently staying in the green. Actually Bill had to push the rover out and ride down to the surface in the cargo bay because I forgot the lander was only a two seater and this was a long term mission.

[JoshTheCoward]

11 hours ago, harrisjosh2711 said:

No, I was working on some recently but haven't gotten around to finishing them. If RSS/RO comes to 1.4.x I will finish them. I'm skeptical it will though I think I seen something about one of their people saying that performance is worse in 1.4 so they weren't worried about it. Of which I must point out, that person is out their mind. I can build a 500+ parts ship in 1.4 with mods and my clock in the green. 1.3 my clock was yellow with 50 parts probably.

I have no clue what I would be doing but I can do any grunt work if you point me in the right direction. The size of the rockets seems right if you set the rescale to 1 but the fuel and oxidizer seems off. How would you go about figuring out the proper amount?

[harrisjosh2711]

6 hours ago, JoshTheCoward said:

I have no clue what I would be doing but I can do any grunt work if you point me in the right direction. The size of the rockets seems right if you set the rescale to 1 but the fuel and oxidizer seems off. How would you go about figuring out the proper amount?

The heights aren't right. I have files where I have fixed the height for everything besides the BFR I believe. I haven't fixed any of the attachment nodes for the tanks though. Considering the amount of work its taking to get working right in 1.4, I mostly considered that project on-hold until everything was updated to 1.4.X. I'm in my senior year of college, which is my main focus right now, not the mod. If you would like to give it a shot I can provide you with the files but you would need to fix the attachment nodes on the tanks. Also, I think this version might have a different tank or two, I re-made one or two of the tanks because I didn't like how scaling the height was making the textures look. You would also need to fix the fuel numbers & mass(I may have already done mass) on the tanks, as-well as the thrust/ISP on the engines. Most of that info is readily available. As to figuring out the fuel/oxy. numbers- the easiest way would be to copy the fuel amounts from a procedural tank (or just stack tanks and take their sum) of the exact same size as the tank you are working with. Then you can just use trial and error for any fine adjustments you may need to make. None of this is technically to difficult, if you can multiply and divide you can do it pretty easily, but its time consuming. The hardest part will likely be making sure you have the right config. for the corresponding part. 

[eskimo22]

any pics of the new BFR wing attached to the ship?

[harrisjosh2711]

15 minutes ago, eskimo22 said:

any pics of the new BFR wing attached to the ship?

The only one I have right this second I took because I was taking a screen shot of a bug so I'm not going to share that, but ill try to get a few next time I have the chance to fire up the game. 

[JoshTheCoward]

2 hours ago, harrisjosh2711 said:

The heights aren't right. I have files where I have fixed the height for everything besides the BFR I believe. I haven't fixed any of the attachment nodes for the tanks though. Considering the amount of work its taking to get working right in 1.4, I mostly considered that project on-hold until everything was updated to 1.4.X. I'm in my senior year of college, which is my main focus right now, not the mod. If you would like to give it a shot I can provide you with the files but you would need to fix the attachment nodes on the tanks. Also, I think this version might have a different tank or two, I re-made one or two of the tanks because I didn't like how scaling the height was making the textures look. You would also need to fix the fuel numbers & mass(I may have already done mass) on the tanks, as-well as the thrust/ISP on the engines. Most of that info is readily available. As to figuring out the fuel/oxy. numbers- the easiest way would be to copy the fuel amounts from a procedural tank (or just stack tanks and take their sum) of the exact same size as the tank you are working with. Then you can just use trial and error for any fine adjustments you may need to make. None of this is technically to difficult, if you can multiply and divide you can do it pretty easily, but its time consuming. The hardest part will likely be making sure you have the right config. for the corresponding part. 

Yeah send me the files, if you got time, I can give it a try. Worst case I can get the fuels mass and thrust right so it can make orbit.

[harrisjosh2711]

1 hour ago, JoshTheCoward said:

Yeah send me the files, if you got time, I can give it a try. Worst case I can get the fuels mass and thrust right so it can make orbit.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2fhfvxp0n3nbfay/KerbalizedSpaceX.zip?dl=0

I think this was the latest version I worked on. To fix the attachment nodes you need to multiply the re-scale value times its current value. You will have to fix these or use the movement tool to pull everything into the right place. Most of the nodes lie bellow where they are suppose to be because the fuel tanks are now a good bit taller.

[sp1989]

I have been away from KSP for almost a year now. I think that is part of that natural progression of a veteran KSP player. But I think I am back now. Don't worry I am not using your thread to announce my return however I do want so a combination of the Making History update and yes this mod has got me excited about KSP once again. 

I do have to ask even though I am gonna throw this in my save file to find out for myself. Does this work in in 1.4.2? It looks like its just parts so I don't see why it wouldn't. Anyway good luck and thank you I will be watching this mod closely

Best.

[harrisjosh2711]

30 minutes ago, sp1989 said:

I have been away from KSP for almost a year now. I think that is part of that natural progression of a veteran KSP player. But I think I am back now. Don't worry I am not using your thread to announce my return however I do want so a combination of the Making History update and yes this mod has got me excited about KSP once again. 

I do have to ask even though I am gonna throw this in my save file to find out for myself. Does this work in in 1.4.2? It looks like its just parts so I don't see why it wouldn't. Anyway good luck and thank you I will be watching this mod closely

Best.

It will work yes, but there is a few minor issues, so I would suggest waiting until it is updated for 1.4.x but it wont break your game or anything if you decide to use it. If you do use it in 1.4.x I would remove the aerosurface.dll inside and replace it with the current version. (It has been updated). I'm not sure what they did with the new RCS effects but it seems they turned the transforms the opposite way on the new RCS so everything that comes integrated with RCS  thrusters is spraying the opposite way that it should be. I'm working on fixing it. Were coming up on the end of the semester at school so everything is coming on pretty hard leaving me with little time to invest into this. 

[sp1989]

2 hours ago, harrisjosh2711 said:

It will work yes, but there is a few minor issues, so I would suggest waiting until it is updated for 1.4.x but it wont break your game or anything if you decide to use it. If you do use it in 1.4.x I would remove the aerosurface.dll inside and replace it with the current version. (It has been updated). I'm not sure what they did with the new RCS effects but it seems they turned the transforms the opposite way on the new RCS so everything that comes integrated with RCS  thrusters is spraying the opposite way that it should be. I'm working on fixing it. Were coming up on the end of the semester at school so everything is coming on pretty hard leaving me with little time to invest into this. 

No No. As always IRL is more important than KSP. I played around with them and I love the way they look. I love the potential of this and I will wait until they are 100% until I start putting them into the rotation of my regular save. But I do have plans for them. Well done. 

[Damon]

22 hours ago, harrisjosh2711 said:

I'm not sure what they did with the new RCS effects but it seems they turned the transforms the opposite way on the new RCS so everything that comes integrated with RCS  thrusters is spraying the opposite way that it should be. I'm working on fixing it.

Change ModuleRCS to ModuleRCSFX if you haven't already. Solved my problems.

Edited April 4, 2018 by damonvv

[eskimo22]

Plz make the F9 landing legs tweakscale compatible in the next update.

new pics of the BFR?

[harrisjosh2711]

4 hours ago, eskimo22 said:

Plz make the F9 landing legs tweakscale compatible in the next update.

new pics of the BFR?

Sure, just make sure to remind me the next post I mention a release in case it slips my mind.

no pics yet, sry

[eskimo22]

Please hurry up with the new BFR, my Kerbals are on strike, they refuse to build another expendable Super Heavy Launch Vehicle.  There has been public outcry from taxpayers over the sheer cost of expendable SHLVs. The space program could loose political support over this. They need evidence of progress in reusable SHLVs (BFR pics). just kidding, don't get mad.

Edited April 9, 2018 by eskimo22