Xenon and On

[JadeOfMaar]

Holy.... Well that'll help to settle the de-abstract LF camp.

But we'd still welcome LH2 as a discreet propellant. LH2 still has its uses after all. Not only as the main fuel beside the oxidizer, but in cases such as diluting the Metallic Hydrogen ignition to that its engine doesn't evaporate itself, and as the propellant for the NERVA and other NTRs. ( @DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE )

[prestja]

4 minutes ago, JadeOfMaar said:

But we'd still welcome LH2 as a discreet propellant. LH2 still has its uses after all.

 

4 minutes ago, JadeOfMaar said:

and as the propellant for the NERVA and other NTRs.

I suspect this might be the case given the dev team's love for Nertea's Near Future Technologies suite.

4 minutes ago, JadeOfMaar said:

but in cases such as diluting the Metallic Hydrogen ignition to that its engine doesn't evaporate itself

This has already been addressed by using water to cool metallic hydrogen engines in-atmosphere and caesium while in a vacuum (hence magnetic nozzles).

Edited October 16, 2020 by prestja

[DerkyJerkyWreaksHavoc]

1 minute ago, prestja said:

 

I suspect this might be the case given the dev team's love for Nertea's Near Future Technologies suite.

This has already been addressed by using water to cool metallic hydrogen engines in-atmosphere and caesium while in a vacuum (hence magnetic nozzles).

One of the reasons i dislike hydrolox in the game is because its gonna make it harder for us to create rockets with more energy per propellant since hydrolox is so low in density. i prefer Methalox and Kerosene for that matter but you are right that Hydrolox still has it uses and advantages.

[Kerminator K-100]

The art looks amazing! 

[Nate Simpson]

15 hours ago, shdwlrd said:

I'm not a fan of the mushroom topped colony buildings. I hope to be able to move away from that design when the colony matures.

The mushroom buildings are among the largest of the phase 1 colony modules -- i.e. they are brought to the site by vehicles, rather than built out of local materials. Basically very large space tents. The rectangular buildings you see on the right are examples of phase 2 habs that are much heavier-duty and made on site. So you're right on the money here -- as your colony matures there will be less inflatable stuff and a lot more heavy metal.

[Guest]

26 minutes ago, Nate Simpson said:

i.e. they are brought to the site by vehicles, rather than built out of local materials. Basically very large space tents.

If there's a part of the game I can't wait to see it's the whole "inventory system" for resources, modules and, I hope, parts and crafts.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Nate Simpson said:

The mushroom buildings are among the largest of the phase 1 colony modules -- i.e. they are brought to the site by vehicles, rather than built out of local materials. Basically very large space tents. The rectangular buildings you see on the right are examples of phase 2 habs that are much heavier-duty and made on site. So you're right on the money here -- as your colony matures there will be less inflatable stuff and a lot more heavy metal.

The phase 2 seems to be more city like TBH. While I like a mix of both phase 1 and 2, it's a good idea since realistically in the future colonies will act more and more like cities.

[prestja]

8 minutes ago, The Doodling Astronaut said:

The phase 2 seems to be more city like TBH. While I like a mix of both phase 1 and 2, it's a good idea since realistically in the future colonies will act more and more like cities.

So, uh, what does phase 3 look like?

[Nate Simpson]

9 minutes ago, prestja said:

So, uh, what does phase 3 look like?

[mcwaffles2003]

5 hours ago, prestja said:

Let's list out the propellants (confirmed ISRU in bold):

• Liquid fuel (methalox?)
• Oxidizer
• Monopropellant (hydrazine?)
• Xenon gas
• Metallic Hydrogen
• Helium-3 (ICF?)
• Nuclear pellets

What fuel do we expect the fusion torchships to consume?

If NSWRs are in the game 20% Ubr₄ should be in the game and 90% in the presence of better centrifuges

http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/enginelist2.php#nswr

12 minutes ago, Nate Simpson said:

If we don't get a bender statue stock crying out "REMEMBER ME" I will now be disappointed immensely

[Okhin]

44 minutes ago, The Doodling Astronaut said:

The phase 2 seems to be more city like TBH. While I like a mix of both phase 1 and 2, it's a good idea since realistically in the future colonies will act more and more like cities.

Or over engineered fuel stations.

[mcwaffles2003]

7 minutes ago, Okhin said:

Or over engineered fuel stations.

• Fuel supply
• Fuel production
• Power production
• Parts supply
• Parts production
• Building production
• Food production to keep producers working

that's a fairly sized town right there

[TLTay]

2 hours ago, Nate Simpson said:

The mushroom buildings are among the largest of the phase 1 colony modules -- i.e. they are brought to the site by vehicles, rather than built out of local materials. Basically very large space tents. The rectangular buildings you see on the right are examples of phase 2 habs that are much heavier-duty and made on site. So you're right on the money here -- as your colony matures there will be less inflatable stuff and a lot more heavy metal.

With the inflatable domes: It seems weird to have them up on stilts, but I understand that terrain deformation to make a flat surface placement is not in the cards... Will there be a compromise for aesthetics? Maybe a slightly built-off-the-ground concrete-looking foundation option so that they are on a flat surface, but not in the air?

[Okhin]

Quote

that's a fairly sized town right there

You're missing socializing spaces for it to be a town. Before that, it's still an over-engineered fuel station. Or a village maybe (but even then, there's social spaces).

[Guest]

36 minutes ago, Nate Simpson said:

snip

haha nice way to tell us without getting in trouble

 

[shdwlrd]

9 hours ago, Nate Simpson said:

The mushroom buildings are among the largest of the phase 1 colony modules -- i.e. they are brought to the site by vehicles, rather than built out of local materials. Basically very large space tents. The rectangular buildings you see on the right are examples of phase 2 habs that are much heavier-duty and made on site. So you're right on the money here -- as your colony matures there will be less inflatable stuff and a lot more heavy metal.

So there is a possibility to make something like this:

Spoiler

Or I can see someone trying to build something like this:

Spoiler

 

Edited October 17, 2020 by shdwlrd

[Incarnation of Chaos]

14 hours ago, DAFATRONALDO2007 IN SPACE said:

One of the reasons i dislike hydrolox in the game is because its gonna make it harder for us to create rockets with more energy per propellant since hydrolox is so low in density. i prefer Methalox and Kerosene for that matter but you are right that Hydrolox still has it uses and advantages.

How? You're still going to have Kerolox rockets if they decide to add Hydrolox, you'd just have the option of a "Master of none rocket" that could do everything alright but wasn't extremely well optimized for anything specific or slapping a hydrolox upper stage on the same rocket for increased performance in Vacuum (Or Basically-Vacuum like Duna, i use NERVA there all the time. And they're patched to use LH2, which actually HELPS with their abysmal TWR).

Heck they could even implement a fuel switcher like Nertea's NERVA's where you can switch on-the-fly between LH2 and LF, which would also apply the respective ISP, Thrust and Fuel consumption values for the given fuel. If they did this for enough engines it might even quell the desire for procedural engines a bit, since the decision to use an engine in a specific "Mode" would also affect it's suitability for a specific regime and therefore give way more flexibility and customization for every mission. Bonus; you can make every engine default to Kerolox/LF and only allow fuel switching when "Advanced Tweakables" or similar is tripped. Best of both worlds (Or 4 if they have Methalox and Ammonia fuels (I really want some NH4 for my nukes)).

Also i don't think this would be a barrier for long gameplay wise, we're getting Project Orion which is the epitome of "Brute forcing your way to space" xD

P.S

I didn't even realize we had font settings on this forum o.o.

2 hours ago, shdwlrd said:

So there is a possibility to make something like this:

  Reveal hidden contents

Or I can see someone trying to build something like this:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

And since it's KSP; you could literally launch the replica of the Burj Khalifa you just painstakingly crafted into space afterwards if you wanted. Because M O A R B O O S T E R S.

[SOXBLOX]

I'm liking the differentiation of fuel types; "LF" always seemed a little silly. I wonder, though, will you be able to use the same parts to hold either kerosene, methane, or hydrogen? It would be a real pain if you couldn't...

Also, mmH probably isn't transferable, right? Are mmH fuel tanks going to need "repacking" at bases? Then they'd be kinda like reusable, toggleable SRBs.

[Lewie]

18 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

If we don't get a bender statue stock crying out "REMEMBER ME" I will now be disappointed immensely

I know right!?

In all seriousness, this is a really sick update!  Hope the dev team is doing alright. (Man, you guys are great at building hype!)

Edited October 17, 2020 by Lewie

[Angelo Kerman]

@Nate Simpson The new colony components look great! The texture artists are doing a great job. If new colony parts and game resources can be modded in as easily as regular rocket parts, then I can port over my flying saucers mod and build a custom production facility for their exotic resources. Heck, if we can mod new space center facilities, I'd be ecstatic.

TBH if it's possible to bring KSP1 assets to KSP2, I'm looking forward to not porting some of my earlier mods like MOLE, Pathfinder, and Buffalo since KSP2 has them covered.

[JadeOfMaar]

14 hours ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

Heck they could even implement a fuel switcher like Nertea's NERVA's where you can switch on-the-fly between LH2 and LF, which would also apply the respective ISP, Thrust and Fuel consumption values for the given fuel. If they did this for enough engines it might even quell the desire for procedural engines a bit, since the decision to use an engine in a specific "Mode" would also affect it's suitability for a specific regime and therefore give way more flexibility and customization for every mission. Bonus; you can make every engine default to Kerolox/LF and only allow fuel switching when "Advanced Tweakables" or similar is tripped. Best of both worlds (Or 4 if they have Methalox and Ammonia fuels (I really want some NH4 for my nukes)).

I have something greater than and equal to, my dude. I have systems for NTRs to switch between reducing agents (Nitrogen, Hydrogen, Methane and Ammonia) and oxidating agents (Liquid CO2 and Water), and for RCS (as cold gas thrusters) to switch between most of these too. These use B9 Part Switch so you can have all in one engine module that and still have the Hydrolox (LANTR) second engine module if it prior existed as in some of Nertea's Kerbal Atomics engines. The fuel switch can also be tied (but isn't actively tied) to stock upgrades so you can progressively unlock them.

If this kind of mechanism does end up part of stock in KSP2 that'd be grand, eh?

These systems aren't released yet.

Edited October 17, 2020 by JadeOfMaar

[mcwaffles2003]

21 minutes ago, JadeOfMaar said:

I have something greater than and equal to, my dude. I have systems for NTRs to switch between reducing agents (Nitrogen, Hydrogen, Methane and Ammonia) and oxidating agents (Liquid CO2 and Water)

N₂ as a reducing agent? H₂O as an oxidizer?

Are you intending to react these for chemical combustion?

[JadeOfMaar]

@mcwaffles2003 No. By oxidating agent I mean the NTR burns things that contain Oxygen (and is not bi-propellant). You can choose between CO2 and Water for this NTR. And for the other NTR, the reducing agent, you can choose from propellants that do not contain Oxygen, so Nitrogen alone, Ammonia alone and so on.

[Incarnation of Chaos]

2 hours ago, JadeOfMaar said:

I have something greater than and equal to, my dude. I have systems for NTRs to switch between reducing agents (Nitrogen, Hydrogen, Methane and Ammonia) and oxidating agents (Liquid CO2 and Water), and for RCS (as cold gas thrusters) to switch between most of these too. These use B9 Part Switch so you can have all in one engine module that and still have the Hydrolox (LANTR) second engine module if it prior existed as in some of Nertea's Kerbal Atomics engines. The fuel switch can also be tied (but isn't actively tied) to stock upgrades so you can progressively unlock them.

If this kind of mechanism does end up part of stock in KSP2 that'd be grand, eh?

These systems aren't released yet.

Oh I've known that there's other options, I was just using that one as an example because I'm familiar with it. 

From what I've heard making multi-mode engines in KSP is a bit of a pain. Hopefully they can make it easier.

2 hours ago, mcwaffles2003 said:

N₂ as a reducing agent? H₂O as an oxidizer?

Are you intending to react these for chemical combustion?

Could you possibly create Nitrous Oxide? I feel like there's a much easier reaction path even if that's the case.

[JadeOfMaar]

1 hour ago, Incarnation of Chaos said:

From what I've heard making multi-mode engines in KSP is a bit of a pain. Hopefully they can make it easier.

Could you possibly create Nitrous Oxide? I feel like there's a much easier reaction path even if that's the case.

KSP's multi-mode engine module only allows for cycling between two engine modes. Effectively you could dodge that module and have all the engine modules you want in a part but you'd have to manually trigger (or action group) the deactivation of the current module when you no longer want it, and the activation of the next module you want, separately. The extra steps you need to take to do manual cycling goes up very fast. Some solutions for handling truly multi-mode engines do exist:

• GT Industries (I never tried this one to be honest. It may be better than WBI but I'll never know, lol.)
• B9 Part Switch (This is great and allows you to pack an array of propellant options and performance characteristics per engine module-- you can have several engine modes per engine mode!-- but the extra effort needs to be spend to make the informative tooltips per option so the average player has an idea what details are behind the extra options. Also you can't action group these.)
• WBI Kerbal Actuators (straightforward and the best option if you want to just add engine modules onto an engine and it replaces the stock multi-mode engine where you choose to use it...but you can only action group cycling forward, not reverse.)

Yes you can make Nitrous Oxide. It exists in CRP so it doesn't need to be defined by the part mod that uses it. But its Isp is roughly equal to MonoPropellant and it's actually only used in sports cars (and in hospitals). I'm pretty confident no KSP mod uses it.

Edited October 18, 2020 by JadeOfMaar