RLA Stockalike v10 released 11th August

[Gryphorim]

Only thing left to request is a high TWR low ISP 1.25 engine to fill the gap with 1.25m and 2.5m.

[MmPMSFmM]

I feel like something's missing... I know! Maybe you should try to make a 0,625m version of the SC-9001 Science Jr. and the Mystery Gooâ„¢ Containment Unit.

[Ralathon]

I feel like something's missing... I know! Maybe you should try to make a 0,625m version of the SC-9001 Science Jr. and the Mystery Gooâ„¢ Containment Unit.

Dunno how good that idea is. A small science bay and mystery goo unit would be strictly better than the normal ones, in terms of mass and ease of placement. So nobody would use the normal ones anymore. You'd need some form of compensating drawback to prevent that.

I really can't think up a good drawback for them. Limiting max science would probably be very hard to balance and decreasing efficiency is probably not strong enough a drawback. Either case would also require writing a plugin which complicates things.

I think it's best to leave the science parts alone, unless someone can think up a good solution for this.

[johnsonwax]

I think it's best to leave the science parts alone, unless someone can think up a good solution for this.

Put them much higher up in the tech tree. Early on you have to use them because you have nothing else. But they're not worth hauling to Jool unless you want to spam transmission (which they're going to break in .23). They don't produce nearly as much science as a MUCH smaller gravioli detector (which has a much larger modifier). As a result, I've never taken those parts out of the Kerbin system. As soon as I get up to tier 4 or 5 and have better parts, I aim for Duna and Gilly and leave these two behind never to use them again. If they reappeared out in fieldScience I'd start using them again.

[Starwaster]

request: those fuel tanks with the rounded edges + flat ends but without the 'bracing' all atound them.

[CrazyIvan]

Those Liquid fuel engine look amazing! Looking forward to those and and cough NEW ELECTRIC THRUSTERS AND NUCLEAR POWER COUGH Great work as always!

[therealcrow999]

I assume these parts for these mods are for more the smaller things like probes and what nots? Covering the area of what stock game is lacking for probes and engines for them.

[Needles_10]

One of the ships in the thumbnail slideshow on the Spaceport page looks like the spaceship from the DK Eyewitness Video documentary about Space. Anyone else notice that?

[thorfinn]

This stuff is great, it's the new KSPX. Thank you very much. Also, have you considered making your own tech tree? With multiple grades of nuclear and electric engines, and many more possibilities for probes than in stock, you could make something which actually offers progression and challenge!

[NathanKell]

That looks great! And just in time--I'm going through all the engines to create an RSS / real-scale config for MFS, and I desperately need new small engines.

A request: for the vacuum-optimized engines, can you give them real vacuum-optimized nozzles? I.e. closer to cone than a "fat" bell, very high area ratio (wide end, narrow throat), and quite large (for shape, see Kommitz's nukes--your own LV-Nc is close, but the throat is IMO rather too wide).

How large? Like, an engine that produces 15kN thrust should have a nozzle as large as the Spinnaker, at least.

You know that giant bell on the back of the Apollo CSM, about 3.7m wide? 91kN thrust, massed about 0.3t.

[MmPMSFmM]

Dunno how good that idea is. A small science bay and mystery goo unit would be strictly better than the normal ones, in terms of mass and ease of placement. So nobody would use the normal ones anymore. You'd need some form of compensating drawback to prevent that.

I really can't think up a good drawback for them. Limiting max science would probably be very hard to balance and decreasing efficiency is probably not strong enough a drawback. Either case would also require writing a plugin which complicates things.

I think it's best to leave the science parts alone, unless someone can think up a good solution for this.

You're exaggerating, that's for sure.

Let's say normally for the materials bay, with a mass of 8, you get 400 science. Then for the 0,625m materials bay, with a mass of 1, you get 50 science. Easy as that right?

Also:

Possibly some octagonal struts, similar to, and inspired by THSS, but probably not quite as expansive!

could you also make a 0,625m version of the Modular Girder Segment XL and a 0,625m version of the Modular Girder Adapter?

Maybe also a better 0,625m Multi-Point Connector than The Not-Rockomax Micronode.

Also, the EAS-4 Strut Connector and the FTX-2 External Fuel Duct is too big when used on the 0,625m parts.

Edited November 16, 2013 by MmPMSFmM
suggestion

[TimMartland]

Do all these work in 0.22?

[Ralathon]

Do all these work in 0.22?

Yes, they do.

[hoojiwana]

Stockalike 0.9 is now available on Spaceport, sorry for the length of time it took to get the few parts released.

The unnamed engine should be called the " LV-W2 Bluebird"

I liked the bird theme, so it's ended up as the TtH-2B "Kingfisher" Liquid Engine.

Only thing left to request is a high TWR low ISP 1.25 engine to fill the gap with 1.25m and 2.5m.

I would love to do one, consider it on the list for the next update. If people like the Kingfisher aesthetic I may make this prospective new engine in the same vein as that.

I feel like something's missing... I know! Maybe you should try to make a 0,625m version of the SC-9001 Science Jr. and the Mystery Gooâ„¢ Containment Unit.

As Ralathon said, they'd be hard to balance. I'm not terribly keen on the science system as it stands right now either, so don't expect anything related to it outside of basic compatibility.

request: those fuel tanks with the rounded edges + flat ends but without the 'bracing' all atound them.

Those Liquid fuel engine look amazing! Looking forward to those and and cough NEW ELECTRIC THRUSTERS AND NUCLEAR POWER COUGH Great work as always!

Electric Engines has some very old parts in it now, the Arcjet design was 4th or 5th thing I ever modelled and textured and I think it shows! The Xenon tanks will also be updated, though I've not settled on a new design for them just yet, I do love the exposed look to them though. When that update comes out it will be a full replacement, with no compatibility with the current release. Any craft that uses those parts is likely to end up breaking.

Also, have you considered making your own tech tree?

I would like to but I don't want to contribute to the proliferation of mod trees and potential mod incompatibilities that the current terrible tech tree design leads to.

That looks great! And just in time--I'm going through all the engines to create an RSS / real-scale config for MFS, and I desperately need new small engines.

A request: for the vacuum-optimized engines, can you give them real vacuum-optimized nozzles?

I love the idea and looked into altering the models for some of the engines and it should be pretty easy to do so without having to completely redo the textures. I didn't want to delay 0.9 any further than I already have so proper engine bells will be something extra sometime soon. I know full well how they should look but what with following the stock aesthetic I'm a little confined in what I can get away with. What I'm going to do is have a second version of the applicable engines with the same stats, but the models and textures will be there to be used for RSS/MFS.

could you also make a 0,625m version of the Modular Girder Segment XL and a 0,625m version of the Modular Girder Adapter?

Maybe also a better 0,625m Multi-Point Connector than The Not-Rockomax Micronode.

Also, the EAS-4 Strut Connector and the FTX-2 External Fuel Duct is too big when used on the 0,625m parts.

The Strut, Fuel Pipe and Launch Clamp all end up looking huge on 0.625m rockets, so I may make alternative versions to use.

Edited November 19, 2013 by hoojiwana

[NathanKell]

I love the idea and looked into altering the models for some of the engines and it should be pretty easy to do so without having to completely redo the textures. I didn't want to delay 0.9 any further than I already have so proper engine bells will be something extra sometime soon. I know full well how they should look but what with following the stock aesthetic I'm a little confined in what I can get away with. What I'm going to do is have a second version of the applicable engines with the same stats, but the models and textures will be there to be used for RSS/MFS.

You, sir/madam, are a hero. That's going well out of your way and I thank you heartily for it!

If you do that, I just realized one other super-helpful thing to do while doing it: could you also get rid of the "lower quarter of fueltank" base that these engines have? So they can be placed on a fueltank of any size. The Spinnaker is fine, but the others, it's a bit of an issue fitting them on larger or smaller tanks, as you can imagine!

Also, while I can easily generate the engine stats for conventional engines, would you be interested in doing a realistic-stats version of your other parts?

I get somewhere between 1.3EC/s (with EC/s as kW) to 5.3EC/s per ton for RTGs, depending on tech level. (I made the AIES one a SNAP-19 and the stock one the Voyager MHW-RTG). But I'm totally out of my depth with electric propulsion. If you can find realistic masses and kW usage for your engines, that'd be wonderful.

(I'm putting together a realism tweaks thread).

[Gryphorim]

Pardon my ignorance, but how is the spinnaker supposed to fare when compared to the 48-7s? It looks like it's the same max thrust, and worse isp. What am I missing here?

[hoojiwana]

Pardon my ignorance, but how is the spinnaker supposed to fare when compared to the 48-7s? It looks like it's the same max thrust, and worse isp. What am I missing here?

The new engines are balanced to each other, but not to the 48-7S. This is because the 48-7S has a combination of stats that make it pretty overpowered. The new engines are sort of a replacement for it, people can now use slightly better balanced options rather than being stuck with something ridiculous.

[Nutter]

I never really understood why it got that ISP increase. Even the original part has a rather nasty thrust ratio, if I remember correctly.

PS: Maybe having the others available a bit sooner would help compensate for the fact? Though, with my game currently unavailable (location, location), I'm not sure if there's any properly suited node for it.

Edited November 20, 2013 by Nutter

[Jeebus_Quade]

Just adding my two cents that the new Spinnaker engine should have increased thrust to match the 47-S. I think maybe just 35 rather than 30 would be good. I think I will change it in the part file for mine.

[Nutter]

Yeah, I upped it too. Though, I did raise it to 40. Might regret in the slightly longer run but I really don't want my game loading an engine just so it can sit there and stock parts, I rather not fiddle with much.

*I also ditched the gimbal.

Edited November 22, 2013 by Nutter

[CoriW]

You know, I've never been one for part packs (In fact I don't even use my own part pack!), the only non-stock parts I've had go along with a plugin like KAS or Kethane.

However I think I may just try this out, consider this my first real part pack! (And my 33rd mod total. )

[Afkpuz]

If I remember right, a dev said the 48-7S was overpowered as the result of a typo, and will be corrected next patch.

Any chance we could get a really micro jet engine? Like, smaller than 0.625, maybe with thrust to match somewhere around these tiny engines you've just released? My ultralight pilots would be most appreciative.

[Supernovy]

Perhaps changing the radial jets to half the thrust of the basic jet (or so)?

Love the Kingfisher, by the way.

[majorwraith]

I really love all the work you have put in to this! This is an essential mod to my ksp!

I'd love to see some more monopropellent engines! maybe a real small with about 1 trust, for probes and shuch

[hoojiwana]

There's been a couple of minor fixes and alterations to Stockalike since the 0.9 release, as well as a couple of alternative models in a separate download. These alternatives are exactly that, and do not replace the existing versions of the parts they are based on. They do work standalone as well.

PS: Maybe having the others available a bit sooner would help compensate for the fact? Though, with my game currently unavailable (location, location), I'm not sure if there's any properly suited node for it.

The stock tree is terribly unfriendly for Stockalike. The Monopropellent engines are in control because of needing the monopropellent tanks as a prerequisite, and it's a similar story for the 0.625m parts, they kinda have to be alongside or after the stock 0.625m stack decoupler. For the users of Electric Engines, that entire part pack is in one node.

I just really do not like the entire science system and tech tree they went with, so part node placement is the minimum amount of effort I can get away with.

Just adding my two cents that the new Spinnaker engine should have increased thrust to match the 47-S. I think maybe just 35 rather than 30 would be good. I think I will change it in the part file for mine.

Yeah, I upped it too. Though, I did raise it to 40. Might regret in the slightly longer run but I really don't want my game loading an engine just so it can sit there and stock parts, I rather not fiddle with much.

*I also ditched the gimbal.

If I remember right, a dev said the 48-7S was overpowered as the result of a typo, and will be corrected next patch.

The Spinnaker with the TWR it has is a very capable engine, one of them can lift an awful lot of rocket above it in one stack, changing its values to compare to an "accidentally" overpowered engine just makes it overpowered in it's own right. For the curious, the Mainsail has a TWR (at Kerbin sea level) of 25.48, the Spinnaker has 24.46, and the 48-7S has 30.58(!) with 20 more ISP. I don't think removing gimbals from primarily probe-controlled rockets is a great idea either, as they have significantly less reaction wheel torque than manned pods.

The reason there was no 1.25m Highpower engine in Stockalike 0.9 is because of the comparably higher thrust that the existing 1.25m engines have. I did a few unscientific tests with similar rockets of all scales as part of the engine balancing for 0.9, the Spinnaker et al. are fairly similar to their 2.5m counterparts, but the 1.25m engines seem to have too much thrust (and mass).

Any chance we could get a really micro jet engine? Like, smaller than 0.625, maybe with thrust to match somewhere around these tiny engines you've just released? My ultralight pilots would be most appreciative.

Might do, but to be honest I don't really end up flying aircraft around so I don't get to see how useful a potential part might be, and there's already fairly useless parts in Stockalike (Radial Jet and Cutter).

Perhaps changing the radial jets to half the thrust of the basic jet (or so)?

The Radial Jet should be exactly equivalent to a stock intake, jet engine and structural part, it's just smaller and less parts.

I'd love to see some more monopropellent engines! maybe a real small with about 1 trust, for probes and shuch

I like that idea, could be a jury rigged linear RCS port, and adding it wouldn't use any extra textures.

Edited November 25, 2013 by hoojiwana