Jump to content

[20/11/2014][0.25] FTmN Atomic Rockets

Kommitz

By Kommitz
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

Hyomoto

Hyomoto

Posted
Posted

As far as engineer goes, I've been looking into it. I thought I could modify the plugin, but even though my changes should theoretically work, they don't. I posted in the Engineer thread about this, and hopefully it will get fixed there. It's a drag, but I'd rather the mod be allowed to embrace its own vision than conform for the sake of primitive compatibility. If I make any headway I'll post a interim fix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LMA

LMA

Posted
Posted
Kerbal Engineer got fixed, testing was succesful. no need to change the cfg :)

New Engineer Redux can now show FTmN stats http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/18230-0-23-Kerbal-Engineer-Redux-v0-6-2-3

New deadly Reentry fixes KW and FTmN engines burning up http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/54954-0-23-Deadly-Reentry-Continued-v4-3-1-11-14

Link to comment
Share on other sites
papics

papics

Posted
Posted (edited)

Maybe instead of the very spiky an unrealistic particles we could opt for something similar (also in the density of particles) as in http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/65754-HotRockets%21-Particle-FX-Replacement for the atomic engine, but in a less harsh colour :) But other than that, I love these engines!

Screenshot77.png

Edited by papics
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kommitz

Kommitz

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Looks like you and Nertea working on the same stuff with that LH2 tanks and struts for it ^_^

Yeah I noticed that. I knew Nert was working on struts but I was just assuming they'd match the hydrogen tank style from his pack.

The octostrut thing makes sense though, it's got nice options for symmetry and having it fit the stock struts give it more utility in the game which is why I went with it. There's only so much you can do with truss sections.

Anyway I've been threatening to actually release these things since so I'm aiming to finish them by the end of the month.

Thanks for update, will test that one. By the way, can you please include electricity generation in next update (scaled to stock atomic engine would be fair)? I'm adding it myself via config, but it's strange that it's not included by default. Or is there any specific reason for that?

I'm hoping to add specific variations on some of the engines down the line that can function as dual mode engines/power reactors down the line. The technical reason is that it requires extra plumbing and I've not modeled it on the engines yet, plus I think electricity is easy enough to manage with batteries and solar panels so I'm not adding generation to the standard engines.

Hi I was wondering whether you would consider doing some small radial nuclear engines

I'm not planning to. Wouldn't add much to the pack that couldn't be done by sticking engines on other parts.

Maybe instead of the very spiky an unrealistic particles we could opt for something similar

I just patched up the pack with some improved particle effects. Changed the sprite to be much smoother. Check on spaceport!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
papics

papics

Posted
Posted
I just patched up the pack with some improved particle effects. Changed the sprite to be much smoother. Check on spaceport!

I like the new particles much better, thanks, but I am still not happy with the density and length of the exhaust, for example, now with the large engines at max thrust, there are only two particles visible behind the engine, which is a bit odd... Anyway, I am willing to experiment with the config without bothering you too much, if you could explain what is the exact meaning/effect of the emission/speed lines for the effects from the config file. Then I might come up with something (which in my mind might be) better :)

modelName = kommit_nucleonics/fx/ftmn_particle1

transformName = thrustTransform

emission = 0.0 0.0

emission = 0.01 0.1

emission = 0.075 0.25

emission = 1.0 1.0

speed = 0.0 0.35

speed = 1.0 1.0

Ps.: do not forget to update the thread title and the first post with the version number and the current date, so people know you made changes already from the main forum!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kommitz

Kommitz

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I like the new particles much better, thanks, but I am still not happy with the density and length of the exhaust, for example, now with the large engines at max thrust, there are only two particles visible behind the engine, which is a bit odd...

That is odd, what are your framerates like when running the game? For me the exhaust looks like this:

32T3jv4.png?1

I could try upping the particle count or changing the shape of the emitter.

Also for the config file 'emission' is the number of particles produced, 'speed' is their speed (pretty self explanatory).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
papics

papics

Posted
Posted
That is odd, what are your framerates like when running the game? For me the exhaust looks like this:

http://i.imgur.com/32T3jv4.png?1

I could try upping the particle count or changing the shape of the emitter.

Also for the config file 'emission' is the number of particles produced, 'speed' is their speed (pretty self explanatory).

This is odd :S The game runs quite smooth, (how can I display my exact FPS in game?), so I do not think that should be an issue, but I will try looking into it, because your picture seems like what I would like to have, so it can not be a config issue! I will come back with an update if I manage to figure out something... THX.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
papics

papics

Posted
Posted

Hmmm, ok, the thing is, that in space, I see the right effect (yeah!!!), but not on the test bench on the launch pad. But then I did something during the flight (went to map mode?), and the effect disappeared completely... There was heating on the engine and reg glow, but no exhaust at all... I do not know what is happening... I will make more tests...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
papics

papics

Posted
Posted (edited)
Hmmm, ok, the thing is, that in space, I see the right effect (yeah!!!), but not on the test bench on the launch pad. But then I did something during the flight (went to map mode?), and the effect disappeared completely... There was heating on the engine and reg glow, but no exhaust at all... I do not know what is happening... I will make more tests...

Indeed, after changing to another vessel and back, there is no flame effect, only orange glow from heat... Can anyone reproduce this (with the latest 2.4 version)?

EDIT: this is also true when starting the game, switching to a vessel which is already on orbit, there is no flame only heating FX :S

Edited by papics
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Starwaster

Starwaster

Posted
Posted (edited)
Probably not unrealistic...

You might get some exhaust glow from engine particles glowing but I doubt you could actually see hot hydrogen exhaust.

Haven't you ever seen photos of the actual Project Rover tests? (Kiwi, Phoebus)

It's visible. Here. This was the first one. Kinda weak but it was just a ground testing prototype

Kiwi-A-reactor.jpg

Edited by Starwaster
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SSSPutnik

SSSPutnik

Posted
Posted

They were conducted in atmosphere...

This video here:

shows flame, but, it looks like they have an ignition source above the exhaust nozzle, probably to reduce to danger of explosion from build up of hydrogen gas. The exhaust itself looks pretty colourless and in a vacuum, I doubt you would see much at all. Even chemical H2 exhaust rocket in a vacuum cannot be seen easily.

Also check the Delta IV video at around 2mins once it gets to high altitude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wasmic

wasmic

Posted
Posted
They were conducted in atmosphere...

This video here:

shows flame, but, it looks like they have an ignition source above the exhaust nozzle, probably to reduce to danger of explosion from build up of hydrogen gas. The exhaust itself looks pretty colourless and in a vacuum, I doubt you would see much at all. Even chemical H2 exhaust rocket in a vacuum cannot be seen easily.

Also check the Delta IV video at around 2mins once it gets to high altitude.

If he makes it realistic, it'll get boring. Actually, I prefered the long exhhaust effects to the new short ones. They might not be that realistic, but they look much cooler. You should never sacrifice cool and fun for the sake of realism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SSSPutnik

SSSPutnik

Posted
Posted

I tend to agree, my original comment was that just the rocket nozzle glowing hot was not a bad thing per se.

Id prefer for making the game fun though, that SRB gave off a ton of smoke n flame, hydrogen/liquid fuels gave more a typical orangey / white flame and less smoke and nuclear a hot blue plume. Or whatever...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

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...