[0.23.5] Spherical and Toroidal Tank Pack (Updated 05/02/14) (New download link)

[Talisar]

Making monoprop tanks in the largest size would be very easy, just a matter of editing the cfg. It's capacity would be 28,688 units of monoprop. The only reason I hadn't was because I figured no one would need that much in one spot As for a larger tank with 3.75m caps, I could make one, but wouldn't one that size be prohibitively huge? It can be a pretty daunting task to get one of the current large tanks in orbit as it is...

[Sarda]

Why are the node connections on the large tanks so small/weak? There set at 1m connections instead of 3m connections. o.O

[Sarda]

All 3 sizes of the radial attachments are set to probe level connections as well.

[leopardenthusiast]

Making monoprop tanks in the largest size would be very easy, just a matter of editing the cfg. It's capacity would be 28,688 units of monoprop. The only reason I hadn't was because I figured no one would need that much in one spot As for a larger tank with 3.75m caps, I could make one, but wouldn't one that size be prohibitively huge? It can be a pretty daunting task to get one of the current large tanks in orbit as it is...

Well, I'm not about to try to launch it while it's full, even with the already absurd 2.5m-ended parts. That would just be silly. I intend to refill it using kethane from Minmus.

[Greys]

Talisar, perhaps make a variant of the current large tank with bigger end bits for 3.75

[taniwha]

As for the 3.75m endcapped spheres: keeping everything else in proportion, an LFO tank would be 11.25m across, have a dry mass of 45.5625t, hold 58320u of LF, 71280u of O (total of 129600u (324000u for a kethane tank)), and have a wet mass of 693.5625t (LFO or kethane (0.4.4)).

Jebadiah would be most amused if one were to land on Bill's toe.

It would take a cluster of five mainsails to get one off the ground (TWR of 1.1). Mind you, you'd probably be able to SSTMFRO: I did last night with the large tank, sufficient tri-hex trusses and five mainsails, with just enough delta-v left over to get into a stable orbit after aerobraking, but the difference in gravity drag might get you. (NOTE: I use FAR).

[leopardenthusiast]

That's... that's incredible. I must have them.

[Talisar]

Talisar, perhaps make a variant of the current large tank with bigger end bits for 3.75

That would be pretty easy. I'll take a swing at it tomorrow

And since taniwha did all the math for it already, I'll throw together one with 3.75m ends and 11.25m diameter too, just for all you masochists out there (Looking at you, XenonBlade )

Edited June 8, 2013 by Talisar

[erisiah]

For those of you who are using Modular Fuels, here's a quick-and-dirty config for the half & full tanks:

Spherical_modularFuelTanks.cfg

I didn't do the Kethane tanks, just the fuel & mono tanks. All values were pulled from the part.cfg files. Also, the empty tanks are untouched.

@PART[HalfSphericalTankMedium]
{
    MODULE
    {
	name = ModuleFuelTanks
	volume = 2400
	type = Default
    }
}

@PART[HalfSphericalTankSmall]
{
    MODULE
    {
	name = ModuleFuelTanks
	volume = 711
	type = Default
    }
}

@PART[SphericalRingedTankLarge]
{
    MODULE
    {
	name = ModuleFuelTanks
	volume = 38400
	type = Default
    }
}

@PART[SphericalTankLarge]
{
    MODULE
    {
	name = ModuleFuelTanks
	volume = 38400
	type = Default
    }
}

@PART[SphericalTankMedium]
{
    MODULE
    {
	name = ModuleFuelTanks
	volume = 4800
	type = Default
    }
}

@PART[SphericalTankSmall]
{
    MODULE
    {
	name = ModuleFuelTanks
	volume = 1422
	type = Default
    }
}

@PART[SphericalMonoTankMedium]
{
    MODULE
    {
	name = ModuleFuelTanks
	volume = 3580
	type = Default
    }
}

@PART[SphericalMonoTankSmall]
{
    MODULE
    {
	name = ModuleFuelTanks
	volume = 1065
	type = Default
    }
}

@PART[HalfSphericalMonoTankMedium]
{
    MODULE
    {
	name = ModuleFuelTanks
	volume = 1790
	type = Default
    }
}

@PART[HalfSphericalMonoTankSmall]
{
    MODULE
    {
	name = ModuleFuelTanks
	volume = 530
	type = Default
    }
}

Save it in the ModularFuelTanks folder.

[killerkevinn]

Have you thought about making micro tanks with .625 endcaps?

[Talisar]

The smallest tanks have .625m endcaps

[EnterElysium]

Does the mod use shared model and textures for performance increase? If so then I am so grabbing the new release, love it so far, very retro sci-fi in feel, otherwise I might wait until I can chop some of my other mods out of rotation.

[Talisar]

It does for the empty and full versions of each tank. I'm going to look in optimizing it further.

[EnterElysium]

It does for the empty and full versions of each tank. I'm going to look in optimizing it further.

Thank you kind sir, you are a gentleman and a scholar!

[Talisar]

So, I've done the work and optimized my tanks so that all tanks of each size share the same model and just change out the textures. Doing this reduced the size of the total mod by over half. The problem is that the updated mod will break currently built craft due to node rescaling issues...

[killerkevinn]

The smallest tanks have .625m endcaps

I mean a tank smaller than the smallest tank, it could just be a radially attached tank for probes or small ships. And i just realized that there are no large half tanks are the any plans on adding them in.

[loppnessmonsta]

Post it and keep the old one up elsewhere as a legacy option? that way people can still get the old version, if they want it.

Between b9, KW, and LLL, any bit of optimization helps, for me. Worth rebuilding my crafts.

[[email protected]]

Talisar: I had made a huge rover centered around your largest LFO tank and put a number of them on various planetary bodies. Since the 1.6 update, if I load the rovers and move them at all, they crumble apart on me. Luckly I keep backup persistence files. Can I please know what you had for Breaking Force and Breaking Torque values before this past 1.6 update so I can edit the cfg files. I wanted to keep the values you have before instead of just upping them to some unknown possibly absurd guess on my part.

[Talisar]

Talisar: I had made a huge rover centered around your largest LFO tank and put a number of them on various planetary bodies. Since the 1.6 update, if I load the rovers and move them at all, they crumble apart on me. Luckly I keep backup persistence files. Can I please know what you had for Breaking Force and Breaking Torque values before this past 1.6 update so I can edit the cfg files. I wanted to keep the values you have before instead of just upping them to some unknown possibly absurd guess on my part.

The breakingForce and breakingForque haven't changed at all. I had them at the (absurd level ) of 10000. I did change the crash tolerance from 40 to 10, however.

[[email protected]]

The breakingForce and breakingForque haven't changed at all. I had them at the (absurd level ) of 10000. I did change the crash tolerance from 40 to 10, however.

Putting that back to 40 fixed my crumbling rover issue oddly enough.. thank you very much

[Klajan]

Just one quick question:

Is the absurd stability of the large LFO normal? I had it crash on the mun with 250 m/s and all it did was bounce of. Mutiple times. Also It survived every crash on the Surface of Kerbin, regardingless what.

Everything else is fine. Great work.

[Talisar]

Just one quick question:

Is the absurd stability of the large LFO normal? I had it crash on the mun with 250 m/s and all it did was bounce of. Mutiple times. Also It survived every crash on the Surface of Kerbin, regardingless what.

Everything else is fine. Great work.

They are extremely durable. I did lower the crash tolerance in the last update to make them easier to explode, but possibly not enough... Unless I'm making a bad assumption about what the crash tolerance variable does (which is quite likely)

[taniwha]

Will ships and stations held together by docking ports attached to the ends of the tanks be fine with the update? Rebuilding my stuff is not just a matter of detach/attach in the VAB, but a lot of orbital construction (much of it around 2-3FPS).

[willow]

They are extremely durable. I did lower the crash tolerance in the last update to make them easier to explode, but possibly not enough... Unless I'm making a bad assumption about what the crash tolerance variable does (which is quite likely)

As a side note: It's a welcoming change that something in KSP doesn't blow up when it hits something.

[entaran]

If you think about it, spheres are strongest object as they have no inherent specific weakpoints.

It stands to reason that they will bounce clear off the surface at 200ms.

The half spheres however are way too strong especially when you land on corners.