[1.0.2] NovaPunch 2.09. - May 6th - 1.0 Compatibility Update

[Tiberion]

I dunno, I must have been half asleep when I added the CrewCapacity = 2 to that.

[Hammaneggs]

There is even an alternate reality book out that has it, as well as a manned trip to Mars in the 70's or 80's. Its called Voyage by Steven Baxter if you are so interested as to read it.

[LaydeeDem]

There is even an alternate reality book out that has it, as well as a manned trip to Mars in the 70's or 80's. Its called Voyage by Steven Baxter if you are so interested as to read it.

Wrong thread.

[antiquark]

Another quibble: I'm thinking that the SPS-175 engine is out of whack. Too much ISP, too much thrust, too little weight. See the image, that simple one stager can reach a 700 km orbit.

[CAPFlyer]

I'm not a fan of doing tests like that to determine balance. I can SSTO almost anything if I put the right level of payload on it. There are real world SSTO rockets (Atlas is the most well known), so it's all a matter of whether it does what it's supposed to. The SPS-175 is designed for a 3-man module (not a 1-man) and as part of a heavier total package with RCS and parachute. By leaving off that mass, it is definitely overpowered. Don't forget, the Apollo Service Module's rocket was designed to make a mid-course correction on the way to the moon, circularize the lunar orbit, and then provide sufficient thrust to send them home, all on fuel that is being used to create oxygen and power for the crew at the same time and thus requiring a very good ISP to be able to provide the thrust for minimal fuel consumption.

Try launching with a more representative payload for the engine and see what it does.

[antiquark]

I guess you're right

I spreadsheeted some of the NP engines, plotted the ISP, mass, and thrust ratios, and nothing seems really out of line.

[antiquark]

... HOWEVER, on the other hand, if you create a "figure of merit" which is Thrust x ISP / Mass, then the SPS-175 does stick out...

[Metascience]

Thanks for all your hard work, Tiberon.

If i could make a humble request, could you do a quickie edit of some of the fuel tanks to make them cut off like this? http://i.imgur.com/HUHLq.jpg

Since you have the NERVA engine, the realist stickler in me really wants to have the properly shaped fuel tanks to accommodate the shadow shield, as well as the neutron isolation shield.

[LaydeeDem]

Tiberion I'm mad at you.

You killed one of my boys.

[Tiberion]

Metascience: Can you explain what you want in more details? Tapered/coned ends on the tank? You can flip a lot of the structures around to do that, and I could probably add a new piece; I don't think I can build them into the single tanks though, since it would make this not as usable for stacking.

Nutt: Erm, thats weird, I just tested that combo again and it landed @ 12.8m/s. Since the mass didn't change I'm not sure why it would have done that; you can try to turn the NP_Smallcapsule crash tolerance up from 17 to like 20 and see if it re-occurs. I can make that change for next release if that seems to make a difference.

[SciMan]

One new bug found!

Does anyone else think that the 1m Bearcat engine mountings are made of rubber? To me, no matter what fuel tank I attach it to, it starts sliding and wobbling around its attach node, at anywhere from 75% throttle upwards!

Luckily, I found a couple of ways to fix it.

The first fix was simply putting struts on the engine, and that works well enough until the bug gets resolved.

Now, seeing as no other 1m engine from this pack needs struts by default to keep it stable, I looked a little deeper into the issue. What I found was that the engine's .cfg did not have "breakingForce = xxx" or "breakingTorque = xxx" lines in it! When I added those lines in with both values set to 1000, the problem disappeared entirely, however a lower/higher value will probably work just as well. That is my second way to fix it, and the one that I humbly recommend be put into practice by Tiberion.

[erkha343]

Hmm, yes, I've found some parts to be really wobbly, the nuclear one for example.

Tiberion, your mods surpass by far any other parts, including the stock ones. Thank you for NP & Tiberion Shuttles

[nerfsmurf]

I agree, this is like the best part mod so far, I will contact you soon!

[The Destroyer]

May i suggest putting the parts into say, the "decals" folder insted of their proper? its just that with 100 parts its hard to find the part you are looking for w/o freezing the VAB.

[erkha343]

May i suggest putting the parts into say, the "decals" folder insted of their proper? its just that with 100 parts its hard to find the part you are looking for w/o freezing the VAB.

nooooo, I already have things there :c

it's ok, you'll get used to it.

[The Destroyer]

Lol. My pc with this crappyness takes like a min for each page to load. after than, 15 sec. thats y i dont have np anymore sadly.... maybe..... ill.... re-install it.

[Tiberion]

Heh well i feel for you there, but dumping all the parts into one category would be a nightmare, trying to find a certain part. I'm afraid you'll need to work on your computer issues.

[MaverickSawyer]

Maybe using sub-packsbased around sizes? That way, you grab what you want, and leave what you don't.

[The Destroyer]

@Tiberon: i considered that too. i guess not XD

@Maverick Hmm maybe, but im unsure what to keep and what to dump....

[erkha343]

If I post the .craft I designed for a manned mission to Vall, will some of you help me find the flaw? I know what it is, but not what it causes it to fail

(we need a thread for discussing things about NP)

[whatisthisidonteven]

If I post the .craft I designed for a manned mission to Vall, will some of you help me find the flaw? I know what it is, but not what it causes it to fail

(we need a thread for discussing things about NP)

What's wrong with it?

I can get it to orbit around Kerbin and the staging seems to work well. The only thing is it's hard to control due to the fact it wobbles a bit in its early stages.

[erkha343]

What's wrong with it?

I can get it to orbit around Kerbin and the staging seems to work well. The only thing is it's hard to control due to the fact it wobbles a bit in its early stages.

If I'm far above supersonic, and above 10km I do my 60* turn, with this craft, 50% of launches break in half at this point.

[whatisthisidonteven]

If I'm far above supersonic, and above 10km I do my 60* turn, with this craft, 50% of launches break in half at this point.

Sounds like baby kraken. But you could also try adding more struts between the stages - I did notice a rather lack of struts (compared to my designs, at least)

Edited September 14, 2012 by whatisthisidonteven

[erkha343]

Sounds like baby kraken. But you could also try adding more struts between the stages - I did notice a rather lack of struts (compared to my designs, at least)

Well, my Kerbals are brave, and they know what they're getting into, when they launch for Vall, they know there's a 50% chance, they won't make it during the first 2 stages. After that it's all good though.

[Nateman482]

Thanks for the awesome pack.

Any chance of adding a rover? Maybe two sizes, one for a single pod, and one for the unmanned command module? That's be really awesome. I haven't been able to find any good rover mods.

Thanks,

| Nathan