[WIP] Nert's Dev Thread - Current: various updates

[Captain Sierra]

Engines are generally supposed to be about 5% better than 4 stock engines of the same type, with about 90% of the mass.

Statistically they're on point.

Subjectively, things change.

The Dudley feels like it really isnt an improvement. Part of the problem for me is that I use the basic jets subsonic, so having their peak thrust be higher than default is not advantageous for me. As I don't imagine many people using them for SSTOs (I gather you'll probably have them level or above stock turbojets in the tech tree), I'd be tempted to suggest adjusting the curve so they peak lower but provide more power on takeoff and at the transonic band (also I'd advise particle effects since emmissives take forever to spool post-1.0).

It should be noted I was testing this on a giant airliner, which may or may not have contributed.

The BROADSWORD shares the same transonic TWR troubles as the RAPIER. (I replicated your plane here). Given the cargo nature of this set and the difficulties a lot of people have doing nominal capacity shuttles (shuttles where you can fill the entire bay with fuel tanks and still go to space) with stock jets, I'd lobby that this pack should provide an edge here.

Ultimately my sentiments are that slight advantages over stock jets while mirroring their performance, both pros and cons, works from a balance perspective, but its not the most interesting or gameplay-creating way to handle it. I'm not a good cargo SSTO builder (I can build SSTOs, but nowhere close to NCSs (nominal capacity shuttles)), so others in the crowd will have to help determine what are the main detriments of stock cargo shuttles and how should these engines make that easier.

They're still flat out gorgeous mind you.

[Starbuckminsterfullerton]

• A couple fuselage parts have unwelded seams (if you see any let me know)

Congrats on a release, glad it's back! You're gonna need another signature section soon .

I remember from MkIV the First the double/triple engine nacelles had a split edge around the inside of the endcaps. You might have already found it, but I don't have a chance to test it.

[loppnessmonsta]

The projected inline cockpit intrigues me. Are you thinking a protruding command section, or inset? If protruding, I'd love to see a sort of container-ship style version. Not terribly aerodynamic but oh-so-cool in space!

[Captain Sierra]

Congrats on a release, glad it's back! You're gonna need another signature section soon .

I remember from MkIV the First the double/triple engine nacelles had a split edge around the inside of the endcaps. You might have already found it, but I don't have a chance to test it.

They've had a texture revamp and maybe a model tweak (they look like it but I cant be sure). Didnt see one on them.

Only seams I've found are on the forward edge of the extended nacelle and on the large side of the iguana.

EDIT: possible bug:

I can surface attach to the ends of the cargo bays. This seems to be the case whether I'm attaching from the inside or the outside.

Edited July 11, 2015 by Captain Sierra

[jonrd463]

I just downloaded and whipped up a basic SSTO to check things out, and I'm having an issue with the Broadsword. (pre-emptive disclaimer: I could possibly be an idiot, so... you know...)

When I switch modes, it just shuts down. It's connected directly to a fuel source with both LF and OX, and plenty available, but simply won't fire in closed cycle mode. Now, I am running a lot of mods, and it could very well be a conflict I haven't identified yet, but just to make sure, is there anything in particular about the Broadswords that might not be obvious that I could be omitting? Otherwise, the parts look great! and flight below 10K under jet power is nice and smooth.

Thanks!

[ultrasquid]

Statistically they're on point.

Subjectively, things change.…

…

Ultimately my sentiments are that slight advantages over stock jets while mirroring their performance, both pros and cons, works from a balance perspective, but its not the most interesting or gameplay-creating way to handle it. I'm not a good cargo SSTO builder (I can build SSTOs, but nowhere close to NCSs (nominal capacity shuttles)), so others in the crowd will have to help determine what are the main detriments of stock cargo shuttles and how should these engines make that easier.

They're still flat out gorgeous mind you.

If the new engines are slightly improved variants on current stock components (whether in performance or mass), they should appear later in the tech-tree and/or be more expensive than their stock counterparts. This achieves game balance by reflecting improved materials and manufacturing methods. This is a principle that can be applied to nearly all mod parts.

That's just my opinion. Take it for what you will.

[Donziboy2]

Found another bug, seems the crew cabin is misbehaving, only the front attach node seems to work the second will not work at all. I can attach with the front node to a root part, but nothing will attach to the rear node and you can attach the rear node to the root part.

[Captain Sierra]

Found another bug, seems the crew cabin is misbehaving, only the front attach node seems to work the second will not work at all. I can attach with the front node to a root part, but nothing will attach to the rear node and you can attach the rear node to the root part.

I already reported this complete with DIY fix info. Third post, previous page. The node is set backwards so you just need to add a minus sign to the correct value in the .cfg file.

[Donziboy2]

I already reported this complete with DIY fix info. Third post, previous page. The node is set backwards so you just need to add a minus sign to the correct value in the .cfg file.

Ah ok, didn't see it.

[Captain Sierra]

I just downloaded and whipped up a basic SSTO to check things out, and I'm having an issue with the Broadsword. (pre-emptive disclaimer: I could possibly be an idiot, so... you know...)

When I switch modes, it just shuts down. It's connected directly to a fuel source with both LF and OX, and plenty available, but simply won't fire in closed cycle mode. Now, I am running a lot of mods, and it could very well be a conflict I haven't identified yet, but just to make sure, is there anything in particular about the Broadswords that might not be obvious that I could be omitting? Otherwise, the parts look great! and flight below 10K under jet power is nice and smooth.

Thanks!

I dunno exactly but on my install there's a hesitation on mode switch, which probably has something to do with the animation factor. It pauses for just a sec before kicking in but I can't report it straight up not firing. More details plz?

[Nertea]

Statistically they're on point.

Subjectively, things change.

The Dudley feels like it really isnt an improvement. Part of the problem for me is that I use the basic jets subsonic, so having their peak thrust be higher than default is not advantageous for me. As I don't imagine many people using them for SSTOs (I gather you'll probably have them level or above stock turbojets in the tech tree), I'd be tempted to suggest adjusting the curve so they peak lower but provide more power on takeoff and at the transonic band (also I'd advise particle effects since emmissives take forever to spool post-1.0).

It should be noted I was testing this on a giant airliner, which may or may not have contributed.

The BROADSWORD shares the same transonic TWR troubles as the RAPIER. (I replicated your plane here). Given the cargo nature of this set and the difficulties a lot of people have doing nominal capacity shuttles (shuttles where you can fill the entire bay with fuel tanks and still go to space) with stock jets, I'd lobby that this pack should provide an edge here.

Ultimately my sentiments are that slight advantages over stock jets while mirroring their performance, both pros and cons, works from a balance perspective, but its not the most interesting or gameplay-creating way to handle it. I'm not a good cargo SSTO builder (I can build SSTOs, but nowhere close to NCSs (nominal capacity shuttles)), so others in the crowd will have to help determine what are the main detriments of stock cargo shuttles and how should these engines make that easier.

They're still flat out gorgeous mind you.

Just an FYI, that plane was hyperedited up . Yeah balance is really a first pass. I appreciate the feedback.

Congrats on a release, glad it's back! You're gonna need another signature section soon .

I remember from MkIV the First the double/triple engine nacelles had a split edge around the inside of the endcaps. You might have already found it, but I don't have a chance to test it.

Yeah, that section got fixed.

The projected inline cockpit intrigues me. Are you thinking a protruding command section, or inset? If protruding, I'd love to see a sort of container-ship style version. Not terribly aerodynamic but oh-so-cool in space!

Protruding, but aerodynamic. Sorry .

New version!

Fixes:

• Added lights to cockpit, crew cabin
  
• Added corrected airlock and ladder colliders to crew cabin and cockpit
  
• Added internal ladders to service bay (only functional atm, not graphical)
  
• Added Mk4 Short Ventral Bay, Ventral Bay and Extended Ventral Bay
  
• Added missing air intakes to nacelles and engine pods
  
• Fixed incorrect node direction on crew cabin
  
• Fixed slightly offset service bay stack nodes
  
• Fixed cargo bay cap colliders accepting part placement
  
• Fixed several model seams on the cockpit, crew cabin and service bay
  
• Fixed smaller 2.5m engine nacelle containing too little IntakeAir for its size
  
• Fixed cost and mass of tailpieces to they don't have a dry mass/cost of 0.
  
• Fixed a number of maxTemps that were way too high
  
• Adjusted stack node location on Mk4 shoulder pieces
  
• Slightly adjusted Arcadia's stack attach node
  
• Downscaled snoopy nosecone/docking nosecone ever so slightly and adjusted attach node
  
• Shortened animation timing on Broadsword mode switch
  
• Normalized surface attach point for cargo bays, ventral cargo bays, fuselage pieces
  

Remaining issues:

• Advanced Shock Intake open animation doesn't always play
  
• Texture colour matching needs to be done still (particularly for the adapters, tails and the cockpit)
  
• Most Mk4 crossection parts lack specular maps
  
• A couple fuselage parts have unwelded seams (if you see any let me know)
  
• Cargo tail part isn't textured or anything
  
• Cargo tail sometimes occludes things on its side nodes
  
• Cargo tail ramp can't alter its angle in the VAB yet
  
• Cargo tail ramp snaps back to horizontal without animating when it is closed
  
• IVAs are really nowhere (cockpit needs reinstrumentation, crew cabin needs textures, finished model and stuff)
  

[AccidentalDisassembly]

New version!

• 
  

That's a lot of progress! This is really a neat pack and I especially like what you've done with it since the last versions, it's all looking great!

I was wondering - since a lot of people around here seem to be knowledgeable about engines and whatnot in real life - what's the deal with engines gaining so much thrust as airspeed increases? Is this a real-life phenomenon on most jet engines, and is it simply because you start cramming a lot more air in the intakes (more O2 for combustion or something...?) as you go faster? Or is there something else going on?

[jonrd463]

I dunno exactly but on my install there's a hesitation on mode switch, which probably has something to do with the animation factor. It pauses for just a sec before kicking in but I can't report it straight up not firing. More details plz?

I'm afraid there's not much else to detail. Upon loading on the runway, I can stage the engines in airbreathing mode as normal with no problems. If I try to switch to closed cycle mode, the engine just shuts down. When I right-click on Activate Engine in closed cycle mode, the green bars for fuel remaining in the stage list appear briefly and disappear. When I switch back to air breathing and click Activate Engine, they fire back up.

It's pretty obvious there's some kind of conflict on my end, likely with a plugin. I'll try reinstalling the mod on a clean KSP install.

Off topic-- Does anyone else have something like 8 or 9 different KSP installations at the same time, or is that just me?

[TrainEngie]

Off topic-- Does anyone else have something like 8 or 9 different KSP installations at the same time, or is that just me?

I have 5 installations: 2 0.90.0s, 2 1.0.2s, and 1.0.4.

[Nertea]

I'm afraid there's not much else to detail. Upon loading on the runway, I can stage the engines in airbreathing mode as normal with no problems. If I try to switch to closed cycle mode, the engine just shuts down. When I right-click on Activate Engine in closed cycle mode, the green bars for fuel remaining in the stage list appear briefly and disappear. When I switch back to air breathing and click Activate Engine, they fire back up.

It's pretty obvious there's some kind of conflict on my end, likely with a plugin. I'll try reinstalling the mod on a clean KSP install.

Off topic-- Does anyone else have something like 8 or 9 different KSP installations at the same time, or is that just me?

Try the latest version. It's the animation between the two states that's pausing things. Changes should fix this.

[AccidentalDisassembly]

I'm afraid there's not much else to detail. Upon loading on the runway, I can stage the engines in airbreathing mode as normal with no problems. If I try to switch to closed cycle mode, the engine just shuts down. When I right-click on Activate Engine in closed cycle mode, the green bars for fuel remaining in the stage list appear briefly and disappear. When I switch back to air breathing and click Activate Engine, they fire back up.

It's pretty obvious there's some kind of conflict on my end, likely with a plugin. I'll try reinstalling the mod on a clean KSP install.

Off topic-- Does anyone else have something like 8 or 9 different KSP installations at the same time, or is that just me?

You probably already checked this, but just on the off chance - did you load the plane completely with liquid fuel and no oxidizer? That could cause what you're describing, I think. Or maybe I'm the only one that does this from time to time, hah...

EDIT: Also noticed this oddity on the Mk4 Extended Fuselage part, here viewed from the rear (default orientation in the SPH):

Edited July 12, 2015 by AccidentalDisassembly

[Naf5000]

I have this to say about my first test flight with MkIV parts:

It was going very well until everything exploded.

There was one survivor.

[loppnessmonsta]

I was wondering - since a lot of people around here seem to be knowledgeable about engines and whatnot in real life - what's the deal with engines gaining so much thrust as airspeed increases? Is this a real-life phenomenon on most jet engines, and is it simply because you start cramming a lot more air in the intakes (more O2 for combustion or something...?) as you go faster? Or is there something else going on?

I'm no expert (or even an amateur) but afaik, you pretty much covered the big thing. More o2, more boom. I think there's some aerodynamic shenanigans involved with intakes and whatnot at extremely high speeds, but it's definitely a RL phenomena. One that is approximated in KSP by making jet engines work better the faster you go, in lieu of true physics.

Gettin super psyched, Nertea!

[Captain Sierra]

Off topic-- Does anyone else have something like 8 or 9 different KSP installations at the same time, or is that just me?

Most of mine are backups (I only play on 1-3 at any given time) but I have about a dozen in differently named directories on my hard drive.

Just an FYI, that plane was hyperedited up . Yeah balance is really a first pass. I appreciate the feedback.

Yeah I ran into that realization pretty quick.

Love the changelog, will experiment with drop bays tomorrow.

EDIT: Also noticed this oddity on the Mk4 Extended Fuselage part, here viewed from the rear (default orientation in the SPH):

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/59567837/mk4LongFuselageSeam.png

That'd be another one of those unwelded seams Nertea wants us to find for him. Good catch, thats a small one.

[jonrd463]

Ok, everything works fine on a clean KSP install. Even after updating to the latest test release, it's still behaving badly on my mod-heavy install. I'll just go through and test mod by mod to see what the culprit is, and will post back with what I find.

[blowfish]

I was wondering - since a lot of people around here seem to be knowledgeable about engines and whatnot in real life - what's the deal with engines gaining so much thrust as airspeed increases? Is this a real-life phenomenon on most jet engines, and is it simply because you start cramming a lot more air in the intakes (more O2 for combustion or something...?) as you go faster? Or is there something else going on?

It's real for supersonic engines (with adjustable nozzles). The simplest way to explain it is that ram compression increases the density of air entering the engine, and thus thrust increases.

[Wolf Baginski]

The Wikipedia article on the SR-71 gives a good outline of the effects, and that plane's service ceiling isn't far off the limit for air-breathing engines in KSP (allowing for the difference in atmosphere between Tellus and Kerbin).

You can go faster, but you hit heating problems if you don't keep climbing. Essentially, a zoom-climb, which is supposed to be how an RAF Lightning F.6 was able to get a picture of an SR-71 from above. They knew exactly where it was going to be, at the end of a speed-record attempt, and the English Electric Lightning was one hot plane.

A large print of that picture was displayed at RAF Binbrook, in the Officer's Mess. until the Lightning was retired and the base closed. The RAF tends to brag a little about its fighter pilots, and with good reason. They were part of the world's only integrated air defence system, 75 years ago, and some bits were only just there in time.

The Luftwaffe didn't realise what they were getting into.

[Donziboy2]

Anyone else playing with MK4 SSTO's? Im having alot of control issues above 10K.

[jonrd463]

Ok, everything works fine on a clean KSP install. Even after updating to the latest test release, it's still behaving badly on my mod-heavy install. I'll just go through and test mod by mod to see what the culprit is, and will post back with what I find.

Quoting myself for context. Problem solved. I didn't have Interstellar Fuel Switch Core installed, only what was bundled with the Mk4. I ticked the box in CKAN, installed, restarted KSP, et voila! All good now.

[Captain Sierra]

Quoting myself for context. Problem solved. I didn't have Interstellar Fuel Switch Core installed, only what was bundled with the Mk4. I ticked the box in CKAN, installed, restarted KSP, et voila! All good now.

Not sure how the heck that caused your problem. I'm just running the bundled version, but glad its fixed.

- - - Updated - - -

Anyone else playing with MK4 SSTO's? Im having alot of control issues above 10K.

You're flying a boat . . . yeah its gonna not exactly wanna cooperate. Stems from lack of appropriately sized control surfaces methinks. I use hefty RCS to compensate. Seems to work.