KSP ARM Parts list (SPOILER)

[kiwiak]

Wait, why Claw doesnt have fuel crossfeed?

Wasnt it supposed to be able to suck fuel from tanks its attached to?

[Pigbear]

If asteroids are parts can you launch them from Kerbin as parts of regular ships?

no you can't

[magnemoe]

What about the tech tree, will we get the 3 m parts before we go interplanetary?

Well as you can get fill out the current tree and have 10.000 spare without going longer than Minmus I don't see why not. If they do as they do in mods they put the new parts in one or two 1000 points nodes past mainsails.

[Random Tank]

Do the big fuel tanks really have a LOWER mass ratio than the smaller ones? Oh brother. When are we going to get some fuel tanks that aren't made out of uranium?

Speaking of uranium, when are they going to change the NERVA to use the right fuel? It'd help its TWR having a lighter fuel....

[CalculusWarrior]

Wait, why Claw doesnt have fuel crossfeed?

Wasnt it supposed to be able to suck fuel from tanks its attached to?

Fuel crossfeed simply means that if you attach a fuel tank above and a fuel tank below, fuel will not flow automatically from one tank to another, like it would if both tanks were directly attached to each other.

However, you can transfer any resource between any tank on the same ship in KSP by simply right-clicking on both tanks with ALT held down, it is this what they are talking about when The Claw's fuel transfer abilities are mentioned.

[PDCWolf]

R.I.P. L.E.S. pack.

[Francesco]

Wait, why Claw doesnt have fuel crossfeed?

Wasnt it supposed to be able to suck fuel from tanks its attached to?

It can, it seems - but to me, it doesn't make sense: that thing is supposed to grab objects, how can it suck fuel out of them?

It just feels wrong.

[Hans Dorn]

Thanks for posting the stats of the ion engine. Looks like more fun to play with now

Cheers

P.S: I just updated the part's config accordingly.

[UmbralRaptor]

The KR-2L has quite impressive stats. It should be possible to use it to build big SSTO rockets with payload fraction over 10%.

11-12% is already doable with the 48-7S. I'm currently more interested in the LFB, if perhaps because I read the KR-2L's vacuum Isp as 330 s, rather than 380s. In any case, an LFB + 2 orange tanks (110 tonnes) should be able to loft 21-23 tonnes into LKO (16-17% payload fraction). If you use 3 of those as a 2STO with crossfeed, 80-90 tonnes (19-21%) appears possible. For a full set of 7, I'm less sure, but would expect a minimum of 150 tonnes into orbit.

[r4pt0r]

i hope this thread doesnt get merged, the megathread is a cluster-mess already

[cantab]

It can, it seems - but to me, it doesn't make sense: that thing is supposed to grab objects, how can it suck fuel out of them?

It just feels wrong.

More than anything else, it's that preventing the claw from allowing manual fuel transfer would require extra coding. Possibly significant extra coding, since I believe that at present the manual fuel transfer doesn't do any sort of route checking at all. It'd be nice to see in future, but IMHO not essential for the ARM.

On another note, I hope the mass fractions on the fuel tanks get fixed. IMHO I shouldn't have to end up clustering smaller tanks to power my big engines if I want good performance.

[Mach_XXII]

R.I.P. L.E.S. pack.

I like your LES pack more than the Stock one

[Xavven]

Yeah, it completely blows the mainsail out of the water with its Isp, talk about fuel efficiency.

Hm, I think this warrants a rebalance against the Mainsail and Skipper. The KS-25x4 has better ISP than a skipper in both atmosphere and vacuum, has better thrust than two mainsails, and masses less than two mainsails.

[merendel]

Introducing the newest product line from Rockomax, the SYK or "Screw You Kerbodyne!" series of rocket components, so large even Jebidiah hesitated to use them for about half a second

That was not hesitation. That was the excitement and anticipation briefly overloading his brain requiring a quick reboot.

[MKI]

Hm, I think this warrants a rebalance against the Mainsail and Skipper. The KS-25x4 has better ISP than a skipper in both atmosphere and vacuum, has better thrust than two mainsails, and masses less than two mainsails.

The Dev's have said the new parts are designed to be BETTER than the old parts.

(i just can't find the reference!)

They wanted the new systems to be simpler, and more powerful. As once you get that far in career mode, its more about the payload than the launcher. Which is probably the main reason behind the KS-25s being a single part.

Yea it hurts the balance of sandbox, but its sandbox. Build rockets to go boom

[Jouni]

11-12% is already doable with the 48-7S. I'm currently more interested in the LFB, if perhaps because I read the KR-2L's vacuum Isp as 330 s, rather than 380s. In any case, an LFB + 2 orange tanks (110 tonnes) should be able to loft 21-23 tonnes into LKO (16-17% payload fraction). If you use 3 of those as a 2STO with crossfeed, 80-90 tonnes (19-21%) appears possible. For a full set of 7, I'm less sure, but would expect a minimum of 150 tonnes into orbit.

I don't really count the 48-7S as a viable SSTO engine, because you need a huge number of them for any reasonable payload. Anyway, the KR-2L has higher TWR than the 48-7S, and it's ISP is also higher, except for horizontal flight in low atmosphere. (It was originally listed as 380/280 atmo/vacuum, but now it appears to be more reasonable 280/380.)

The LFB appears to have even more ridiculous TWR. Even with lower ISP than the KR-2L, it might be possible to land on Mun and return, if you can fly really well.

With engines like that, I'm probably going to drop asparagus staging and other unrealistic uses of fuel lines between stages. You can even build an Eve lander with a simple three-stage vertical core and three LFBs with one extra orange tank each as radial boosters.

[magnemoe]

I don't really count the 48-7S as a viable SSTO engine, because you need a huge number of them for any reasonable payload. Anyway, the KR-2L has higher TWR than the 48-7S, and it's ISP is also higher, except for horizontal flight in low atmosphere. (It was originally listed as 380/280 atmo/vacuum, but now it appears to be more reasonable 280/380.)

The LFB appears to have even more ridiculous TWR. Even with lower ISP than the KR-2L, it might be possible to land on Mun and return, if you can fly really well.

With engines like that, I'm probably going to drop asparagus staging and other unrealistic uses of fuel lines between stages. You can even build an Eve lander with a simple three-stage vertical core and three LFBs with one extra orange tank each as radial boosters.

Will probably go my usual way, 1) 1.25 meter-> 2) add 1-2 SRB -> 3) 2.5 meter-> add 4-6 SRB -> 4) add 2.5 meter boosters -> 5) more 2.5 boosters.

However 3.75 meter will replace the 4) and 5) will be add SRB to it, 6) will add two 2.5 meter boosters, 7) two 3.75 meter boosters.

In short this pushes asparagus into the 200 ton to orbit area rather than 50 ton.

The stiffer joints might be even more important, in 0.23 and before I found it smart to build wide simply to get something stable, trying to put an interplanetary craft 40 ton 1.5 times as long as an orange tank on top of

an booster tend to fail. it was smarter to add boosters to the side of the interplanetary craft as it was easier to strut it.

----

Did an test, found you can put 12 LV-N around a 3.75 meter tank, using an 48 ton tank you can easy get an 90 ton ship with an TWR of 0.8 and 6km/s dV

Now you might want to add an drop tank below this, and use this from circulate until matching speed with asteroid.

[Pulsar]

I'm pretty sure there will be a mod for stock-alike 3.75 meters upper stage engine and docking port. Kinda missed out there for who want to build an even larger interplanetary ship.

I know there're KW one, but the style are different.

[jmiki8]

Wow, these parts are huge, and their ISP is fairly high! (I thought they would be very inefficient to compensate for their brute force)

[Javster]

The only thing I don't like is the lack of an Orion

[NecroBones]

The only thing I don't like is the lack of an Orion

Still waiting for stock payload fairings too.

[Xavven]

The Dev's have said the new parts are designed to be BETTER than the old parts.

(i just can't find the reference!)

They wanted the new systems to be simpler, and more powerful. As once you get that far in career mode, its more about the payload than the launcher. Which is probably the main reason behind the KS-25s being a single part.

Yea it hurts the balance of sandbox, but its sandbox. Build rockets to go boom

Ah, ok! As long as it was done intentionally. I play career mode, and I'm comfortable with progressions that include obsolescence. I just hadn't noticed obsolescence in the .23 stock part tech tree, perhaps aside from the Stayputnik. So long, Skippers! You have been replaced!

[Joonatan1998]

Are the new engines better than 48-7S?

I think that the ion engines may be too powerfull now, I would be OK with 4 times the thrust

OR 1/4 the electricity but both make the engine seem OP (Landers that use ion engines???)

[katateochi]

I'm looking forward to these new parts! Also really interested to see what can be done with the ion engine now. I know some peps think that it will now be OP, but tbh I'd rather have a more versatile engine and sacrifice some realism. I miss the old MMI ion engines!

[Dispatcher]

... I think that the ion engines may be too powerfull now, I would be OK with 4 times the thrust

OR 1/4 the electricity but both make the engine seem OP (Landers that use ion engines???)

I already use ion engines on my rovers (throttle them up, fire and no need to keep holding down the wheels' travel direction key). The revised ions should really help by allowing the mass/ drag of the solar panels to be reduced on a rover, as well as possibly using them on boats. I'll probably test your idea of ion landers.