[0.24.x] Stock ReBalance v1.4 | 11/09/14

[undercoveryankee]

Hello,

i'm not adept of hyper-realism, but...

i noticed that irl all services engines have very low isp, because they are using monopropellant (315 for apollo, 330 for fregat stage, 290 for soyouz).

very high isp of the launcher upper stage engine are not used once in space because O2 and H2 are not storable for long time.

so, i suggest the use of monopropellant for services engine (for small ship & lander).

High isp for launchers, but add a power generator, producing around no power, but consumming all oxydizer in about 24h.

so you have to use the fuel for launch and first orbit injection, and then use monopropellant...

this does not apply to ION & nuclear engines, designed for interplanetary travel.

that would lead to a very different rocket design.

thanks.

Since stock KSP doesn't let you choose whether your fuel is storable or cryogenic, it's probably better to keep all of the stock fuels storable and all of the stock chemical engines on one curve and let Real Fuels take care of simulating that wrinkle.

[NathanKell]

Batsignal called me here.

Uh, none of those craft you mentioned are using monopropellants; they're using storable hypergolics; NTO/AZ50 for Apollo, and NTO/UDMH for the Russians. Monopropellants would have a far lower Isp; hydrazine tops out at about 240s.

It actually applies *worse* for nuclear engines, since (at 800s specific impulse) they're obviously using liquid H2, which as you point out boils off very fast; LOX actually is only mildly cryogenic and much easier to keep around.

[Woopert]

Hello,

i'm not adept of hyper-realism, but...

i noticed that irl all services engines have very low isp, because they are using monopropellant (315 for apollo, 330 for fregat stage, 290 for soyouz).

very high isp of the launcher upper stage engine are not used once in space because O2 and H2 are not storable for long time.

so, i suggest the use of monopropellant for services engine (for small ship & lander).

High isp for launchers, but add a power generator, producing around no power, but consumming all oxydizer in about 24h.

so you have to use the fuel for launch and first orbit injection, and then use monopropellant...

this does not apply to ION & nuclear engines, designed for interplanetary travel.

that would lead to a very different rocket design.

thanks.

The don't actually use "monopropellant," for example the AJ10 on the Apollo SM used Aerozine-50 and dinitrogen tetroxide -- so it's bipropellant.

[rkman]

All parts with no physical significance now hav a mass of zero to show correct CoM in the editor (ladders, landing gear, lights, struts, etc)

I noticed in the console (alt-F2) spamming of an error message complaining about parts being zero mass. I solved it by giving the zero mass parts a very low mass. Also gave launchclamps their original mass (they can't hold on to anything when their mass is very low).

[stupid_chris]

I noticed in the console (alt-F2) spamming of an error message complaining about parts being zero mass. I solved it by giving the zero mass parts a very low mass. Also gave launchclamps their original mass (they can't hold on to anything when their mass is very low).

It does throw errors, but they don't affect gameplay.

[TheExplosionist]

Increase all the TWR to 100:1 to 150:1 and 450 ISP for H2/O2 engines, 1200 ISP for nuclear engines. Realism is vital for gameplay.

[stupid_chris]

Increase all the TWR to 100:1 to 150:1 and 450 ISP for H2/O2 engines, 1200 ISP for nuclear engines. Realism is vital for gameplay.

I suggest you get Modular Fuels

[Franklin]

Increase all the TWR to 100:1 to 150:1 and 450 ISP for H2/O2 engines, 1200 ISP for nuclear engines. Realism is vital for gameplay.

Why is realism vital to gameplay?

Thanks for this mod, though, Chris. I hope Squad takes a nod from there being a localized balancing add-on now and use it as a source for future patches. I'm sure balancing is low on their priority list right now, so simply handing to them what needs balancing and how is great help I'm sure.

[R0cketC0der]

Increase all the TWR to 100:1 to 150:1 and 450 ISP for H2/O2 engines, 1200 ISP for nuclear engines. Realism is vital for gameplay.

Only a few engines have such a high TWR and most LH2/LOX engines have a lower ISP, 450 is close to the maximum theoretically possible. Also bipropellant nuclear engines have a ISP of about 500.

[lordkrike]

I was just poking around in the files and noticed a few little bugs.

The Z-400 battery has physicssignificance=1 in stock. You set the Z-100 to physicssignificance=0. So this leads to the awkward situation where the Z-100 battery has significance, but the Z-400 doesn't. I noticed it while playing around with the RCSBuildAid and using batteries to balance a probe. Setting it to 0 for the Z-400 seems to have fixed it.

Also, your antennae transmit speeds are backwards. packetInterval is how long between each packet is sent, so a lower interval is better. This is confusing because there is a display bug in the game, causing it to show the incorrect value for bandwidth (it multiplies packet size by interval when it should be dividing).

[stupid_chris]

I was just poking around in the files and noticed a few little bugs.

The Z-400 battery has physicssignificance=1 in stock. You set the Z-100 to physicssignificance=0. So this leads to the awkward situation where the Z-100 battery has significance, but the Z-400 doesn't. I noticed it while playing around with the RCSBuildAid and using batteries to balance a probe. Setting it to 0 for the Z-400 seems to have fixed it.

Also, your antennae transmit speeds are backwards. packetInterval is how long between each packet is sent, so a lower interval is better. This is confusing because there is a display bug in the game, causing it to show the incorrect value for bandwidth (it multiplies packet size by interval when it should be dividing).

Yeah I forgot to change it, it's changed in my new configs, I'll upload them when I have some time.

And no, the antennas are alright. Slower antennas consume less ElectricCharge, faster antennas consume more but deliver the science faster.

[lordkrike]

Yeah I forgot to change it, it's changed in my new configs, I'll upload them when I have some time.

And no, the antennas are alright. Slower antennas consume less ElectricCharge, faster antennas consume more but deliver the science faster.

Got it, got it. I presume the reasoning behind this progression is that, while the c16 is fastest, it also consumes the most power. So, the "upgrades" are slower, but more energy efficient, giving a tradeoff.

Also, I don't know if you would consider doing something like this, but I like to go in to the files and set my antennae to transmit 1 Mit per packet, and halve the transmission interval and energy/packet. I think it is strange that you have to transmit 6 Mits to send back a 5 Mit data piece.

Anyway, thanks for all of this, I find it quite a nice little quality of life thing.

[Read have Read]

Any thoughts about the Oscar-B .625 fuel tank? it holds a pitiful 6 units of Liquid Fuel. The Toridal donut tank holds more, and the .625 Mono tank from KSPX holds 50 units.

[stupid_chris]

Also, I don't know if you would consider doing something like this, but I like to go in to the files and set my antennae to transmit 1 Mit per packet, and halve the transmission interval and energy/packet. I think it is strange that you have to transmit 6 Mits to send back a 5 Mit data piece.

Not sure what you mean there, mind to explain?

Any thoughts about the Oscar-B .625 fuel tank? it holds a pitiful 6 units of Liquid Fuel. The Toridal donut tank holds more, and the .625 Mono tank from KSPX holds 50 units.

LF/LOX is much more voluminous than monopropellant. It is getting a small buff to have the same fuel/drymass ratio than other stock tanks, but the amount doesn't change much.

[lordkrike]

Not sure what you mean there, mind to explain?

All stock antennae transmit 2 mits per packet. If your piece of data has an odd number of mits, it wastes the last mit on the last packet, essentially sucking down power while it transmits nothing.

Granted, this only applies to the crew report, but hey.

If you halve the size, interval, and cost, you essentially modify the antennae to transmit only 1 mit at a time, at the same speed and energy cost as before (except in the case of crew reports, which are slightly cheaper due to you not having to transmit that extra mit). It basically just gives more granularity to your % completion readout, and smooths out the antennae sucking power out of your batteries (it comes out in smaller chunks more often, rather than bigger chunks less often).

It's not really a big deal, but I like it for some reason.

[stupid_chris]

All stock antennae transmit 2 mits per packet. If your piece of data has an odd number of mits, it wastes the last mit on the last packet, essentially sucking down power while it transmits nothing.

Granted, this only applies to the crew report, but hey.

If you halve the size, interval, and cost, you essentially modify the antennae to transmit only 1 mit at a time, at the same speed and energy cost as before (except in the case of crew reports, which are slightly cheaper due to you not having to transmit that extra mit). It basically just gives more granularity to your % completion readout, and smooths out the antennae sucking power out of your batteries (it comes out in smaller chunks more often, rather than bigger chunks less often).

It's not really a big deal, but I like it for some reason.

That sounds very reasonable to me

[stupid_chris]

Hey guys, updating this!

Changelog:

April 19th 2014
v1.3
-Toroidal/0.625m dry tank mass aligned with other tanks
-Radail/inline Zenon dry tank mass aligned as well
-Decoupler strenght/mass is now linear
-Solar panels mass adjusted according to EC generation
-RCS thrust bumped to 2kN
-Reaction wheel torque has gone through a heavy nerf to make RCS competitive with it, although it does not make them worthless (thanks to m4v for the help on that)
-Two new parts: 2.5m SRB based on the NASA SRB and 0.625m LES for the Mk1 pod
-NASA SRB and new 2.5m SRB have gimbals
-Size 3 decoupler and Z-400 battery no longer physics insignificant
-Antennas package size reduced to one mit and speed/EC consumption adjusted accordingly

And now the verbosed list with every change up to now:

• The NASA LFB now has a mass of 6.5t (10.5t with the tank) a thrust of 1800kN and an ISP of 270-335, as well as an alternator
  
• The KR-2L now has a mas of 9.75t, a thrust of 2000kN, and an ISP of 250-360
  
• The SLS quad engine now has a mass of 13t, a thrust of 4000kN and an ISP 0f 260-325
  
• The LES now has a decoupler
  
• All nose cones, most adapters, and some other structural parts now contain fuel.
  
• The SAS units have been rebalanced so that the old SAS part is the lightest and "weakest" reaction wheel, and that the 2.5m unit is the heaviest and most performant. The old 1.25m ASAS sits between both.
  
• The cupola has been weighed down to 3t (it's still a lot of glass panels), and it's drag has been lowered to 0.2
  
• The Poodle has been rebalanced: mass of 1.75t, thrust of 160kN, ISP of 270-410. Higher ISP, lower TWR, but much lower engine mass fraction.
  
• The 48-7S now has a mass of 0.15t and an ISP of 290-340
  
• The 24-77 now has a mass of 0.1t and an ISP of 290-340
  
• The LV-1 and LV-1R now have an ISP of 280-350
  
• The Mk. 55 radial engine now has a thrust of 150kN, and an ISP of 310-370. Basically it's an all-around engine that can both help lifting stuff from the ground, or tow things around in orbit, and now has an alternator.
  
• The LV-1 and Ion engine now show the "fuel gauge".
  
• R.A.P.I.E.R. was given an alternator.
  
• The shielded docking port's drag has been reduced to 0.1
  
• All alternator output has been unified to 0.008EC/kN (12EC/s at 1500kN)
  
• All probe/pod reaction wheel EC consumption has been normalized to 0.1EC/torque
  
• All SAS units reaction wheel EC consumption has been normalized to 0.01EC/torque
  
• Electric charge and mass thorought the probe cores has been unified to have some sort of progression
  
• The rover body is now a probe core, it's EC capacity has been bumped to 500, and it has a very weak reaction wheel
  
• Monpropellant amount bumped in the two lander cans
  
• Mass of the Mk2 lander can reduced to 1.25t
  
• EC within lander cans reduced, and augmented into normal pods
  
• Mass of the Mk1 cockpit reduced to 1t to match the Mk2 cockpit
  
• 1.25m nose cone rescaled to fit onto 1.25m tanks (and not the pod)
  
• Clampotron Jr. rescaled to fit better on the Mk1 pod (still looks good on 0.625m tanks)
  
• Important parts with no physical significance now have it back and have a sensible mass (looking at you Z-100 battery)
  
• Mass rebalance on some various structural parts
  
• All parts with no physical significance now hav a mass of zero to show correct CoM in the editor (ladders, landing gear, lights, struts, etc)
  
• Solar panels charge curve rebalance to give an inverse sqaure law (-> CaptRobau)
  
• OX solar panels (no case) cannot be retracted anymore (-> CaptRobau)
  
• Ruggedized wheel and inflated wheel have rebalanced mass/EC consumption to have different niches (-> CaptRobau)
  
• Antennas transmission speed/cost/mass rebalanced to have some form of progression (-> CaptRobau)
  
• Parachutes all have a deployment sound (only the Mk16 had one)(at least for those who aren't using RealChute )
  
• Micronode/station hub have symmetry enabled (-> CaptRobau)
  
• The weird hydraulic structural pylon now uses the decoupler module and has a staging icon that isn't blank
  
• Node fixes and CoM rebalancement on all plane parts (-> CaptRobau)
  
• The materials bay's radial attach node is now at the back of it, not on the side
  
• Typos on aerodynamics parts fixed (-> CaptRobau)
  
• Toroidal and Oscar-B fuel tank dry mass adjusted to have 1t/720LF
  
• Radial xenon tank dry mass adjusted top have the same ratio as the inline one
  
• Decoupler ejection force has been adjusted to be function of it's mass for all decouplers
  
• Solar panel mass is now adjusted to be linear with EC generation
  
• RCS units now output 2kN of thrust (-> m4v)
  
• Reaction wheel torque is much lower than it used to be to be competitive with RCS without feeling useless(-> m4v)
  
• New 2.5m SRB based off the NASA SRB, meant to be a low mass payload cheap first stage
  
• New 0.625m LES using the NASA LES model
  
• Both LES have a CoM offset to reduce a little the side thrust
  
• The NASA SRB and 2.5m SRB have gimbals
  
• Size 3 decoupler no longer physically insignificant
  
• Antennas now deliver one mit per package and speed/package EC consumption has been adjusted accordingly

I'd love some feedback on the new SRB, I tested it a bit aruond and it seemed to perform pretty well.

Cheers!

[lordkrike]

I'd love some feedback on the new SRB, I tested it a bit aruond and it seemed to perform pretty well.

Radial attach nodes are jacked up (radially attached items clip into the SRB) and the flag on the SRB is stretched horizontally.

It can get a 10t payload to an apoapsis of 75km and a pretty decent orbital speed provided you set the thrust limit appropriately. Crazy. Also, the gimbal didn't seem to be working. Maybe that's just me.

Previously, SAS devices were scaled to mass. With the new change, that's no longer so. Maybe you should increase the mass of the 2.5m ASAS to .4t to reestablish that scaling. A larger craft won't notice, but it makes it more difficult for smaller craft to just throw it on there.

Also, the bottom stack node for the LVT-30 is just ever so slightly too long. Maybe try reducing it by .05. I haven't tested to find the sweet spot. Edit: -6.975 or thereabouts seems to work.

Dobbel edit: the LVT-45 is too short and items clip into the fairing. Try about -6.3.

Triple edit: Also, the Gigantor solar panel scales by mass with the OX series panels, but is retractable. It should probably scale similarly to the SP series, or be unretractable.

Edited April 19, 2014 by lordkrike

[lordkrike]

Rather than just editing my post a million times, another thought is to make the Gigantor and OX panels unretractable, but allow a Kerbal on EVA to crank them back by hand (similar to repacking a parachute, I think).

This means that they can be stowed for travel by hand, but a probes have to take the SP series panels if they want to aerobrake.

Also, the OX-STAT should have some kind of weight advantage over the rest. It is completely fixed, and a slight weight advantage can help compensate. Beyond that, their only use is in rovers, which can be dubious at times if you can throw enough RTGs on there.

Edited April 19, 2014 by lordkrike

[stupid_chris]

Radial attach nodes are jacked up (radially attached items clip into the SRB) and the flag on the SRB is stretched horizontally.

It can get a 10t payload to an apoapsis of 75km and a pretty decent orbital speed provided you set the thrust limit appropriately. Crazy. Also, the gimbal didn't seem to be working. Maybe that's just me.

Yeah the flag will look weird cause I didn't scale it linearly. I'll probably just remove the flag.

Previously, SAS devices were scaled to mass. With the new change, that's no longer so. Maybe you should increase the mass of the 2.5m ASAS to .4t to reestablish that scaling. A larger craft won't notice, but it makes it more difficult for smaller craft to just throw it on there.

Yeah, I'll rego at their masses, didn't think of that one.

Also, the bottom stack node for the LVT-30 is just ever so slightly too long. Maybe try reducing it by .05. I haven't tested to find the sweet spot. Edit: -6.975 or thereabouts seems to work.

Dobbel edit: the LVT-45 is too short and items clip into the fairing. Try about -6.3.

I didn't really touch that. If I move it down, the fairing will move too, so yeah, not happening, clipping will be better than a gap in the fairing.

Triple edit: Also, the Gigantor solar panel scales by mass with the OX series panels, but is retractable. It should probably scale similarly to the SP series, or be unretractable.

Rather than just editing my post a million times, another thought is to make the Gigantor and OX panels unretractable, but allow a Kerbal on EVA to crank them back by hand (similar to repacking a parachute, I think).

This means that they can be stowed for travel by hand, but a probes have to take the SP series panels if they want to aerobrake.

Thing that I can't do without doing my very own solar panel module. I thought about making it unretractable but wasn't sure, this would have very large implication since there isn't a retractable equivalent.

Also, the OX-STAT should have some kind of weight advantage over the rest. It is completely fixed, and a slight weight advantage can help compensate. Beyond that, their only use is in rovers, which can be dubious at times if you can throw enough RTGs on there.

The OX-STAT looks good to me, I wouldn't touch it much more than this.

[lordkrike]

I didn't really touch that. If I move it down, the fairing will move too, so yeah, not happening, clipping will be better than a gap in the fairing.

Works just fine for me. The fairing doesn't move if you shift the node_stack_bottom. Proof.

And yeah, if you don't want to bother with fanciness with the solar panels, I'd just make the Gigantor heavier (like the SP series). It's still a massive buff from what it was.

[stupid_chris]

Works just fine for me. The fairing doesn't move if you shift the node_stack_bottom. Proof.

And yeah, if you don't want to bother with fanciness with the solar panels, I'd just make the Gigantor heavier (like the SP series). It's still a massive buff from what it was.

AFAIK the fairings fit correctly with the decouplers which is what we're looking for here.

And no, since I don't really want to bother rewriting a whole solar panels module just to allow repacking via EVA but not right click, I'll see about the mass It seems like a buff because it was massively heavy before for it's performance.

[CaelReader]

Is there a point to the SAS modules vs the Inline Reaction Wheels? Are the new antenna changes compatible with AntennaRange?

[stupid_chris]

Is there a point to the SAS modules vs the Inline Reaction Wheels? Are the new antenna changes compatible with AntennaRange?

Both the SAS and reaction wheels do the same: they're reaction wheels, really. Some have more torque than others, depends what you need. And I have no clue for AntannaRange.

[Rakaydos]

Not downloading 1.3 till after my Grand Tour mission- weakening my reaction wheels will make maneuvering this whale even more painful

I lost three stages of fuel to a fuel line mistake and a staging order error, and still got the rest of it up there...