[1.7.2] KK Launchers - Delta, Atlas Pack

[Delta_8930]

SO excited to see the Atlas back with us again!

[ReventonHawx]

Ahh yes! I can finally update to 1.0.5 (I think)!

 

Also, anyone want to try an early version of my Falcon 9 Full Thrust RO configs? I gave them a quick test in a 1.0.5 RSS-RO build and it seemed to work fine. ISPs might seem off but it was the only way to get the right weight-to-burntime-to-thrust. Any other criticisms and/or edits are welcome!  CLICK HERE FOR DOWNLOAD and then it should be a simple drag and drop into your KSP directory. Includes the config and the CRAFT file because I had to do some wonky things with the nodes to get the first stage cold gas thrusters working.

Edited January 22, 2016 by ReventonHawx

[Kerbal01]

13 hours ago, Drj3199 said:

The dragon v2 is only crew. You are thinking of the dragon which is in the mod but (as far as I can tell) doesn't do anything other than look cool. I may be wrong but I don't even think it comes with a docking port.

Dragon V2 with a berthing port was offered to NASA for CRS2 contract, no idea on which one they picked.

Edited January 22, 2016 by DarthVader

[RaendyLeBeau]

great work ! grossartig!

 

[Hysterrics]

Atlas V!
AHggkgfdhDHhfds

You're doing amazing work man, keep it up! I've been waiting for this return!
 

[Kartoffelkuchen]

17 hours ago, Tracer96 said:

Just so you know, the Falcon 9 V1.0 upper stage has something like 4000 liquid fuel. The rocket barely gets off the ground.

The *upper stage* has 4000 liquid fuel? That can't possibly be right. The config file gives it 720 lqf and 880 ox, and even the 1.1 and 1.1 FT don't have more than 2000 lqf..

[Giuliano]

Kartoffelkuchen, can you add compability with Real Plume mod (Like the plume of MUOS-4 Flight plume)?

[Kartoffelkuchen]

26 minutes ago, Giuliano said:

Kartoffelkuchen, can you add compability with Real Plume mod (Like the plume of MUOS-4 Flight plume)?

I could have a look at it. I didn't do Real Plumes before. But it's an interesting option. Though, just to mention it, the MUOS-4 plume looked mostly the way it looked because the sun shone onto it in a special way, but I can try to make a nice plume!

[Hysterrics]

2 hours ago, Kartoffelkuchen said:

I could have a look at it. I didn't do Real Plumes before. But it's an interesting option. Though, just to mention it, the MUOS-4 plume looked mostly the way it looked because the sun shone onto it in a special way, but I can try to make a nice plume!

Yeah, having the plume on the Falcon 9 widen as you gain altitude would be awesome.

[Kerbal01]

Atlas v looks neat, but F9 1.2 is theoretically capable of the full range of atlas v payloads (minus heavy), so that is my go to launcher.

[Delta_8930]

20 minutes ago, DarthVader said:

Atlas v looks neat, but F9 1.2 is theoretically capable of the full range of atlas v payloads (minus heavy), so that is my go to launcher.

You mean the AV 551 (and maybe 541)? ULA decided to stop developing the AV-heavy because Delta IV Heavy could carry payloads in its range and Vulcan would be able to carry more

[Kerbal01]

I meant heavy, as AV HLV did exist in this mod at one point (don't know if it still does?)

[Tracer96]

13 hours ago, Kartoffelkuchen said:

The *upper stage* has 4000 liquid fuel? That can't possibly be right. The config file gives it 720 lqf and 880 ox, and even the 1.1 and 1.1 FT don't have more than 2000 lqf..

I redownloaded, and still got 4212 Liquid Fuel. Oxidizer was similarly out of whack. This is the only stage that is causing issues.

I think it has something to do with your 64K config. That lists the Liquid fuel at 4212 units and oxidizer at 5148. . It is missing something in the config too.

"

@PART[KK_SPX_F91_S2tank]
{
    @mass = 4
    @RESOURCE[LiquidFuel]
    {
        @amount = 4212
        @maxAmount = 4212
    }
    @RESOURCE[Oxidizer]
    {
        @amount = 5148
        @maxAmount = 5148
    }
}

"

It lacks the term NEEDS[64K]

Edited January 24, 2016 by Tracer96
Think I found problem.

[nathan98900]

Just wanted to say a huge thank you for the Atlas pack. I love it.

[Rybo]

AHHHHHH! I just got on to check the status and saw the Atlas V pack! Thanks! I can't WAIT to use it.

Now someone just needs to make SLC-3 and the MST 

[curtquarquesso]

So, I tried the new Atlas pack, and there are quite a few issues. 

1. The front page doesn't describe what scale/difficulty this pack should be used with. Stock? 6.4x? RSS? RO? FAR? SMURFF? ROMini? What system are these parts balanced for?

2. All the parts have wildly offset CoMs in the negative Y direction. This makes things flip around like crazy. Mainly, the CoM offsets cause the Centaur upper stage to be spun wildly around. Shifting CoM further back only encourages wild flipping. What's the reason for this?

3. The Atlas 401 fairings are not the correct dimensions. Payload that should fit inside the fairings don't fit. The Fairings needs to be slightly longer. I can provide proof of some of this. 

4. The 401 XEPF fairing doesn't attach correctly. It sits lower down than it should when attached. 

5. The 401 conical piece and cylindrical interstage aren't long enough for the RL-10 to fit in. The engine bell of the RL-10 clips into the top of the CCB main fuel tank.

6. The 401 interstage is still explodey when decoupling from the RL-10. If not done just right, very bad things happen. By using the offset tools, and using the attach nodes differently than intended, this can be avoided. 

7. The 401 fairings don't decouple properly if you accidentally attach them to each other, which is very easy to do. Can be catastrophic. 

8. The CCB sep motors can be heard still really far away, even after the stage is hundreds of meters away. Something messed up with the audio effects. 

9. The gimbal range on the RD-180s while perhaps technically accurate, make flying difficult. They're super sensitive, and over-react to input.  

10. Even though all the parts are larger, they don't have much fuel. Again, this refers to the first bullet-point. What type of KSP build are these parts balanced for?

11. The conical and cylindrical adapters have vertex alignment issues. 

Here's an album showing some of the mentioned issues:

 

The biggest problem when trying to set up this pack to work with stock KSP or a 6.4x scale system is that add-ons like SMURFF assume that the parts being balanced are already balanced to be similar to stock KSP. 

So, I've made new part configs for the Atlas series that emulate stock KSP balance as closely as possibly. This way, they work in stock like you'd expect, and if you apply add-ons like 64k, Sigma Dimensions, FAR, or SMURFF, the parts get re-balanced like you'd expect, and the rockets perform like they do in real life, and have similar TWRs, and similar payload capacities for their size. 

As soon as I'm done with the configs, I'll post them here if it's ok with @Kartoffelkuchen. They accomplish a few things:

• Converts sizes to 62.5% of original size. This makes the Atlas V CCB 2.5, and the Centaur stage 2.0m. 

• Fuel tank masses and capacities are exactly inline with stock equivalents. 

• Engine thrusts are inline with stock equivalents. 

I would have liked this to be accomplished via MM patch, but there's simply too much to patch. A simple resize reduction doesn't do the trick.

I'll try to post some configs later in the week. I haven't even touched the 500 series or the boosters. 

 

[Kartoffelkuchen]

35 minutes ago, curtquarquesso said:

So, I tried the new Atlas pack, and there are quite a few issues. 

1. The front page doesn't describe what scale/difficulty this pack should be used with. Stock? 6.4x? RSS? RO? FAR? SMURFF? ROMini? What system are these parts balanced for?

2. All the parts have wildly offset CoMs in the negative Y direction. This makes things flip around like crazy. Mainly, the CoM offsets cause the Centaur upper stage to be spun wildly around. Shifting CoM further back only encourages wild flipping. What's the reason for this?

3. The Atlas 401 fairings are not the correct dimensions. Payload that should fit inside the fairings don't fit. The Fairings needs to be slightly longer. I can provide proof of some of this. 

4. The 401 XEPF fairing doesn't attach correctly. It sits lower down than it should when attached. 

5. The 401 conical piece and cylindrical interstage aren't long enough for the RL-10 to fit in. The engine bell of the RL-10 clips into the top of the CCB main fuel tank.

6. The 401 interstage is still explodey when decoupling from the RL-10. If not done just right, very bad things happen. By using the offset tools, and using the attach nodes differently than intended, this can be avoided. 

7. The 401 fairings don't decouple properly if you accidentally attach them to each other, which is very easy to do. Can be catastrophic. 

8. The CCB sep motors can be heard still really far away, even after the stage is hundreds of meters away. Something messed up with the audio effects. 

9. The gimbal range on the RD-180s while perhaps technically accurate, make flying difficult. They're super sensitive, and over-react to input.  

10. Even though all the parts are larger, they don't have much fuel. Again, this refers to the first bullet-point. What type of KSP build are these parts balanced for?

11. The conical and cylindrical adapters have vertex alignment issues. 

Here's an album showing some of the mentioned issues:

 

The biggest problem when trying to set up this pack to work with stock KSP or a 6.4x scale system is that add-ons like SMURFF assume that the parts being balanced are already balanced to be similar to stock KSP. 

So, I've made new part configs for the Atlas series that emulate stock KSP balance as closely as possibly. This way, they work in stock like you'd expect, and if you apply add-ons like 64k, Sigma Dimensions, FAR, or SMURFF, the parts get re-balanced like you'd expect, and the rockets perform like they do in real life, and have similar TWRs, and similar payload capacities for their size. 

As soon as I'm done with the configs, I'll post them here if it's ok with @Kartoffelkuchen. They accomplish a few things:

• Converts sizes to 62.5% of original size. This makes the Atlas V CCB 2.5, and the Centaur stage 2.0m. 

• Fuel tank masses and capacities are exactly inline with stock equivalents. 

• Engine thrusts are inline with stock equivalents. 

I would have liked this to be accomplished via MM patch, but there's simply too much to patch. A simple resize reduction doesn't do the trick.

I'll try to post some configs later in the week. I haven't even touched the 500 series or the boosters. 

 

 

1. If it says nothing like "6.4k", "RSS/RO" etc. in the Supports section, it is only stock compatible.

2. You installed everything from the GameData folder from the pack  into KSP GameData folder? And installed Old School Fairings? Centaur doesn't flip usually. Otherwise, I didn't mind CoM, as long as the parts worked for me, and they did so.

3. No comment, Atlas will be redone, so I won't mind with incorrect dimensions. No sense in fixing that now.

4. OK.

5. You need BD Animation Modules to make RL-10 extend/retract (sorry, forgot to mention that, it's now also listed as required in the OP).

6. Doesn't happen with BD Animation Modules installed.

7. How do you attach fairings to each other? That's why I have provided .craft files...

8. Well, OK then...

9. I can lower them a little bit, but you need a higher than usual gimbal range to make the rocket controllable with SRBs.

10. Well, balancing real stuff to stock is always hard, and often ends up with unrealistic numbers if you compare the size with fuel, thrust etc. I'm sorry, but there's not really more which can be done about this if you want a more realistic performance. They are for stock use.

11. Atlas V will be redone, I won't bother with that.

 

You could just use a MM patch for things like SMURFF. It may be easier first to just balance the parts for stock or something, and then just let SMURFF do its thing, but I'd rather like having full control over everything.

Why would you convert stuff to 62.5%? If you converted the parts smaller, use 64%, that's what the most parts use. This mod isn't supposed to be stockalike.

 

I'd like you to, if you really want to do all this, use Modulemanager. I know I know, just editing the configs itself is easier, but it always leaves the opportunity to just remove the patch again, instead of reinstalling the pack.

 

 

 

[curtquarquesso]

2 hours ago, Kartoffelkuchen said:

1. If it says nothing like "6.4k", "RSS/RO" etc. in the Supports section, it is only stock compatible.
2. You installed everything from the GameData folder from the pack  into KSP GameData folder? And installed Old School Fairings? Centaur doesn't flip usually. Otherwise, I didn't mind CoM, as long as the parts worked for me, and they did so.
3. No comment, Atlas will be redone, so I won't mind with incorrect dimensions. No sense in fixing that now.
4. OK.
5. You need BD Animation Modules to make RL-10 extend/retract (sorry, forgot to mention that, it's now also listed as required in the OP).
6. Doesn't happen with BD Animation Modules installed.
7. How do you attach fairings to each other? That's why I have provided .craft files...
8. Well, OK then...
9. I can lower them a little bit, but you need a higher than usual gimbal range to make the rocket controllable with SRBs.
10. Well, balancing real stuff to stock is always hard, and often ends up with unrealistic numbers if you compare the size with fuel, thrust etc. I'm sorry, but there's not really more which can be done about this if you want a more realistic performance. They are for stock use.
11. Atlas V will be redone, I won't bother with that.

You could just use a MM patch for things like SMURFF. It may be easier first to just balance the parts for stock or something, and then just let SMURFF do its thing, but I'd rather like having full control over everything.
 

Why would you convert stuff to 62.5%? If you converted the parts smaller, use 64%, that's what the most parts use. This mod isn't supposed to be stockalike.

I'd like you to, if you really want to do all this, use Modulemanager. I know I know, just editing the configs itself is easier, but it always leaves the opportunity to just remove the patch again, instead of reinstalling the pack.

First off, I just want to make sure this didn't come across like a laundry list of things that are wrong with the entire add-on. Reading through it now, it seemed blunt. I've been working on some recreation stuff here and there, and rather than make separate posts for each problem, I combined them into a list of sorts. Heh.

1. Hmm. Ok. The increased scale of all the parts made me assume that it was for a larger scaled Kerbol system. 

2. Yep. All of the above. I'm having difficulty replicating it dependably.I think some of the difficulty comes from the two floating nodes on the bottom of the Centaur stage. It can be tricky to get the correct one.

3. Cool. 

4. Cool.

5. I've got it, and I don't see any options to animate the nozzle. From what I can see, the mesh doesn't look like it would support an animation. Are you sure it's an animated part? It matter not, because I found the problem! I forgot to scale it down with the rest of the parts. Duh. Fits fine now. Also, I believe with most Atlas V launches currently, the nozzle starts in the extended position to lower the risk of a extension malfunction. There's enough room in the conical interstage, so they just launch it extended. 

6. It's less explodey now. I turned down my physics time delta. I think with that interstage, if it decouples at the wrong time, the two parts will clip a bit inadvertently and kraken a bit. Not your fault though. That could happen with any modded interstage. 

7. The two large attach nodes are on top of each other, so, if you move the fairings up or down, then attach to the other fairing and not the node, they attach to each other. Can't think of a good solution. I think when the nodes were on the top of the centaur stage, things were better. It may affect the way they decouple depending on where their CoM is. 

8. Cool.

9. I'll tes.t with SRBs. 

10. I think there are a few schools of thoughts when balancing parts. My preferred method is to balance as close to stock as possible in terms of part size, tank size-to-mass ratios, and propellant capacity. This makes the parts play nice with stock parts, be balanced well against them, and be neither over or under-powered. Currently, the CCB has 5500:6600 LFO, and the largest stock Kerbodyne S3 tank holds 6480:7920 LFO, and is only about 3/10ths of the length. This effectively makes the the CCB hold only a quarter of the amount of LFO it should to be even close to useful in stock KSP. This also makes the tank have a much higher tank mass to fuel capacity ratio. It's incredibly heavy and large for how much fuel it can hold. The Centaur stage suffers from the same problem. 

11. Cool

I chose to convert to 0.625x scale because that would make the CCB 2.5m. If you assume that the stock Mk1 capsule is the same size as the Mercury capsule in real life, then an Atlas CCB should be about 2.5m in diameter in KSP. 

I think I will try to make a ModuleManager patch in the near future. I guess I'm just trying to figure out what the balance logic is of the parts are by default so I know what needs to change. Currently, the parts are under-powered compared to stock. For users, it's easier to have everything somewhat close to stock values, then use one patch that patches everything in one fell swoop like SMURFF to make everything more realistic. 

[MajorLeaugeRocketScience]

I have nothing else to do, might as well make a SpaceX LC-39A. Also, probably some SpaceX hangers.

[Drj3199]

Is there a mod that adds water effects to the launch pad?

[Delta_8930]

1 hour ago, Drj3199 said:

Is there a mod that adds water effects to the launch pad?

You mean the "Niagra" thing at the SpaceX launch pad that sprays water onto the pad right before ignition?

[Drj3199]

2 minutes ago, Delta_8930 said:

You mean the "Niagra" thing at the SpaceX launch pad that sprays water onto the pad right before ignition?

Exactly.

[Kartoffelkuchen]

That shouldn't be too hard to do actually. Just some custom particles and a simple model should do.

[Motokid600]

The large shutte mod that's not been updated ( I forget the name sadly ) had sparkers that were really cool. I mentioned awhile back in a suggestion that we should have "decoration" parts with effects to add LoX boil off, smoke and yea some sort of hydrant that sprays a water effect.

@Kartoffelkuchen Would it be possible to actually make the hydrants practical by adding an acoustic damage system? If you have so many engines clustered the acoustic vibrations should/could damage/destroy the engine(s). Forcing you to use a water suppression system to dampen the vibrations. Whether or not its in your ability its just a thought I had.

[Delta_8930]

39 minutes ago, Motokid600 said:

The large shutte mod that's not been updated ( I forget the name sadly ) had sparkers that were really cool. I mentioned awhile back in a suggestion that we should have "decoration" parts with effects to add LoX boil off, smoke and yea some sort of hydrant that sprays a water effect.

@Kartoffelkuchen Would it be possible to actually make the hydrants practical by adding an acoustic damage system? If you have so many engines clustered the acoustic vibrations should/could damage/destroy the engine(s). Forcing you to use a water suppression system to dampen the vibrations. Whether or not its in your ability its just a thought I had.

Coolrockets takes care of the LOX boil-off

Edited January 26, 2016 by Delta_8930