Stockalike RF Engine Configs v3.2.6 [01/20/19][RF v12]

[Svm420]

Definately need files for roverdudes sounding rockets. I had some for 0.90, but he changed the engines a bit so new ones are needed. I may get to them if you don't, but was having weird issues with the site for making configs

[Senshi]

I'm getting a hang on loading, with part "VenStockRevamp/Part Bin/ShibaNTR/PoodleM" being shown.

Logfile:

PartLoader: Compiling Part 'VenStockRevamp/Part Bin/ShibaNTR/PoodleM'

(Filename: /home/builduser/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/LinuxStandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 56)

[shipTemplate]: No Resource definition found for RESOURCE

(Filename: /home/builduser/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/LinuxStandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 56)

[shipTemplate]: No Resource definition found for RESOURCE

(Filename: /home/builduser/buildslave/unity/build/artifacts/LinuxStandalonePlayerGenerated/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 56)

U235Rods not found in resource database. Propellant Setup has failed.

So it looks like another faulty reference to the u235 rods, but I'm not sure where I have to look for it. VenStockRevamp only changes cosmetics, and still keeps LiquidFuel. So is this cuased by one of the many .cfgs in the RealFuels folder?

[Raptor831]

Definately need files for roverdudes sounding rockets. I had some for 0.90, but he changed the engines a bit so new ones are needed. I may get to them if you don't, but was having weird issues with the site for making configs

Yeah, never got around to doing those before. Before you start, though, RF v10 now has a bunch of different solid fuel/propellants, so we'd need to research what should go there. But, if you come up with something, make sure to put it in the webapp, I'd appreciate the help.

I'm getting a hang on loading, with part "VenStockRevamp/Part Bin/ShibaNTR/PoodleM" being shown.

Yes, that's caused by the RFStockalike config for the Stock Revamp. Didn't realize that it had nuclear engines in there, so I missed it. So thanks for letting me know! I've updated the release to include that fix now.

[Northstar1989]

Hi Raptor,

As always, I've been busy (when I'm not working one of my 3 jobs! Speaking of which, I'm sick today...) doing research on finding what the current frontiers are of rocket science, what current capabilities really are, and where things are headed- such as to better direct the growth and development of the KSP-Interstellar Extended mod I help develop.

Anyways, my latest thing has been Meth/LOX chemical rocket engines, seeing as they would be highly useful in combination with the Sabatier Reaction of real life/ KSP-I Extended for Mars/Duna missions...

It turns out, there are a lot more types than the Raptor being designed to use Meth/LOX. Many of the more famous/successful rocket engines are being re-designed for Meth/LOX (probably in anticipation of a future Mars mission- and because it provides the best ISP of any mainstream fuel that is not Hydro/LOX, a bit better than Kero/LOX and quite a lot better than hypergolics...) including, notably, the J-2X Rocket engine which NASA has been working on for Constellation and then SLS for most of the past 5+ years...

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=31679

I've been play-testing and doing research on Meth/LOX fuel mixtures, and it seems the ratio used in the KSP-Interstellar Meth/LOX Raptor-analog (44:56 ratio Meth:LOX) is fairly accurate- as there is a strong tendency to want to burn fuel-rich (the stoichiometric burn-ratio is 2:1) in order to get a lighter mix of exhaust gasses (with some unburned methane and Carbon Monoxide molecules mixed in with the CO2 and H2O) and better ISP.

Given a 44:56 fuel-ratio, and existing ISP figures (380 seconds for a vacuum-optimized Raptor- which would still fundamentally be an engine optimized for thrust rather than ISP), some play-testing revealed an appropriate and realistic balance with the following code for most engines:

      PROPELLANT
      {
        name = LqdMethane
        ratio = 44
        DrawGauge = True
      }
      PROPELLANT
      {
        name = LqdOxygen
        ratio = 56
      }
      IspSL = 1.1100
      IspV = 1.1200

I have extensively play-tested this config, and it seems to be accurate- typically yielding an ISP that is typically about 30-50 seconds lower for Meth/LOX than for Hydro/LOX (compare the real life RS-68 Hydro/LOX rocket with an ISP of 410 seconds with the 363 seconds that is expected for the atmospheric version of the Raptor Meth/LOX rocket and 380 seconds expected for the more vacuum-optimized version) and a slightly higher sensitivity to atmospheric pressure than Kero/LOX (which, once again, matches with reality- Meth/LOX engines appear to be much more similar to Kero/LOX then Hydro/LOX engines in terms of atmospheric ISP-loss, despite their higher ISP to begin with, as evidenced by such designs as the Raptor...)

The highest possible ISP you can get with this config is over 400 seconds with the NovaPunch2 RMA-3 engine at techlevel 7, at which point the Hydro/LOX version is pushing some obscenely-high ISP figures inching up on 500 seconds (both of these figures are within the theoretically-possible ISP range for these fuel-mixtures with a sufficiently large vacuum-optimized nozzle: and the RMA-3 is an engine designed purely for vacuum use- it loses over 3/4th of its thrust at sea level, ostensibly due to its very large nozzle and atmospheric-compression of the highly over-expanded exhaust stream...)

I would very much like to see Meth/LOX added as a normal fuel-mode for, at the very least, the NovaPunch2 K-2X rocket engine line (there are NovaPunch J-2X analogs called "K-2X" rockets in all diameter-ranges, from 1.25 to 5 meters), the RMA-3 rocket engine, and the 2.5 meter Orbital Bertha rocket (these last two engines are designed for orbital stages and extra-atmospheric or low-atmospheric landers, such as on the Mun or Duna... They have no clear real-life analogs that I could easily identify...) to provide upper-stage and orbital/lander-stage Meth/LOX engines to go along with the launch-stage Meth/LOX engine provided in the form of the KSP-Interstellar Meth/LOX Raptor-analog... (whose name I can never remember how to spell- but is named after the Greek god of wine...)

I provided the necessary code above. The Thrust should remain the same as Kero/LOX and Hypergolic versions of any engines Meth/LOX is added to (Meth/LOX is several times denser than Hydro/LOX on a per-liter basis, and would not pose any greater challenges for a turbopump than Kero/LOX, which it only has *slightly* greater turbopump-requirements than...) as should heat-production (which we currently don't vary with fuel-mode in 0.90) etc.

If we can go around setting up the foundation for weird "Cold War Nightmare" fuel-mixtures that never saw use in real life for some very good reasons, certainly we can go about adding the very boring but useful fuel-mixture of Meth/LOX to some existing rocket engines- particularly many of the NovaPunch2 ones, which currently tend to be limited to use of hygergolics and Hydro/LOX in most cases... (many of the engines in the mod pack are based on real engines that would be poorly-suited to using Kero/LOX, but are well-suited to using Meth/LOX, for reasons I'd prefer not to go into right now... Some are based on engines, usch as the J2-X, that are actually being deisgned or retrofitted for Meth/LOX as a possible fuel-mode...) Most could use a third fuel-mode with density (and boil-off characteristics!) intermediate between the two to round them out and make them more competitive with engines from mods such as KW Rocketry!

Raptor, please give this serious consideration, and let me know what you think. I can go about adapting NovaPunch2 engines to use Meth/LOX for you where it seems appropriate if you'd like

Regards,

Northstar

Edited May 21, 2015 by Northstar1989

[undercoveryankee]

I would very much like to see Meth/LOX added as a normal fuel-mode for, at the very least, the NovaPunch2 K-2X rocket engine line (there are NovaPunch J-2X analogs called "K-2X" rockets in all diameter-ranges, from 1.25 to 5 meters), the RMA-3 rocket engine, and the 2.5 meter Orbital Bertha rocket (these last two engines are designed for orbital stages and extra-atmospheric or low-atmospheric landers, such as on the Mun or Duna... They have no clear real-life analogs that I could easily identify...) to provide upper-stage and orbital/lander-stage Meth/LOX engines to go along with the launch-stage Meth/LOX engine provided in the form of the KSP-Interstellar Meth/LOX Raptor-analog... (whose name I can never remember how to spell- but is named after the Greek god of wine...)

The Greek god of wine is Dionysus. The Raptor in KSPI is called the Deinonychus-1D. It's a dinosaur related to a velociraptor.

[Raptor831]

Hi Raptor,

As always, I've been busy (when I'm not working one of my 3 jobs! Speaking of which, I'm sick today...) doing research on finding what the current frontiers are of rocket science, what current capabilities really are, and where things are headed- such as to better direct the growth and development of the KSP-Interstellar Extended mod I help develop.

Anyways, my latest thing has been Meth/LOX chemical rocket engines, seeing as they would be highly useful in combination with the Sabatier Reaction of real life/ KSP-I Extended for Mars/Duna missions...

(...snip for brevity...)

Regards,

Northstar

First off, hope you feel better soon. Being sick is never fun.

There's a lot of changes coming with Real Fuels, starting with v10. So, my priority is there, to make sure this mass of .cfg files works with RF down the road.

That said, I'll point this out again. I know I've mentioned this before, but it's been a while back in this thread. Every part mod I add (i.e. NovaPunch, KW Rocketry, FASA, SpaceY, AIES, Home Grown Rockets, etc) I "assign" a personality. Usually this is based on the type of parts they have, or maybe just the flavor I'm feeling from them. For example, FASA and Stock have a NASA personality. KW and AIES have an ESA personality. KOSMOS and NovaPunch have a Roscosmos personality. HGR has a Chinese personality. SpaceY has the (wait for it...) SpaceX personality.

Each personality has certain fuels it likes and uses most often, and even then they have different mixture ratios. So, NP uses lots of hypergolic fuels. SpaceY favors kerolox, hydrolox, and methalox. FASA uses a mix, but tends to favor the *lox. KW is fairly balanced. My assumption is that most RFStockalike players have at least 2 or 3 personalities in their game, so it should balance out. If you only have KW, you'll be a bit bored with the choices probably, true, but most part mods don't break the bank with RAM, and can be easily pruned.

Originally I did this because almost every part mod has a J-2 or J-2X clone. I didn't want to sift through every single mod to find the J-2 clone and make it a hydrolox/methalox/kerolox engine. It's much easier to say "You're a ESA-type" and choose fuels from there. I've branched from that slightly, as the case arises. SXT is a good example, because there are clones of both Saturn V engines and N1 engines. But on the whole, I like the idea of these "personalities" because they force decisions on the player. You choose a certain personality for this rocket, so it uses all hypergolics. Swap out for a different mod's engine, and now you have to swap your fuels to kerolox for the first stage. Different mass ratio, different TWR, different style.

All of that is my idea of a good game (or mod in this case). But I'm not the everyman, I know that. Which is why I wanted to give everyone the tools to tweak these as they like. The webapp is exactly this. You should be able to find any engine you want to tweak, and to make those tweaks using the same tools I do. You want methalox in all engines? You can make those changes (relatively) easily. And, if you really want to, you can take the Stockalike configs and make an entirely different engine set. The license is open for that purpose. And, there's a feature in the webapp that'll let you clone out an existing engine to tweak. So, you can make a copy of a NP engine and make an entirely new engine out of that doesn't conflict with any other engine, but will use the same model/effects.

Even so, I'll see about adding methalox to the K-2X line for NovaPunch. It at least makes sense there. May not be soon, since I want to try and make this as "future-proof" as possible as RF updates. One thing on the table is different engine cycles being modeled directly in RF, and not being inferred through configs. Which is very relevant to methalox engines similar to the Raptor. I would like to use methalox a bit more in Stockalike. However, it most certainly is a first-line mixture. It's just used mostly in the NASA and SpaceX "personalities". It's just I don't have many places to use it that make sense given the framework I've set up.

Anyway, I've written far too much. Hope that makes sense.

[Northstar1989]

The Greek god of wine is Dionysus. The Raptor in KSPI is called the Deinonychus-1D. It's a dinosaur related to a velociraptor.

Oh, lol. I always just assumed it was a mis-spelling of Dionysus. That actually makes more sense! And makes it more obvious it is a Raptor-analog!

So, Raptor, could we get some Meth/LOX fuel-modes for engines besides the Raptor? It makes sense for the K2-X engines in Novapunch (I was mistaken: they only come in 1.25, 3.75, and 5 meter sizes- there is no 2.5 meter variant) at the very least, and the RMA-3 and Orbital Bertha would make excellent Meth/LOX lander engines (like were at one point considered for use in the Altair Luna Lander program...)

Regards,

Northstar

- - - Updated - - -

First off, hope you feel better soon. Being sick is never fun.

There's a lot of changes coming with Real Fuels, starting with v10. So, my priority is there, to make sure this mass of .cfg files works with RF down the road.

That said, I'll point this out again. I know I've mentioned this before, but it's been a while back in this thread. Every part mod I add (i.e. NovaPunch, KW Rocketry, FASA, SpaceY, AIES, Home Grown Rockets, etc) I "assign" a personality. Usually this is based on the type of parts they have, or maybe just the flavor I'm feeling from them. For example, FASA and Stock have a NASA personality. KW and AIES have an ESA personality. KOSMOS and NovaPunch have a Roscosmos personality. HGR has a Chinese personality. SpaceY has the (wait for it...) SpaceX personality.

Each personality has certain fuels it likes and uses most often, and even then they have different mixture ratios. So, NP uses lots of hypergolic fuels. SpaceY favors kerolox, hydrolox, and methalox. FASA uses a mix, but tends to favor the *lox. KW is fairly balanced. My assumption is that most RFStockalike players have at least 2 or 3 personalities in their game, so it should balance out. If you only have KW, you'll be a bit bored with the choices probably, true, but most part mods don't break the bank with RAM, and can be easily pruned.

Originally I did this because almost every part mod has a J-2 or J-2X clone. I didn't want to sift through every single mod to find the J-2 clone and make it a hydrolox/methalox/kerolox engine. It's much easier to say "You're a ESA-type" and choose fuels from there. I've branched from that slightly, as the case arises. SXT is a good example, because there are clones of both Saturn V engines and N1 engines. But on the whole, I like the idea of these "personalities" because they force decisions on the player. You choose a certain personality for this rocket, so it uses all hypergolics. Swap out for a different mod's engine, and now you have to swap your fuels to kerolox for the first stage. Different mass ratio, different TWR, different style.

All of that is my idea of a good game (or mod in this case). But I'm not the everyman, I know that. Which is why I wanted to give everyone the tools to tweak these as they like. The webapp is exactly this. You should be able to find any engine you want to tweak, and to make those tweaks using the same tools I do. You want methalox in all engines? You can make those changes (relatively) easily. And, if you really want to, you can take the Stockalike configs and make an entirely different engine set. The license is open for that purpose. And, there's a feature in the webapp that'll let you clone out an existing engine to tweak. So, you can make a copy of a NP engine and make an entirely new engine out of that doesn't conflict with any other engine, but will use the same model/effects.

Even so, I'll see about adding methalox to the K-2X line for NovaPunch. It at least makes sense there. May not be soon, since I want to try and make this as "future-proof" as possible as RF updates. One thing on the table is different engine cycles being modeled directly in RF, and not being inferred through configs. Which is very relevant to methalox engines similar to the Raptor. I would like to use methalox a bit more in Stockalike. However, it most certainly is a first-line mixture. It's just used mostly in the NASA and SpaceX "personalities". It's just I don't have many places to use it that make sense given the framework I've set up.

Anyway, I've written far too much. Hope that makes sense.

Well, I'm really not so sure a RosCosmos "personality" was the best choice for NavaPunch2. It has Saturn V, no fewer than *THREE* J-2X (in different sizes), and aerospike analogs (the last of which was a technology that was most developed by NASA, not RosCosmos)- and some entirely original stuff. If anything, it's more of a mixture of the "best" ideas from both NASA and RosCosmos than a direct analog of either...

Anyways, many players (including me) are severely pressed for RAM and don't install more than one conventional parts-mod (as opposed to KSP-Interstellar, which I also use but doesn't really have a lot of rocket engines in the conventional sense- opting for a number of thermal rocket setups where you combine different reactors, fuels. and even nozzles to get different performances...) As such, having options that limited really isn't FUN. I'd very much like to have a Meth/LOX lander engine (which I'm not sure can be found in ANY parts-pack at the moment, even SpaceY...) as well as a Meth/LOX J-2X fuel-mode in Novapunch+Stockalike, and the RMA-3 and Orbital Bertha are NovaPunch's 2 main lander-engines...

One last, unrelated question. What's up with the Thrust/Weight Ratio (and ISP) on the M50 rocket engine in NovaPunch? Its mass and Thrust values remain COMPLETELY unmodified from their stock values. In fact, I'm not sure the engine was even modified by Stockalike at all aside from a backup-config replacing its LFO with Kero/LOX (the *ONLY* fuel-mode it is capable of using, which itself seems strange). I can't even find the m50 in a text-search of the Stockalike config for NovaPunch- so it seems you probably missed it. The excessively-high mass of the engine make it nigh-worthless compared to all the other 2.5 meter engines in Novapunch+RealFuels+Stockalike, and the engine-config really should be fixed to balance properly with Stockalike...

Regards,

Northstar

P.S. Precisely *because* major changes are coming down the line for RealFuels, I strongly advise updating things like this *BEFORE* the RealFuels 10 release. It's usually easy for something like this to get kicked down the road indefinitely and never get done if you put it off until after some major project. Go for the low-hanging fruit (a couple extra fuel-modes for some engines that I already provided balanced configs for) first!

Edited May 21, 2015 by Northstar1989

[Raptor831]

@Northstar1989: Originally when I made the decision of NP's personality, they didn't have all of those versions of the J-2, they just had the 1.25m K-2X. They also had a bunch of Energia-inspired parts. And since I already had a few NASA personalities, it made sense to pick Roscosmos.

RAM is pretty much set at 3-3.5 GB max anyway. I can't get KSP to use more than 3 GB. I have no less than 5 parts mods (KW, NP, SpaceY, FASA, some NearFuture) with hopes to add B9, AIES, and maybe RLA. The trick is only keeping the parts you use. For example, FASA is like 200+ MB on disk, but I only have about 35 MB installed. And I abuse ATM and use quarter-size graphics. With Procedural Parts installed, you can get away with almost no fuel tanks from mods.

NovaPunch M50 looks like it was missed. I'll look into that when I look at getting some methalox configs for the NP J-2 clones. But I'm not going to stray too far from my chosen personalities. And like I mentioned before, you can add to the Stockalike configs with a config of your own, making any changes you want for your own install. Clone the engine in question and apply the mixtures you want. Or re-write the config for the engines in question with the changes you want. That's the beauty of configs and open licensing.

I will open the floor here to say that if anyone has thoughts on engine mixtures for particular engines or thoughts on my "personalities", please let me know. This "mod" is first and foremost a mod for myself, because I like to play like this. However, I do understand that other people use it, so I'm willing to open discussion about changes.

Edited May 21, 2015 by Raptor831
formatting

[Senshi]

My opinion: I don't care about realism in this mod pack. I want diversity, and your philosophy of spreading "personalities" around sounds like a very reasonable way to achieve this. But adding some more custom compositions even if they don't fit the personalities would be totally fine, as well. KSP is the greatest place for crazy "what if" propulsion, after all.

As a player I really only focus on the engineering standpoint: I pick the most cheapest, most efficient engine I can found for the specified job (Lifter, Orbiter, etc.) . Same goes for fuel combinations, because I don't have to care about how volatile or toxic the fuels might be. Which means I only ever use about three or four fuel combinations in most of my missions (UDMH/MMH+NTO, Kerolox, and some common monoprop), which doesn't really represent the full spectrum of fuel types available.

This is exacerbated by the fact that RF with your engine pack turns KSP into "super easy mode" when using FAR as well. Using SETI, I face the problem that I can easily reach even Moho with only the first 2-3 tech levels. I even have to add ballast fuselage to my rockets to keep them aerodynamically stable during ascent, because I just don't need all that size filled with fuel and short stubby rockets disintegrate with FAR.

With RO, I really have to be very considerate in my engine choices, because you really notice that they will work "just barely" to get their job done (e.g. FASA lineup up to Mercury and Atlas Lifters was always a close call to reach orbit in my games). The balance of TWR, ISP and cost is not as pronounced in stock KSP.

[Raptor831]

My opinion: I don't care about realism in this mod pack. I want diversity, and your philosophy of spreading "personalities" around sounds like a very reasonable way to achieve this. But adding some more custom compositions even if they don't fit the personalities would be totally fine, as well. KSP is the greatest place for crazy "what if" propulsion, after all.

As a player I really only focus on the engineering standpoint: I pick the most cheapest, most efficient engine I can found for the specified job (Lifter, Orbiter, etc.) . Same goes for fuel combinations, because I don't have to care about how volatile or toxic the fuels might be. Which means I only ever use about three or four fuel combinations in most of my missions (UDMH/MMH+NTO, Kerolox, and some common monoprop), which doesn't really represent the full spectrum of fuel types available.

This is exacerbated by the fact that RF with your engine pack turns KSP into "super easy mode" when using FAR as well. Using SETI, I face the problem that I can easily reach even Moho with only the first 2-3 tech levels. I even have to add ballast fuselage to my rockets to keep them aerodynamically stable during ascent, because I just don't need all that size filled with fuel and short stubby rockets disintegrate with FAR.

With RO, I really have to be very considerate in my engine choices, because you really notice that they will work "just barely" to get their job done (e.g. FASA lineup up to Mercury and Atlas Lifters was always a close call to reach orbit in my games). The balance of TWR, ISP and cost is not as pronounced in stock KSP.

If you want a bit more of a challenge, set useRealisticMass = false in the RealFuelsSettings.cfg. That will restore stock mass values to the engines and tanks. Which makes everything a lot harder on stock-sized Kerbin.

And thank you for your thoughts!

[westamastaflash]

How would I go about adding the R&S Capsuledyne "X-tra Large Atomic motor"?

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/75074-1-0-Taurus-HCV-3-75-m-CSM-System-v1-5-01-Apr-27-2014

The motor has what appear to be two sets of engines - the big one, and 4 small ones for tiny orbital adjustments.

Is there a way to make it so that it appears in the staging "twice" and each engine can be activated/deactivated independently?

Or could the small engines be set to operate using the RCS controls (but still use NTR hyrdo/methane/ammonia)?

[Canis Dirus Leidy]

There is small problem in v2.1.6: no config for RT-5 ("Flea" by Squad, not scaled down RT-10 from RealFuels mod) solid booster.

[NathanKell]

Also, could you update to ModuleRCSFX 4.1? I fixed a gigantic bug with thrust...

Congratulations being the only engine pack RFv10 complaint though!

[Nerd1000]

I'm getting a hang on loading the Basic Jet engine. It only happens with this config installed. I'd post an output log, but KSP didn't make one.

[Raptor831]

@westamastaflash: I haven't seen the cfg file for that engine, but we'd be restricted to however they set it up. In particular, the transforms on the model. I'll have to look into it though.

@Canis Dirus Leidy: Yeah, haven't added the new solid booster yet. Was trying to hold off because the new RF/CRP has multiple solid propellants, and I wanted to figure those out and get everything all at once.

@NathanKell: I'll update the repo. Thanks for the heads up!

@Nerd1000: I haven't noticed any trouble with that engine. That said, Stockalike doesn't mess with the jets too much. You'd be better off using AJE for that. Which brings me to a question: what other mods that touch the jets do you have installed? And, can you make this happen with a Stock + RF + Stockalike only install?

[jstnj]

If you want a bit more of a challenge, set useRealisticMass = false in the RealFuelsSettings.cfg. That will restore stock mass values to the engines and tanks. Which makes everything a lot harder on stock-sized Kerbin.

And thank you for your thoughts!

Raptor can you explain what useRealisticMass actually does, calculation-wise?

[Raptor831]

Raptor can you explain what useRealisticMass actually does, calculation-wise?

useRealisticMass is a flag for RF that tells it to use a realistic mass for engines and fuel tanks. If you flip it to false, it will add mass to the fuel tanks and engines so that they resemble stock mass ratios. On a stock-sized Kerbin, it'll force you to use stock-like rockets again, and not tiny rockets that get you to Moho.

[jstnj]

useRealisticMass is a flag for RF that tells it to use a realistic mass for engines and fuel tanks. If you flip it to false, it will add mass to the fuel tanks and engines so that they resemble stock mass ratios. On a stock-sized Kerbin, it'll force you to use stock-like rockets again, and not tiny rockets that get you to Moho.

Thanks for the reply.

I guess I assumed that "Stockalike" config would scale it to resemble stock difficulty while simulating/scaling ISP between the different fuel types...is that an incorrect assumption?

If it is tripped to false...does Aerozine weigh the same as Kerosine as Liquid fuel does etc? Or are the different fuel types all scaled?

I'm just kind of realizing how "easy" it becomes dV - wise when you enable the config...trying to see what I can do to make it more resemble the harder difficulty I experienced when using stock values.

Edited May 26, 2015 by jstnj

[Raptor831]

Thanks for the reply.

I guess I assumed that "Stockalike" config would scale it to resemble stock difficulty while simulating/scaling ISP between the different fuel types...is that an incorrect assumption?

If it is tripped to false...does Aerozine weigh the same as Kerosine as Liquid fuel does etc? Or are the different fuel types all scaled?

I'm just kind of realizing how "easy" it becomes dV - wise when you enable the config...trying to see what I can do to make it more resemble the harder difficulty I experienced when using stock values.

The intention was that you'd use that flag if you were on stock-sized Kerbin. 64% scaled Kerbin is about right for the realistic mass.

The "Stockalike" refers more to the fact that you're using stock engine (models) and not an F-1, J-2, RD-180, or Merlin 1D. They've been re-tooled to be realistic in mass, thrust, and Isp. Before KSP 1.0, it was a much bigger difference between stock and the Real* mods. Now, it has at least a passable atmospheric model and properly working Isp/thrust. So, using a realistically massed engine just makes is crazy easy.

Bumping the mass back up to "stock" levels will make it so you need stock-like rockets to get around. But the masses will be scaled properly, and Isp/thrust rules still apply as they do in RF. (So, the LV-N is really heavy.) In that sense, you can still have a stock-type experience with stock scale.

But, honestly, you would probably be better served to use the 6.4x scaled stuff when it comes out for Kopernicus (what RSS will be using for planet scaling/editing), as it'll fit much nicer.

Edited May 26, 2015 by Raptor831
forgot an "and" in there....

[jstnj]

The intention was that you'd use that flag if you were on stock-sized Kerbin. 64% scaled Kerbin is about right for the realistic mass.

The "Stockalike" refers more to the fact that you're using stock engine (models) and not an F-1, J-2, RD-180, or Merlin 1D. They've been re-tooled to be realistic in mass, thrust, and Isp. Before KSP 1.0, it was a much bigger difference between stock and the Real* mods. Now, it has at least a passable atmospheric model and properly working Isp/thrust. So, using a realistically massed engine just makes is crazy easy.

Bumping the mass back up to "stock" levels will make it so you need stock-like rockets to get around. But the masses will be scaled properly, and Isp/thrust rules still apply as they do in RF. (So, the LV-N is really heavy.) In that sense, you can still have a stock-type experience with stock scale.

But, honestly, you would probably be better served to use the 6.4x scaled stuff when it comes out for Kopernicus (what RSS will be using for planet scaling/editing), as it'll fit much nicer.

Thanks yeah...I understand now. I think the most logical thing isn't to mess with RF or with your configs here...it's to use 6.4x Kerbin.

...now to wait until the 64k mod is updated.

Edited May 26, 2015 by jstnj
Realised RO and RSS are still not v1 compatible :(

[Senshi]

The thing with scaled solar systems is that there many different flavours: We have RSS/RO for earth-like, we have Kerbin 6.4x for earth-like-Kerbin and some more which feature small planets, but increased distances.

I personally would actually prefer a "large planets but small distances" config, because interplanetary travel is just so dull , while atmospheric flight is a bit too "compressed" in stock Kerbin. I'll probably not get that, so I am very happy with your Stockalike engines, and even happier with your tipp to set RealisticMass to false, returning a bit of the building challenge.

[Raptor831]

ModuleRCSFX is updated to 4.1 in the repo. I haven't made a new "release" yet since there are other fixes that need to be made (like the Flea) before then. But, everything in the "master" branch on GitHub should be as up to date as can be.

[Frimi_2]

Hi Raptor,

I was trying to update the configs for the necrobones SpaceY engines because, first of all thy are awesome with real fuels and more importand there have been some changes in namings and ISP settings, but I can't get the values right. I corrected the mass and trust values but the ISP values won't comply -.-

I input the values as so:

@atmosphereCurve

{

@key,0 = 0 295

@key,1 = 1 255

as in the original engine configs stated. I'm aware I should reduce this values because they were multiplied wit the values

IspSL = 1.1021

IspV = 1.1021

but I was testing out. And I noticed the result is not 325 and 281 as you would expect. Instead it is 345 and 307

Am I missing something?

[Raptor831]

@Frimi_2: This is probably due to the fact that Real Fuels now uses a "solver" module instead of a config-driven one. In short, it "solves" the problems of Isp, thrust, etc. on the fly based on atmospheric pressure, fuels, and Isp multipliers. At least that's how I understand it. If I'm incorrect, NK, please feel free to step in.

Going forward the engines will pretty much be based on role and not any actual values in the system. The old way of taking the un-modded thrust and building the engine around that can't really be done any more, since stock changed all their thrust values to match the new aero system. Which is good, but it sticks me with a bit of a problem. I'm still building this mod essentially to fit well in 6.4x scale using RF defaults. This should also work for stock size if you set useRealisticMass = false.

[NathanKell]

That's the plan, but right now the solver mostly (though not entirely) just runs the same logic the old engine module did. So you can still apply all the old parameters (and a few more)...