[1.4] SpaceY Heavy-Lifter Parts Pack v1.17.1 (2018-04-02)

[Loren Pechtel]

4 hours ago, ExtremeSquared said:

Given the capacity of the SY tanks, you shouldn't be worrying about losing a bit of fuel to maneuvering vernors. I suspect that using vernors/fuel for maneuvering a large rocket results in less deltaV loss than the sevaral-dozen tons of reaction wheels that would be required to manhandle that much mass anyway.

You can always spam the giant SY probe cores -- those have a fair bit of torque.

I tried it with the vernier engines and found it had so little authority that it went into oscillation, unable to orient to the target direction.  Are there some more powerful vernier engines I'm not seeing?

[Norcalplanner]

5 minutes ago, Loren Pechtel said:

I tried it with the vernier engines and found it had so little authority that it went into oscillation, unable to orient to the target direction.  Are there some more powerful vernier engines I'm not seeing?

Can you post a picture of the craft? It might help the suggestions be more targeted and/or specific.

[DStaal]

If you need really heavy-duty reaction control wheels, you might want to take a look at USI's FTT.  It's got a couple.

[NecroBones]

On 2/14/2017 at 9:03 PM, Loren Pechtel said:

Gigantic rocketry has a 7.5m docking port but Colossal rocketry does not have a 10m docking port.

 

Yep, no 10m docking port. At least for now, that was an executive decision. They're always a weak point, making craft flimsy, etc, and I figure 10m will mostly be used for launch vehicles anyway. If there's enough interest, I can always add one.

 

On 2/16/2017 at 9:21 PM, Firemetal said:

So quick question. I'm probably missing it in the OP but whatever. I downloaded the RO pre-release for 1.2 along with SpaceY and am unable to use the parts much since they literally say "Non RO". So where is the RO download? Thanks.

Fire

That's all controlled on the RO side. I don't think they fully support us.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

7 hours ago, Norcalplanner said:

Can you post a picture of the craft? It might help the suggestions be more targeted and/or specific.

Unfortunately I don't have the exact design anymore.  It didn't work, I went looking at reaction wheels instead.

Are there any verniers with a real kick?  That's probably the right answer.

[gilflo]

I am having issue with the big blue and white landing leg, gliding on very light slope

12 landing legs to support 250T on Eve ground and it skids on any light slope

[NecroBones]

On 2/27/2017 at 1:42 PM, gilflo said:

I am having issue with the big blue and white landing leg, gliding on very light slope

12 landing legs to support 250T on Eve ground and it skids on any light slope

 

Yeah, unfortunately I can't do much about that. KSP's overhaul of wheels and landing gear has changed how friction and suspension works. I'm at their mercy.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

54 minutes ago, NecroBones said:

 

Yeah, unfortunately I can't do much about that. KSP's overhaul of wheels and landing gear has changed how friction and suspension works. I'm at their mercy.

 

Did they overhaul friction or simply delete it?

[shichigatsu]

Hi, I'm having a bit of an issue with your mod. When I first load a vessel containing engines from your mod there are some weird collision/physics issues. I am running quite a bit of mods and will list them below, however I don't notice this across any other mods or stock parts. Following are a few videos showing said issues in both a small vessel containing only a Kiwi engine and stock fuel tank + command pod, and a large multi-stage vessel containing MRS and stock parts along with quite a few SpaceY engines and adapters. Since the game did not crash I cannot provide either error.log or output.log, and looking through the regular KSP.log I did not see anything specifically pointing to a cause; The vessel is loaded, physics is started, and then debris is generated. Any help you can provide would be greatly appreciated, and I can provide further documentation as necessary. I do understand though if this is an unsolved matter.

Modlist:

Spoiler

KSP: 1.2.2 (Win64) - Unity: 5.4.0p4 - OS: Windows 10  (10.0.0) 64bit
000_AT_Utils - 1.4.2
Filter Extensions - 2.8.1.2
USI Tools - 0.8.16
AtmosphereAutopilot - 1.5.10
B9 Part Switch - 1.7.1
Better Science Labs Continued - 0.1.9
Chatterer - 0.9.92.1622
Community Category Kit - 1.2.2
Community Resource Pack - 0.6.6
CommunityTechTree - 3.0.3
Contract Configurator - 1.22.2
Contract Pack: Clever Sats - 1.4
Contract Pack: Field Research - 1.2
Contract Pack: Kerbal Academy - 1.1.6
Contract Pack: Bases and Stations - 3.6
Contract Pack: Unmanned Contracts - 0.3.27
Contract Reward Modifier - 1.0.2.4
CryoEngines - 0.4.6
CustomBarnKit - 1.1.10
DistantObjectEnhancement - 1.8.1
DMagic Orbital Science - 1.3.0.8
Contract Parser - 1.0.5
Progress Parser - 1.0.6
EditorExtensionsRedux - 3.3.11.1
Engineer Level Fixer - 0.3.2
ExtensiveEngineerReportContinued - 0.0.3
Extraplanetary Launchpads - 5.6
Firespitter - 7.5.1
GroundConstruction - 1.1.2.1
HeatControl - 0.3.4
ImageViewerContinued - 0.0.3.1
JanitorsCloset - 0.2.14.6
RasterPropMonitor - 0.28
Kerbal Attachment System - 0.6.2
KerbalAnimationSuite - 1.2.1
Kerbal Engineer Redux - 1.1.2.8
Kerbal Joint Reinforcement - 3.3.1
HyperEdit - 1.5.3
KerbNet Controller - 1.0.2.1
Kerbal Inventory System - 1.4.3
KSP-AVC Plugin - 1.1.6.2
LaunchCountDown - 1.7.8.1586
Maeneuver Node Evolved - 1.0.2.3
MarkIVSystem - 2.3.5
Modular Rocket Systems - 1.13.1
ModularFlightIntegrator - 1.2.3
Docking Port Alignment Indicator - 6.5.2
NearFutureConstruction - 0.7.5
NearFuturePropulsion - 0.8.4
NearFutureSolar - 0.7.2
NearFutureSpacecraft - 0.6.2
PersistentDynamicPodNames - 0.1.6.1
Kerbal Planetary Base Systems - 1.4.1
RCS Build Aid - 0.9.1
RealChute - 1.4.1.2
RealFuels Stockalike Configs - 3.2.3
RealPlume - Stock - 0.11.4
ReentryParticleEffect - 1.2.0.1
SCANsat - 1.1.6.11
Celestial Body Science Editor - 1.0.8
Science Relay - 1.0.3.1
SETI-Contracts - 1.2.2
SETI-ProbeParts - 1.2.2
ShipSectionsContinued - 0.0.2
SolverEngines - 3.0
SpaceY Expanded - 1.3.1
SpaceY Lifters - 1.16
StageRecovery - 1.6.8
StationPartsExpansion - 0.4.3
StationScienceContinued - 2.1.3
TAC Fuel Balancer - 2.12
TarsierSpaceTechnology - 6.6.1
TAC Life Support - 0.12.9
Trajectories - 1.6.6
Kerbal Alarm Clock - 3.8.4
Transfer Window Planner - 1.6.1
TweakScale - 2.3.4
USI Core - 0.3.9
USI Exploration Pack - 0.7.3
Freight Transport Tech - 0.6.7
Konstruction - 0.1.11
MKS - 0.50.17
USI Alcubierre Drive - 0.5.4
Universal Storage - 1.2.2
Unmanned before Manned - 1.2.2
Waypoint Manager - 2.6.2
[x] Science! - 5.4

 

Kiwi Engine plus stock parts

Multi-stage, MRS/SpaceY and stock parts

[Mikeloeven]

For some reason the SpaceY 10R Radial SRB's are not working with Tweak Scale. Scale settings are available on most of the boosters I have unlocked so far so I suspect they are just missing a config entry.

Edited March 5, 2017 by Mikeloeven

[ringerc]

Hi

I really appreciate the scale offered by the SpaceY parts. It's been rock solid on 1.2.2 (Linux) and adds both convenience and scope to the game.

The main thing I'm noticing is that in general, things are absurdly cheap. Particularly the large SRBs. Want to get payloads into orbit practically for free? SRB time. The SpaceY parts feel like "cheat codes" sometimes. Having trouble getting a large payload to its destination under budget (obviously with non-default contract payout and part cost scaling). Whack a SpaceY booster or four on it.

For example:

• The S109 delivers 1700-2000 kN of thrust over 28s, wet weight 32T, TWR unloaded 6.3, dV 3200-3600 with no payload. Cost: 3650.
• The LFB KR-1x2 "Twin Boar" fueled to 70%ish delivers 1866-2000 kN of thrust over 33s, wet weight 32T, TWR unloaded 6.2, dV 3136-3360 with no payload. Cost: 16000

Not totally unreasonable - the SRB is much less flexible, for one thing. But it's less than 1/4 the price. Going big(er) looks similar.

• The S217 delivers 3.3-3.8Mn of thrust over 50s with initial TWR 3.6 unloaded, dry weight 107T, dV 3260-3678 with no payload. Cost: 12200.
• A S3 KR-25x4 with 2x S3-7200 and 1x S3-3600 tanks delivers 3.7-4.0Mn of thrust over 70s with initial TWR 3.6 unloaded, dry weight 116, dV 4300-4600 with no payload. Cost: 56000.

Again, the LF stack performs moderately better, is more flexible, can be crossfed from extra fuel stacked on side-mounted boosters, etc, but at a massively greater cost. They don't even offer significantly better control and thrust vectoring than the SpaceY SRBs.

I reckon the prices should be about double or 3x what they are at the moment. It can't be cheap to cast a monster SRB, right?

That said: In stock KSP, as soon as I get the "Kickback" SRB in a career game I pretty much stop using LF stacks for small payloads. Why bother when you have an enormously powerful, dirt cheap SRB you can use as a first stage? It's even more absurdly superior to the LF alternatives than the SpaceY ones. 2700 gets you a 2.85 initial TwR booster with 600-670 thrust over 62s, why would you use anything else? About the only reason is vectoring. A "skipper" + tanks will deliver superior performance and control for 10000, true, but 4x the price.

So I guess your SRBs are consistent with stock SRB and scale, albeit with great vectoring, and SRBs in KSP are just ridiculously good. So nevermind, ignore me.

 

 

[eberkain]

I found this discussion on another forum.   http://www.thespacerace.com/forum/index.php?topic=2761.0

Quote

Astronautix says an SRB costs about $23 million for 11,000 kN thrust (is that a pair of SBRs? it wasn't clear).   A Delta IV medium costs about $96 million for 3,300 kN thrust.  I think this is a very rough way to compare, but it looks like solid fuel rockets are relatively cheap.

So the pricing may not be too out of line.  

[Loren Pechtel]

56 minutes ago, ringerc said:

So I guess your SRBs are consistent with stock SRB and scale, albeit with great vectoring, and SRBs in KSP are just ridiculously good. So nevermind, ignore me.

That's reality.  Solid boosters are far cheaper than liquid for a given amount of thrust.

It's just solid boosters have a terrible ISP compared to liquid.  Hence they are relegated to use as first stage engines.  You pay a lot for the controlability and ISP of liquid engines.

[Vahal]

Another downside of SRBs, the weight. IMO they provide a cheap kick for launcher that have trouble to reach the nice 1.44 TWR needed to take of, and sometime, at least in my case, they're used as a cheap alternative for LF/Ox engine/tanks. I guess my motto "Kerbal Reusable Space Program" has an impact of the overall use of SRBs.

[mdailey403]

So, I don't know if this was by design to remove it from the game or not, but when I updated this mod the SY-DP7 7.5 meter docking ring was not showing up in the tech tree.  This caused every design I had with this part to fail loading on the launch pad.  I discovered the issue was in the SYdocking7m.cfg file in the Gamedata\SpaceY-Lifters\Parts\Docking folder.  

By opening the .cfg file in notepad, I was able to modify the line  TechRequired = -1 to read  TechRequired = composites.  This added the part to the tech tree and allowed me access to my designs again.  I am not sure where it was originally supposed to go in the tech tree.

 

Edited March 26, 2017 by mdailey403
Adding nomenclature designation for the SY-DP7 7.5 meter docking ring.

[NecroBones]

On 3/26/2017 at 1:02 PM, mdailey403 said:

So, I don't know if this was by design to remove it from the game or not, but when I updated this mod the SY-DP7 7.5 meter docking ring was not showing up in the tech tree.  This caused every design I had with this part to fail loading on the launch pad.  I discovered the issue was in the SYdocking7m.cfg file in the Gamedata\SpaceY-Lifters\Parts\Docking folder.  

By opening the .cfg file in notepad, I was able to modify the line  TechRequired = -1 to read  TechRequired = composites.  This added the part to the tech tree and allowed me access to my designs again.  I am not sure where it was originally supposed to go in the tech tree.

 

 

Something is wrong with how the MM patches are executing in your build, then. That part is disabled by default, but is configured to be enabled if SpaceY-Expanded is installed. Are you running with Expanded installed? Since it's 7.5m, it should only be visible when that's there. These patches disable themselves if HPTechTree is installed, to favor its rules instead. Are you using that?

[eberkain]

The tweakscale config is missing a number of parts, the srb nosecones, the oms/rcs blisters, and a few of the interstage adapters.  I updated my local file if you would like to use it, I also added the engine behavior to all the engine parts.  https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_wAo_KZdHCraEsweXNkRTlIUGs  

[mdailey403]

On 3/27/2017 at 3:18 PM, NecroBones said:

 

Something is wrong with how the MM patches are executing in your build, then. That part is disabled by default, but is configured to be enabled if SpaceY-Expanded is installed. Are you running with Expanded installed? Since it's 7.5m, it should only be visible when that's there. These patches disable themselves if HPTechTree is installed, to favor its rules instead. Are you using that?

That must be the problem.  I must have updated the Heavy Lifter parts pack after the Expanded parts pack.  That would explain why I had to do the workaround.  Thanks for this.

Edited March 29, 2017 by mdailey403
clarification

[Krazy_Kerbal]

I've been having an ongoing long-term issue with one part, the BFR9 "Omega Ratite." Basically, it's sticking to the launch pad area. I went through this thread and feel a little surprised I didn't find any similar issues--I must be the only one? I've tested the other parts, and they seem fine. For instance, to compensate, I will use one of your 3.75m interstage thrust plates and add the Ratite engines separately with better results (and no sticking). Unfortunately, there isn't one available with a 3.75m diameter for 9 Ratites. Would you have any recommendations for a closer approximation to the real Falcon 9?  According to the thread, my mods are all compatible.

Discovery and tests: Initially, I scaled it down to 3.75m to be more on point with the real thing, but I wasn't getting enough thrust from it and then saw you were going for a more stock feel. However, even at its default 5m, I'm having the same issue. I tested this with just the engine, a fuel tank, and a SY 5m probe.

Thank you for any assistance.

[Mikeloeven]

I suggest adding launch clamps if it doesn't already have them than using the move tool to offset the rocket above the pad. Its possible that the collision geometry of the part doesn't match the visuals a slight vertical offset should solve the issue

Edited April 30, 2017 by Mikeloeven

[Krazy_Kerbal]

3 hours ago, Mikeloeven said:

I suggest adding launch clamps if it doesn't already have them than using the move tool to offset the rocket above the pad. Its possible that the collision geometry of the part doesn't match the visuals a slight vertical offset should solve the issue

Ahh, I forgot to mention I did try that. The part works at 7.5m, but as soon as I scale it down to 3.75m (same issue with 5m), it sticks, regardless of using clamps and elevation from the launch pad. Thank you

 

Edit: As cool as these parts are, I have no modding experience and even wonder if I had permission (assuming I figure out how) to re-adjust the values of these parts to be more in-line with their real life equivalents. For instance, the Ratite engines could use a big thrust boost when scaled to 1.25m. They work well enough alone in a symmetrical pattern on the end of a fuel tank. Never mind. See screenshot below. Seriously, I can't use Google Drive to share images?

 

 

Edited April 30, 2017 by Krazy_Kerbal
Updated issue.

[Mikeloeven]

if your using tweak scale for this than it should apply a modifier to engine thrust based on the new size.

For sharing images use tinypic.com its a easy upload and doesn't require an account. though personally if your demonstrating a bug a youtube video is worth a thousand pics

Edited May 6, 2017 by Mikeloeven

[Krazy_Kerbal]

On 5/6/2017 at 0:47 AM, Mikeloeven said:

if your using tweak scale for this than it should apply a modifier to engine thrust based on the new size.

For sharing images use tinypic.com its a easy upload and doesn't require an account. though personally if your demonstrating a bug a youtube video is worth a thousand pics

I made a video, and I hope it helps clarify the issue. Additionally, I didn't have time to fully test it again to recreate the issue, but I was running into problems using the SpaceY trunk when it was placed under command pods (seen on the top of the rocket in this video). When I have the time, I will make another video if it happens again. I love this mod because it's the closet thing to SpaceX Falcon 9 love. 

 

[MaxL_1023]

Would it be possible to get a somewhat larger radial decoupler? The triple-packed is sized perfectly for 5m parts, but is a little small when you want 7.5m or especially 10m radial boosters.

Also, could there be a larger Vacuum engine than the Penguin? It's undersized for second stage duties on 10m stacks - the dual and quad penguins waste a lot of space and don't fit well. 

[Pxtseryu]

Getting a REALLY strange bug; all the textures are flickering like crazy. Possibly overlapping textures. Is there a fix for this?