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

[GiantTank]

Whelp, I made a derp and realized I was in 0.25, and this was at 0.90. So, loading issue fixed.

also, yeah RO and SpaceY are hard to use. 10,000 thrust is not a lot in the magical world of RSS.

[Starman4308]

Whelp, I made a derp and realized I was in 0.25, and this was at 0.90. So, loading issue fixed.

also, yeah RO and SpaceY are hard to use. 10,000 thrust is not a lot in the magical world of RSS.

It won't help your cause that the SpaceY engines will still have abysmal stock-like TWR numbers, on account of RO not having a configuration for SpaceY engines. At least you'd be enjoying the benefits of magical stock LF/O with realistic tank masses.

[NecroBones]

I still think the stock fuel tank mass ratios are pretty awful too. Some of the best fuel tanks in the game (in terms of the wet/dry ratios) have about 9.7% of the launch mass in the tank. If we look back at the Saturn V first stage as a real world example, about 95% of its launch mass was fuel. That other 5% was not just the tanks, but the engines as well. To get that in KSP, the engines and tanks would all have to have their masses dropped significantly.

[wasmic]

I still think the stock fuel tank mass ratios are pretty awful too. Some of the best fuel tanks in the game (in terms of the wet/dry ratios) have about 9.7% of the launch mass in the tank. If we look back at the Saturn V first stage as a real world example, about 95% of its launch mass was fuel. That other 5% was not just the tanks, but the engines as well. To get that in KSP, the engines and tanks would all have to have their masses dropped significantly.

Yeah, but that'll also drop rocket sizes by quite a lot. I like big rockets

[Red Iron Crown]

I think the poor mass ratios of tanks and TWR of engines compared to real life is more about compensating for the tiny scale of KSP's planets and solar system.

[Starman4308]

One other interesting benefit of the ridiculously heavy stock tanks and engines is that it encourages creative staging techniques like asparagus and twisted candle. Realistic tank/engine masses make it much less urgent to stage. For all that I go in for the realistic side of things, I will admit stock's not all bad.

[NBZ]

Yeah, but that'll also drop rocket sizes by quite a lot. I like big rockets

It's more than that. If the engines were not so heavy and weak, we would all be doing SSTOs all the time, losing the so essential aspect of staging.

Historical anecdote: When my father studied for his MSE in the early fifties, his professor "proved" on the blackboard that it was impossible for man to free himself of Earths gravity. The professor didn't know about staging. Sputnik used two stages, and Vostok used three.

[NecroBones]

Oh yes, I'm definitely not suggesting that we "fix" it for the stock game. The gameplay reasons for the current balance are quite valid. It's just hard to make real-world comparisons as a result, since this has to be taken into account.

BTW, on another note--- Good news! Lo-fi helped figure out what was wrong with the landing legs. I'll be able to get 0.6 out pretty soon with the legs included! EDIT: (I think we'll get it working-- I just had another test fail, fingers crossed!)

Edited December 22, 2014 by NecroBones

[NBZ]

I still think the stock fuel tank mass ratios are pretty awful too. Some of the best fuel tanks in the game (in terms of the wet/dry ratios) have about 9.7% of the launch mass in the tank. If we look back at the Saturn V first stage as a real world example, about 95% of its launch mass was fuel. That other 5% was not just the tanks, but the engines as well. To get that in KSP, the engines and tanks would all have to have their masses dropped significantly.

10% is actually pretty realistic for liquid hydrogen.

[NecroBones]

10% is actually pretty realistic for liquid hydrogen.

True... of course KSP has never been specific about the type of liquid fuel it's meant to represent, though it might imply liquid hydrogen in that sort of case.

[NBZ]

Yep, it should work with action groups, just like the Rapier engine (it's using the rapier's multi-mode system). It still has an "automatic switching" button, which doesn't make much sense in this context, but I don't know of a way to hide that. The gimbal range appears to just have one setting for the whole engine, since it's in a separate module from the thrust characteristics. Same thing with the heat animation, so I just turned the heat way down on the center engine mode so that they don't all light up. Just some limitations that have to be worked around.

I see. I cannot tell from the RAPIER config file how it determines when to switch modes. It would be pretty cool if the M9 and R9 would switch to single engine mode when TWR>10...

Now that you have gotten this down. You could make the 5-way clusters able to power down the center engine just like the Saturn V's first two stages did to keep TWR below 4. Of course, it is not necessary in KSP, because all engines can be throttled freely, but it would be cute to have anyway, as an easter egg. Regarding heating, it is reasonable for the center bell to be kept warm by its neighbors.)

Fixed it, see second image. At the time that the model is loaded by KSP, there has to be a texture present, or else the entry doesn't exist for MM's "model" block to replace the texture with. So either the texture has to exist in the same directory as the model, or else a dummy placeholder does (presumably a 1x1 image might be OK here).

But yeah, I think KSP still loads the models and textures from the stock parts too, so this would be additional memory usage. But it's a lot nicer/cleaner than overwriting the stock files.

http://www.necrobones.net/screenshots/KSP/KSP%202014-12-21%2015-22-05-99.jpg

http://www.necrobones.net/screenshots/KSP/KSP%202014-12-21%2015-29-21-77.jpg

Uhh, this is getting really exciting. However, this needs to go into another pack. It has nothing to do with heavy lifting. Don't worry, we'll find a good name for it. Something like Color Coded Canister Products...

I know the picture is just a concept test, but I just want to repeat that the X200-32 should have some homage to its original two-part design. Maybe just being clad in white panels like the SpaceX tanks, and the panels having half its height, so there would be a fine line half way up...

Let me know if you want suggestions for each stock tank. I'll be more than happy.

Oh, and I forgot to give you rep...

[NecroBones]

I see. I cannot tell from the RAPIER config file how it determines when to switch modes. It would be pretty cool if the M9 and R9 would switch to single engine mode when TWR>10...

Now that you have gotten this down. You could make the 5-way clusters able to power down the center engine just like the Saturn V's first two stages did to keep TWR below 4. Of course, it is not necessary in KSP, because all engines can be throttled freely, but it would be cute to have anyway, as an easter egg. Regarding heating, it is reasonable for the center bell to be kept warm by its neighbors.)

Oh yes, cutting out the center engine on those would be cool as an optional mode. Probably not this update though, since it's just about ready.

Uhh, this is getting really exciting. However, this needs to go into another pack. It has nothing to do with heavy lifting. Don't worry, we'll find a good name for it. Something like Color Coded Canister Products...

I know the picture is just a concept test, but I just want to repeat that the X200-32 should have some homage to its original two-part design. Maybe just being clad in white panels like the SpaceX tanks, and the panels having half its height, so there would be a fine line half way up...

Let me know if you want suggestions for each stock tank. I'll be more than happy.

Oh, and I forgot to give you rep...

Oh yes, it'll definitely need its own thread, name, and so forth. Just bringing it up here since that's all I've done so far. But yes, I definitely want the tanks to be recognizable as to which stock tank they are, just with a new look. I'm thinking that with shared textures, like with SpaceY, the tanks can look pretty good while also keeping the memory footprint low.

What I'm tempted to do is leave the orange tank alone, since it's so iconic. And since there's only one 0.625m LFO tank, I'm not sure how much it's worth redesigning that one with a color code. But the 1.25m and 2.5m could use it for sure. The 3.75m tanks technically don't need to be redesigned, but they drive me crazy because the stripes aren't at perfect angles, so they're worth redesigning for that reason alone.

[NecroBones]

BTW, on another note--- Good news! Lo-fi helped figure out what was wrong with the landing legs. I'll be able to get 0.6 out pretty soon with the legs included! EDIT: (I think we'll get it working-- I just had another test fail, fingers crossed!)

I spoke too soon. The legs are usable but still not working correctly. What I may do is get 0.6 out, without the legs for now, while trying to track down what the issue is.

What the legs are doing wrong:

1. The telescoping piston stopped working, and so the legs are completely rigid. The legs are surviving fairly significant landing speeds, close to 20m/s, so it's doing something. But it's not right.

2. The retraction phase is not animating, so the legs are teleporting when retracting. The extension works fine.

3. Most importantly, the deployed state isn't persisting in the save. So switching back to the vehicle later will have the legs retracted, and it will just fall.

[NBZ]

But yes, I definitely want the tanks to be recognizable as to which stock tank they are, just with a new look. I'm thinking that with shared textures, like with SpaceY, the tanks can look pretty good while also keeping the memory footprint low.

What I'm tempted to do is leave the orange tank alone, since it's so iconic. And since there's only one 0.625m LFO tank, I'm not sure how much it's worth redesigning that one with a color code. But the 1.25m and 2.5m could use it for sure. The 3.75m tanks technically don't need to be redesigned, but they drive me crazy because the stripes aren't at perfect angles, so they're worth redesigning for that reason alone.

Oh, I am so looking forward to this.

(While I like some of Ven's things, I disagree with too much, and I have not taken the effort to do partial installs. E.g. his re-vamp makes it even harder to distinguish tanks and engines. And the impossibility of uninstalling is maddening.)

I only have rather low-spec machines to play on, and for some reason, your things always look crisp on low settings, while stock stuff is way blurred.

Yes, Oscar-B is easily recognizable.

I suggest a light-weight approach, where you substitute original lines with panel seams.

But, by know, this is taking enough shape that you should start another thread. I think your SpaceY fans have noticed...

Something else. Rename other parts to match engine and booster names:

title = SpaceY F2C Fuel Tank Nose Cone

title = SpaceY F6 Fuel Tank

title = SpaceY F9A5-3 Fuel Tank Adapter

title = SpaceY F12 Fuel Tank

title = SpaceY F26 Fuel Tank

title = SpaceY F38 Fuel Tank

title = SpaceY A5-3 Structural Adapter

title = SpaceY A5-123 Adaptive Structure

title = SpaceY A3-12 Adaptive Structure

title = SpaceY A3-123 Adaptive Structure

I hope to continue my quest for easier names tomorrow. I have thrust plates and adapters in line.

[Niemand303]

Made a stockalike Apollo-11 recreation with your rocket, ALCOR, K-P0110 for pods and that sweet new mod for LEM tank (http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/104370-Lander-Part-Pack-for-MK1-Size-Can). You rock, NecroBones!

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[NecroBones]

Oh, I am so looking forward to this.

(While I like some of Ven's things, I disagree with too much, and I have not taken the effort to do partial installs. E.g. his re-vamp makes it even harder to distinguish tanks and engines. And the impossibility of uninstalling is maddening.)

I only have rather low-spec machines to play on, and for some reason, your things always look crisp on low settings, while stock stuff is way blurred.

Yes, Oscar-B is easily recognizable.

I suggest a light-weight approach, where you substitute original lines with panel seams.

But, by know, this is taking enough shape that you should start another thread. I think your SpaceY fans have noticed...

Yep, I want to get a couple of screenshots of at least one new tank before starting the thread. And I haven't made a new tank yet. Heh. I definitely like the ModuleManager approach better since it'll play nice as a mod that can be uninstalled and updated easily, and will work with CKAN, etc. Plus, it won't interfere with patching KSP with the official updates.

Something else. Rename other parts to match engine and booster names:

title = SpaceY F2C Fuel Tank Nose Cone

title = SpaceY F6 Fuel Tank

title = SpaceY F9A5-3 Fuel Tank Adapter

title = SpaceY F12 Fuel Tank

title = SpaceY F26 Fuel Tank

title = SpaceY F38 Fuel Tank

title = SpaceY A5-3 Structural Adapter

title = SpaceY A5-123 Adaptive Structure

title = SpaceY A3-12 Adaptive Structure

title = SpaceY A3-123 Adaptive Structure

I hope to continue my quest for easier names tomorrow. I have thrust plates and adapters in line.

OK cool. I may get the next update out before then, or maybe not, we'll see. I was going to get it out today, with or without the landing legs. But I spent too much time on the legs, and they're still not quite right, so I'll probably go ahead and release, and hold the legs back after all.

Made a stockalike Apollo-11 recreation with your rocket, ALCOR, K-P0110 for pods and that sweet new mod for LEM tank (http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/104370-Lander-Part-Pack-for-MK1-Size-Can). You rock, NecroBones!

http://imgur.com/a/Se2ew

Wow, that's really awesome! That turned out great! Thanks for sharing the screenshots. I love seeing what people do with it.

[Vladthemad]

Any chance this includes/you could include a nose cone for the 3.75m parts? It bothers me to no end that they don't have a stock nose cone for them! A simple resize/retexture of your jumbo nose cone would do just fine

[NecroBones]

Any chance this includes/you could include a nose cone for the 3.75m parts? It bothers me to no end that they don't have a stock nose cone for them! A simple resize/retexture of your jumbo nose cone would do just fine

Heh, you mean just a plain nose-cone? We have a fueled one in the pack, and technically you can just take the fuel out if you don't want it there.

[NecroBones]

OK, 0.6 is up. I probably won't get a chance to work on much during the holidays, so this version may be up a little longer.

What I did was inch upward in the engines per some of our previous discussions, but without pushing it quite so far. For now, the R1 remains on a 2.5m plate (making it more like a stronger Mainsail/LFB than something directly competing with the KR-2L). I bumped up the thrust on the R-series engines a little, but more more so on the M-series.

Before making the larger, more aerodynamic version of the "Dibamus" RCS/Engine, I figured I'd let people play with the small one first.

The mode-switch on the M9 gives that center-engine mode slightly more than 1/9 the thrust. It's more like 12.2% instead of 11.1%. I can boost that if it seems inadequate... We can pretend that the technology allows for running one engine at a higher flow rate and combustion pressure, at the cost of a little ISP.

I held the legs back due to problems. Worst case scenario, we'll get rigid legs in the future, but I wanted to see if I can solve the suspension problem first.

0.6 (2014-12-23) - Beta
 - Removed SAS from Reaction Wheel parts, since it no longer works without being on a command pod/core.
 - Updated the naming convention for all engines, SRBs, tanks, and size adapters to be clearer and more consistent.
 - Added mode-switching for the M9 engine. Alternate mode engages only center engine, for landing. 
 - Corrected K1 "Kiwi" engine's manufacturer so that it shows up in the SpaceY tab.
 - Increased thrust slightly on K1 "Kiwi" engine.
 - Increased thrust of R-series "Ratite" engines by 10%.
 - Increased thrust of M-series "Moa" engines by 33%.
 - Increased gimbal range of all M-series engines to 3 degrees.
 - Added RCS/OMS "Dibamus" monopropellant engine and maneuvering unit.
 - Slightly slowed the spool-up rate for all engines, to reduce sudden dissassembly syndrome with Z and X keys

[NBZ]

OK, 0.6 is up. I probably won't get a chance to work on much during the holidays, so this version may be up a little longer.

What I did was inch upward in the engines per some of our previous discussions, but without pushing it quite so far. For now, the R1 remains on a 2.5m plate (making it more like a stronger Mainsail/LFB than something directly competing with the KR-2L). I bumped up the thrust on the R-series engines a little, but more more so on the M-series.

Before making the larger, more aerodynamic version of the "Dibamus" RCS/Engine, I figured I'd let people play with the small one first.

The mode-switch on the M9 gives that center-engine mode slightly more than 1/9 the thrust. It's more like 12.2% instead of 11.1%. I can boost that if it seems inadequate... We can pretend that the technology allows for running one engine at a higher flow rate and combustion pressure, at the cost of a little ISP.

I held the legs back due to problems. Worst case scenario, we'll get rigid legs in the future, but I wanted to see if I can solve the suspension problem first.

0.6 (2014-12-23) - Beta
 - Removed SAS from Reaction Wheel parts, since it no longer works without being on a command pod/core.
 - Updated the naming convention for all engines, SRBs, tanks, and size adapters to be clearer and more consistent.
 - Added mode-switching for the M9 engine. Alternate mode engages only center engine, for landing. 
 - Corrected K1 "Kiwi" engine's manufacturer so that it shows up in the SpaceY tab.
 - Increased thrust slightly on K1 "Kiwi" engine.
 - Increased thrust of R-series "Ratite" engines by 10%.
 - Increased thrust of M-series "Moa" engines by 33%.
 - Increased gimbal range of all M-series engines to 3 degrees.
 - Added RCS/OMS "Dibamus" monopropellant engine and maneuvering unit.
 - Slightly slowed the spool-up rate for all engines, to reduce sudden dissassembly syndrome with Z and X keys

Yay. Will play.

On a different note: I am not a designer like you, but had some fun toying around with a logo for "Color Coded Canisters": Wedge, Letters.

[NecroBones]

On a different note: I am not a designer like you, but had some fun toying around with a logo for "Color Coded Canisters": Wedge, Letters.

Ooh, I like. Though one thought: How do you feel about switching red over to Rockomax / 2.5m? I started out that way on the tanks (screenies, thread, and alpha copy soon), since my worry is that since the tanks are grey/white already on the outside, the color-coding might get lost in the menu if the interior is grey too.

FYI, the reason I haven't started the thread yet is that I'd rather have just one "releases" thread and keep the discussion in there, rather than have to open and then close a dev-only thread. So having an alpha copy, even if it's just a few tanks, would be a great way to start it.

[NBZ]

SpaceY 0.6 Review:

Dibamus flies like a dream. I attached four to an R&S Capsuledyne Taurus HCV, and wow, its hovering around the launchpad like if it didn't weigh anything. I'll precision land a heavy base somewhere interesting soon... This is going to be fun.

Typo in filled nose cone title; "F2C" -> "F02C" (to match "F06" – which I think is better too)

Typo in M1 description: M"oa" -> "Moa"

Wasn't Moa supposed to be bumped 400 -> 425?

Engines are now spread out nicely to fill the stock gaps:

I moved orange to Rockomax (gray outside), and gray to Kerbodyne (b/w outside). I don't think bright red will be good on large parts. However, when you redo the stock tanks, you must redo Kerbodyne's too, as they already have orange inner-tanks. It works out nicely that the KR-1x2 remains orange inside (despite being from Kerbodyne), as it is only 2.5m.

The orange tank should definitely stay orange, and will look great with orange inside too. Maybe add a matching orange 2.5m fuel-filled nose cone?

I'll get back regarding more part names. I am considering "SpaceY A5-2+8x1", but it looks too much like a polynomial.

[NecroBones]

Typo in filled nose cone title; "F2C" -> "F02C" (to match "F06" – which I think is better too)

Typo in M1 description: M"oa" -> "Moa"

Wasn't Moa supposed to be bumped 400 -> 425?

Just a quick reply here since I need to run off and do things.

Fixed the typos, and the Kiwi thrust. Yes, somehow I lost the thrust change. Dang it. I'll probably put out 0.6.1 pretty quickly just for these.

[NecroBones]

Just a quick reply here since I need to run off and do things.

Fixed the typos, and the Kiwi thrust. Yes, somehow I lost the thrust change. Dang it. I'll probably put out 0.6.1 pretty quickly just for these.

Fixed.

0.6.1 (2014-12-23) - Beta
 - Actually applied the thrust increase for the K1 Kiwi engine that belonged in the last update.
 - Corrected a few typos in part titles and descriptions.

[NecroBones]

I moved orange to Rockomax (gray outside), and gray to Kerbodyne (b/w outside). I don't think bright red will be good on large parts. However, when you redo the stock tanks, you must redo Kerbodyne's too, as they already have orange inner-tanks. It works out nicely that the KR-1x2 remains orange inside (despite being from Kerbodyne), as it is only 2.5m.

The orange tank should definitely stay orange, and will look great with orange inside too. Maybe add a matching orange 2.5m fuel-filled nose cone?

I dunno, I kinda like the golden-orange on the Kerbodynes. Heh. Well, we can talk about it.

I started the thread, and we can continue the discussion there:

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/104660

You can download and play with what I've put together so far.