Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Putnam]

So am I the only one who noticed the absolute saturation of ISRU stuff recently?

I mean, used to be Kethane was the only thing that did that, then Interstellar did its own and I never touched Kethane again, but THEN Stock got its own ISRU system.
And then theres the stuff that builds off Kethane like Extraplanetary Launchpads and Umbra Colonization Crap.

umbra definitely does not use kethane

IIRC it uses karbonite, or maybe stock now (since the developer is sorta the one who made the stock ISRU)

[forsaken1111]

In fact USI was created because the author disliked kethane's approach, so he coded his own resource model which was eventually folded into the base game.

[BFEL]

Yeah, woops, it uses Karbonite yes. Which makes FOUR SEPERATE FUCKING ISRU SYSTEMS. One of which is Stock and thus in EVERY game.

So if I wanted to put USI in my game, I would have 3 different ISRU systems simultaneously. That's a lot of parts doing the same thing differently, as well as 3 separate layers of deposits on every planet.
This adds up when you have a...was the limit 3 GB or 6 GB? I forget, but yeah, limited space to put all this before the game implodes under its own weight. And that's without even considering the possibility of conflicts.

[forsaken1111]

You could consolidate it with a little work. The ISRU stuff all works on modules, so copy/paste the modules into a few multipurpose parts. Memory bloat comes from the parts and textures mostly, so paring down your parts will help a lot.

[Putnam]

Yeah, woops, it uses Karbonite yes. Which makes FOUR SEPERATE FUCKING ISRU SYSTEMS. One of which is Stock and thus in EVERY game.

Again, I'm pretty sure that USI uses stock considering that the developer of it made the stock system.

[forsaken1111]

Yep, the USI resource system is just the stock system with additional overlays for various resources. Heck if you wanted you could edit them all to use the stock ore resource and have only one resource mineable.

[BFEL]

Ok, granted, but Extraplanetary Launchpads, one of USI's dependencies for anything actually fun in the mod uses Karbonite.

[forsaken1111]

Ok, granted, but Extraplanetary Launchpads, one of USI's dependencies for anything actually fun in the mod uses Karbonite.

You aren't getting this. Karbonite is the stock system. The guy who made karbonite also made the stock resource system.

[BFEL]

So could I then use Extraplanetary Launchpads without putting in Karbonite?

[Putnam]

There are no mods that exist at all that rely on Karbonite because the Karbonite ISRU system no longer exists because it was folded into stock.

This can be seen by looking up carbonite and reading the bold red text at the top.

[BigFatStupidHead]

BFEL, one to check out is AntennaRange. It's a good light alternative to RemoteTech.

And, yes, much ISRU abounds.

[BFEL]

There are no mods that exist at all that rely on Karbonite because the Karbonite ISRU system no longer exists because it was folded into stock.

This can be seen by looking up carbonite and reading the bold red text at the top.

So could I then use Extraplanetary Launchpads without putting in Karbonite?

It seems like the answer is yes, but that isn't absolutely definitive.
If so, I MIGHT try to just do USI stuff again. And hope it doesn't do weird stuff with TACLS like it does in my current build.

Also, probably just gonna go with RemoteTech anyway, because the Interstellar Quest thing was a conflict with Ferram, and while I think I saw it having issues somewhere else, its unfair to damn it without actually giving it a shot.

[fourpotatoes]

An hour and a half ago I finally succeeded in building an SSTO that (a) operates from a runway, (b) can make orbit without parts exploding and (c) isn't an orange tank with delta-wings, a Mainsail and fixed tricycle gear glued on; five minutes ago I recovered it intact. It has no useful payload and hardly any delta-v left after reaching orbit, but it actually works and I am very pleased.

Spoiler: SSTO Mk.VI "This time it will work for sure!" (click to show/hide)

The crew are flying from the rear cockpit because of an accident that happened during high-speed cruise testing of a prototype.

One of the byproducts of the development program is a nice supersonic runabout based on an earlier LF-only version of the SSTO with the rockets removed. It has range to reach halfway around Kerbin (a failed test flight groundbreaking expedition is currently landed there waiting for a damaged-in-delivery ISRU rig I flew out to make more fuel braving the strange dangers of an unexplored tropical island) and handles well enough to make me almost not hate flying KSP fixed-wing aircraft. I can't help but compare KSP's controls to FS5 of two decades ago and find them lacking.

Although it's my first SSTO, technically it's not my first spaceplane:

Spoiler: The Mun Bomber does not inspire confidence in its crew (click to show/hide)

The crew must know that they land at dawn.

[nogoodnames]

So, I'm going to attempt to build a semi-practical SSTO spaceplane using realism overhaul. If I had a proper SABRE analog I would do something like Skylon, but the RAPIER was made to use methane instead and isn't efficient enough for my needs. Instead, I've settled on something akin to Venture Star: vertical-takeoff-horizontal-landing and powered by LH2/LOX engines. I want it to carry 6 kerbals and maybe another 10 tonnes of payload.

I've narrowed the engines down to two options: the J-2T-250K Aerospike and the LR87-LH2. The aerospike has great vacuum Isp and can be ignited up to 3 times but lacks thrust vectoring. On the other hand, the LR87 has fantastic TWR, better surface Isp and can gimbal but has worse vacuum Isp and can only be ignited once. The number of ignitions is important since neither is throttleable and being able to temporarily switch the engine off would give me more control in the late stages of flight. However, I could also "throttle down" by using multiple engines and switching some off prematurely, and a gimbaling engine would also be a big help with control during ascent.

So, which looks like the better option?

[BFEL]

I'm thinking aerospike. Number of ignitions could be HUGELY important.

In fact with just one you CAN'T make a proper spaceplane. The entire idea of spaceplanes is accurate landings. Having an extra two ignitions means you can use it to get to orbit, then use it when back in atmo to get back to the runway, something not always possible with just gliding.