Some future update mod ideas/wishlist

[The Astronomer]

After discussions with people on Discord, I came up with some mod ideas for future updates which might interest some modders.

Basic Overhaul and Realism Overhaul mods
SFS is, in many fields, not realistic, nor does it intended to be. There are some elements that are greatly simplified, and for a very good reason.
The Basic Overhaul would be the mod which introduces some changes which makes the gameplay more realistic, but not too difficult. I imagine the changes would make physics more similar to Kerbal Space Program.
Possible changes:
- Isp/thrust shifts as ambient air pressure changes, including plume shape shift
- Inverse square law in solar panels, power dropping as you go further away from light sources.
- Capsules and probes, among other things, now consume electricity.
Meanwhile, the Realism Overhaul would be, as its name suggests, an attempt to introduce all possible real world engineering challenges. For all possible changes, try download KSP Realism Overhaul and its associated mods, such as Ferram Aerospace Research.

Advanced Spaceflight
Rockets are not forever. New alternative concepts are quickly being developed as we talk, some of which seems set to become the better way to get to places. This mod would attempt to capture that.
Possible features:
- Advanced future propulsion, such as various types of nuclear rockets, sails (solar, laser, magnetic, beam, etc).
- Space infrastructure, such as power collector stations and beam stations for powering, propulsion, and selling energy to Earth for fund.

 

[Horus Lupercal]

- Advanced future propulsion, such as various types of nuclear rockets, sails (solar, laser, magnetic, beam, etc).

I remember seeing a programme on using lasers to propel objects a few years back. A base station fired an upward mounted laser at a special shaped disc and if it hit just right then the light would superheat the air inside the disc and pulse it forwards.
The guy was trying to match the height of the first conventional rocket flight with it to show the concept but kept failing due to the wind knocking the disc out of alignment with the base station.

Chapperall (a race car company) designed a concept called the 2X for Gran Turismo powered by the same system but got around the alignment issue by fixing the laser to the disc using a super rigid chassis. The car was rapid because there was no drivetrain to overcome and the laser would keep accelerating the car until drag said no.

 

[Danny Batten]

I remember seeing a programme on using lasers to propel objects a few years back. A base station fired an upward mounted laser at a special shaped disc and if it hit just right then the light would superheat the air inside the disc and pulse it forwards.
The guy was trying to match the height of the first conventional rocket flight with it to show the concept but kept failing due to the wind knocking the disc out of alignment with the base station.

Chapperall (a race car company) designed a concept called the 2X for Gran Turismo powered by the same system but got around the alignment issue by fixing the laser to the disc using a super rigid chassis. The car was rapid because there was no drivetrain to overcome and the laser would keep accelerating the car until drag said no.

Oh I know that, project starshot? But that was going to be in space, so I must be thinking of a different thing.

 

[Altaïr]

Interesting ideas.
To make things trickier, I suggest restrictions on engines:
- throttle cannot be lowered below a given threshold
- limited number of reignitions
- some engines could have two variants: one for ground level, one adapted for vacuum. The one for vacuum would be more efficient in space, but also heavier because of the longer nozzle.

Several fuel types:
LOX/LH2: the most efficient
+++++ very high Isp
~ allows "only" average thrust
- LH2 fuel tanks are voluminous and their fuel mass/dry mass ratio is lower than for other fuel types
-- LH2 must be kept very cold, and it tends to boil as and when the tank get hotter: as a result, the fuel reserve progressively vanishes with time.

LOX/RP1: the most balanced
~ average Isp
++ Allows the highest thrust
+ dense fuel: an important fuel mass can be stored in a relatively small fuel tank
- Because of LOX, it also vanishes with time, but much slowly than LOX/LH2

Hypergolic: the most durable
-- Low Isp
~ average density
+ engines using hypergolic fuel are lighter because it doesn't need an ignition mechanism
+ Very permissive throttle adjustment
+ Unlimited number of reignitions
+ stockable: doesn't vanish with time

@8bitCosmonaut may be interested in completing/correcting this

 

[The Astronomer]

Interesting ideas.
To make things trickier, I suggest restrictions on engines:
- throttle cannot be lowered below a given threshold
- limited number of reignitions
- some engines could have two variants: one for ground level, one adapted for vacuum. The one for vacuum would be more efficient in space, but also heavier because of the longer nozzle.

Several fuel types:
LOX/LH2: the most efficient
+++++ very high Isp
~ allows "only" average thrust
- LH2 fuel tanks are voluminous and their fuel mass/dry mass ratio is lower than for other fuel types
-- LH2 must be kept very cold, and it tends to boil as and when the tank get hotter: as a result, the fuel reserve progressively vanishes with time.

LOX/RP1: the most balanced
~ average Isp
++ Allows the highest thrust
+ dense fuel: an important fuel mass can be stored in a relatively small fuel tank
- Because of LOX, it also vanishes with time, but much slowly than LOX/LH2

Hypergolic: the most durable
-- Low Isp
~ average density
+ engines using hypergolic fuel are lighter because it doesn't need an ignition mechanism
+ Very permissive throttle adjustment
+ Unlimited number of reignitions
+ stockable: doesn't vanish with time

@8bitCosmonaut may be interested in completing/correcting this

For Realism Overhaul I imagine what KSP RO and its associated mods, so basically those points you suggested, but even more:
- Stock engines are replaced by real rocket engines, each using the fuel they really use in real life, and real propellants with real properties.
- Ullage. Propellant in the tank can float around, so you need a rocket motor to settle the propellant before ignition.
- Cryogenic boil-off. Some kinds of tanks can slow the boil off.
- Engines taking time to start, and have some 'instabilities'.
- And many more.

...yeah, I guess we should start with the Basic Overhaul first...

 

[Jez 10]

After discussions with people on Discord, I came up with some mod ideas for future updates which might interest some modders.

Basic Overhaul and Realism Overhaul mods
SFS is, in many fields, not realistic, nor does it intended to be. There are some elements that are greatly simplified, and for a very good reason.
The Basic Overhaul would be the mod which introduces some changes which makes the gameplay more realistic, but not too difficult. I imagine the changes would make physics more similar to Kerbal Space Program.
Possible changes:
- Isp/thrust shifts as ambient air pressure changes, including plume shape shift
- Inverse square law in solar panels, power dropping as you go further away from light sources.
- Capsules and probes, among other things, now consume electricity.
Meanwhile, the Realism Overhaul would be, as its name suggests, an attempt to introduce all possible real world engineering challenges. For all possible changes, try download KSP Realism Overhaul and its associated mods, such as Ferram Aerospace Research.

Advanced Spaceflight
Rockets are not forever. New alternative concepts are quickly being developed as we talk, some of which seems set to become the better way to get to places. This mod would attempt to capture that.
Possible features:
- Advanced future propulsion, such as various types of nuclear rockets, sails (solar, laser, magnetic, beam, etc).
- Space infrastructure, such as power collector stations and beam stations for powering, propulsion, and selling energy to Earth for fund.

Wouldn't it be better if we add plane parts for sstos?

 

[The Astronomer]

Wouldn't it be better if we add plane parts for sstos?

Plane parts in a 2D game? Maybe not. I think scriptable auto probes for booster landing are more fun. Which brings you to mod no 3:

Scriptable Automatic Probes
Intended for stuff like launch vehicles and such. Basically you can script the probe core on your rocket and automate the launch. Especially useful for situations like landing boosters as you can just set the engine to burn X meters above the surface and such, instead of having to manually land each, which risks the other crashing while you were away.

 

[BANDWITH]

Landing gear:
Suspension
Big landing Gear
Procedural landing struts
Wheel settings
Crumpling of landing gear
Landing gear suspension
Wheel poping
Disable probe gyro
Pistons
Rotators
Service bays

 

[Danny Batten]

Landing gear:
Suspension
Big landing Gear
Procedural landing struts
Wheel settings
Crumpling of landing gear
Landing gear suspension
Wheel poping
Disable probe gyro
Pistons
Rotators
Service bays

YES! I wouldn’t have to make these bulky landing gears

 

[BANDWITH]

YES! I wouldn’t have to make these bulky landing gears

I'd imagine suspension would be quite broken at first tho.

 

[Danny Batten]

I'd imagine suspension would be quite broken at first tho.

Lol yeah, I can already imagine what derpy shit you could do with them

 

[TtTOtW]

Wouldn't it be better if we add plane parts for sstos?

Oh no, here comes Cosmo, lol!

 

[SupremeDorian]

I remember seeing a programme on using lasers to propel objects a few years back. A base station fired an upward mounted laser at a special shaped disc and if it hit just right then the light would superheat the air inside the disc and pulse it forwards.
The guy was trying to match the height of the first conventional rocket flight with it to show the concept but kept failing due to the wind knocking the disc out of alignment with the base station.

Chapperall (a race car company) designed a concept called the 2X for Gran Turismo powered by the same system but got around the alignment issue by fixing the laser to the disc using a super rigid chassis. The car was rapid because there was no drivetrain to overcome and the laser would keep accelerating the car until drag said no.

There was also Project Orion, which was intended to use Nuclear Bombs as a means of propulsion, which isn't a bad idea except for the fact that a lot could go wrong with something like that.

 

[8BitCosmonaut]

Wouldn't it be better if we add plane parts for sstos?

You're lucky I practice Tai Chi.

Aircrafts are far more complicated, if we can't even get the rockets and aerodynamic mechanics right, why the fuck would it be better to implement bloody aircrafts that need a highly sophisticated aerodynamic system which the game is no where near achieving??

 

[8BitCosmonaut]

which isn't a bad idea

a lot could go wrong with something like that.

That makes it a bad idea.

 

[The Astronomer]

Nuclear pulse drives sound great.

 

[8BitCosmonaut]

Wouldn't it be better if we add plane parts for sstos?

Again, SSTOs are horribly inefficient, the X-33 Venture Star is basically the SSTO version of the STS, both are limited to low earth orbit. Not to say the X-33 is any better, it's design forces it to carry even less (20 tons, STS is 30 tons). This may be solved by giving it more fuel, but giving it more fuel will need larger tanks, and if you haven't realized by now, hydrogen fuel's wet to dry mass ratio becomes exponentially worse the larger it becomes.

 

[Horus Lupercal]

I remember seeing a programme on using lasers to propel objects a few years back. A base station fired an upward mounted laser at a special shaped disc and if it hit just right then the light would superheat the air inside the disc and pulse it forwards.
The guy was trying to match the height of the first conventional rocket flight with it to show the concept but kept failing due to the wind knocking the disc out of alignment with the base station.

Chapperall (a race car company) designed a concept called the 2X for Gran Turismo powered by the same system but got around the alignment issue by fixing the laser to the disc using a super rigid chassis. The car was rapid because there was no drivetrain to overcome and the laser would keep accelerating the car until drag said no.

Laser and Parabola on the back of the 2X

 

[8BitCosmonaut]

I can see that it produces much more thrust than a conventional ion drive, but it needs to heat the gas up to around 5000~6000 degrees, which means it could be even less efficient than normal ion drive. Unless the vehicle only carries the gas and the laser is provided by a satellite or Earth-based source. However trying to aim at a vehicle located at Jupiter for example, while your Laser source is near the Sun or Earth, that would be extremely difficult and the vehicle's burn window will be very limited as it needs to constantly align either the top or rear to the source.

One way to eliminate this problem would be to bring the laser source with you, but a 5000 degree laser would mean high wattage, and high wattage is only achievable by nuclear power especially when you are operating anywhere further than Mars. Bringing a reactor along would hurt the wet to dry mass ratio a lot, and hence you'll end up with less dV.

I don't know about you but I am skeptical of laser based propulsion, I believe solar sails are far simpler.

 

[The Astronomer]

I can see that it produces much more thrust than a conventional ion drive, but it needs to heat the gas up to around 5000~6000 degrees, which means it could be even less efficient than normal ion drive. Unless the vehicle only carries the gas and the laser is provided by a satellite or Earth-based source. However trying to aim at a vehicle located at Jupiter for example, while your Laser source is near the Sun or Earth, that would be extremely difficult and the vehicle's burn window will be very limited as it needs to constantly align either the top or rear to the source.

One way to eliminate this problem would be to bring the laser source with you, but a 5000 degree laser would mean high wattage, and high wattage is only achievable by nuclear power especially when you are operating anywhere further than Mars. Bringing a reactor along would hurt the wet to dry mass ratio a lot, and hence you'll end up with less dV.

I don't know about you but I am skeptical of laser based propulsion, I believe solar sails are far simpler.

Pretty sure ablative laser propulsion, with the right propellant and beam, can have exhaust velocity approaching 50 km/s.

Beamed power propulsion doesn't mean laser propulsion only, even. You can have your ship ride a particle stream from a beam station. There are works about those like PROCSIMA concept, which could be used to extend the range of the beam stations greatly. While I don't know much about how those works, I can ask my friends in ToughSF Discord server.

 

[8BitCosmonaut]

Landing gear:
Suspension
Big landing Gear
Procedural landing struts
Wheel settings
Crumpling of landing gear
Landing gear suspension
Wheel poping
Disable probe gyro
Pistons
Rotators
Service bays

We should go with procedural parts for fuel tanks, it'll sure make the building menu much simpler.

 

[Horus Lupercal]

I can see that it produces much more thrust than a conventional ion drive, but it needs to heat the gas up to around 5000~6000 degrees, which means it could be even less efficient than normal ion drive. Unless the vehicle only carries the gas and the laser is provided by a satellite or Earth-based source. However trying to aim at a vehicle located at Jupiter for example, while your Laser source is near the Sun or Earth, that would be extremely difficult and the vehicle's burn window will be very limited as it needs to constantly align either the top or rear to the source.

One way to eliminate this problem would be to bring the laser source with you, but a 5000 degree laser would mean high wattage, and high wattage is only achievable by nuclear power especially when you are operating anywhere further than Mars. Bringing a reactor along would hurt the wet to dry mass ratio a lot, and hence you'll end up with less dV.

I don't know about you but I am skeptical of laser based propulsion, I believe solar sails are far simpler.

Yeah mate, it's that age old problem with lasers. Make them big enough to do some work and you've made them too big to move anywhere. And you'd have to take the laser with you, using a base station to LEO wouldn't work because air and clouds would ruin the beam.
The object would have to travel straight line from emitter to destination, none of this orbit business that everything in the solar system is subject to. The accuracy required to hit the back of a vehicle from half a solar system away doesn't bear thinking about with beam divergence etc. And if something gets in the way then the vehicle dead in space, and whatever gets in the way is in for a helluva surprise.
I think the guy was going for low thrust, high ISP in the video, he's talking about achieving an ISP in the thousands with that system.
If he can get it to lift more than an ash tray 30 metres.

 

[The Astronomer]

We should go with procedural parts for fuel tanks, it'll sure make the building menu much simpler.

A mod that removes all the stupid amount of fuel tanks/other parts with various sizes and replacing it with one procedural part for one kind of module sounds great.

 

[8BitCosmonaut]

Pretty sure ablative laser propulsion, with the right propellant and beam, can have exhaust velocity approaching 50 km/s.

Beamed power propulsion doesn't mean laser propulsion only, even. You can have your ship ride a particle stream from a beam station. There are works about those like PROCSIMA concept, which could be used to extend the range of the beam stations greatly. While I don't know much about how those works, I can ask my friends in ToughSF Discord server.

You still haven't answered the problem of achieving a maximum contact area of a receiver and a laser source. That means to achieve the greatest contact area, the beam must be normal to the receiver surface, and we can't maintain it like that, as burning at an angle from the normal of the burn window would hurt the accuracy of the final orbit.

 

[8BitCosmonaut]

You still haven't answered the problem of achieving a maximum contact area of a receiver and a laser source. That means to achieve the greatest contact area, the beam must be normal to the receiver surface, and we can't maintain it like that, as burning at an angle from the normal of the burn window would hurt the accuracy of the final orbit.

We could get multiple satellites that can reflect the beam to an angle where the main vehicle can simply head straight while still receiving a normal angled laser source, but that would make things complicated.