zorg2044
commented
5 days ago Haven't tested everything in the list but in general I feel like I'm not going to make any changes to the fuel loads. The current base tank has the same prop load as the old build to the same height. All the extension tanks are based on the formula we use for volume.
Due to various factors the performance of KSP rockets can vary a lot but I consider between 2/3 to 100% of IRL performance in 2.5x scale to be acceptable.
The IRL figures here are from example missions from Ed Kyle so are indicative rather than max payload. From Atlas 2 onwards the figures are max payload from Lockheed/ULA users guides.
Atlas II struggles to LEO but this is due to the difference in scaling between the world vs the atmo I believe. It suffers significant gravity losses and the core never gets close to 1:1 TWR. However most other builds fall in an acceptable range so I'm planning to leave the balance as is. Some small tweaks to structural parts mass might still happen.
Need to verify updated Atlas parts are well balanced by testing a few key builds and seeing if the performance is sensible.
testing will be done is KSRSS reborn. (IRL orbit - ksp atmo height) x 0.25 + KSP atmo height
Some amount of excess performance for player margin is fine. Its reasonable to assume most of the IRL reference missions arent completely maxing out the performance of the rocket.