• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

487 Excellent

1 Follower

About AlphaMensae

  • Rank
    Junior Rocket Scientist

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Location Terran Trade Authority

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. @ZobrAA Whoops! Thanks, I keep forgettting to change things in the dev folder files before zipping them up. Got it fixed. The bottom-mount arm is placed so the vertical pin at top goes on the bottom of a first/core stage/tank/engine mount/engine plate, like this: It was designed for rockets like this, and indeed many rockets use something like it. I changed its part title to say "Bottom-Mount" instead of "General" to reflect this. There already is a long-arm hold down type; an even longer one would require a whole new part. It'll be something I can add in for v2.0, probably a mesh-switching one with different arm length options.
  2. @ZobrAA I have the new insert ready for separate download from my Dropbox if you don't want to wait for the official update release. Put the .mu file into ModularLaunchPads/3D_Assets; overwrite the old one Put the .cfg file into ModularLaunchPads/Saturn_Pad/Base_Parts; overwrite the old one.
  3. Funny enough, when I added the 3x120 configuration, I had also thought about a 6x60 version...but decided not to, as I felt that the 3-way version was sufficient for the Delta II and other rockets with multiple small SRBs or side boosters, using the new bottom-mount hold-down arm (which was inspired by the Delta II's and Titan II's hold-downs). However, I see I was in error, and can rather easily make a 6-way version. I'll have it up on Wednesday, as part of yet another MLP v1.3 update. Will use the existing v1.3 square insert. Incidentally, that's the Saturn V tail service mast you're using, and was not actually a hold-down or clamp.
  4. Progress on the RSS: Payload changeout room is mostly modeled aside from some details, next up is the massive surrounding framework of struts and beams
  5. Yep, that would be more work, and then you'd have an elevated track...not what I want either. No, the only real alternative, and for which I'll be making the outer support have a mesh-switchable height, is to use this Kerbal Konstructs LC 39B recreation being made by @damonvv :
  6. Progress on the RSS has been slow, due to having to work 4 days this week (Friday off, woo!), but I have managed to plot out the general dimension limits and complete the mount and hinge assembly: Beyond the hinge and mount, there isn't much to the RSS other than an early version of the payload changeout room opening, and some placeholder objects for the outer support, put in temporarily for planning purposes. A design decision I've made was to have the outer support rest on the ground when the RSS is in the rolled-back position; this makes the support clip through the pad and be partially hidden when closed. Since I don't want the RSS to be suspended in mid-air, and the open position is the one most used, I went with clipping through the pad. The RSS is extremely complex, and no way will I include every detail or try for near faithfulness to the real one. What I'm going to do is turn this: Into something like this: (That's a Revell model kit, btw)
  7. I haven't used VesselMover, but I don't see why it would not work with the pads. They are parts after all, and act like other parts.
  8. Ok, posted another minor update of v1.3, this one is v1.3.5: Changelog: Created new custom tech tree nodes for the Saturn and Soyuz pads. They are located to the left of the start node and are all independent of each other. Revised all Saturn pad parts that use Animated Decouplers by adding a size 0 attach node that is setup to decouple. Nothing can be attached to this node. I was alerted to an issue with the Saturn pad parts that use Animated Decouplers (hold down arm, tail service masts and the swing arms), they were throwing null ref error messages. Turns out that Animated Decouplers (or KSP) didn't like them not actually having a decouple node set up in the .cfg. So I added a size 0 top node to the parts, and made that the decouple node (mothing can be attached to this node). Now, no more null ref spam. I also added the new tech tree nodes for the Saturn and Soyuz pad parts (the Russian Launch Stand remains in the start), and put the associated parts in them. These nodes are located to the left of the start node, and are all independent of each other. Oh yes, made new subassemblies for the pads and Russian stand.
  9. I would just do the Wenchang pad and tower, it'd be far easier and usable with a wide variety of rocket types. The launcher base would just be a switchable color option for the large general pad (could be two sizes of general pad bases), and the tower would be an additional add-on part. The general pads will use the existing (and any future) hold-down arms, with the bottom-mount one best for the Chinese-style four side boosters.
  10. Looking great @damonvv! To clarify something, that's a dev build of the shuttle pad that I'm currently working on, and is not in the current release of Modular Launch Pads
  11. @Deltac Thanks! Looks that big one is kind of distinctive after all.... It's sufficiently different (is that a round base the rocket sits on?) that it would probablt require a whole separate pad. And yeah, with those lower swinging structures (side booster access) it'd be for rockets with 4 stubby side boosters like the Chinese use. But those structures would be separate parts, and thus optional, leaving just the tower. I would need to video of it in action first. The other tower, yep, quite doable as a tower option. Are those swing arms? Side-mounted straight ones too.
  12. It's partly due to what @CobaltWolf said, but also due to that there isn't anything really distinctive or significant about the Chinese pads to make a separate one. However, I could make a representative Chinese service/umbilical tower option for the new general-type pad base I'll be making. This will be a smaller, lower-height alternative to the Saturn V's mobile launcher base, and will be a launch clamp-type base and not free-standing. It will be the default base for all sorts of add-on towers from various smaller rocket types: Falcon 9/FH, Atlas V, Delta II, Delta IV, Titan II/III/IV and more.
  13. @linuxgurugamer Ok, here are the revised tower bases with a 120m elevator position, on my Dropbox. Merge or copy the contents (just two .mu files) from the .zip's 3D_Assets folder to the 3D_Assets folder in Modular Launch Pads. The two .cfg files can go in the Saturn tower folder. They won't overwrite the existing bases, but will be new parts, identified with "*Rev*" in the part title.
  14. @linuxgurugamer Ah, I know why you said you only had 60m as the max elevator height--that's the square tower base you're using...forgot I made the angled and square bases have different elevator positions. The square base was intended for shorter and narrower rockets, with the angled base for the Saturn V and like-types. I suppose I could make them the same. I'll have an updated file up soon.
  15. The v2.0 parts are available now as an alpha dev build on my Dropbox, the link was posted a few posts up. They're not polished, still a bit rough and subject to further changes, but do work. Right click on them, they make much more use of mesh switching.