Jump to content

Jso

Members
  • Posts

    683
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Jso

  1. It used to be much better - or worse depending on how you look at it. https://github.com/CobaltWolf/Bluedog-Design-Bureau/issues/300 Titan III is a very simple design with 2 big srb's. From a pure cost point of view it's all business. Solids don't require expensive engines. Complexity such as decouplers, fins, retros, ullage motors, instrument units, and especially rcs thrusters cost $. The mini decoupler was added specifically to address the high cost of 9x radial decouplers. Cryogenic stages are the most expensive by weight.
  2. The lander can has a retractable antenna now, nice! We'll have to stick a better data transmitter in there. It needs to be rotated 180 degrees. The pitch controls are reversed when hovering facing this way. It's got room for a flag on the side. It's heavy for it's size and I'm thinking we could drop the mass to 300 or 200 kg. I'd yank out most of the MP and battery to compensate, but replacing that with other parts would be lighter than 100 kg.
  3. I've just been throwing fx_smokeTrail_medium on the solids. I need to go back and fix it though because I don't like how it stops when the thrust drops (we use thrust curves). One thing to watch is not overdoing it since we don't want to grind the slower computers to a halt. It will never be SmokeScreen smoke.
  4. Working on some new engine effects for stock (not RealPlume). Much thanks to @JadeOfMaar for making these available.
  5. Sort of. It's a Star 48 plus up to 1 ton payload under the fairing. The Viklun-4688 fairing base tapers from 0.625 to 0.9375, but you could probably use a flat 1.25m fairing base with a flipped over 1.25-0.625 structural adapter. A single Dioscuri-4 Inline version for the core 3rd stage. The radial Dioscuri-4 doesn't have thrust vectoring, so you'll need 6 Dioscuri-4 Inline versions attached radially, and you'll need to find a nosecone you like for them (tweakscale helps). 4 light on the ground for stage 1, then 2 in the air for stage 2. You can also get away with the non-vectoring radial versions for the second stage and use the core stage's RCS for attitude control.
  6. Komodo's right, that's what I would expect to see loading a normal scale Saturn craft file with the Saturn Rescale from extras. It's probably 2/3's fueled as well. Try building it from scratch.
  7. It's choking on this line: parent = #$../ModuleEngines*/thrustVectorTransformName$ It should be: parent = #$../MODULE[ModuleEngines*]/thrustVectorTransformName$
  8. I think it's just that the maneuver doesn't make sense at the scale we're playing. Apollo came in at about 11000m/sec. In stock it's 3100, and in 2.5x 5100. There's just a lot more speed to lose in the Earth/Moon system.
  9. I think it was 45,000m periapsis on a Mun return. This is 2.5x so that's 5000+mps. I really don't know how much the lift contributed vs just aerobraking into a suborbital trajectory.
  10. You got it. Size is not a factor in delta V, only Isp and the ratio of wet mass to dry mass. dv = 9.80665 * Isp * ln(wet mass / dry mass). Cryo works best when delta V needs are higher and TWR needs are lower, since adding engines to get more thrust will hurt the mass ratio and offset the Isp gains. In addition a bigger but lighter second stage means the first stage can be smaller, or the payload can be increased. For the same delta V, if the second and third stages of that Saturn V were Kerosene/Oxygen they would smaller. But the whole thing would be well over 2 million pounds heavier and need a much larger first stage with 7 or 8 F1s to get off the ground.
  11. This has been corrected. There's also a center of mass adjust @Marcelo Silveira put together that toggles in flight and gives the capsule a 10 degree pitch. Look for that on the right click menu. With the CoM offset reentry should be head down to get lift. I did manage a skip reentry after several attempts.
  12. Why would you want that? Delete the science parts and you don't need DMagic. CRP and B9 aren't going anywhere.
  13. This depends on the vac Isp being listed in the first key, but I've never seen it not. Isp upgrades can become downgrades doing this so I'm just removing them. @PART:HAS[@MODULE[ModuleEngines*]:HAS[@PROPELLANT[MonoPropellant]]] { @MODULE[ModuleEngines*],*:HAS[@PROPELLANT[MonoPropellant]] { @atmosphereCurve { vacIsp = #$key,0[1, ]$ } @atmosphereCurve:HAS[#vacIsp[<300]] { @key,0 = 0 280 } @atmosphereCurve:HAS[#vacIsp[>300]] { @key,0 = 0 310 } @UPGRADES { @UPGRADE,* { !atmosphereCurve {} } } } }
  14. Since around the date of the first post. Look there a a list of contributors. A lot of people help and it's a very incomplete list though. There's more here.
  15. Ok, no need to nag. It's on the todo list but it's a massive undertaking involving hundreds of parts so I can't give an eta.
  16. Do whatever makes you happy, KSP is great that way, I don't know what to do with it. The X-250 without upgrades is based on the Titan C second stage engine. Everything else is hypothetical. The vacuum version really needs it's own model and should probably be later in the tech tree so it can get a decent Isp and fill the huge gap between the Rl-10 and J-2. Everything Titan related is due for a rebuild so we'll see what happens.
  17. 10 minute burns for upper stages are undesirable, so for game play purposes we give a petty big (sometimes huge) buff to vacuum engines. It leads to weirdness when you have an engine with upper and lower stage versions. For balance the mass and thrust are linked, so it gets heavier with the buff. I think on the J2's we kind of met in the middle when the SL version was added. In this case removing the buff from the vacuum engine entirely might be appropriate.
  18. You mean inline and radial? No, that shouldn't effect nodes. There's no multi engine config in B9 if that's what you're referring to.
×
×
  • Create New...