Tiankay

Members
  • Content Count

    39
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

28 Excellent

About Tiankay

  • Rank
    Rocketeer

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Get it here: [1.2.2-1.5.1] Tundra's Space Center - v0.9.1 (November 17th) - Stockalike KSC launchpads! TK
  2. Tiankay

    KSP Community Rewind 2018

    I´d hope this could still squeeze into the "visual/planet" category" and say Sigma Dimensions/Rescale was the most important one for me this year. Completely changed how I view and play the game, and I will never ever return to stock scale at this point. Peace TK
  3. Yes, its updated in the master. But I assume that most players dont actually download straight from repos. So "technically", people who could encounter this are on the most up to date (release) version Peace TK
  4. Looks awesome as usual @CobaltWolf! Public Service Announcement for 1.5.1 players: The currently bundled version of B9PartSwitch in BDB 1.4.4 is outdated! It works fine in KSP 1.4.x, but in 1.5.x the attachement nodes of the RD-180 (Muo-5E-2207 "Czar") wont switch with the mesh and thus, the engine will clip into the main tank. Manually update to the most recent version of B9PartSwitch *here* to fix that. Peace TK
  5. Small bug report: The end cap for the STS tank is using "Liquid Fuel" instead of "Liquid Hydrogen". Just a typo tho, ratios and fuel numbers are fine. Left you a report on Github. Peace TK
  6. Tiankay

    KSP Weekly: The Orbiters!

    Suit looks nice. Helmet? not so much. Needs a more clean look, dont like that noise. Im on team white+red+blue, but please add some color to the helmets once again. Maybe a bit more subtle than before, some stripes or anything, but not this bland like it is right now. Peace TK
  7. Yaaay, I have been missing this one for a long time now. Thanks @Starwaster Peace TK
  8. Tiankay

    [1.6.1-1 + Backports] Kopernicus & KittopiaTech

    Oddly enough, I also had this exact same bug in I believe 1.4 or 1.4.1 with Sigma Dimensions and Galileos 2.5x Rescale Config. So it doesnt seem like its related to either SD or RescaleZ, but possibly to any rescale method. But it only happened once and I could never reproduce, so I didnt report it. Peace TK
  9. @CobaltWolf IIRC Star-13 and Star-26 for Thor-Burner II A and B variants are missing for example. BDB "only" has Star-20, 31, 37 and 48 according to the config files. Have to boot up the game later to check, but unless you hid a star in another config file thats it^^ http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets_2/United_States_4/Thor/Description/Frame.htm ATK Solids Datasheet: http://www.ltas-vis.ulg.ac.be/cmsms/uploads/File/DataSheetSolidATK.pdf Also what has been already said, the Star-37 lacks guidance, thus not making it a true Burner 2 stage. Peace TK
  10. I use both the booster solids aswell as kickstages quite alot when (and thats often) im trying to to missions with accurate launch vehicles. I just trial and error them or do rough estimates and do fine re-adjustment with the payload itself after seperation^^ While recently doing all my subassemblies i noticed that some vehicles were "almost" possible but ultimatly lacked just the right SRB or Kickstage. (Burner Stages come to mind, gib pl0x ) So yes, i would really enjoy a touch up on these parts^^ Peace TK
  11. Dude, i absolutely understand that. Thats why I dont point out every other (minor) flaw i also found, only the most severe ones. There are a number of smaller flaws that do bug me, but probably arent worth the time to fix and dont impact the game that much. Some things that may even be compromises like the centaur insulation that you described. I know that I am a very nitpicky person and so I try to limit myself in that regard^^ The thing with that Delta-1000 ELT is just that its hard to build correctly if you dont have a website on the second screen with drawings and measurements to compare to. I just did it with the 2700 like it was in the manual, and then when i tried to do the Thorad/Delta-J stuff nothing made sense anymore and confused the hell out of me. So thats why I think another tank would be a good idea here. I have a feeling that we misunderstood each other in the beginning. Im not talking about "re-doing" the Thor stuff, the 2700 is fine. Im talking about an addition to whats already there. Even if its only placed on a bucket list and may be done later when you have more time for it^^ Though I would appreciate a fix in the manual, not longer describing it as "Daleth 1000" but rather als "Daleth-E" or "Daleth 0600". That way the possibility for confusion is eliminated^^ Actual numbers for the centaurs can be found here. http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets_2/United_States_3/Centaur/Centaur.htm Infos about centaurs are pretty scattered on the internet, but i found some of the Atlas II/III mission design guide documents that suggest these numbers are correct. https://de.scribd.com/document/20046628/ILS-Atlas-IIAS-IIIA-B-V-400-500-Mission-Planners-Guide Atlas V boosters look good! Peace TK
  12. @draqsko I get your point, but for that matter a new tank wouldnt be needed at all. Lots of Delta 1000-5000 Versions actually have parts of their main tank in that blue shade and the daleth-II 1700 fits just fine length wise with two 880 tanks. The problem is that the tank rims are at the wrong position, and that actually was a concern to @CobaltWolf earlier about some Saturn tanks. An extensien to the Fenris-2700 would only worsen this problem. Instead, just keeping the 2700 as it is (Maybe retexturing it at some point to match the rim) and doing a new one for the ELTTAT would make it look way better without beeing save-breaking and would also be easier to build for people. I mean, on single stick vehicles it doesnt even really look that bad, but as soon as you add SRB´s it gets obvious how much too low that rim really is. So a new proper ELT, maybe split in 2 parts like the EELT daleth-II ones for the "lego-factor", only would make sense here. But thanks for your clarification about the tank masses. I never laid my hands on part configs for now, so this was new to me^^ I probably wont. I am already at 124 craft files (and not done yet ) as im doing all the possible variants of everything. Having them loadable in a savegame makes it cluttered as hell. Instead, i will probably release them as a pack on Spacedock with my "SubassemblyCategories.cfg" along with it so one can put this into his game and have it orderly structured and easy to access. But I will message you, no Problem Peace TK
  13. @CobaltWolf Yeah, thats what i figured too, The 1440 fits the Atlas LV-3C pretty good, the new one fits the Atlas V pretty good, but the third one probably should be somewhere in the middle between the current Inon-D3 and Inon-D5 in length. I know thats maybe hard to believe, but im actually not actively trying to obsess over these things. it just happens Peace TK
  14. @CobaltWolf - Hey, its me again. Sorry, I really didnt intend to be such a nuisance, but i spent a whole day googling and i cannot help myself Since im pretty much done with all the first stage variants (Boy, theres ALOT of possible Delta configurations ) i started doing the upper stages. Im on the newest dev-version btw. Doing the Centaurs i got confused now. Theres not much info available online about the whole centaur family with contradicting drawings, but everything i found suggests 3 different tank lengths (without the G-T variants or IDCS/DCSS).One used with Atlas D, a stretched one on Atlas II & III , and the longest one now an Atlas V. But there are four variants provided with BDB, labeled as Inon-D 1440, Inon-D3 1800, Inon-D5 2160 and the new Inon-V X464 tank. Wich tank is now supposed to go with wich vehicle? Peace TK