TK-313

Members
  • Content Count

    185
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

296 Excellent

1 Follower

About TK-313

  • Rank
    Spacecraft Engineer

Contact Methods

  • Skype tk-313

Recent Profile Visitors

2,135 profile views
  1. Third this, option 1. Also, will the cylindric compartment be a lab or just a hab (with or without experiments)?
  2. Agreed... White just doest't feel right. I'd rather vote for something darker, maybe darker than the original nozzles.
  3. No love for the MOEs? Well, you know, the rectangular ones with twin top nozzles?
  4. Well, there's always the option of leaving the RCS blocks to run on monoprop and the MOE ones to use LF/O. Plus, it will add some difference between them other than cosmetic. Plus, if we were to follow that road to the end, the service modules would change a bit: T-75K would carry (and use) both LF/O and monoprop instead of monoprop only, while T-85K would only have LF/O for both its engine and RCS.
  5. A moment of thought after reading the Wiki article about the Soyuz in Russian. Older ships: Newer ships: TL/DR: the new Soyuz service module had the same thrust and higher ISP and the new RCS system ran, in kerbal terms, on LF/O instead of monoprop. Not sure if an appropriate config change would be really appropriate, but, IMO, that's at least something to think about for a moment.
  6. Hello @AlphaMensae, I'm sorry to ask since this appears so far off the current topic, but are there any plans to add the twin service towers to the Soyuz launch pad?
  7. Here's a little something in the form of subassemblies that I made to make my life easier and my launches better looking. Glory to @AlphaMensae! R7 on launch clamp Soyuz on launch clamp Soyuz on launch pad Proton on launch pad Zenith on launch pad If you find it tedious to build your R7 out of little pieces, here is a ready-baked one on an early career launch stand. Press 0 to retract the fuel arm. What was said about the R7 on the left remains true for the Soyuz rocket. Here is a ready-baked one on an early career launch stand. Press 0 to retract the crew access tower, 9 and 8 to retract the fuel arms. Same as previous, but now on a fancy launch pad (which also takes a ton of time to build). Press 0 to retract the service towers, 9 and 8 to retract the fuel arms. If you ever get bored of building your Proton rocket out of those big pieces, here is a ready-baked one on a fancy launch pad (which also takes a ton of time to build). This is pure fiction, since real Protons are serviced from mobile towers, but this will surely come in handy if you decide to launch something crewed on top of yours! Crew access arm optimised for the Tantares TKS. If you find it tedious to build your Zenith rocket out of those four big pieces (highly unlikely) or want something nice to stand by its side for launch (waaay more likely), here is a ready-baked one on a fancy launch pad. This is pure fiction, since real Zeniths are serviced from mobile towers, but this will surely come in handy if you decide to launch something crewed on top of yours!
  8. I hope the "E for Exact" meshes will still be around? Because honestly, they're the best.
  9. Nice! By the way, that black thing in the middle is the unmanned control unit, as I understand... But is it a disc or a ring like the one on S-IVB?
  10. Yeah, it worked when I updated Kopernicus. Sorry for the false alarm!
  11. TK-313

    [1.5.1+] NASA CountDown Clock Updated

    Hi @linuxgurugamer, I'm putting together a Soyuz sound pack for this mod. On the records I have there is ~110 or so seconds of post-launch countdown (like: "10 [seconds in flight], flight progressing normally... 20, vessel stabilized... 30, pitch, yaw, roll nominal..."). I'm actually torn on whether to include it in the liftoff event or not - especially since the actual "Liftoff contact, check!" is almost drowned out by the sound of the rocket lifting off on each record I've found so far. What do you think? For now it sounds like this: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gtoHzGrHgR94ocxpoUWj3wo0aMBOr-HE/view?usp=sharing
  12. @ZobrAA, I have a problem - when I install this mod, the system remains stock. I'm running 1.5.1. Is the proberm here or in Kopernicus?
  13. The colours are, in fact, perfectly fine for the Mir modules. I'm uncertain about the "plain structural" approach - for those playing with realism life support mods that base a ship's habitability on the number and size of crew cans this will be off-putting to say the least. *Sigh* I wish there was a way to make "crew can" and "structural" two variants of one part. Other than that, I'd vote for the two parts being habitation pods. Yes, the one without windows as well. After all, while you can't manually fly and redock a Mir module* as they turned out in the end, you can still live in one. Also, do I get it right that the new Mir modules will now be flown with those tiny flat control units? *By design, however, the modules were initially planned to be semi-autonomous! That was for various sensitive experiments likely to be affected by the vibration of the big big station all around. Ah, KOSMOS. The mod that inspired me to play KSP in the first place. And to think I haven't yet built a Tantares version of this...
  14. Correct me if I'm wrong, bot do you mean the large-diameter command section? My reactions were quite varied... №1: Ouch. That was such a nice one-piece part to have. №2: Yay! We will get to use the big command section for bigger ships without having to clip it inwards! №3: This one really wants the new command section to have an IVA. Probably a spacious one that suggests the ship continues behind the pod's base. Or... Is it possible?
  15. Well, the Igla antenna on Salyut and TKS did share a straight-ish backwards-folding arm...