.png.1aa391ea503f9b086284b3629ec7f543.png)
Invaderchaos
-
Posts
383 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Invaderchaos
-
-
17 hours ago, zakkpaz said:
I'm having difficulty getting Clementine to the Mun, I'm pretty sure it's supposed to launch directly to intercept but I have no idea how to do that.
is there a good guide for it?
Hmm that’s strange. I did test Clementine for both 2.5x KSRSS and JNSQ, and it had more than enough delta V to reach the moon. This is because after it’s Lunar mission, Clementine was to fly by the near Earth asteroid Geographos with its remaining fuel. This never occurred though because of a computer error. Regardless, it should have enough fuel.
Which rocket are you launching on? Clementine was launched on a Titan 23G. This is pretty much a Titan 2 with a Star 37 solid rocket motor on top. The Titan 2 and the Star 37 will be enough to bring it to trans-Lunar injection. Clementine’s large supply of liquid fuel and its highly efficient engine would be enough to bring it to a stable Lunar orbit. Let me know if you are launching Clementine in this way. If not, I’ll double check my numbers.
-
14 hours ago, davidy12 said:
Kerballo Spyglass
Getting the hang of Camera tools. Haven't seen many depictions of this bad boy. IIRC, it was supposed to be stowed in the SIM Bay, BUT I did it in the SLA since the SIM bay was too small. NOT that the SIM is a problem. Would rather not have you guys redo Apollo again for just a minor Alt. Hist scenario.
Was waiting for someone to make this! Beautiful.
-
The KLAW! is now on github.
-
I seem to have sorted out the scale problems with Mariner and now I have caught back up to the point just before I started unwrapping/texturing. Additionally, I took the time to make an actually deployable sun shade for Mariner 5.
-
20 hours ago, zakkpaz said:
Nope still happening, any chance it's a compatibility issue?
Yea, Zorg was right. It was an export issue with Unity. You used to be able to export the part with the animation deployed in Unity so it would show deployed in the VAB part menu. However in 1.12 this would also make it deployed when you get it from the VAB. I uploaded the fix along with a fix for the same issue for my other parts.
-
On 9/26/2021 at 12:52 PM, zakkpaz said:
the Transit 5 solar panels are bugged for me, they always load looking like they are deployed, they'll reset back to the stowed position and run the normal animation when i deploy them and then i can fold them back down.
has anyone else had this issue?
Ok it should be fixed now. Let me know if this issue persists.
-
22 hours ago, zakkpaz said:
the Transit 5 solar panels are bugged for me, they always load looking like they are deployed, they'll reset back to the stowed position and run the normal animation when i deploy them and then i can fold them back down.
has anyone else had this issue?
Hmm I’ve launched Transit a few times and never had any problems like that. However, this problem is definitely one I am aware of, it is caused by not turning off a specific setting in Unity when exporting, which is an easy fix. I’ll double check to make sure this is not the case. In the mean time, what version are you using?
If they are bugged though, thanks for letting me know lol. While many things I put in Dev branches have bugs that because they are simply not finished, sometimes there are issues I might have overlooked in a part I believe is finished. If there are any other issues with the Transit/SOLRAD/POPPY parts, let me know as those parts are supposed to be 100% finished.
-
Alrighty, couple updates. Mariner seemed like it was close to being finished, but I will have to redo some stuff. Here's some extra technical details why I will need to redo many of these parts if any of you are interested:
SpoilerAt first glance, Mariner 3-5 seems like it uses the same octagonal bus as Mariner 6-10. However, while I was doing initial research, I learned that Mariner 6 and beyond received a significantly upgraded bus. However, according to some sources (like NSSDC and a few others), Mariner 6-10's bus was about 10% larger than Mariner 3-5's (which made sense to me, considering Mariner 3-5 launched on an Atlas-Agena, and Mariner 6-10 launched on Atlas-Centaur). I assumed this was one of the upgrades for the later Mariner's. It was also hard to compare Mariner 6-10 to Mariner 3-5 through pictures, as it 6-7 used a different engine cap, a different HGA, a different LGA, different solar panels, and a different science payload, while Mariner 8-10 bared even less resemblance to the earlier Mariner's. I assumed that looks deceive, and the Mariners must have a bus size difference. However as I later found out, I turned out to be incorrect about the bus sizes.
At the time I had started modeling Mariner, I was still fairly new to KSP modding (I modeled the bus and the engine in December of 2020) before moving on to other parts I wanted to make. At the time I was less familiar with using NTRS (which for me has been the best source of references for part-making) and I relied on most images, orthographics/diagrams, and any physical dimensions I could get my hands on. This will be important later. The dimension that was flawed was the 'diameter' of the bus. As it turns out, measuring the diameter/width of an octagon can be annoying, as the distance between two vertices of an octagon is larger than the distance between two edges. I found several references on google listing Mariner 3-5's diameter as 127 cm "across the diagonal" (another word for point to point) and its height as 45.7 cm. Many others referenced Mariner 6-10's diameter as 137-138ish cm across the diagonal, with the same height as Mariner 3-5. If you squint enough at the Mariner's, in my mind I could see how Mariner 3-5 would look skinnier/taller and Mariner 6-10 was thinner and shorter (as I thought Mariner 3-5 was less wide yet the same height as Mariner 6-10). It didn't help that there are fewer high-res images of Mariner 3-5, since there are no museum models of those Mariner's while there are of Mariner 6-7, and Mariner 10.
What I did not realize was that for an octagon that is 137 cm (Mariner 6-10) across the diagonal, the edge to edge distance is 127 cm, which is what I thought was Mariner 3-5's distance across the diagonal. Recently I realized there was a discrepancy with the size of my thermal louvers, and I realized that something wasn't adding up. I checked the documents I had collected from NTRS when I got back to working on Mariner, and I realized that several of them list Mariner 3-5's length across the diagonal to be about 138 cm, not 127 cm. These documents are final reports, design reviews, etc. so a dimensional value that consistently appears across many of these design documents is pretty much irrefutable. Frantically checking to see where I got my initial info from, it turned out NSSDC must have made the mistake of mistaking Mariner 3-5's edge to edge length as its length across the diagonal, thus giving a smaller, incorrect value for its size. The other instances of this incorrect value (notably Wikipedia) seemed to use NSSDC as a source as well. If they had also given Mariner 6-10's size the wrong value, I would've realized that 127 cm is an incorrect dimension, but instead, the Mariner 6-10 sizes were accurate. While I modelled many parts in terms of separate dimensional values I found (like the antennas, the engine, and the solar panels) making their size accurate, many parts were based on the size of the bus, like most of the experiments, the decoupler, the antenna support structure, and all bus endcap variants between Mariner 3-5, and will need to be resized along with the bus.
To make matters worse, the bus wasn't simply underscaled because the height was accurate. This means that I couldn't just scale up the model, I would have to manually edit it, requiring me to re-unwrap and retexture the bus. While a small part of me wanted to just say screw it and leave it underscaled (although I am somewhat of a perfectionist so I probably wouldn't do that), correctly scaling Mariner 3-5 now would save me the trouble of working with Mariner 6-9 later, as either Mariner 6 would be underscaled (which would impact the size of the experiments and more) and not line up with the size of Mariner 10, or I would have to model a whole new accurately sized bus, taking up a lot of extra texture space. While this doesn't seem too bad, all of Mariner's parts need to be very specifically made so they all fit together. The solar panels are a very tight fit in the Lunar Orbiter Agena fairing, Mariner 3-4 have dampeners that connect to solar panels (which were modelled around the size of the bus), Mariner 5 has a solar shade that needs to fit under the decoupler, Mariner 5's HGA and Mariner 3-5's LGA have struts that connect to specific points on the bus, etc. Additionally, I have already unwrapped many parts, and I try my best to pack my texture maps as tight as possible, so increasing the size of the parts would likely mean I would need to rethink my UV's. On the bright side, it would be nice to have the experiments be a little larger, as they were already quite small.
To summarize, Mariner 3-5's bus' diameter will need to be larger, and many other parts need to be upscaled by this same factor. I probably was on track to get the Mariner parts in game in a week or two(depending on how much spare time I have to work on modding), but it might take longer now.
In better news, a blast from the past: the 0.625 m Klaw that Cobalt made a while ago is being brought in game! I am having some troubles getting it to cooperate but it will be on github soon.
A little Pioneer 6 based probe I made with it:
-
Some progress on mariner 3-5:
-
New all-white DCSS texture inspired by ICPS now on github. Also made a cool probe kitbash, (almost) completely out of BDB parts.
-
35 minutes ago, Entr8899 said:
Would it make more sense to have the scansat mode for Clementine's camera HiRes visual instead of LoRes as it is currently?
HiRes might be for SAR stuff. I can't remember for sure. Clementine just has a LIDAR laser altimeter. It would be kinda weird for Clementine to be as powerful as Seasat or something. Additionally, Clementine's sensor is already a little overpowered (already has like 4 higher science value experiments in one single part), so I think it's fine if the altimeter is nerfed a little.
-
some quick things for Clementine: added a toggleable probe plaque, raised normals on radiator, cleaned up ISAS colliders and texture, and also redid the emit for the light on the ISAS battery.
-
Alright, another round of pioneer fixes have been made. All pioneer parts are now (or at least they should be) properly named w/ descriptions and w/ the right tech tree stuff. All that's left to do for pioneer is finish setting up all the experiments, do cost balancing, and multispectral imaging sci def. Also got around to fixing the Clementine engine and naming format, might add a toggleable probe name plaque to Clementine tomorrow. At this point Pioneer should be totally playable and stable, minus the science being set up.
Additionally, craft files for Pioneer 10/11, Pioneer SUAE (pioneer Uranus atmospheric probe), and Pioneer outer planets orbiter have been uploaded. These might be helpful as with all the experiments, pioneer is a lot of parts and can be hard to put together.
-
Ayyy that bottom tweet tho (it might be cut off if you don't click to see the full thing, but Scott Manley replied to a picture of the new BDB Pioneer) -
more cool stuff to come... -
34 minutes ago, pTrevTrevs said:
Is anyone currently working on new Saturn I parts or is Cobalt planning on doing that himself?
Considering that Cassini is in Coatl Aerospace (albeit in a very outdated state), I’d love to see Galileo first. I don’t know of any mods which have a proper set of parts for that.
Other than that, there’s a whole laundry list of probes I’d love to see eventually; Surveyor, Viking, Mariner 9, maybe even Magellan. Of course, I’m getting ahead of myself…
Galileo is also being made in the other project I am working on (not by me though). I have no plans for Cassini. Mariner 9 will eventually be in BDB along with Mariner 6-9. Not sure when this will all happen though.
-
7 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:
So your ambitious with probes lately. Do you have a general roadmap or plans for what’s next?
Well there are two probes I have left to do before I release my probe update (which at that point would contain ten-ish sets of parts for various probes which is outlined under the issue section on the BDB github). I have to finish Mariner 3-5 and RAE A/B(Explorer 38/49). I'm also doing Pegasus (the satellite) for the Apollo update. I am also working on another probe project separate from BDB; the first three probes in that project will be Voyager, Kepler Space Telescope, and AMSAT P3. As Voyager and Kepler will be relatively big projects, it is hard for me to say what will come after that. Perhaps a proper Seasat?
-
A (VERY ALPHA) version of Pioneer is on github. It is NOT DONE by ANY means. I literally haven't done any of the experiments, names, or descriptions yet. However it is (mostly) balanced and physically it is complete. -
19 minutes ago, Starhelperdude said:
I would appreciate more options for kick motors
Yea, I am growing more warm to the idea of including Star 17A. Not sure how much space the textures will take for this (I just might be able to fit it all in a 256x512 texture), but if I can’t fit Star 17A in the texture, then I’m not going to lose any sleep. It shouldn’t take too much space though as it uses the same nozzle mesh and texture as Star 17.
8 minutes ago, TaintedLion said:It did, but RAE was literally just some very long wires, I don't think it had anything to really focus the radio waves. Perhaps it was more for just detection rather than forming radio images?
I don’t believe something has to be an imager to be a telescope. Again, the definition of a telescope can be as abstract as measuring a magnitude of light (or in some cases, even particles) and determining the direction it originated. RAE certainly fit this definition. After all, (while Explorer 1 does technically satisfy the definition of a telescope), Explorer 11 is often referred to as the first space telescope, which could measure gamma rays and sense the direction they originated, was not an imaging telescope. Many non-imaging instruments, such as charged particle and cosmic ray experiments, are often officially referred to as charged particle telescopes and cosmic ray telescopes by NASA.
-
13 minutes ago, TaintedLion said:
There was one that was deployed from Salyut 6 too, so RAEs + Salyut + HALCA + Spektr-R means five radio astronomy launched into space. I guess it's harder to launch radio telescopes considering the dishes have to be very big to detect the relatively weak radio sources, unless you're doing some interferometry jazz. Strangely enough though the Wikipedia page for radio telescopes don't consider the RAEs as radio telescopes, maybe they weren't true "telescopes".
Ah, hadn’t considered Salyut 6. While there is certainly a utility to launching radio astronomy satellites, (certain wavelengths don’t reach the ground iirc) most radio waves can penetrate Earth’s atmosphere (unlike xray’s or gamma rays, which require space telescopes), meaning for the most part ground based radio astronomy is usually more advantageous than space-based astronomy which explains the small amount of radio astronomy satellites. In terms of whether not it’s a telescope, the definition of telescope can be extremely loose (as abstract as some sort of detector that can measure a certain amount of light and determine what direction that light came from). Some even have called explorer 1 the first space telescope (I guess it would be a cosmic ray telescope) because it was able to accomplish this. By this definition Wikipedia should have RAE A/B listed as a telescope; for niche space related information, Wikipedia is usually lacking. Additionally, while some radio telescopes use an actual mirror to my knowledge (like a “conventional” telescope), I believe Spektr-R just uses a dish, making it as much of a telescope as RAE. But I could be wrong
-
1 minute ago, Beccab said:
For the fixed panel, would it be feasible to add also a B9 variant that isn't angled and/or one angled of 90 degrees?
Definitely, good idea, I hadn’t thought of that. I could do that
-
7 minutes ago, Beccab said:
At least for me there would! The more kick stages the better, they are small enough it's hard to find a perfect fitting if you are kitbashing parts
I'm very curious about those solar panels and the b9 options they could have, it could be as useful as the Ranger solar panels with enough variantsStar-17A might be good to do? It appears to be at a midpoint between Star-27 and smaller motors. I guess it’ll depend on how much texture space I’ll have leftover. The panels appear to be promising for variants and kit bashing, but they are sadly just fixed, double-sided solar panels angled at 26.5 degrees, luckily, I am making a version of the panel that’s one-sided and tracking. But it couldn’t be a B9 variant (due to how modules work), but a separate part instead. They are super cool panels though, I think they will be fun to use in custom sats.
-
15 hours ago, pTrevTrevs said:
Flew another KH-4 on Thor-Agena D last night, and the rocket violently flipped before the navball marker was even outside the circle of the prograde vector. My biggest suspect right now is BDB in Colors, considering how it messed up the old Apollo chutes, so I'll remove it and try launching again.
Not really sure if that would make sense? It messed up the old Apollo chute because of the wonderful parachute module not really cooperating with the switch module BDBNIC put on the chute. As there is no parachute on a KH-4 Thor that BDBNIC applies a switch to, BDBNIC is likely not the culprit. Still, let me know if this actually does anything.
In other news, I was away from my primary computer most of yesterday so I was unable to work on finishing Pioneer. Instead, I got started on a super small set of parts (Explorer 38/49, along with its associated Star 17). Explorer 49, Radio Astronomy Satellite B is probably the most underrated US lunar orbiter of all time. It was also technically one of the largest spacecrafts ever launched, as it had 4 radio booms that were each over 240m long. RAE-A and RAE-B were also 2 out of 4 of the only radio astronomy satellites ever launched (to my knowledge). Also a super BDB looking probe. Also, would there be any interest in a Star-17A(extended version of Star-17). It was used as a kick motor for a few sats. Wouldn’t be too much trouble to make as I’m already doing Star 17, but if there’s not much interest in it, I don’t know if I’d bother.
-
12 hours ago, pTrevTrevs said:
Is the addition of the notorious Pioneer Plaque going to cause this mod’s ESRB rating to go up to “M for Mature”?
The pioneer plaque will be a flag transform, so pretty much anything can go there. In my pics I found a flag online and edited it to match the BDB gold color. We will dodge ESRB for another day
[1.12.5] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.13.0 "Забытый" 13/Aug/2023)
in KSP1 Mod Releases
Posted
At least for the moment, our to-do list is pretty much filled with revamps (mostly Apollo), probes, and a couple new Apollo parts. I’ve been doing a lot of probes lately and I have a lot more I plan to do for BDB and beyond. As for beyond probes, I am planning on revamping the newer Centaur variants that are in BDB.
As for rockets families not in BDB, there’s nothing currently planned that at least I’m aware for BDB. That being said, eventually I want to make the fairing base and decoupler for MDD Barbarian. I also briefly considered the idea of potentially doing Vulcan, but my current to-do list is already big enough, plus I don’t think it’d be a good idea to do until Vulcan launches, and/or there are more pictures of flight-ready hardware for Vulcan itself as well as new Centaur for Vulcan. But no promises on that in the slightest.