[1.12.5] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.13.0 "Забытый" 13/Aug/2023)

[akron]

9 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

Unfortunately, we cannot balance based around the limitations of a mod that players may or may not have installed.

As I have seen with many other mods, I am sure someone will write up some configs for RT if you do not include them by default. Same with RF, and probably RO and others. I'd honestly wait until after 1.1 to take a hard look at, and balance, antenna ranges/stats.

[CobaltWolf]

1 hour ago, akron said:

As I have seen with many other mods, I am sure someone will write up some configs for RT if you do not include them by default. Same with RF, and probably RO and others. I'd honestly wait until after 1.1 to take a hard look at, and balance, antenna ranges/stats.

RemoteTech, RealPlume and Tweakscale are the only mods we currently support out of the box.

[Araym]

Did another pass on test:

TITAN ENGINES and REDSTONE ENGINE tweaked:

Definitely, both "Redstone" and "Titan" engines are still in a pre-tank tweaks values.

Download my "test engines" HERE (Dropbox) (plus the already publicized Thor's engines tweaked)

I did my math, my researches, some comparison with payloads and weights. No craft files, this time, because I used other mod parts as fitting in the Gemini role, so it's difficoult to share them (mostly tweakscaled part)... but you could build your own.

Titan ones were very easy to tweak: I started by the (real life) notion that a Titan II GLV launched a Gemini with a TWR = 1.2. Build/tweaked engines and rockets using that central parameter as comparison with perfomances, and some room for longer Titan rocket like the Titan 3(34) - the first series with first stage streched - that flew with an Agena D upper stage and some payload, but without SRBs...

For example: A Titan IV, built with relative tanks, my tweaked engines, and 2x Prometheus-IV-3 "Selene" SRBs (the long, 3 segments, white SRBs) orbited more than 25 tons in 120x120 orbit, IF i started the liquid engine in the first stage when the SRBs were almost depleted (like the real Titan IV did) IN FLIGHT (not at the launch pad). Pretty good payload, if we consider that the Titan series launched some of the heavier payload, or those with the longer ranges (Voyager 1 and 2 tell something to you??? Cassini??? :P)

 

 

---------- EDIT ----------

For the Redstone I removed, we should open a different discussion:

the provided tank is "stock-alike" if considered a "tank full of rocket fuel". The proposed engine I added in the above .zip reflect just a lowered thrust to be in line with stock-alike engines. The actual engine is not so much overpowered compared to stock ones: sure things it has a lot of thrust, for its "single long tank", but nobody moves us to use tweakable slider in the VAB to reduce it slightly. My tweaks for it were also not optimized (bad file added) so.. well... I removed the Redstone engine test i added.

BUT if CobaltWolf is looking to make a replica of the redstone-based rocket, you should notice (clearly visible here: http://andegraf.com/rockets/us_early.htm) that the upper part of a Redstone-Mercury (I assume that we have a tank rappresenting it, having the chessboard-alike pattern on the top) was EMPTY by fuel, casing only the flight instruments...

... actual reproduction of a Redstone+Mercury, if paired with a similar lenght Thor-built rocket, weight almost the same in game, when (with a good portion of the actual Redstone left empty) should be a little more 1/2 weight than a Thor-based rocket of the same lenght.

BUT that is not a real "bug": just a different consideration (we can left the actual tank values, considering it just a "longer stock-alike 1.25m tank") of what we wanna achieve in the pack.

Rockets that looks alike real life, and having performance stock-alike, capable to achieve what they did in real life (no Titan's first stages directly orbiting the Mun, for example or Redstone making a Mercury orbital ) or exactly replicas, both in dimensions and weight: for the latter, I just could ask to try RSS mod... I'm good to balance stock-ish-look alike parts to performance near real life in stock game behaviour  so I do not bother myself more than needed.

My tweaks are focused to bring parts in a "stock-performance range", having them to build "real life-look-alike" rockets. Any further problem does not bother me

I guess that, after this, last, zip, actually I overlooked all the major issues I found in the pack.

Edited January 12, 2016 by Araym

[Jso]

@Araym For balancing we'll want engine masses adjusted to give a TWR in the 15-25 area. Especially on upper stages it has an effect. These are the numbers I came up with earlier for a Titan II with a 2.078 ton stand in for Gemini.

bluedog_LR91_mod2: Mass 0.7, Thrust 120, Vac Isp 320, SL Isp 160

bluedog_LR87_mod2: Mass 2.75, Thrust 675, Vac Isp 300, SL Isp 260

 

@CobaltWolf His observation about Redstone looks like a good justification to nerf the PGM-1800 down to a PGM-1200. There's a discussion about how to build the canon "Thor" fuselage. An SSR-760 on top of an SSR-900 looks correct, but it's too short:

Should it be SSR-760 on top of 2 SSR-900's, or do parts need to be lengthened? Odin is very displeased and demands answers :-)

[CobaltWolf]

The Thor parts were made before I became more exacting with how matched parts to their real life proportions. For now, I believe adding the short straight tank to the long adapter + medium length tank will make it a bit more correct. They're due to be looked at, probably once Delta becomes a priority.

@Jso @Araym Thank you again for the continued discussion on balance. I think bumping the redstone tank down makes sense, since Mercury/Redstone felt pretty good beforehand. Perhaps split the difference so it's closer to stock than not.

I believe we did the math and Titan IV was meant to get 22 tons to orbit in KSP scale. If I remember correctly. That would include the upper stage and payload.

Speaking of upper stages, I want to do IUS at some point but it's not a priority for the Titan update. I have a solution for making solid upper stages viable, so I'm excited to see if I'm right.

[CobaltWolf]

Dev release. More balance changes, in particular to the Titan engines. I forgot to fold the new values for the Thor stuff in but there are alternate configs from Araym that got left in, so use those if you're testing. Titan parts got their textures tweaked. Not much, just got a bit done this afternoon while waiting for renders.

There's also an experimental solid upper stage (uses the flea model) from my experimenting. The end goal for the 'feel' for solid upper stages is to have them be little self contained stages. Throw them under the payload to get X amount of Delta V. They can get shut down, and throttled slightly. Trying to make them usable for normal KSP play. Venom is working on some models for various upper solids, and some will probably be included in the release after Titan.

EDIT: Also, @Araym the last time any of the Mercury files were edited was the 29th.

Edited January 12, 2016 by CobaltWolf

[Jso]

I'm liking leaving the Redstone tank max capacity where it is, and filling it to less than 100%. 630/770 in the tank by default. Then drop the engine thrust to 145, Isp to 265/235. Getting about 150 km altitude that way.

You can still fill the tank all the way, swap Mercury for an Agena A, put a few small SRBs on the side to get it off the pad, and have a serviceable Thrust Assisted Agena-Redstone ^_(TM). 

Edited January 13, 2016 by Jso

[CobaltWolf]

32 minutes ago, Jso said:

I'm liking leaving the Redstone tank max capacity where it is, and filling it to less than 100%. 630/770 in the tank by default. Then drop the engine thrust to 145, Isp to 265/235. Getting about 150 km altitude that way.

You can still fill the tank all the way, swap Mercury for an Agena A, put a few small SRBs on the side to get it off the pad, and have a serviceable Thrust Assisted Agena-Redstone ^_(TM). 

(Thanks for posting, I thought this was going to be my third post in a row)

Oh! You're right. I was hesitant to have it be filled less than 100% because then the player would have to fiddle with it to maintain the proper ratio. But if we have it not be filled 100% by default, and rather, say, 80% (off the top of my head) then the player can just pull the sliders to 100%. TA-Redstone/Agena sounds cool, I'll have to build that next time I play. Agena (with a payload) might be reaching a bit high for Redstone - Ablestar might be more appropriate.

Worked a bit this afternoon while I was waiting for renders. I've been playing with the textures for Redstone, Thor, and Vanguard. Mostly passing on the new texturing techniques I used for the Titan stuff. They'll be included in the next release. I also have fairing bases for the Titan I (1.5m) and Titan II (1.875m, with a 1.7m fairing). The stock fairing module is AWFUL, and butchers the textures, kicked my dog, and gave me cancer. If anyone has any tips to make it work better I'd appreciate it.

 

Edited January 13, 2016 by CobaltWolf

[Jso]

I'm ready to go back to procedural fairings (are they working with FAR these days?). I'm getting tired of looking at the sharp edges on the stock fairings.

[fs10inator]

On 1/10/2016 at 7:14 AM, VenomousRequiem said:

There's just something so majestic about launching with HullCam...

True.




 

1 hour ago, CobaltWolf said:

The stock fairing module is AWFUL, and butchers the textures, kicked my dog, and gave me cancer. If anyone has any tips to make it work better I'd appreciate it.

I agree. I don't really know any other viable tip than to just stick with procedural fairings
All joking aside, I, too, would appreciate tips to improve the stock fairing system other than just a clamshell mod.
Also, I just learned that the Titan II(23)G has a tri-sector fairing... 
brb fixing my Titan 23G

[Mecripp]

2 hours ago, Jso said:

I'm ready to go back to procedural fairings (are they working with FAR these days?). I'm getting tired of looking at the sharp edges on the stock fairings.

If you want to use procedural fairings and have it installed unzip PF_Bluedog_DB and move the folder Bluedog_DB to you ksp/gamedata folder and have fun ( REMOVED Sorry my bad )

Edited January 14, 2016 by Mecripp2

[CobaltWolf]

31 minutes ago, MeCripp said:

If you want to use procedural fairings and have it installed unzip PF_Bluedog_DB and move the folder Bluedog_DB to you ksp/gamedata folder and have fun https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/72893034/Test%20Parts/PF_Bluedog_DB.zip

I'll have to make sure you get the two new ones to make them compatible. What were you thinking for distribution - would you want to fold them into PF for Everything?

Stream tomorrow (Thursday the 14th) at 6PM EST, possibly starting slightly earlier. Work will be on the Transtage, cleaning up some textures and working on probe stuff.

On another note, I need someone(s) to help write sciencedefs for the upcoming science parts. Cameras, various things ending in '-meter'. I am awful at writing flavortext and I don't really understand how most of this stuff works. Preferably someone who is scientifically literate, or at least could gain a working understanding of the instruments they'd be writing about.

[Mecripp]

48 minutes ago, MeCripp said:

12 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

I'll have to make sure you get the two new ones to make them compatible. What were you thinking for distribution - would you want to fold them into PF for Everything?

Stream tomorrow (Thursday the 14th) at 6PM EST, possibly starting slightly earlier. Work will be on the Transtage, cleaning up some textures and working on probe stuff.

On another note, I need someone(s) to help write sciencedefs for the upcoming science parts. Cameras, various things ending in '-meter'. I am awful at writing flavortext and I don't really understand how most of this stuff works. Preferably someone who is scientifically literate, or at least could gain a working understanding of the instruments they'd be writing about.

If you want to use procedural fairings and have it installed unzip PF_Bluedog_DB and move the folder Bluedog_DB to you ksp/gamedata folder and have fun https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/72893034/Test%20Parts/PF_Bluedog_DB.zip

Removed my bad

[CobaltWolf]

6 minutes ago, MeCripp said:

Removed my bad

Oh no no no no that wasn't what I was saying. I was asking what the best way to release the Bluedog Procedural Fairings parts would be. The way I see it, there are 3 options:

• Include the Bluedog Procedural Fairings in the normal BDB download, and use Module Manager to automatically switch them.
• Release the Bluedog Procedural Fairings as a separate download.
• Include them in the Procedural Fairings for Everything download.

I was asking what you thought was best. Personally, I've been enjoying having both the stock and PF versions available because sometimes the stock fairing is handy.

[Araym]

6 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

Oh no no no no that wasn't what I was saying. I was asking what the best way to release the Bluedog Procedural Fairings parts would be. The way I see it, there are 3 options:

• Include the Bluedog Procedural Fairings in the normal BDB download, and use Module Manager to automatically switch them.
• Release the Bluedog Procedural Fairings as a separate download.
• Include them in the Procedural Fairings for Everything download.

I was asking what you thought was best. Personally, I've been enjoying having both the stock and PF versions available because sometimes the stock fairing is handy.

My thoughts:

If you prepare Procedural Fairing parts to this mod, release them in this mod main download.
Maybe in a separate folder not directly needed for a standard, stock, playstyle install, but then easy to be found and installed for any using PF (I already enjoying your prev PF parts in my games :P)

[Mecripp]

2 hours ago, MeCripp said:

If you want to use procedural fairings and have it installed unzip PF_Bluedog_DB and move the folder Bluedog_DB to you ksp/gamedata folder and have fun https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/72893034/Test%20Parts/PF_Bluedog_DB.zip

MM would be the best but that was kicked my backside not sure what, I was doing wrong but couldn't get all the changes to take other then that would be just to add them, I could make it  where they had both, I pretty sure that would cut down on the extra parts.

 

EDIT- Well test for having both on one part didn't go good it works but the stock fairings turned out bad.

EDIT- Add you would still have to add the textures for PF and have them in a set place to work.

Edited January 14, 2016 by Mecripp2

[VenomousRequiem]

SURPRISE!

Come watch Cobalt work for the next few hours over on Twitch.

 

There will probably also be a stream tomorrow, but this one is happening right here right now.

[Jso]

The PF bases appear to be included in the download. They just need some MM magic to make them not appear when PF is not installed.

[Araym]

On 12/1/2016 at 10:41 AM, Jso said:

@Araym For balancing we'll want engine masses adjusted to give a TWR in the 15-25 area. Especially on upper stages it has an effect. These are the numbers I came up with earlier for a Titan II with a 2.078 ton stand in for Gemini.

bluedog_LR91_mod2: Mass 0.7, Thrust 120, Vac Isp 320, SL Isp 160

bluedog_LR87_mod2: Mass 2.75, Thrust 675, Vac Isp 300, SL Isp 260

 

Yeah... masses for engines is undoubtly a point to be looked at:

Looking at my tweaks (dunno what CobaltWolf is going to implement as official, but sometime I feel to modify mod on my use, and probably I'll going to make a ModuleManager patch to myself, using my datas: sadly, not a mod fault, but only my urges to not have "uberperformances", I generally heavily nerf modded engines) I forgot indeed to "balance" their weights. I'll take a look... but surelly I feel that a 0.7 tons upper (like you pointed) is "too light". for a range of 120 thrust as you propose (and given that is a 1.875m form engine) should be in the range of  1tons/1.2 tons... probably the latter 1.2/1.3 with mine - that are a bit highr in thrust. (CobaltWolf parameter at 2 tons are a bit too much... under 1 tons are too light for a stock-ish weigth/performance ratio).
Just probably the smalle 1.5m Titan I upper stage engine... but as designed by CobaltWolf, with the added verniers, some thought about weight performances (in my thrust/isp values) compared to stock, should still be in the 1 ton region

If we do them too light, they will screw, overall, what is expected by "A Titan": my "Titan II GLV" equivalent, with a Gemini-ish capsule+service module, does NOT use any of the longer, silver "bluedog_Titan2_FuelTank2" at all, NEITHER for the first stage: using both a "bluedog_Titan2_FuelTank3" (the medium silver tank) as extension of the first stage, and as second stage itself. And I end ALWAYS with way too much fuel on the second stage, to be almost trans-munar (in my tweaks, with "original engines masses" by CobaltWolf) after a circularization (always ditched with more than 500ms dV... and original engines, with too much thrust are very similar...). Make them light and... brrrr... will they go to the mun in a "not SRB boosted" Titan II-Gemini configuration??????? NOPE NOPE! BALLAST and DEATH WEIGHT!!! ADD IT, not shave it from

AND I'll be cautios to add weight to first stage engines. This is a gameplay issue: long rockets with small diameter (and "titan-alike", from Titan II onward, in a 1.875 diameter, are very thin and long) and a heavy engine on the bottom tends to "flip", as center of mass switch with fuel depletion, needeing then some additional gimbal tweaks. Stock bigger engines has 0.004 tons for every 1 point of thrust ("Mainsail" and "SSME"... "Skipper" engine is someway worse, with a 0.0046 tons for every 1 point of thrust)

With MY tweaks of thrust/ISP, they could be (NOT TESTED IN GAME: just made figures on paper... and my ISP data are rounded number based on REAL Titan engines : 1 case on 1 millions they almost fit in the game :P)

• bluedog_LR87_mod1 (Titan I first stage engine -1.8 tons BD-original- ): Thrust 496, a.s.l. ISP 256, vacuum ISP 290, 2.3 tons (basically, the worst, initial, development, 0.0046370....etc etc tons x 1 point of thrust: skirt protections mass added, probably not optimized engineering costruction, value very similar to the first heavy duty stock 2.5m engine "Skipper")
• bluedog_LR87_mod2 (Titan II first stage engine -2 tons BD-original-): Thrust 565, a.s.l. ISP 258, vacuum ISP 296, weight 2.26 (perfect 0.004 tons x 1 point of thrust as "Mainsail" and "SSME")
• bluedog_LR87_mod4 (Titan IV first stage engine -2 tons BD-original- ): Thrust 630, a.s.l. ISP 256, vacuum ISP 302, weight 2.4 (better than stock 0.0038 tons x 1 point of thrust: basically some material/construction/engineering advance in performance, overall, with an added weight for the added skirt protections)

Stock upper stage engines:

• stock LV-909 "Terrier" : Thrust 60, a.s.l. ISP 85, vacuum ISP 345, 0.5 tons (first, early career, 1.25m stock "pure vacuum" upper stage in game: 0.008333... tons x 1 point of thrust... vacuum engines have not so good weight/power ratio as it seems: double weigth every point of thrust in vacuum)
• stock RE-L10 "Poodle" : Thrust 250, a.s.l. ISP 90, vacuum ISP 350, 1.75 tons (better 2.5m "pure vacuum" upper stage: 0.007 tons x 1point of thrust)
• stock KR-2L+ "Rhino" : Thrust 2000, a.s.l. ISP 255, vacuum ISP 340, 9.0 tons (0.0045 tons x 1 point of thrust: advanced 3.75m single engine bell engine... an "atmospherical" engine with still good vacuum performance that could considered also an "upper stage" engine for 3.75m rockets: it pays its added mass, like a "pure first stage" engine, because its dimension ARE to be accounted aside its still useable a.s.l. ISP in atmosphere... overall probably one of the best engines, considered its weigth/power proportion both atmo and vacuum)

My tweaked BD Titan's upper stage engines (my tweaks power levels, ISP made by REAL LIFE Titan's upper stages, masses parameter shown as "original" made by CobaltWolf and eventually my "tweaked mass" ideas):

• bluedog_LR91_mod1 (Titan I, 1.5m diameter engine: it's not a "pure vacuum" engine, with this "taken from real life" ISPs: it should have some better ratio than a 3.75m Rhino, that is still useable in atmosphere, but NOT going to be good like a 1.25m "Terrier" or a 2.5m "Poddle", made for vacuum):

Thrust 120, a.s.l. ISP 150, vacuum ISP 308 for main engine

Thrust 20, a.s.l. ISP 250, vacuum ISP 290 for verniers

1. 2 tons like BD-original (0.016666...etc tons x 1 point of thrust = NO GOOD, indeed) is it too heavy, with my power level
2. 1 tons could be good (0.00714...etc tons x 1 point of thrust: in a career-progression point of view, it has not a good upper stage overall, it is going to be an small early version of an engine that should be "bad" enough to be phased out for later versions...)

• bluedog_LR91_mod2 (Titan II, 1.875m upper engine):

Thrust 180, a.s.l. ISP 160, vacuum ISP 316 (it needs some "power more" than you planned for a simple "Titan II GLV-Gemini launcher": consider that it was used in early "Titan III", when was added the big 3rd stage "Transtage", basically, to a Titan II)

1. 2 tons like BD-original (0.011111... etc tons x 1 point of thrust) is TOO HEAVY too...
2. 1.25 tons (0.0072222...etc tons x 1 point of thrust: it is bigger than "mod1", it has NOT the weight penality of a stock-vacuum engine, it has a penalty to be used ONLY like an "high atmosphere" engine - too low a.s.l., respect real-ish life ISP overall, and DO NOT NEED too much of a buffer, to not be capable without boosters to send a Gemini-like vehicle on Mun orbit, but still has a weight penalty rather the "very advanced" 3.75m Rhino: overall, with THIS weight, it is already BETTER THAN A STOCK UPPER STAGE ENGINE. In a scale with "Terrier" and "Poddle", should weight around 1.5 tons)

• bluedog_LR91_mod4 (Titan IV, 1.875m upper engine - 2 tons BD-original)

Thrust 210, a.s.l. ISP 160, vacuum ISP 316, 1.3 tons (0.0061904...etc tons x 1 point of thrust: basically the very same weight/very same engine, only "pimped up" in performances engine... other consideration already done above)

 

... I do not wanna be the "prophet of KSP balance", but your engines are too heavy, considering the first stage one, and too light as upper one. Balancement should be done against stock performances of similar roles/power parts: overall, if you use my figures, globally you net similar weight advantages in full-rocket stack, but with weight placed strategically not only to keep each part balanced against other stock-engines, but also considerign that a too heavy bottom causes "rocket flipping" in KSP, during first stage late burning phase (in a stock game, we add fins....... in a Titan rocket i DO NOT wanna add fins )

Also, made my research, the Titan II GLV for Gemini launches has a TWR 1.2, and I balanced the engine "mod2", to reflect this, with already some buffer up, when I build a sort of Gemini replica with CobaltWolf's gemini-alike capsule plus some other mod parts to be consistent for the role expected by that craft (Actually I use the "Spica" parts from Tantares, for my gemini launches: I could make a "small Gemini" .cfg with a x0.75 Spica, to fit in BD Titans, using the full scale Spica only in the role of the "Big Gemini"... or directly tweakscale up to 2.5m the whole group of Titans... or both... )

 

On 12/1/2016 at 10:41 AM, Jso said:

@CobaltWolf His observation about Redstone looks like a good justification to nerf the PGM-1800 down to a PGM-1200. There's a discussion about how to build the canon "Thor" fuselage. An SSR-760 on top of an SSR-900 looks correct, but it's too short:

Should it be SSR-760 on top of 2 SSR-900's, or do parts need to be lengthened? Odin is very displeased and demands answers :-)

 

... you mailed me with your consideration here for the "lenght of parts"...

NOW WITH A PICTURE (sorry to be italian, and sometime not keeping immediately the meaning of an idea wrote in english ) I agree with you. Indeed, as an early Thor as the flared upper part starting half way to his lenght, and as it was long at least like a Redstone-Mercury, we are missing a 1\3 of the rocket.

BEFORE CobaltWolf kill himself in the thought to "rebuilt" new models, he could use the "scale" command in hte "model" module:

MODULE
	{
		model = <...whatever your model folder path is>
		scale = <scaling value 1>, <scaling value2>, <scaling value 3>
	}

to just lenght for the game the height of those two parts.

They could also NOT BE a tweaks on those exactly two parts: making a JUST a couple of new .cfg files, with a little different part name, x1.5 in height (it should be the second value: I always forgot in the x,y,z directions in KSP which it is the "height" ), using the very same model of the actual parts, to ADD the right tanks to build a basic "Thor". It could depend on original scale model the exactly number, and maybe should needed the addition of some tweak on "rescaleFactor" and/or the addition of the "scale" command outside the MODULE "model", like this:

MODULE
	{
		model = <...whatever your model folder path is>
		scale = <scaling value 1>, <scaling value2>, <scaling value 3>
	}
scale = <A value, generally should be "1", using the parameter in "model" module to give the dimension of the part>
rescaleFactor = <a tweaked value, but generally "1", as the dimension now are defined inside "model" module>

to avoid strange resize sometime KSP do if you reload a save/quicksave/revert from a launch, if the part is the "root part"...

Then, lenghtened those 2 parts, it's needed just to multiply x 1.5 the fuel values. (We were modifing just 1 dimension, the height, of the 3 about x1.5, so just that is needed to have a proportional part's fuel load)

I'll try some experiment later in the day

Edited January 14, 2016 by Araym

[Araym]

Simple test of the above tecnique:

from left to right: Atlas (base version) tanks, Redstone tanks, x1.5 Thor tanks stretched with above explained method, original Thor Tanks that we have already...

... what I did (as example) here:

... taking an arbitrary value of x1.5 to make an experiment, in the bluedog_thorLongAdapter I made these changes:

• First was needed to stretch the height:

MODEL
{
   model = Bluedog_DB/Parts/EarlyRockets/bluedog_thorLongAdapter
}
	rescaleFactor = 1

became

MODEL
{
   model = Bluedog_DB/Parts/EarlyRockets/bluedog_thorLongAdapter
   scale = 1, 1.5, 1
}
	scale = 1
	rescaleFactor = 1

... this make the model x1.5 in height...

• Then was the moment to fix the nodes

	node_stack_top = 0.0, 1.49, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0
	node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -1.49, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0

became

	node_stack_top = 0.0, 2.235, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0
	node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -2.235, 0.0, 0.0, -1.0, 0.0

... I select an arbitrary x1.5 height, so I had to multiply the vertical value of the nodes x1.5 too

• Finally, change the proper values for fuel

	RESOURCE
	{
		name = LiquidFuel
		amount = 342
		maxAmount = 342
	}
	RESOURCE
	{
		name = Oxidizer
		amount = 418
		maxAmount = 418
	}

became

	RESOURCE
	{
		name = LiquidFuel
		amount = 513
		maxAmount = 513
	}
	RESOURCE
	{
		name = Oxidizer
		amount = 627
		maxAmount = 627
	}

... as I changed just 1 dimension of the tank, I do not need to make particulary math: just x1.5 values will fit.
I DID NOT REALLY CHECKED IF DIAMETERS OF ABOVE TANKS ARE PERFECTLY FITTING "ORIGINAL" PARTS

THOSE EDITS ARE JUST LENGHTENED VERSION OF THE ORIGINAL PARTS: the above procedure is just an example to the procedure available in KSP to change dimension on parts by cfg editing, NOT CHANGING ANY, IN THIS CASE, THE DIAMETER.
(Those edits are making perfectly fine 1.5m diameter parts as ALL Thor parts we have)

NOW, the x1.5 scale is a bit too much, for me for both parts, but It was made as a simple example to show how it should be easy (without any need for CobaltWolf to design new models) adjust dimensions to put in better scale the above tanks.

I already added them in my savegames without any issue, as ADDITIONAL tanks (made new .cfg files and called differently both in part name and description in game )

Actually, probably, an Atlas stack built like that is a "bit short" (it could need an added bluedog_atlas1ShortTank to be long enough to be an "Atlas"),to make a Redstone tank and the "edited" Thor tank be in scale.
Also, the tapered upper Thor tank, in real life, is not starting exactly half way like the above example, so it could be needed a bit longer lower tank, and a little less stretched tapered upper one.

--- EDIT ---

Some additional consideration:

as I made some size comparison with various graphics showing the three rockets and a couple of fact could be pointed:

1. Taken the Redstone tank as a "Redstone-Mercury" (differently, it is too long), to be properly proportioned an Altas needs, aside those tank I used in the picture, definitely a bluedog_atlas1ShortTank to be right (and maybe a new "shorter tanks" half the height of the mentioned "short tank")
2. The right tank assembly for a "Thor balistic missile" is a bit shorter than a Redstone-Mercury (and the tapered upper part was slightly above the mid-height): it could be the lower x1.5 that I stretched + the "original" long adapter (that shown in the full right example, as it is in the BD mod). This is also the right choice for earlier Thor-Able/Thor-Ablestar/Thor-Agena (A and B)
3. Those couple of x1.5 stretched/edited Thor tanks are the right height for a Thor used as "first stage" of earlier "Delta rockets" and Thor-Agena D (Basically a Thor-Able/Ablestar a little streched before there were developed longer version that could be used also as a Thorad-Agena D and some latter Delta still cathegorized with "letter" definition before the built of a Delta-II)
4. Final version of Deltas, before the development of the Delta-K that built the "Delta-II" rocket, could be a bit stretched again without being longer than a Delta-II
5. Delta-II (the final product we should considered built by actual CobaltWolf parts) need the blue-ish XL tank and, probably by guessing made by eyes, the longer, original, white tank (the same shown in the picture in the full right). Using my x1.5 stretched/edited version is a bit too much longer
6. Our only limit is, in between them, having fantasy: nobody stop to add tanks and make longer, stranger, customized versions

Edited January 14, 2016 by Araym

[Jso]

@Araym Expect a 1.875m Titan II GLV to have excess dv when launched from stock Kerbin. Isp would have to be cut in half to avoid that. That the Thor did not have that problem is why I checked the scale. After the tank rebalance there was a complaint that Titan II was falling a little short on Kerbin 3x and lowering the second stage engine mass solved that (on paper anyway). 0.7 ton for a 120 kn engine is the same TWR as an LV-T30 so it falls within stockalike range. I haven't seen the mass yet for the "official" Gemini so it's all academic at this point.

Your rescale solution looks like a good one until Cobalt revisits Thor.

 

Edit: 20 thrust on verniers seems high to me. They shouldn't be adding 20% to the total thrust. 2-4 should suffice with Isp set to match the engine. I've seen at least one first stage engine with the vernier Isp at something like 300 vac / 80 SL. That just kills the thrust down low in the atmosphere.

Edited January 14, 2016 by Jso

[TimothyC]

@CobaltWolf I've done some digging, and the blocks on the side of the Titan Transtage are aerodynamic covers for the Stage's RCS system.

[VenomousRequiem]

2 minutes ago, TimothyC said:

@CobaltWolf I've done some digging, and the blocks on the side of the Titan Transtage are aerodynamic covers for the Stage's RCS system.

It's only single axis. It's ullage thrusters. 

[TimothyC]

17 minutes ago, VenomousRequiem said:

It's only single axis. It's ullage thrusters. 

That's not what I'm getting from the diagrams where they are attached to payloads. I'm seeing RCS quads under an aerodynamic cover for launch.

 

Edit: At least that is the case for the X-20 launch. Other versions show six thrusters  (two Pitch, two Yaw, and two Roll).

Edited January 14, 2016 by TimothyC

[VenomousRequiem]

19 minutes ago, TimothyC said:

That's not what I'm getting from the diagrams where they are attached to payloads. I'm seeing RCS quads under an aerodynamic cover for launch.

 

Edit: At least that is the case for the X-20 launch. Other versions show six thrusters  (two Pitch, two Yaw, and two Roll).

Really? Ive only seen a picture of it with single axis.