Jump to content

[1.12.3] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.10.4 "Луна" 19/July/2022)


CobaltWolf
 Share

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, GoldForest said:

bigapollo.jpg

 neat build.   Too bad Big Apollo is a McDonald / MD "this is why Big G" is better proposal eh?

 

Note the McDonald style (Gemini station) Fork style docking port.  That was only ever drawn on McDonald stations

 

Edited by Pappystein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, OrbitalManeuvers said:

pardon my buttinski - I believe you will have better luck if you: snap on, symmetry > 1, hold ALT. They snap right in.

Didn’t know that! Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, OrbitalManeuvers said:

Is this the intended texture for the 6.25m subtype of the SIVB IU? (the smaller one is the same, the normal one is the normal b/w)

770BCGk.png

No, it should have the same texture as the regular sized IU I believe. I'll check and report back. 

Edit: Yeah @OrbitalManeuvers It's supposed to have the same texture as the default IU.  I would suggest redownloading.

xYVwoXX.jpg

 

Edited by GoldForest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ks2CHgB.jpg

cTQTbAr.jpg

GiRQeS6.jpg

81cqtd1.jpg

Full Album: Imgur: The magic of the Internet

"Kouston... We have confirmation. Janus has landed. Artemis Mission 4A was a success!" 

With the successful landing of Janus on the Mun, Artemis 4B and 4C could proceed on schedule. Janus will provide the crew with a month's worth of supplies for an extended stay on the Mun. 

(Yes, this is an ETS mission)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, DaveyJ576 said:

@CobaltWolf, @Invaderchaos, @Zorg,

Some notes for the Big G. Disregard if you already have these for action:

1. The 2.5m decoupler acted a bit wonky on my flight test. The flaps moved properly, but the retro module didn't detach. I tapped the thrusters a bit and the capsule threw off the retro section. Could the connecter node for the decoupler or the CCR module be set just a tad off? The force setting was at its highest level.

2. Currently there is no way to transfer crew to the CCC module. There would need to be at least one in there so that the spacecraft could be visually guided to docking. Also, can there be a lights on function for the cargo module when there is crew inside? Are any of the greebles on the bottom of the CCC module intended to be docking radar?

3. The Banger solids can be attached to the retro module, but you have to use the move and rotate tool to get them into the right spots.

4. Nitpick alert... Most diagrams I have seen of the Big G show the crew tunnel to the cargo section right in the center of the CCC and CCR sections just like you have it currently. If that is the case, shouldn't the hatch in the 2.5m heatshield correspond to the tunnel location? Minor point really.

5. One thing I am not sure of... when Big G was to be used with the "Matisse" module on the Titan IIIC, did the spacecraft have a separate retro section for deorbit, or was it intended to use the RCS for deorbit? It is not clear on the diagrams that I have seen. If there is a separate retro module for this config, would it be possible to just get a part switch for the existing CCR module so that it will connect with the Matisse module?

One other minor request for the S-IVB instrument unit... can we get an all white version for the AS-201 and 202 flights?

Fantastic work on the Big G. Thank you!

First off - THANK YOU! I've said it before, I'll say it again - I don't really have the time or energy to play with these parts extensively. So please, be vocal with your feedback and I'll address things as best I'm able.

  1. I'll have to look into it, I'm not sure what the cause would be.
  2. Are you referring to ConnectedLivingSpace? If so... uh, does anyone want to try and take a look at the compatibility cfgs for that?
    1. Yes, I completely forgot to add light function to the cargo module window.
    2. The brown hemispherical bit, yeah. I think.
  3. As @OrbitalManeuverssaid, holding ALT makes it possible to node attach them. I'll have to add a note about that to the part description.
  4. Yeah probably not going to fix it. :P
  5. The 'cylindrical' SM (as I call it) needs to be remade. I just sorta winged it and threw it together a couple years ago. It's going to be redone fully. Idk if the CCR module works for that, I think the bottom is too wide. In any case, I am planning on remaking it in the next dev cycle at some point. I just felt that making the 'conical' SM was a bigger priority, now that we have the proper sized S-IVB.
  6. I thought Invader added a white IU?

 

2 hours ago, TheLoneOne said:

@GoldForest why do I get notifications from you writing things in various things..

55 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

If you follow me or follow the threads I post in, you'll get a notification.

I prefer to think of it as GoldForest having incredible powers that they're just unaware of

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CobaltWolf said:

Yeah probably not going to fix it. :P

Do it. It is your destiny. 

2 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

I thought Invader added a white IU?

Not for the S-IVB. The S-IVA got white versions, but not the B.

3 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

I prefer to think of it as GoldForest having incredible powers that they're just unaware of

Hey, don't go around revealing my secrets. I don't reveal your secrets do I? :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, GoldForest said:

Edit: Yeah @OrbitalManeuvers It's supposed to have the same texture as the default IU.  I would suggest redownloading.

OK, my turn to ask if you're totally up to date with the repo, too? I got 4 new files this morning from Zorg's commit, but was otherwise already up to date. Still showing the same this morning. Also are you using B9 2.19.0? The only other notable thing about my install is that I don't have the OldParts folder, but that shouldn't be involved either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, OrbitalManeuvers said:

OK, my turn to ask if you're totally up to date with the repo, too? I got 4 new files this morning from Zorg's commit, but was otherwise already up to date. Still showing the same this morning. Also are you using B9 2.19.0? The only other notable thing about my install is that I don't have the OldParts folder, but that shouldn't be involved either.

Yes, I have the latest download for BDB, as for B9, no. I'm still on 2.18, didn't realize it had been updated. But I don't think B9 would cause that issue. That seems more like a 'the textures didn't get downloaded or are corrupted', 'the config file was borked' or the texture map got rearranged.  I could be wrong, unable to check, as not on my laptop where my KSP install is. 

Edited by GoldForest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CobaltWolf said:

First off - THANK YOU! I've said it before, I'll say it again - I don't really have the time or energy to play with these parts extensively. So please, be vocal with your feedback and I'll address things as best I'm able.

  1. I'll have to look into it, I'm not sure what the cause would be.
  2. Are you referring to ConnectedLivingSpace? If so... uh, does anyone want to try and take a look at the compatibility cfgs for that?
    1. Yes, I completely forgot to add light function to the cargo module window.
    2. The brown hemispherical bit, yeah. I think.
  3. As @OrbitalManeuverssaid, holding ALT makes it possible to node attach them. I'll have to add a note about that to the part description.
  4. Yeah probably not going to fix it. :P
  5. The 'cylindrical' SM (as I call it) needs to be remade. I just sorta winged it and threw it together a couple years ago. It's going to be redone fully. Idk if the CCR module works for that, I think the bottom is too wide. In any case, I am planning on remaking it in the next dev cycle at some point. I just felt that making the 'conical' SM was a bigger priority, now that we have the proper sized S-IVB.
  6. I thought Invader added a white IU?

 

I prefer to think of it as GoldForest having incredible powers that they're just unaware of

ok dad…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CobaltWolf said:

First off - THANK YOU! I've said it before, I'll say it again - I don't really have the time or energy to play with these parts extensively. So please, be vocal with your feedback and I'll address things as best I'm able.

  1. Are you referring to ConnectedLivingSpace? If so... uh, does anyone want to try and take a look at the compatibility cfgs for that?
    1. Yes, I completely forgot to add light function to the cargo module window.
    2. The brown hemispherical bit, yeah. I think.
  2. As @OrbitalManeuverssaid, holding ALT makes it possible to node attach them.
  3. The 'cylindrical' SM (as I call it) needs to be remade. I just sorta winged it and threw it together a couple years ago. It's going to be redone fully. Idk if the CCR module works for that, I think the bottom is too wide. In any case, I am planning on remaking it in the next dev cycle at some point. I just felt that making the 'conical' SM was a bigger priority, now that we have the proper sized S-IVB.

@CobaltWolf, feedback on your feedback about my feedback... :lol:

1. It doesn't have to be anything fancy. The cargo module simply needs to have habitable volume. It had interior space large enough for at least one astronaut. See diagram below:

Spoiler

7t3Nmri.jpg

It was necessary because automated docking systems were in their infancy and the spacecraft had to be manually flown to docking. It could be something as simple as the blank space that you have in the Skylab workshop. It is a minor point really, but it adds to the immersion factor.

2. Yeah, I actually didn't know that! Simple stuff from the School of KSP, courtesy of @OrbitalManeuvers!

3. What I had in mind for that was a B9 part switch for the CCR module that would shrink the bottom edge to the same size as the cylindrical SM. It would be the same concept as the fairing that is used for the Saturn A-1. One fairing that has three different configurations via a part switch. Can this idea be applied to the CCR module so that it will fit both the big cargo module and the cylindrical SM?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@CobaltWolf

Quick couple of questions in regards to the big G development.

1. Will there be any plans to eventually add an engine option to the MOL rcs like the big G oms, and if so would this option also be possible in for a variant of the Apollo rcs used on the cylindrical big G SM?

2. Is there any plan to add a custom decoupler for the conical SM or should we just use the Saturn IB interstage.

Also thank you for your continued work on BDB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 1124max said:

1. Will there be any plans to eventually add an engine option to the MOL rcs like the big G oms, and if so would this option also be possible in for a variant of the Apollo rcs used on the cylindrical big G SM?

You can kind of already do this with mechjeb's smartRCS. 

It automatically provides throttle controlled forward RCS thrust when an engine is not in use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, KeaKaka said:

You can kind of already do this with mechjeb's smartRCS. 

It automatically provides throttle controlled forward RCS thrust when an engine is not in use.

Thanks for letting me know,.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, GoldForest said:

Hey, don't go around revealing my secrets. I don't reveal your secrets do I? :P

Have you ever posted about BDB, ever?  if so then:

 

YES YES YOU HAVE! :P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Garuda said:

Are any parts for the AAP extended lunar stay proposals (LM truck, LM shelter/lab, etc) planned to be added?

Yes but not until we get this release pushed out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, DaveyJ576 said:

@CobaltWolf, feedback on your feedback about my feedback... :lol:

1. It doesn't have to be anything fancy. The cargo module simply needs to have habitable volume. It had interior space large enough for at least one astronaut. See diagram below:

  Reveal hidden contents

7t3Nmri.jpg

It was necessary because automated docking systems were in their infancy and the spacecraft had to be manually flown to docking. It could be something as simple as the blank space that you have in the Skylab workshop. It is a minor point really, but it adds to the immersion factor.

2. Yeah, I actually didn't know that! Simple stuff from the School of KSP, courtesy of @OrbitalManeuvers!

3. What I had in mind for that was a B9 part switch for the CCR module that would shrink the bottom edge to the same size as the cylindrical SM. It would be the same concept as the fairing that is used for the Saturn A-1. One fairing that has three different configurations via a part switch. Can this idea be applied to the CCR module so that it will fit both the big cargo module and the cylindrical SM?

1) Oh, like I literally just forgot to add crew capacity to the part? Whoops.

3) I'll have to see. My gut says I'll have to make a separate mesh, but yeah if people want it I can combine the two Big G retro modules with B9 probably. Not happening right away, mind you.

 

22 hours ago, 1124max said:

@CobaltWolf

Quick couple of questions in regards to the big G development.

1. Will there be any plans to eventually add an engine option to the MOL rcs like the big G oms, and if so would this option also be possible in for a variant of the Apollo rcs used on the cylindrical big G SM?

2. Is there any plan to add a custom decoupler for the conical SM or should we just use the Saturn IB interstage.

Also thank you for your continued work on BDB.

21 hours ago, KeaKaka said:

You can kind of already do this with mechjeb's smartRCS. 

It automatically provides throttle controlled forward RCS thrust when an engine is not in use.

20 hours ago, The Dressian Exploder said:

Alternatively you could just enable 'Fore by Throttle' on the RCS you want to use as an engine.

Yeah I'm still unclear on whether RCS can just work as engines now or not.

Regarding the interstage, I've set it up so that you can use the wide SLA base for it - there's a switch that changes the nodes to be more appropriate. Was I being lazy? Yes. Does it perfectly fit the length I needed? You betcha.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CobaltWolf said:

Yeah I'm still unclear on whether RCS can just work as engines now or not.

I don't think there's been a Mechjeb update to fix the burn offset.  RCS "can" work as engines, but Mechjeb doesn't calculate the burn start offset properly with just RCS active, thus messing up the whole maneuver and necessitating additional maneuvers to get closer to a target rendezvous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...