Jump to content

[1.12.3] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.11.0 "вне" 22/Oct/2022)


CobaltWolf
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, AlphaMensae said:

Ah, going to render another of Zorg's screenshots outdated shortly after being posted :D 

For you fans of the early Thors and Deltas, the newest thing for v2.1 of Modular Launch Pads: the Thor/Delta Launch Stand (actually shown in the above screenshot :) and animated Fallback Tower (used mostly with the Able-derived upper stages):

 

 

Fantastic! I am really liking having my screenshots obsoleted like this :P 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Cedric Feldmann - Bear said:

Weird thing to ask, but can we get an unpainted Saturn V?


credit for ThePrimalDino for the Unpainted Saturn V.

That's not what an unpainted Saturn V would look like :P That's just a Saturn with Spray On Foam Insulation (SOFI) would look like. The insulation schemes for Saturn V were actually unique for each stage, coming from different contractors/design teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Cedric Feldmann - Bear said:

Darn! But hey, at least we got to see what an unpainted Saturn V looks like! Imagine the weight savings on that baby!

Actually that is nothing like what an Unpainted Saturn V would look like.  All the Insulation on Saturn V is INTERNAL meaning it (the Saturn V) would look more like an un-painted Atlas.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pappystein said:

Actually that is nothing like what an Unpainted Saturn V would look like.  All the Insulation on Saturn V is INTERNAL meaning it (the Saturn V) would look more like an un-painted Atlas.

It very much is not all internal. Both S-II insulation schemes were external (and yes, the last couple of flights used a form of SOFI but I don't know if the formula was the same ie whether it would look like a shuttle ET.) http://heroicrelics.org/info/s-ii/s-ii-insulation.html

The S-IV and S-IVB used internal insulation, but I believe some fears of it breaking off and being ingested by the engines led to the scheme being abandoned after those flew. https://cdm16608.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16608coll1/id/4082/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey everyone, I have a question for those who play career with BDB and are interested in the contracts that are now bundled with this mod.

Currently, they have been made to loosely resemble the original, historical counterpart as it actually flew. But they have been made different in a couple of ways, including randomisation, in order to allow more science situations to be part of them. The result is though, that in the appropriate scale and OSO contract for example, is not possible with a historically correct build, due to the Delta C rocket not having enough delta-v.

So we had a little discussion as a result: should the contracts be closer to their historical counterparts, at the cost of the science you can do with em?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Cedric Feldmann - Bear said:

Weird thing to ask, but can we get an unpainted Saturn V?

credit for ThePrimalDino for the Unpainted Saturn V.

Wasn't all that insulation on the inside of the tanks anyway?

Edited by blowfish
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Morphisor said:

Hey everyone, I have a question for those who play career with BDB and are interested in the contracts that are now bundled with this mod.

Currently, they have been made to loosely resemble the original, historical counterpart as it actually flew. But they have been made different in a couple of ways, including randomisation, in order to allow more science situations to be part of them. The result is though, that in the appropriate scale and OSO contract for example, is not possible with a historically correct build, due to the Delta C rocket not having enough delta-v.

So we had a little discussion as a result: should the contracts be closer to their historical counterparts, at the cost of the science you can do with em?

I'm leaning towards the more randomised ones, simply because if you want full on historical missions, there's already a separate contract pack for that.  I think in the spirit of BDB, the bundled missions should encourage a bit of legoing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

It very much is not all internal. Both S-II insulation schemes were external (and yes, the last couple of flights used a form of SOFI but I don't know if the formula was the same ie whether it would look like a shuttle ET.) http://heroicrelics.org/info/s-ii/s-ii-insulation.html

The S-IV and S-IVB used internal insulation, but I believe some fears of it breaking off and being ingested by the engines led to the scheme being abandoned after those flew. https://cdm16608.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16608coll1/id/4082/

Just further proof I am a recovering Know-it-All........ Which makes me a Know-It-Most BTW :P

 

Joking aside, I was un-aware of the S-II being external.  I knew the S-IV/-IVB was internal by all the drawings I have of those stages (nothing not shared before.   But then again I do remember a picture somewhere of almost a "nylon fabric" on the S-II tank so......

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, sorry if you've answered this before, but is this going to be updated to 1.9 anytime soon? It doesn't seem to be compatible with 1.9, (judging from the crash after start up when ever I try to load this mod.) This is one of my most favorite part packs, and I'd just love to have it in my current 1.9 save. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Space_or_Bust Make sure the mod dependencies (Module Manager, B9 Part switch and whatnot) are up to date with 1.9. The bundled plugins are most likely for 1.7 or 1.8, depending on which version you're using. The mod itself shouldn't cause a CTD as far as I'm aware.

Edited by Mudwig
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/13/2020 at 9:44 AM, CobaltWolf said:

Who knew Gemini had so much crap sticking out of it?

Early space programs bro. You weren't cool if you didn't have little bits and pieces sticking out. Russia was a BAMF in that regard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Mudwig said:

@Space_or_Bust Make sure the mod dependencies (Module Manager, B9 Part switch and whatnot) are up to date with 1.9. The bundled plugins are most likely for 1.7 or 1.8, depending on which version you're using. The mod itself shouldn't cause a CTD as far as I'm aware.

I would add that the very first message in this Thread has all the links to ALL the dependencies.  So you can just go to message one and click on the individual links to download those files

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:o I just found out about the Gemini REP (rendezvous evaluation pod) from the Gemini 5 flight. What a cool little piece of thinger! I imagine there were some people who spent weeks or months of their lives designing and building that thing ... and they had to completely abandon it in orbit without using it. Ugh, can you imagine?

If this ever shows up in BDB I promise I'll use it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, OrbitalManeuvers said:

:o I just found out about the Gemini REP (rendezvous evaluation pod) from the Gemini 5 flight. What a cool little piece of thinger! I imagine there were some people who spent weeks or months of their lives designing and building that thing ... and they had to completely abandon it in orbit without using it. Ugh, can you imagine?

If this ever shows up in BDB I promise I'll use it. 

:)

CKleBLu.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not sure if this is a bug in BDB, SAF, or my install but the SAF fairings are all messed up in the latest dev build. Every fairing is missing the left bottom segment and most of them have the segments and top rotated 90 degrees. raw
This screenshot shows the missing bottom segment. I didn’t get a screenshot of the other glitches.

I have SAF 1.2.1 and the latest BDB dev version from Github running on KSP 1.8.1 w/ JNSQ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CDSlice said:

I’m not sure if this is a bug in BDB, SAF, or my install but the SAF fairings are all messed up in the latest dev build. Every fairing is missing the left bottom segment and most of them have the segments and top rotated 90 degrees.
This screenshot shows the missing bottom segment. I didn’t get a screenshot of the other glitches.

I have SAF 1.2.1 and the latest BDB dev version from Github running on KSP 1.8.1 w/ JNSQ

You should be using the SAF and B9PS versions included in the dev branch, there are features actively being developed for both in support of Zorg's fairings :) Basically, delete+replace them along with the Bluedog_DB folder whenever you update the dev build 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, CDSlice said:

I’m not sure if this is a bug in BDB, SAF, or my install but the SAF fairings are all messed up in the latest dev build. Every fairing is missing the left bottom segment and most of them have the segments and top rotated 90 degrees. 
This screenshot shows the missing bottom segment. I didn’t get a screenshot of the other glitches.

I have SAF 1.2.1 and the latest BDB dev version from Github running on KSP 1.8.1 w/ JNSQ

Hmm? There was never a v 1.2.1 of SAF as far as I know, there was a v1.2.0 in 2018..

The current version is v 1.10.1 and the BDB fairings ALSO requires B9 part switch v2.16.0 (these are officially for KSP 1.9 but they work fine on 1.8).

As Cobalt mentioned, the most current versions are included with the BDB dev branch in the repo as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Zorg said:

Hmm? There was never a v 1.2.1 of SAF as far as I know, there was a v1.2.0 in 2018..

The current version is v 1.10.1 and the BDB fairings ALSO requires B9 part switch v2.16.0 (these are officially for KSP 1.9 but they work fine on 1.8).

As Cobalt mentioned, the most current versions are included with the BDB dev branch in the repo as well. 

So, it looks like I downloaded v1.2.1 of the KW Rocketry SAF pack when I was trying to get all the dependencies.. :/

I'll remove that and try the bundled version, thanks for the help! :)

Edited by CDSlice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

Still a long way to go

Mercury Revamp:  Climbing a hill full of puppies.

Gemini Revamp:  Climbing Everest without assistance.

Apollo and Saturn V Revamp:  Climbing K2 while goats throw shurikens at you and the French make fun of you from inside their castle.

 

Good luck you mad lad.  o7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, OrbitalManeuvers said:

I just found out about the Gemini REP (rendezvous evaluation pod) from the Gemini 5 flight.

NASA was inconsistent in what the "R" stood for. You are correct that it was usually "rendezvous".

In 3 documents, including a report to Congress, it became the Gemini V "radar evaluation pod". https://nasasearch.nasa.gov/search?utf8=✓&affiliate=nasa&sort_by=&query="radar+evaluation+pod"

 

 

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...