Jump to content

[1.12.5] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.12.0 "Песок" 13/Jan/2023)


CobaltWolf
 Share

Recommended Posts

Will the RD-180 be separate from the Atlas V bottom shroud? After all, it apparently looks like this without it:
RD180_NASA4X3_0.jpg

Also, any chance that dedicated booster mounting points will be added, for the authentic asymmetric configurations?

Edited by Ithirahad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Ithirahad said:

Will the RD-180 be separate from the Atlas V bottom shroud? After all, it apparently looks like this without it:

Also, any chance that dedicated booster mounting points will be added, for the authentic asymmetric configurations?

Yes and yes. I'd recommend Editor Extensions once the parts are out - the paired mounting points (the side with the pipe and avionics raceway, as opposed to the empty side with 3 SRBs) are at 20 degree increments rather than the standard 15 degree increments that the editor defaults to using.

EZTxb5z.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Cheesecake said:

That looks awesome.

Another question: do you have plans for a revamp of the Delta I/Thor and Delta II parts?

Delta K is already redone, Delta II (with the 3 GEMs) is a very-near-feature task (I plan on making it part of the next release, but this release is also shaping up to have a 6 month dev cycle... again...). Thor/Delta... not really. Like, yeah, those parts aren't aging well but they're far from the worst parts in the mod right now so I'm not losing sleep over them. Yet. Just all the other stuff :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

Delta K is already redone, Delta II (with the 3 GEMs) is a very-near-feature task (I plan on making it part of the next release, but this release is also shaping up to have a 6 month dev cycle... again...). Thor/Delta... not really. Like, yeah, those parts aren't aging well but they're far from the worst parts in the mod right now so I'm not losing sleep over them. Yet. Just all the other stuff :wink:

So totally MY opinion and all.  But I think the art on the Thor/Delta I parts is actually pretty good.  No it does not have quite the shine of a lot of the later parts but I think it is Fitting for the rocket is is based on.  

I am still launching EELT Thor based Delta I rockets in my late career over the EEELT Delta II.   I don't need the extra Delta V with how I fly a Delta-I/Delta-P + STAR-48BV for my science Satellite in Kerbin-SOI

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/19/2018 at 7:54 PM, Abpilot said:

If we do go NOVA i have found a pic that might help you @CobaltWolf

 

Um hate to be the bearer of bad news Abpilot.   That is only ONE of MANY proposals for NOVA.   And I think it was one of the SMALLEST late in the program.  It is missing the M-1 Supersized Hydrolox engine...  It is missing the lander compartment entirely...  This is just a souped up Venus/Mars Flyby Nova from one of the last couple years when NOVA was actively funded (65/66???)  

 

On 4/19/2018 at 7:54 PM, Abpilot said:

BTW the Apollo spacecraft in the pic is wrong

Here’s the proper lander.

 

That picture is actually one of the early DIRECT flight landers proposed for Apollo Saturn.   For the Saturn C-8 IIRC.... Which your Nova Picture is almost a near copy of...  That would be a Pre 1963(?) Lander proposal I think and it clearly calls this out in it's headings.  When they switched to the rendezvous method to get a lander to the Moon, they scaled back from the Saturn C-8 to the Saturn C-5 which of course became the Saturn V with minor tweaks.  And yes I know that the Diameter capable of the Michoud factory has a part to play in this as well.

ABOVE ALL I want to be clear.  NOVA had so many DIFFERENT versions... Feel free to like what ever one you like.  Just please don't assume the one you like was THE Nova and also please don't assume @CobaltWolf  Is going to make the one YOU like IF he ever decides to make a NOVA.

Heck, as Cobalt can plainly tell you I have been pestering him about the Saturn S-III stage for like the last month and a half.    It was canceled in 1961-62 timeframe even BEFORE Saturn C-2 and Saturn C-3 (the rockets it was to be used on) were canceled.   Coincidentally anyone wanting to make a Saturn C-II from 1961... Use the S-IVC parts Cobalt has recently added to BDB....  The Tank extension and the 2x engine mount with 2 J-2s on it work GREAT as a S-III stage between your 4x E-1 powered S-IB stage and your 1x J-2 Powered S-IVB stage for a Saturn C-2 analog.  and you can lift Moar to orbit than a standard Saturn IB rocket can (with either the 8 H-2s or the 4 E-1s)  Oops SORRY Cobalt... I will shut up about the S-III stage again :):):D:D  I promise! :cool::cool: 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What were  your short 1.875m diameter Titan SRMs supposed to be? I've been trying to round up info on all of the SRBs Titan used or were developed for Titan. The only one I don't have pretty good info on is the 65 inch Aerojet motor and I was wondering if that's what your short 1.875m motor was supposed to be a corollary of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/04/2018 at 12:02 PM, Pappystein said:

Um hate to be the bearer of bad news Abpilot.   That is only ONE of MANY proposals for NOVA.   And I think it was one of the SMALLEST late in the program.  It is missing the M-1 Supersized Hydrolox engine...  It is missing the lander compartment entirely...  This is just a souped up Venus/Mars Flyby Nova from one of the last couple years when NOVA was actively funded (65/66???)  

 

That picture is actually one of the early DIRECT flight landers proposed for Apollo Saturn.   For the Saturn C-8 IIRC.... Which your Nova Picture is almost a near copy of...  That would be a Pre 1963(?) Lander proposal I think and it clearly calls this out in it's headings.  When they switched to the rendezvous method to get a lander to the Moon, they scaled back from the Saturn C-8 to the Saturn C-5 which of course became the Saturn V with minor tweaks.  And yes I know that the Diameter capable of the Michoud factory has a part to play in this as well.

ABOVE ALL I want to be clear.  NOVA had so many DIFFERENT versions... Feel free to like what ever one you like.  Just please don't assume the one you like was THE Nova and also please don't assume @CobaltWolf  Is going to make the one YOU like IF he ever decides to make a NOVA.

 

Yep. Like many of the "never built" things, there's no single Nova. Hell, there's no single saturn, and they built those. The nova program was a collection of ideas of where to go after saturn, and it's a wide and varied field. Although there were at least prototype M-1 engines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@CobaltWolf I have a problem using bluedog_Soltan_Radial  4x as a first stage...

  1. they're not recognized by PartCommander being engines in the first place @linuxgurugamer
  2. they just won't fire up on staging/launching, neither manually nor by MechJeb Ascent Guidance
  3. when using MechJeb, the next stage is fired, what is the launch clamps, and then the next stage, that is the main engine on liquid fuel (that should be fired by a SmartPart 10s prior boosters become dry)

Log and vessel:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/015gup23pakbv77/2018-04-22_2 KSP.log.7z?dl=1

Video:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

@CobaltWolf I did notice that the category for them is set to Propulsion, Squad depreciated that category and uses Engine now instead, you may want to fix that.  Also, i saw in the zip that your "Gamedata" directory has a lowercase "d", which can cause problems for people on Linux and Macs, it should be "GameData"

59 minutes ago, Gordon Dry said:
  • they're not recognized by PartCommander being engines in the first place @linuxgurugamer
  •  

They were recognized as engines perfectly well.  I made a test of two BACC Srbs and two Prometheus SRBs, and they both worked fine.  See the following Imgur album:

https://imgur.com/a/Sh3vs7c

 

Edited by linuxgurugamer
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...