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

On 5/1/2018 at 5:51 PM, Saltshaker said:

Adapters would be a great (re)start. And not just LDC adapters...(pls i need bluedog quality  3.75->3.125m/2.5m)

Noted.

On 5/1/2018 at 10:43 PM, Nnimrod said:

Single use parts are not at all a bad thing. Almost all parts are designed as single use IRL. It's creative people that make them into rockets.

True, but generally with the BDB parts for KSP I've tried to keep them flexible like the stock parts. And when possible, I at least try to make stuff modular (the Delta K fairing base and interstage kinda need each other, but what you put inside it is up to you...) I'm just worried we're maybe approaching/past a 'critical mass' of replica parts.

17 hours ago, Snark said:

Several posts have been removed here.  Folks, a few things to bear in mind (I'm sure you already know this-- right?-- but perhaps a refresher is in order):

  • Please try to be considerate towards modders.  Don't demand updates-- they'll update as and when they're inclined to do so.  They're doing this for all of us for free.
  • If you do ask a question... try to do some homework first.  For example, you don't need to demand "1.4.3" because the mod already says "1.4.X", meaning it works for the various 1.4 patches.
  • Don't criticize or make personal attacks.  If you see someone doing something that you believe is inappropriate, don't try to be a cop.  Just report the post and the moderators can look into the matter.
  • No personal attack is ever okay... but please don't criticize people's spelling and grammar.  There are an awful lot of folks out there for whom English is not their native language, and it's not very welcoming to give them grief just because they don't speak your language perfectly.  I expect they speak your language better than you speak theirs, so let's cut some slack, shall we?

Thank you for your understanding.

Thanks for the assist Snark! I was away and didn't even see whatever it was.

9 hours ago, drtedastro said:

Hey CobalWolf.

really, really enjoying the hell out of this mod.

way too much fun flying the old birds.

great work and great stuff.

thanks and cheers.

Thank you! :)

1 hour ago, Kerbal01 said:

@CobaltWolf This has got to be a record for fastest rendezvous. https://imgur.com/a/JkSZLJZ

Jeepers! Nearly 9 minutes after launch? That might be... (at least among this mod's users)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That stuck thruster firing thing is still going on and has been for some time now. When it happens to me it's when the Apollo CSM is in orbit aft releasing lem. Lem goes down to the mun and comes back to redock. CSM is waiting in orbit with all thrusters going full speed and can't be shut off.  Do it all the way when you it,, dock with it and land with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, MikeO89 said:

That stuck thruster firing thing is still going on and has been for some time now. When it happens to me it's when the Apollo CSM is in orbit aft releasing lem. Lem goes down to the mun and comes back to redock. CSM is waiting in orbit with all thrusters going full speed and can't be shut off.  Do it all the way when you it,, dock with it and land with it.

An easy workaround is to switch to the CSM from the Tracking center. That'll clear the thrusters firing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MikeO89 said:

That stuck thruster firing thing is still going on and has been for some time now. When it happens to me it's when the Apollo CSM is in orbit aft releasing lem. Lem goes down to the mun and comes back to redock. CSM is waiting in orbit with all thrusters going full speed and can't be shut off.  Do it all the way when you it,, dock with it and land with it.

There is nothing we can do about it I'm afraid, it is related to the command module being the root part. It's a stock bug that we seem to be agitating. We had a workaround ready to go involving switching it back to the old legacy ModuleRCS as opposed to the newer, more flexible ModuleRCSFX, but the 1.4.X KSP update broke ModuleRCS. :( As @G'th said, leaving and then coming back to the flight scene should fix it. It is really annoying though... I believe it also might be best practice to use the parachute structural mount as the root part for the CSM stack, since to my understanding that will avoid the issue.

In other news, following Scott Lowther finding and posting the McDonnell Med-Lite Brochure, I have once again abandoned something half finished jumped over to thinking about Delta 2 for a minute. The first stage tank lengths need to be increased - offhand I think about 15% - so this might be a bit save breaking... oh well :P Note the more accurate color (still not the official color code for Delta Blue, which is a registered trademark believe it or not, since its just a bit too saturated for my liking) as well as the better raceways. Still a lot more detail to add, particularly SRB mountings.

delta-brochure-scan-2018-03-29_0002.jpg

delta-brochure-scan-2018-03-29_0003.jpg

IcVy4XR.png

Edited by CobaltWolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

There is nothing we can do about it I'm afraid, it is related to the command module being the root part. It's a stock bug that we seem to be agitating. We had a workaround ready to go involving switching it back to the old legacy ModuleRCS as opposed to the newer, more flexible ModuleRCSFX, but the 1.4.X KSP update broke ModuleRCS. :( As @G'th said, leaving and then coming back to the flight scene should fix it. It is really annoying though... I believe it also might be best practice to use the parachute structural mount as the root part for the CSM stack, since to my understanding that will avoid the issue.

In other news, following Scott Lowther finding and posting the McDonnell Med-Lite Brochure, I have once again abandoned something half finished jumped over to thinking about Delta 2 for a minute. The first stage tank lengths need to be increased - offhand I think about 15% - so this might be a bit save breaking... oh well :P Note the more accurate color (still not the official color code for Delta Blue, which is a registered trademark believe it or not, since its just a bit too saturated for my liking) as well as the better raceways. Still a lot more detail to add, particularly SRB mountings.

Looks great! I always felt like it was missing something for some reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is nothing we can do about it I'm afraid, it is related to the command module being the root part. It's a stock bug that we seem to be agitating. We had a workaround ready to go involving switching it back to the old legacy ModuleRCS as opposed to the newer, more flexible ModuleRCSFX, but the 1.4.X KSP update broke ModuleRCS.

:( As @G'th said, leaving and then coming back to the flight scene should fix it. It is really annoying though... I believe it also might be best practice to use the parachute structural mount as the root part for the CSM stack, since to my understanding that will avoid the issue.

So changing the root part to something besides the command module will fix this (without having to rebuild the whole ship from scratch with a different root part)? Last time this happened I couldn't even end the mission cause the CM landed back on Kerbin on a slope and the thruster firing was just enough the keep the craft moving slightly so the mission wouldn't end. The only action  that would work in the menu at that point was revert flight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just fyi to anyone downloading this for the first time in 1.4.3. You gotta download the most recent version of b9 part switch. Once you do that it will work just fine. 

 

EDIT: even updating the b9 part switch it still doesn't work!!WAHHH!

Damnit! Why did i have to want to play with the new launch pad! its definitely not worth not being able to use BDB.

Edited by sp1989
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, MikeO89 said:

So changing the root part to something besides the command module will fix this (without having to rebuild the whole ship from scratch with a different root part)? Last time this happened I couldn't even end the mission cause the CM landed back on Kerbin on a slope and the thruster firing was just enough the keep the craft moving slightly so the mission wouldn't end. The only action  that would work in the menu at that point was revert flight.

The thruster firing is just visual and doesn't produce thrust. You were just, y'know, on a slope. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was more to it than that. Once in the situation of the continuous thruster firing in the CM (even before docking LEM to CSM), nothing else worked after that. I could not go to tracking station or anything else, coudn't even exit to main menu. The only option I had at that point was resume game or revert back to launchpad, essentially erasing the mission.

Edit. I tried your instruction of changing the root in VAB from CM to parachute cover. Seems to have worked. I played another mun mission and this time when launching LEM from mun and locating CSM, there it was with no thruster firing. I will play a few more mission to make sure.

Edited by MikeO89
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thoughts on BDB

1) 300 parts! Who needs that kind of part bloat, no thank you!

2) Well might as well take a look, some of those interstage parts look interesting, I like some detail at the tail end of my upper stages rather than just an engine attached to a tank... I can select the parts I like and prune the rest

3) This stuff is awesome! I'm keeping all of it! :D

So yeah despite the initial intimidation I am really enjoying these parts and recreating some early missions in my new 1.4.3 science playthrough. Also it took me a little while to realise that the MSM storage bays seem to have been designed with Universal Storage in mind. I was initially quite disappointed at how small the bays were and there was no way I was going to use the ugly stock 2.5m service bay for my life support needs but the MSM with UniversalStorage is pure happiness for extended exploration!

jQmh5JS.jpg?1

(Universal Storage seems more geared towards TAC LS than USI, it has supplies storage for USI but no recycler. Couple of supply packs is honestly enough for the Kane in the Kerbin system but I patched in a recycler anyway using an existing model for TAC for extended mission time.)

Speaking of USI life support and patches, I saw in the USI compatibility patch for BDB that the Hokulani Airlock is supposed to have enough life support to support 6 kerbals for 7 months. However, while the patch adds 1470 units of supplies to the airlock, the life support recycler module is missing. Moreover, to stretch 1470 units of supplies for 7 months you would need 89% recycler efficiency which seems a bit OP for USI life support.

I personally patched it to add a 75% recycler module which stretches the 1470 supplies to 90 days for 6 kerbals as per the mission profile in the "Manuel II".

Spoiler

@PART[bluedog_Skylab_Airlock]:NEEDS[USILifeSupport]
{
    // Enough Life Support Supplies to Allow 6 kerbals to survive in orbit for 3 months
    // Each month is 30 6 hr kerbin days    
    
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleLifeSupport
    }
    
    RESOURCE
    {
        name = Supplies
        amount = 1470
        maxAmount = 1470
    }
    RESOURCE
    {
        name = Mulch
        amount = 0
        maxAmount = 30
    }
    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleLifeSupportRecycler
        CrewCapacity = 6
        RecyclePercent = .75
        ConverterName = Life Support
        tag = Life Support
        StartActionName = Start Life Support
        StopActionName = Stop Life Support

        INPUT_RESOURCE
        {
            ResourceName = ElectricCharge
            Ratio = 1.5
        }
    }
}

I saw in this thread that these patches are community maintained so I can submit this as a pull request on Github if the dev wishes. Never used github but I guess I should be able to figure it out.

One hold up though, I kept electricity consumption at 1.5 ec/s as a placeholder. I'm kind new to all this and not sure about what a good balance should be.

The USI large recycler gobbles electricity at 18 ec/s for 79% efficiency for 3 kerbals...

K&K Planetary bases has a 70% recycler at 5.25 ec/s for 3 Kerbals.

We need 75% for 6

I was thinking around 10 ec/s to keep things reasonable, the lab itself will also consume 12 ec/s when doing science conversion but the solar panels can handle an additional 10 ec/s. However you might need a lot more batteries for the dark side of your orbit... perhaps someone more experienced in the modding scene and life support could weigh in?

Edited by Zorg
Clarity, spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Zorg said:

I saw in this thread that these patches are community maintained so I can submit this as a pull request on Github if the dev wishes. Never used github but I guess I should be able to figure it out.

One hold up though, I kept electricity consumption at 1.5 ec/s as a placeholder. I'm kind new to all this and not sure about what a good balance should be.

The USI large recycler gobbles electricity at 18 ec/s for 79% efficiency for 3 kerbals...

K&K Planetary bases has a 70% recycler at 5.25 ec/s for 3 Kerbals.

We need 75% for 6

I was thinking around 10 ec/s to keep things reasonable, the lab itself will also consume 12 ec/s when doing science conversion but the solar panels can handle an additional 10 ec/s. However you might need a lot more batteries for the dark side of your orbit... perhaps someone more experienced in the modding scene and life support could weigh in?

Yup, submit a patch on GitHub if something's not working right. Since neither @CobaltWolf or myself use USI it's up to you guys to keep this stuff working. It shouldn't be necessary to add batteries for this to function so you can add EC to the part if it needs it for the dark side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jso said:

Yup, submit a patch on GitHub if something's not working right. Since neither @CobaltWolf or myself use USI it's up to you guys to keep this stuff working. It shouldn't be necessary to add batteries for this to function so you can add EC to the part if it needs it for the dark side.

Cool, I'll have a little time later in the coming week so I'll test it a bit and submit the pull request by the weekend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, HooHungLow said:

cVFMW6S.png

Thanks! Just downloaded it and had a look in the sandbox. Very nice! should fit in nicely with my early days of space exploration roleplay with BDB parts in my current playthrough. 

Erm do you also have the same issue where the delta V stats dont show up in KER/MJ unless you launch it? I can take it up with the mod developer but its not a big deal ig uess. Could be something to do with the way the engine is configured...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@CobaltWolf kitbashed a Delta Med-Lite. https://imgur.com/a/JG8Na5Y

1500kg to orbit. Notice only 5.4 km/s of dv in the editor normally you'd need 6.2 km/s but with solids if you accelerate really fast you can lessen the dv needed. I quite like this booster, Nice balance of fairing size, vehicle layout and performance. High energy missions could have added a Star-37.

Edited by Kerbal01
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Zorg said:

Erm do you also have the same issue where the delta V stats dont show up in KER/MJ unless you launch it? I can take it up with the mod developer but its not a big deal ig uess. Could be something to do with the way the engine is configured...

I have that issue too. 

@CobaltWolf Really stunning Delta II!

Edited by HooHungLow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this discussion has reminded me of a question I wanted to ask about the Daleth 2000 (in its current release). How are the boosters meant to be arranged? I haven't noticed any air launched variants of them, so I assume that they all get ignited on the pad, but that can cause TWR issues. Are some of them meant to be air ignited, and I'm just not being observant?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MinimumSky5 said:

All this discussion has reminded me of a question I wanted to ask about the Daleth 2000 (in its current release). How are the boosters meant to be arranged? I haven't noticed any air launched variants of them, so I assume that they all get ignited on the pad, but that can cause TWR issues. Are some of them meant to be air ignited, and I'm just not being observant?

I believe it was a 6-3 burn http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets_2/United_States_5/Delta_II/Flight/sequence.htm

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...