CobaltWolf

[1.6.X] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.5.2 "Бруно" 8/Feb/2019)

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

Working towards finishing the Atlas V 401. The RD-180 isn't done but I need to clear my head so I'm starting with (hopefully) finishing the Centaur V tankage.

Nice. One fairly simple suggestion I'd have would be a double or even triple long steel Atlas tank for use on A-III, since it's first stage is way bigger than on early versions. The entire rocket is just a few meters short of A-V... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone else have problems with the narly probe core? Every rocket I build with it keeps breaking, with the probe core hovering above the craft, and whatever remains is stuck to the ground with an apparent velocity of ~100 m/s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, mr. engino said:

Does anyone else have problems with the narly probe core? Every rocket I build with it keeps breaking, with the probe core hovering above the craft, and whatever remains is stuck to the ground with an apparent velocity of ~100 m/s.

If it only uses BDB parts, can you send me a .craft file that is affected? I'd be happy to take a look. :) Also would like to know what KSP version you're on, what version of BDB you're using, stuff like that.

17 hours ago, notJebKerman said:

Nice. One fairly simple suggestion I'd have would be a double or even triple long steel Atlas tank for use on A-III, since it's first stage is way bigger than on early versions. The entire rocket is just a few meters short of A-V... 

There's definitely opportunity for special Atlas 3 tanks, but they're definitely not a priority (as in, no plans to actually do them). I intended the Atlas 3 to be made just by stacking more of the Atlas extension tanks on top.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Cdodders said:

CobaltWolf any ideas?

No, sorry. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@CobaltWolf

I found an issues with the Delta series or rather its tanks. Your manual states that the Fenris-2700 tank is supposed to be a "Extended Long Tank" (wich was used in Delta 1000-5000 series), but after some fact checking it doesnt fit. I first calculated it through the ~1.6 scaling factor your parts seem to use. The first stage is 11.8 meters long ingame, times 1.6 makes it 18.8m, just 0,5m short of a real life "Long Tank Thor" first stage. The "Extended Long Tank" First stage was 22.5m long, dividing again by 1.6 makes it 14m ingame. about 13.5 if we give it the same "0.5m short" than with the Fenris-2700. Here is it illustrated with technical drawings:

o1tdWPk.jpg

Sources:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40733.60

http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets_2/United_States_5/USA.htm

 

Through further testing i found out that the closest thing to an actual "Extended Long Tank" isnt a Fenris-2700 with two Fenris-360, but rather two Fenris-880 with a Daleth-II 1700 ontop of it. It comes out to 13,7m ingame and is therefore within "margin of error". It works as an interim solution i guess, but I am not sure of the tank masses are balanced that way. It would be cool if we could get a "proper" Extended Long Tank when you find the time for it.

GeoA3QP.png

 

Also two other things: Since I have to much free time on my hand, I am currently building each and every real (or real-ish for the Eyes turned Skyward & concept vehicle stuff) vehicle thats buildable with this pack for fun. (Guess how I found this one out :D ) Are you interested in my craft files for distribution when im done? The ones linked on KerbalX seem pretty outdated and some of them dont even load anymore.

And finally, do you consider adding the Castor 4/Castor 4A SRM´s somewhere down the future? Along with that tank, these are the only things missing to build Delta 3XXX - II-6XXX vehicles, closing the missing Link between Delta 2000 and Delta II 7000 series.

 

Peace

TK

Edited by Tiankay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Tiankay said:

@CobaltWolf

I found an issues with the Delta series or rather its tanks. Your manual states that the Fenris-2700 tank is supposed to be a "Extended Long Tank" (wich was used in Delta 1000-5000 series), but after some fact checking it doesnt fit. I first calculated it through the ~1.6 scaling factor your parts seem to use. The first stage is 11.8 meters long ingame, times 1.6 makes it 18.8m, just 0,5m short of a real life "Long Tank Thor" first stage. The "Extended Long Tank" First stage was 22.5m long, dividing again by 1.6 makes it 14m ingame. about 13.5 if we give it the same "0.5m short" than with the Fenris-2700. Here is it illustrated with technical drawings:

~snip~

Sources:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40733.60

http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets_2/United_States_5/USA.htm

 

Through further testing i found out that the closest thing to an actual "Extended Long Tank" isnt a Fenris-2700 with two Fenris-360, but rather two Fenris-880 with a Daleth-II 1700 ontop of it. It comes out to 13,7m ingame and is therefore within "margin of error". It works as an interim solution i guess, but I am not sure of the tank masses are balanced that way. It would be cool if we could get a "proper" Extended Long Tank when you find the time for it.

~snip~

Also two other things: Since I have to much free time on my hand, I am currently building each and every real (or real-ish for the Eyes turned Skyward & concept vehicle stuff) vehicle thats buildable with this pack for fun. (Guess how I found this one out :D ) Are you interested in my craft files for distribution when im done? The ones linked on KerbalX seem pretty outdated and some of them dont even load anymore.

Also, do you consider adding the Castor 4/Castor 4A SRM´s somewhere down the future? Along with that tank, these are the only things missing to build Delta 3XXX - II-6XXX vehicles, closing the missing Link between Delta 2000 and Delta II 7000 series.

Peace

TK

 

Wow, good eye! The 'Fenris' parts were made a long time ago, when the standards for accuracy in BDB were a lot lower. I don't think I ever used any sort of reference to make sure they were the right lengths, but trying to fix it now would just break people's craft files. If need be, you can roll your own rescaled tanks with a module manager patch. :)

I am working on making my own 'official' craft files for BDB... actually, I think I have them laying around here somewhere...

I don't think we'll see proper Castor 4s for BDB, there already isn't a terribly larger gameplay difference between the Scout's Castor and the GEM-40 oweing to them both being 0.625m diameter in game (since the Castor ALSO has to work as a inline part...).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How would a fix break peoples crafts? I am not suggesting that you rescale the Fenris-2700 as it is absolutely perfect for building the early lettered Deltas. I am suggesting keeping the 2700 as it is, and adding another tank as a new part and simply changing the manual. This way, it would be accurate and not save breaking at all. I wouldnt want to anger the community with this :D

 

Thanks for clarification on the Castors.

 

Also good eye to you too. If you never used a direct measuring reference for the 2700, chances are good you had Delta X pictures as visual reference maybe? Because you nailed the Long Tank length wise. Everything works out pretty close to that 1.6 scale. My visual reference only got me to "something isnt quite right here", but i wouldnt be able to recreate something like this without any dimensional reference ^^

 

Peace

TK

 

 

Edited by Tiankay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tiankay said:

How would a fix break peoples crafts? I am not suggesting that you rescale the Fenris-2700 as it is absolutely perfect for building the early lettered Deltas. I am suggesting keeping the 2700 as it is, and adding another tank as a new part and simply changing the manual. This way, it would be accurate and not save breaking at all. I wouldnt want to anger the community with this :D

 

Thanks for clarification on the Castors.

 

Also good eye to you too. If you never used a direct measuring reference for the 2700, chances are good you had Delta X pictures as visual reference maybe? Because you nailed the Long Tank length wise. Everything works out pretty close to that 1.6 scale. My visual reference only got me to "something isnt quite right here", but i wouldnt be able to recreate something like this without any dimensional reference ^^

 

Peace

TK

 

 

There's a file in extras that fixes a similar problem with the Titan II. I believe the Delta II tanks (EELT) were lengthened recently and should be correct. He was using some inaccurate drawings at the time as a reference for the models so you'll find little things like this all over the place if you look too close. The simplest fix is don't look too close, he'll get to it eventually.  :-)

Since the Scout is massively overscaled the Castor 1 from it's second stage (both inline and radial versions) have the performance numbers for a Castor 4. The Dioscuri-I 'Dziran'/'Dzira'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

If it only uses BDB parts, can you send me a .craft file that is affected? I'd be happy to take a look. :) Also would like to know what KSP version you're on, what version of BDB you're using, stuff like that.

Hmm, it appears that the problem I was having disappeared. Considering that I made a fresh reinstall of ksp, that might have fixed the problem!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For some reason, when I use most engines on this mod, such as the Etoh Sandstone or Sarnis I engines, there is no plume or sound when I activate those engines.

What is a possible reason for this graphic issue? Could it be that the current KSP (1.4.4) does not support this mod fully?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, careermode100 said:

For some reason, when I use most engines on this mod, such as the Etoh Sandstone or Sarnis I engines, there is no plume or sound when I activate those engines.

What is a possible reason for this graphic issue? Could it be that the current KSP (1.4.4) does not support this mod fully?

Need a ksp.log. One of your other mods likely has an incorrect realplume config.

If you know how to read it you can identify it by searching for FOR[RealPlume] in the log.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@CobaltWolf Is there a reason why the Ruby and Sapphire boosters have an ISP curve of 245 - 274, but the Emeralds are doing their own thing with ISP's of 272 - 274? Its having the odd effect of making the solid boosters more efficient than the Darkah engine at liftoff! Looking at the real engine stats, the sea level ISP of the Emeralds should be 242.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, MinimumSky5 said:

@CobaltWolf Is there a reason why the Ruby and Sapphire boosters have an ISP curve of 245 - 274, but the Emeralds are doing their own thing with ISP's of 272 - 274? Its having the odd effect of making the solid boosters more efficient than the Darkah engine at liftoff! Looking at the real engine stats, the sea level ISP of the Emeralds should be 242.

It's a typo bug from de-nurfing the solids recently. My fault. It should be 242.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@CobaltWolf - Hey, its me again. Sorry, I really didnt intend to be such a nuisance, but i spent a whole day googling and i cannot help myself :/

 

Since im pretty much done with all the first stage variants (Boy, theres ALOT of possible Delta configurations  :D)  i started doing the upper stages. Im on the newest dev-version btw. Doing the Centaurs i got confused now.

 

Theres not much info available online about the whole centaur family with contradicting drawings, but everything i found suggests 3 different tank lengths (without the G-T variants or IDCS/DCSS).One used with Atlas D, a stretched one on Atlas II & III , and the longest one now an Atlas V.  But there are four variants provided with BDB, labeled as Inon-D 1440, Inon-D3 1800, Inon-D5 2160 and the new Inon-V X464 tank. Wich tank is now supposed to go with wich vehicle?

 

Peace

TK

Edited by Tiankay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Tiankay said:

@CobaltWolf - Hey, its me again. Sorry, I really didnt intend to be such a nuisance, but i spent a whole day googling and i cannot help myself :/

Since im pretty much done with all the first stage variants (Boy, theres ALOT of possible Delta configurations  :D)  i started doing the upper stages. Im on the newest dev-version btw. Doing the Centaurs i got confused now.

Theres not much info available online about the whole centaur family with contradicting drawings, but everything i found suggests 3 different tank lengths (without the G-T variants or IDCS/DCSS).One used with Atlas D, a stretched one on Atlas II & III and III, and the longest one now an Atlas V.  But there are four variants provided with BDB, labeled as Inon-D 1440, Inon-D3 1800, Inon-D5 2160 and the new Inon-V X464 tank. Wich tank is now supposed to go with wich vehicle?

Peace

TK

You and @Pappystein should get together, you have the same eye for detail ;) 

The D3 and D5 tanks are 'obsolete' and are being replaced, the D5 with the new Inon-V tank and the D3 with a new tank that I need to make that is a trimmed down version of the Inon-V. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@CobaltWolf Yeah, thats what i figured too, The 1440 fits the Atlas LV-3C pretty good, the new one fits the Atlas V pretty good, but the third one probably should be somewhere in the middle between the current Inon-D3 and Inon-D5 in length. I know thats maybe hard to believe, but im actually not actively trying to obsess over these things. it just happens :/

 

Peace

TK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎7‎/‎8‎/‎2018 at 1:08 PM, Tiankay said:

@CobaltWolf

I found an issues with the Delta series or rather its tanks. Your manual states that the Fenris-2700 tank is supposed to be a "Extended Long Tank" (wich was used in Delta 1000-5000 series), but after some fact checking it doesnt fit. I first calculated it through the ~1.6 scaling factor your parts seem to use. The first stage is 11.8 meters long ingame, times 1.6 makes it 18.8m, just 0,5m short of a real life "Long Tank Thor" first stage. The "Extended Long Tank" First stage was 22.5m long, dividing again by 1.6 makes it 14m ingame. about 13.5 if we give it the same "0.5m short" than with the Fenris-2700. Here is it illustrated with technical drawings:

o1tdWPk.jpg

Sources:
https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=40733.60

http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets_2/United_States_5/USA.htm

 

Through further testing i found out that the closest thing to an actual "Extended Long Tank" isnt a Fenris-2700 with two Fenris-360, but rather two Fenris-880 with a Daleth-II 1700 ontop of it. It comes out to 13,7m ingame and is therefore within "margin of error". It works as an interim solution i guess, but I am not sure of the tank masses are balanced that way. It would be cool if we could get a "proper" Extended Long Tank when you find the time for it. 

GeoA3QP.png

 

Also two other things: Since I have to much free time on my hand, I am currently building each and every real (or real-ish for the Eyes turned Skyward & concept vehicle stuff) vehicle thats buildable with this pack for fun. (Guess how I found this one out :D ) Are you interested in my craft files for distribution when im done? The ones linked on KerbalX seem pretty outdated and some of them dont even load anymore.

And finally, do you consider adding the Castor 4/Castor 4A SRM´s somewhere down the future? Along with that tank, these are the only things missing to build Delta 3XXX - II-6XXX vehicles, closing the missing Link between Delta 2000 and Delta II 7000 series.

 

Peace

TK

If the tanks are balanced around stock, then wet mass to dry mass ratio shouldn't change no matter how many or what tanks you add unless someone messed up with the dry mass. Obviously service modules aren't going to have the same ratio but just plain fuel tanks with LF/O should all have the same dry mass per tonne of fuel. Personally the only thing we really need is an extension tank to go on the LTTAT that will make up the proper length for the ELTTAT rather than a dedicated tank for ELTTAT. It would also be a bit more fitting for this part pack which tries to maintain a Lego like variety of parts to mix and match how you desire and it would slot right in between the 360/380 and 860/880 tanks giving users another option for the 1.5m class.

 

PS Leave a message when you upload them to KerbalX, I always like to check out real world rockets other people make with these parts and to see how they would compare to ones I build.

Edited by draqsko
post script

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@draqsko I get your point, but for that matter a new tank wouldnt be needed at all. Lots of Delta 1000-5000 Versions actually have parts of their main tank in that blue shade and the daleth-II 1700 fits just fine length wise with two 880 tanks. The problem is that the tank rims are at the wrong position, and that actually was a concern to @CobaltWolf earlier about some Saturn tanks.

Quote

In reference to your specific requests, there already is a stretched 3rd stage tank (or rather, an additional shorter tank to add to the existing tank's length) that was included in the last release of the mod. Creating stretched variants of the S-1C and S-II is harder. I basically modeled/textured myself into a hole with them. Because they have the ribbed intertanks at the top and bottom of the part, it would look very weird if an extension tank was just stuck on top. Does anyone have feelings on that or ideas for a solution? 

An extensien to the Fenris-2700 would only worsen this problem. Instead, just keeping the 2700 as it is (Maybe retexturing it at some point to match the rim) and doing a new one for the ELTTAT would make it look way better without beeing save-breaking and would also be easier to build for people. I mean, on single stick vehicles it doesnt even really look that bad, but as soon as you add SRB´s it gets obvious how much too low that rim really is. So a new proper ELT, maybe split in 2 parts like the EELT daleth-II ones for the "lego-factor", only would make sense here. But thanks for your clarification about the tank masses. I never laid my hands on part configs for now, so this was new to me^^

 

1 hour ago, draqsko said:

PS Leave a message when you upload them to KerbalX, I always like to check out real world rockets other people make with these parts and to see how they would compare to ones I build.

I probably wont. I am already at 124 craft files (and not done yet :D) as im doing all the possible variants of everything. Having them loadable in a savegame makes it cluttered as hell. Instead, i will probably release them as a pack on Spacedock with my "SubassemblyCategories.cfg" along with it so one can put this into his game and have it orderly structured and easy to access. But I will message you, no Problem

 

Peace

TK

Edited by Tiankay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Tiankay Ok I can see your point with the ELT. But if a new one is created, it would be a good idea to split it in two with one tank slotting between the 360/380 and 860/880 and the other being the difference.  Pretty much all the common tank sizes (1.25m, 1.875m and 2.5m) all have quite a few options either covered in stock or by this mod. However the 1.5m size is pretty much limited to the Delta parts, something around 500-600 in size would slot in nicely.

I assume that quote you posted is from @CobaltWolf? If so, just because it has ribbing doesn't mean it'll always look terrible:

ECD7C61968D998A7B1EEE09E96C13AB0E30614ED

 

I probably should have flipped that small tank above the LTT or put it on the bottom, but as you can see the ribbing doesn't really stick out. I think it depends more on how tight the ribbing is and how wide it actually is. It also helps when you do like I did here and match the ribbing up against another color instead of the same basic white tank texture.

 

10A520F7196BD823DEAA5021BD00741500FF04A9

 

Another tank that doesn't look terrible with ribbing being in the middle of the rocket, but again it is bordered by the orange stripe with a darker grey below so it looks more like a transition to the adapter tank than a sore thumb even though the adapter tank doesn't start until the black stripe. Actually that white/light gray line at the joint sticks out more than the ribbing does.

Edited by draqsko
forgot a word

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Tiankay said:

@CobaltWolf Yeah, thats what i figured too, The 1440 fits the Atlas LV-3C pretty good, the new one fits the Atlas V pretty good, but the third one probably should be somewhere in the middle between the current Inon-D3 and Inon-D5 in length. I know thats maybe hard to believe, but im actually not actively trying to obsess over these things. it just happens :/

Oh, trust me it's actually usually appreciated (after an initial bout of 'what' ;) ); since there is indeed a lot that I miss. I go into it a little more below, but trust me when I say I generally want the same thing as you all I just simply need to make compromises and judgements on factors other than accuracy. For example I've had a couple of people ask about detachable insulation panels for the Centaur D over the years, but after looking into it I had to decide it wasn't worth the a) time to make them, especially because it would include remaking the Centaur tank again, b) texture space since that would increase the memory overhead of the mod, c) it wouldn't be intuitive to a lot of players and would likely earn me more grief than it would praise. Those are all the sort of thing I have to think about when making new parts, and honestly it's only in the last... year or so that I've been focusing more on accuracy. That's both because I'm finding it more rewarding trying to capture unique details from real life vehicles, and also because I've found that often, when I make too many compromises on a part it just winds up creating issues further down the road (see: things like the Saturn V scaling).

That is good to know about the Atlas II / III Centaur tank length. If you have an actual number for the length that is even better. :)

15 hours ago, Tiankay said:

@draqsko I get your point, but for that matter a new tank wouldnt be needed at all. Lots of Delta 1000-5000 Versions actually have parts of their main tank in that blue shade and the daleth-II 1700 fits just fine length wise with two 880 tanks. The problem is that the tank rims are at the wrong position, and that actually was a concern to @CobaltWolf earlier about some Saturn tanks.

An extensien to the Fenris-2700 would only worsen this problem. Instead, just keeping the 2700 as it is (Maybe retexturing it at some point to match the rim) and doing a new one for the ELTTAT would make it look way better without beeing save-breaking and would also be easier to build for people. I mean, on single stick vehicles it doesnt even really look that bad, but as soon as you add SRB´s it gets obvious how much too low that rim really is. So a new proper ELT, maybe split in 2 parts like the EELT daleth-II ones for the "lego-factor", only would make sense here. But thanks for your clarification about the tank masses. I never laid my hands on part configs for now, so this was new to me^^

Unfortunately the issue with things like the Thor tanks is that BDB is built on, at this point, years of work and questionable decisions. The earlier parts were much looser in their interpretation of IRL rockets. You also have to remember that I am only one person, who already has a very finite amount of time ( @Jso does a ton of work on the back end but pretty much anything involving the models and textures is up to me). This Atlas V is taking months to get done, and I have plenty more stuff on my plate.

Now, it's true that I'm not exactly thrilled with the Thor parts when I look at them, yeah I'd love to have time to redo that rocket along with several others, but the simple fact is I don't have time to fix every issue in the mod. If something is 'good enough', I have to try and force myself to leave it alone because usually there are much more significant issues that need to be addressed. 

By that token, it's appreciated if such energy is devoted to upcoming/current projects. Better to know

Specifically talking about the Saturn tanks, my fear/worry/the-thing-I'm-upset-about is that I put these very big, prominent intertank structures where the tank domes go, which is generally at the ends of the parts. I am worried that adding more parts above/below those will look strange, and I'm still not sure how I plan to resolve it. Things like the S-II tank don't really lend themselves to having those structures removed.

Anyways, as usual this is a half-baked ramble from work while I shuffle through renders, so apologies if it's a bit incoherent.

Also, AJ-60As!

hm2RLsw.pngRgzZK4T.png8mCq7jW.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

Now, it's true that I'm not exactly thrilled with the Thor parts when I look at them, yeah I'd love to have time to redo that rocket along with several others, but the simple fact is I don't have time to fix every issue in the mod. If something is 'good enough', I have to try and force myself to leave it alone because usually there are much more significant issues that need to be addressed. 

Dude, i absolutely understand that. Thats why I dont point out every other (minor) flaw i also found, only the most severe ones. There are a number of smaller flaws that do bug me, but probably arent worth the time to fix and dont impact the game that much. Some things that may even be compromises like the centaur insulation that you described. I know that I am a very nitpicky person and so I try to limit myself in that regard^^ The thing with that Delta-1000 ELT is just that its hard to build correctly if you dont have a website on the second screen with drawings and measurements to compare to. I just did it with the 2700 like it was in the manual, and then when i tried to do the Thorad/Delta-J stuff nothing made sense anymore and confused the hell out of me. So thats why I think another tank would be a good idea here. I have a feeling that we misunderstood each other in the beginning. Im not talking about "re-doing" the Thor stuff, the 2700 is fine. Im talking about an addition to whats already there. Even if its only placed on a bucket list and may be done later when you have more time for it^^ Though I would appreciate a fix in the manual, not longer describing it as "Daleth 1000" but rather als "Daleth-E" or "Daleth 0600". That way the possibility for confusion is eliminated^^

 

Actual numbers for the centaurs  can be found here.

http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets_2/United_States_3/Centaur/Centaur.htm

Infos about centaurs are pretty scattered on the internet, but i found some of the Atlas II/III mission design guide documents that suggest these numbers are correct.

https://de.scribd.com/document/20046628/ILS-Atlas-IIAS-IIIA-B-V-400-500-Mission-Planners-Guide

 

Atlas V boosters look good!

 

Peace

TK

Share this post


Link to post
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.