CobaltWolf

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

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

The Scout is scaled the way it is for a couple of reasons. It's just about the smallest LV you can make without going to non-standard bulkhead sizes. Any smaller, and you'll struggle to find a useable payload for it, in more ways than one - not only is making a useful probe hard at that size, but any smaller and it becomes much harder to work with the parts due to the limits on how much you can zoom the camera in the VAB.

Yeah. I understand the VAB zoom issue and the issue with small probes. Even just the build mode move widget is too sensitive at small scales.

2 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

The densities of the stock LF and Oxidizer are actually fairly close to the densities of the Titan's propellants in real life. I think the only thing we're really missing is a mild cryogenic to represent LOX, and even that can be sort of abstracted away since at least the hydrogen is boiling off.

I've been thinking more about this since I posted it and doing some spreadsheet calculations. Using LOX=KSP liquid oxidizer as a standard and with mixture ratios from Astronautix ( the 2.56:1 LOX-RP1 ratio is the only real sticker, because staged combustion engines use a much more oxygen rich mixture ), I calculated what the densities would have to be for the various propellants to have volume/mass-flow ratios be accurate while still using having KSP friendly masses.

*Note that 'Liquid fuel' is standing-in for both Kerosene and UDMH, which are similar in density.

Cryogenic fuel ( LH2 )= 0.3105 g/cm3

Cryogenic oxidizer ( LOX )= 5.0000 g/cm3

Liquid fuel ( RP1/UDMH )= 3.5320 g/cm3

Liquid oxidizer ( N2O4 )= 6.3997 g/cm3 6.4582 g/cm3 ( I calculated this using the wrong value for liquid fuel initially )

Only the all cryogenic mixture deviates wildly from KSP propellant masses volumes, the others are within 10%, but volume ratios and mixture ratios would be very close to real world values for most cases, though I don't like that the liquid oxidizer has to be rounded.

I think I'm gonna try this out.

2 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

All the Titan parts are getting remade (the ~60 part To Do list on Github turned out to still be missing stuff!) or made for the first time (the new fairing bases, for example). I actually even started remodeling them already, I just haven't pulled them into the same scene as the other parts nor started texturing them. This stuff is pretty time consuming, especially with how much I spend fussing over everything. :)

The Titan stuff is my favorite in the mod and by far my most used, so I'm very happy to hear this!

Edited by Mudwig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Mudwig said:

The Titan stuff is my favorite in the mod and by far my most used, so I'm very happy to hear this!

Aside from Saturn II and INT/MLV hypothetical parts I agree 100% with this statement.      Titan is FrankenSTEIN's monster rocket in so many ways yet, even with the costly/caustic fuel it is near and dear to many peoples hearts.  

*History section to follow*

Aerojet General, built a modular engine that could run almost any liquid fuel thought up with minor modifications.  Swap a few parts here or there and you get a completely different engine performance with the same core set of parts.   Martin Marietta took a conservative belt&Braces approach to designing the core missile for the USAF.   Let Convair div of General Dynamics tackle the wacky and new Balloon tank.  They are going to pop anyway... we will go old school.  Heck we won't even use much of the technology that was common to aircraft in late 1920s.  Monocoque* structures would greatly lighten the rocket..   Nope We are going to use plates to re-enforce plates to re-enforce plates to re-enforce the structure....    And our Missile will carry the same warhead as Atlas and do it more reliability (that part is debatable.)  The only MOSTLY Monocoque parts in the Titan were the actual Fuel tanks INSIDE the tank structure.  They were pill shaped in the first stage and semi-spherical in the 2nd stage.  There is so much wasted room in the Titan stages that the USAF when refurbishing old Titan II missiles to use in the Titan 23G program added RCS in the middle of the 2nd stage.

To my recollection no other Rocket in the history of space flight is/was more easily re-configurable (MAYYYBE the R-7.)   When the NRO, or USAF or NASA asked for a change.... after the in Service Titan II missiles were in production (so after Gemini) Aerojet would slap together parts from one engine variant to another... heck this is why a lot of early Titan IIIBs claim to have flown with LR87-AJ-11 engines (they all flew with -9s but SOME of them had PARTS from the -11)   I know of no other rocket to go through that kind of evolution.  

Monocoque is a French term that in the aircraft world is said to mean strength of egg-shell.  or Strength of skin.  Most aircraft and rockets are manufactured to a SEMI-Monocoque standard today... The Skin is most of the strength... but not all, there are still longerons, ribs, girders, flanges etc...)    Titan did not use many classical monocoque structures... Conversely the Balloon envelop of an Atlas rocket is 100% pure monocoque in it's ultimate/lightest form.   Oh and for those counting Atlas V structure is closer to Titan than any other Atlas variant on the monocoque spectrum.

 

Oh and the list of Aerojet LR87/LR91 fuels:

LF/O

AZ-50/NTO

Alumanize/NTO (Gelled AZ-50 with aluminum flakes in the suspension) <- if perfected this would have greatly increased thrust

Hydrolox <- possibly not with the LR91 due to turbopump restrictions... <--this was mostly perfected and nearly ready to fly on Saturn when it was shelved!

FLOx/UDMH,  FLOx/LF, LF2/ <-thankfully none of these were tested and I am unsure how much if any design work went into them any of the Florine based acids are best left planets away!

Keep in mind that the engineers at Aerojet made all these design changes... using slide rules.  (not much better than counting your fingers and toes folks!) The sheer amount of math required just to solve the different flow rate from LF/O to Hydrolox is daunting to someone even today....  and they calculated it all out with 4 pieces of metal joined together in such a way as to aid their calculation process......   The Descendant company today, with all it's gee wiz computers couldn't figure out how to quickly put together the AR-1 which to my mind is just a staged combustion variation of the LR87... (I know there is more involved but in it's simplest form....)

 

Edited by Pappystein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love this mod, i've had it for over a year. but I still think the IVA on the mercury capsule needs work. I'd help with it but I don't know jack sh*t about coding. anyways, amazing work!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
22 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

 

 

Hmmm... I forget, what was the real reason for doing this?

More thrust on the s2 is good at first but the engine switches to 5:1 for more efficiency the J2 on the s1b were locked to 5:1 though. As for why I like it it's because of realism

Edited by Anders Kerman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Esq. Scisms said:

I love this mod, i've had it for over a year. but I still think the IVA on the mercury capsule needs work. I'd help with it but I don't know jack sh*t about coding. anyways, amazing work!

I do not make any IVAs for the mod (they are super time consuming and most people don't care) so we're stuck with whatever gets donated. I wouldn't hold your breath for a new Mercury IVA :)

 

4 hours ago, Anders Kerman said:

More thrust on the s2 is good at first but the engine switches to 5:1 for more efficiency the J2 on the s1b were locked to 5:1 though. As for why I like it it's because of realism

I'm confused, I thought last time we talked about it it was some sort of mundane real-life reason that had no application in KSP. But if we could justify it as just a straight toggle between slightly more ISP or slightly more thrust that would be nice to have in game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does change the ISP and thrust to weight ratio, however we don't really need to worry about delicate fuel consumption reality of real rockets.  They always burn exactly as specified, in ksp.  How does the fuel boil off work, I never left a rocket around long enough to care about the boil off.  Would it matter to change the ratio to use up more fuel? That might help squeeze an ounce of power from the rocket lol?

Share this post


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

I do not make any IVAs for the mod (they are super time consuming and most people don't care) so we're stuck with whatever gets donated. I wouldn't hold your breath for a new Mercury IVA :)

 

I'm confused, I thought last time we talked about it it was some sort of mundane real-life reason that had no application in KSP. But if we could justify it as just a straight toggle between slightly more ISP or slightly more thrust that would be nice to have in game.

Yup after I ran the math again (this time correctly) it all made sense :D

Also you may be wondering why have it be able to go all the way down to 4.5:1 since you have less thrust and even lower isp due to not all the hydrogen being burnt, but this is to basically throw away hydrogen that would not be able to be burnt at the amount of oxygen left. So actually increasing deltav.

39 minutes ago, debaker02 said:

It does change the ISP and thrust to weight ratio, however we don't really need to worry about delicate fuel consumption reality of real rockets.  They always burn exactly as specified, in ksp.  How does the fuel boil off work, I never left a rocket around long enough to care about the boil off.  Would it matter to change the ratio to use up more fuel? That might help squeeze an ounce of power from the rocket lol?

Unless you use ro... Boil off means cryogenics are released because they cause to much pressure and you want your stage to stay a stage not a bomb.

Share this post


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

I'm confused, I thought last time we talked about it it was some sort of mundane real-life reason that had no application in KSP. But if we could justify it as just a straight toggle between slightly more ISP or slightly more thrust that would be nice to have in game.:)

I also sent aerojet-rocketdyne an email asking for j-2 documents but didn't get a response yet :c

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
23 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

I'm confused, I thought last time we talked about it it was some sort of mundane real-life reason that had no application in KSP. But if we could justify it as just a straight toggle between slightly more ISP or slightly more thrust that would be nice to have in game.

Game design fact: The implementation of Mode switching is pretty easy to do (I believe the effects become the most complicated part of this.)    

Now  Putting on my "I am an opinionated Jerk" hat

The REASON for this is boil off.

The REASON for not doing this:   Boil off.

Personal opinion:  Until such a time as Boil off actually takes tank construction into account (AKA each tank has it's own boil off factor)  and assuming you keep with ONLY boiling off ONE cryogenic fuel (LH2) and don't add the LOX that would be needed for Accuracy, This is simple math.  I see at-least 10 variables in play that will affect this.  I see a lot of cogative work for a feature that many will not take advantage off (remember the altered state would be LOWER THRUST than a standard J-2)   Yes if I am using BDB's boil off feature, I would get a little more d/v out of my S-IVB stage around the mun.   My Centaur MIGHT survive to orbital Circulation around minimus.   Or... I do what I already do and turn off Boil-off.  No issues, no need to complicate the math (BDB's or ours.) 

DEEPER OPINION BEHIND THIS:   KSP and SQUAD do not give us the tools to properly plan out a flight path before launch.  Most of the mods that focus on this only focus on one part or another of the over all "I need to plan the launch to make it there" mentality that is the real world.   It is one of the neat things I liked about the original implementation of the BDB Safe Solid program.   I could shut off and then turn back on the engine... allowing me to deal with the slop that was the end of my interplanetary flight.   Was soo sad to see that 'feature' (cheat if you will) go.      Now you might be thinking  "that is all and good but what does it have to do with the J-2 and Boiloff?"   Simple:  Without the ability for good planning, the average player trying to get somewhere from Kerbin SOI is left with a rocket in orbit near the edge of the SOI.... Boiling off fuel.   or alternatively  Said player is using rockets that do not have fuel boiloff to avoid the boiloff hit.... Or most probably... Like me they turn boil off either way down or OFF before starting to play the game. 

But as I said those are my opinions, feel free to have your own and share it.   Just as I won't assume you all like mine I will not necessarily like or agree with yours.... The hat is off now

35 minutes ago, Anders Kerman said:

I also sent aerojet-rocketdyne an email asking for j-2 documents but didn't get a response yet :c

Good luck with that.  I have had exactly ONE TWO company(s) ever respond back to me for the various points of research I have done in the past.     And their response was to contact the government body that was in charge of the program in 1952....    The government body that no longer exists...  The second one was a company producing replica aircraft from original drawings and reverse engineered parts from real aircraft.   Have you attempted to reach out to NASA's historical section, or the Library of Congress?

 

Edited by Pappystein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Barzon Kerman said:

This was posted in a science thread, and I thought you might be interested in it @CobaltWolf. It is about a reusable agena.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19740024172.pdf 

I know it wasn't directly for me but THANKS for posting that!  I am just skimming it now but I love the Drop tank Idea for Agena as well as the picture in Figure 2-1 of both the Drop tanks and more importantly the larger engine bell that was used for Ascent Agena (supposedly.)  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/1/2019 at 8:30 AM, CobaltWolf said:

My therapist: Titan Superheavy isn't real, it can't hurt you.

Titan Superheavy:

OPi3efR.png

haha its funny cus I need a new therapist because the sad thoughts are back

Ah. When you require fins for stability but only have boosters. 

I wonder if it could be launched from the runway with that much body lift. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Barzon Kerman said:

You can thank @Silavite for that! :) 

They are thanked!  :)

So a few things I have seen in my quick skim. 

Parts that could be used given BDB design goals (what types of craft used in BDB):  

  • The Growth Option for Shuttle Agena is remarkably similar to Agena 2000 for the Atlas V....  Drawing shows the correct tankage size (120" IRL or about 1.875m KSP)
  • Actual exploded skeletal diagrams show that the current Agena D if not exactly correct is pretty good accuracy wise..  To the point I don't think the Agena D assets need any major changes to physical design (the GCU could be a tiny bit longer but that appears to be the biggest part change that I see.)
  • Extended 50:1 and 150:1 bells are well drawn in this document. (including the possibility of making the 150:1 an extending bell ala RL10-B2)

Parts that I like and will add to craft I make:

  • 6x Drop tanks!  Now I am even MOAR happy that Cobaltwolf has made the new series of decouplers!
  • The CLAW! (yes there are two drawings with what in KSP is called the Claw!)  In document it is a "Satellite maintenance mechanism"
  • Extended RCS to work with the CLAW.   

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, komodo said:

Ah. When you require fins for stability but only have boosters. 

I wonder if it could be launched from the runway with that much body lift. 

Sadly no... (I know I tried! :) )   HOWEVER I have had success with fly back of boosters and landing on the KSP runway.  I have flown Atlas V Heavys (old models) and in one case a Titan II derived (only one of the two boosters made it back the other ditched in the ocean due to early MECO AKA I separated BOTH boosters a little too late and one flew worse than the other.) 

 

However each of those had wings attached to allow control and a boost-glide approach.    Unfortunately there really isn't a configurable lifting surface that is retractable... so they were UGLY as well.  For proper flyback at-least 1x new plugin would need to be developed and many people would think it was cheaty.   You would need a custom configurable COL/COM/COP adjustment and the ability to edit the overall Lift vector (adding or subtracting lift.)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Pappystein said:

Unfortunately there really isn't a configurable lifting surface that is retractable... so they were UGLY as well.  For proper flyback at-least 1x new plugin would need to be developed and many people would think it was cheaty

Isn't that what this does? Disclaimer, I haven't given it a go before.

It's also a single player game. What is cheating in this context? (I digress before I get started!..)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, komodo said:

Isn't that what this does? Disclaimer, I haven't given it a go before.

It's also a single player game. What is cheating in this context? (I digress before I get started!..)

 

Sorry What Retractable Lifting surface does is allow a single piece to have aerodynamic controls for both Stock and (since I don't use it I am unsure) maybe FAR.   It allows something that does not normally provide lift to provide lift once deployed.  I already have this via the REKT mod and I used to have it when I tried to make KRE work for this.   It was KRE that made me realize another mod/dll was needed.   The Problem is you have no way to adjust the COL/COM/COP of the rocket stage to MATCH the COL of the wing you attach from Kerbal Recovery (or any other mod.)   The end result is at best a squirrelly stage that only an expert pilot (certainly NOT MECHJEB!) could land....   and Only with much effort.    Sure I could slap on 9x SAS modules that are appropriately tweakscaled to my most common 1.875 diameter core with an equal number of large inline batteries to power all those gyroscopes... but then it would be easier just to do a SpaceX style landing then.  

Here is the set of retractable wings I have tried:

Like I said, typically the COL and the COP are too far off from the COM when the tanks are empty for these wings to be effective on MY stages.   While I have had issues with many rockets, does seem to work fine for most Zenit first stages I have flown these wings on (from various mods.)  

But then again to be a really effective boost-back plane style lander the retractable wings have to be able to carry with them the pogo/outrigger wheels for a Bicycle style landing system ala M-4/3M/3MN/3MS Bison, Harrier or U-2 Spyplane.   Landing such a huge stage as say Titan III Stage 1, on 3 landing gears all attached to the fuselage leaves a lot to be desired with roll instability on landing.... More likely to have the stage roll over on it's side than make a smooth landing... Short of having 3 or 4 large SAS reaction wheels on it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I heard y'all weren't satisfied with the current Titan decoupler...

Z6b6Daa.png
acy9q2C.png
AwTYf36.png

 

EDIT: Oh yeah, I heard y'all like variants. The TVC tank and the segment paint schemes will be a separate switcher. :)

t8IqPeU.png
5nDqAjh.png

Edited by CobaltWolf

Share this post


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

I heard y'all weren't satisfied with the current Titan decoupler...

Z6b6Daa.png
acy9q2C.png
AwTYf36.png

 

EDIT: Oh yeah, I heard y'all like variants. The TVC tank and the segment paint schemes will be a separate switcher. :)

t8IqPeU.png
5nDqAjh.png

 

That looks fantastic. Can't wait.

So... two OG black-and-white and one Titan III Commercial/Titan IVA style white, with and without TVC tanks, that means... 6 variants?! Ooh, that's a lot. :o

Will they be switchable independently when attached in symmetry mode, Like the Cormorant Aeronology thermal tiles?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Mudwig said:

 

So... two OG black-and-white and one Titan III Commercial/Titan IVA style white, with and without TVC tanks, that means... 6 variants?! Ooh, that's a lot. :o

Will they be switchable independently when attached in symmetry mode, Like the Cormorant Aeronology thermal tiles?

So I am going to guess here because It looks like we are seeing an engineering diagram/artwork (4 side views)...  I think you have 2 variants.  White, and Black and White.  but really Cobaltwolf will have to confirm.   Pay attention to the nose cone in the pictures.  you can see the upper Seperation motor 3 of the views... (center left, Center Right and Right)  That tells me the SRM is just rotated for each image.  

I wont bore you with the details but suffice to say a UA-1205 flying without TVC is a big bomb waiting to land someplace and do damage...   HOPEFULLY Range safety can blow it wide open if loss of TVC happens.

 

@CobaltWolf  I love how these integrate with the core stage.   I assume that is a new decoupler for the SRMs... It isn't by chance built into the SRM itself is it?   I am curious what kind of awesome wizardry you are using to make such a decoupler both attach and work (given what we "know" about KSP & Decouplers.)

 

I see you went with the mid/late style conic bottom TVC tank.  I have been unable to find proof but I think that bottom conic part is actually a tank extension (Some of the heavier Titan IVas flew with and the lighter ones did not is my only proof.)   I prefer this look over the hollow bottomed look of the flat bottomed TVC tanks...  It does not look like something is missing to me (obviously that is what I think when I look at the Flat bottomed TVC tanks.)   Thanks for that design choice!   By the looks of these Dev photos you will need to purchase inbox protection because when they release Realism Overhaul etc will want to come knocking and filling up your mail boxes :) for all the Titans! (If they haven't already)   :D

 

*EDIT*  Oh and I didn't notice this without blowing the picture up.  The Detonation cord/range safety destruct on the SRMs is awesome!  It will make it easy to ensure the Separation cone is lined up correctly with the UA-120x (assuming similar split between the nosecone and the SRM like previous generation.)

Edited by Pappystein

Share this post


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

I heard y'all weren't satisfied with the current Titan decoupler...

 

I actually WAS, but now that you mention it... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pappystein said:

So I am going to guess here because It looks like we are seeing an engineering diagram/artwork (4 side views)...  I think you have 2 variants.  White, and Black and White.  but really Cobaltwolf will have to confirm.   Pay attention to the nose cone in the pictures.  you can see the upper Seperation motor 3 of the views... (center left, Center Right and Right)  That tells me the SRM is just rotated for each image.  

I wont bore you with the details but suffice to say a UA-1205 flying without TVC is a big bomb waiting to land someplace and do damage...   HOPEFULLY Range safety can blow it wide open if loss of TVC happens.

 

The real ones were painted differently depending on which side they were on, so I ( perhaps wrongly ) was assuming that'd be the case here.

I think I simply misunderstood the post about the TVC being switchable as being the model rather than the texture. I know the TVC fluid is necessary for the real deal boosters to function, but in game it doesn't matter at all. The TVC tanks are purely cosmetic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

USI Life Support Update

well, USI LS has been updated some time ago and it broke the recyclers and habitation modules in Bluedog. USI now uses the USILS_LifeSupportRecyclerSwapOption and USILS_HabitationSwapOption instead of the old modules (that are now deprecated). These new modules allows to choose between different applications for the same parts. 

The exact duration of the supplies and habitation depends heavily on your USI settings as well as what parts are present in your craft.

Parts with updated modules:

Spoiler
  1. Apollo Block II SM, 750 kg of supplies
  2. Apollo Block III Mission Module, 750 kg of supplies and 10 months of habitation
  3. Apollo Block IV Mission Module, 1485 kg of supplies and 16 months of habitation 
  4. Gemini Service Module, 325 kg of supplies 
  5. MOL Lab and MOL Hab, 250 kg of supplies  with storage for 1 t + 250 kg of machinery. They can be used as recycler, living quarters or command module. The recycler reduces the consumption of supplies , the living quarters increase the KerbalMonths the module has and the command module (do not mistake it with the stock ModuleCommand) increase the habitation multiplier in your vessel, thus increasing the total KerbalMonths in your hole craft.
  6. Skylab Adapter and Skylab Airlock, 1500 kg of supplies
  7. Skylab OWS and Skylab Wet OWS,  500 kg of supplies with storage for 1t + 360 kg of machinery. They can be used as recycler, living quarters or command module.
  8. Saturn Flyby Mission Module, 250 kg of supplies + up to 750 kg of fertiliser, 150kg of machinery. It can be used as a recycler, living quartes or Agroponics module.
  9. Apollo LEM Ascent Module, 125 kg of supplies

The parts that have multiple options (MOL, Skylab) can be switched in flight at a cost in machinery and ElectricCharge. Some modules consume machinery so they will require resupply flights (I would like some feedback on that)

MM Patch, just replace the patch in Bluedog_DB/Compatibility/USI-LS/USI-LS.cfg with the code below


@PART[bluedog_Apollo_Block2_ServiceModule]:NEEDS[USILifeSupport]:FOR[Bluedog_DB]
{
	@cost += 1875 // supplies * $2.5
	RESOURCE
	{
		name = Supplies
		amount = 750
		maxAmount = 750
	}
}

@PART[bluedog_Apollo_Block3_MissionModule]:NEEDS[USILifeSupport]:FOR[Bluedog_DB]
{
	@cost += 1875 // supplies * $2.5
	%MODULE[USI_SwapController]	{}
	MODULE
	{
		name = USI_SwappableBay
		bayName = Bay 1
		moduleIndex = 0
	}
	MODULE
	{
		name = USI_Converter
		UseSpecialistBonus = false
	}

	RESOURCE
	{
		name = Supplies
		amount = 750
		maxAmount = 750
	}
	MODULE 
	{
		name = USILS_HabitationSwapOption
		ConverterName = Habitat
		StartActionName = Start Habitat
		StopActionName = Stop Habitat		

		BaseKerbalMonths = 10
		CrewCapacity = 3
		BaseHabMultiplier = 0

		INPUT_RESOURCE
		{
			ResourceName = ElectricCharge
			Ratio = 0.267
		}
	}
}

@PART[bluedog_Apollo_Block4_MissionModule]:NEEDS[USILifeSupport]:FOR[Bluedog_DB]
{
	@cost += 3645 // supplies * $2.5
	// Increased life support supply capacity over block III mission module

	%MODULE[USI_SwapController]	{}
	MODULE
	{
		name = USI_SwappableBay
		bayName = Bay 1
		moduleIndex = 0
	}
	MODULE
	{
		name = USI_Converter
		UseSpecialistBonus = false
	}

	RESOURCE
	{
		name = Supplies
		amount = 1458
		maxAmount = 1458
	}

	MODULE
	{
		name = USILS_HabitationSwapOption
		BaseKerbalMonths = 16
		CrewCapacity = 3
		BaseHabMultiplier = 0
		ConverterName = Habitat
		StartActionName = Start Habitat
		StopActionName = Stop Habitat
		INPUT_RESOURCE
		{
			ResourceName = ElectricCharge
			Ratio = 0.325
		}
	}
}

// Item description says LEO MSM60 Service module is filled with Fuel, Monoprop etc AND LS Supplies.
// Therefore, following patch adds 325 supplies, enough for 2 Kerbals to survive 15 days without recycling.
@PART[bluedog_Gemini_MalhenaSM]:NEEDS[USILifeSupport]:FOR[Bluedog_DB]
{
	@cost += 812 // supplies * $2.5
	@description ^= : and batteries:, batteries and life support supplies:
	RESOURCE
	{
		name = Supplies
		amount = 325
		maxAmount = 325
	}
	RESOURCE
	{
		name = Mulch
		amount = 0
		maxAmount = 20
	}
}

//MOL has three versions: Recycler, Habitation and command
//It is possible to change between those threee types at a cost in the form of machinery resource.
@PART[bluedog_MOL_Lab|bluedog_MOL_Hab]:NEEDS[USILifeSupport]:FOR[Bluedog_DB]
{
	@cost += 6450// Machinery * 15.8 + supplies * $2.5
	RESOURCE
	{
		name = Machinery
		amount = 0
		maxAmount = 250
	}
	RESOURCE
	{
		name = Supplies
		amount = 250
		maxAmount = 1000
	}
	MODULE:NEEDS[USILifeSupport]
	{
		name = USI_SwapController 
		ResourceCosts = Machinery,105,ElectricCharge,135
	}
	MODULE
	{
		name = USI_SwappableBay
		bayName = Bay 1
		moduleIndex = 0
	}
	MODULE
	{
		name = USI_Converter
		UseSpecialistBonus = false
	}

	MODULE:NEEDS[USILifeSupport]
	{
		name = USILS_LifeSupportRecyclerSwapOption
		ConverterName = Recycler
		StartActionName = Start Recycler
		StopActionName = Stop Recycler

		CrewCapacity = 3
		RecyclePercent = 0.65

		INPUT_RESOURCE
		{
			ResourceName = ElectricCharge
			Ratio = 0.85
		}	
	}		
	MODULE:NEEDS[USILifeSupport]
	{
		name = USILS_HabitationSwapOption
		ConverterName = Habitat
		StartActionName = Start Habitat
		StopActionName = Stop Habitat

		BaseKerbalMonths = 8
		CrewCapacity = 2
		BaseHabMultiplier = 0.05

		INPUT_RESOURCE
		{
			ResourceName = ElectricCharge
			Ratio = 0.4625
		}
	}
	MODULE
	{
		name = USILS_HabitationSwapOption
		ConverterName = Hab-Command
		StartActionName = Start Command
		StopActionName = Stop Command		

		BaseKerbalMonths = 2
		CrewCapacity = 2
		BaseHabMultiplier = 1.35

		INPUT_RESOURCE
		{
			ResourceName = ElectricCharge
			Ratio = 1.235
		}
		INPUT_RESOURCE
		{
			ResourceName = Machinery
			Ratio = 0.00001
		}
	}
}

// Enough Life Support Supplies to Allow 6 kerbals to survive in orbit for 3 months as per Manual II Mission Profile when used with recycler in the OWS

@PART[bluedog_Spacelab_Adapter|bluedog_Skylab_Airlock]:NEEDS[USILifeSupport]:AFTER[Bluedog_DB]
{
	@cost += 3750 // supplies * $2.5
	RESOURCE
	{
		name = Supplies
		amount = 1500
		maxAmount = 1500
	}
	RESOURCE
	{
		name = Mulch
		amount = 0
		maxAmount = 30
	}
}

// Adds habitation module to Skylab Orbital workshop
@PART[bluedog_Skylab_OWS|bluedog_Skylab_OWS_Wet]:NEEDS[USILifeSupport]:FOR[Bluedog_DB]
{
	//CrewCapacity = 6
	@cost += 8188 // Supplies * $2.5 + Machinery * $15.8
	@RESOURCE[ElectricCharge]
	{
		@amount += 6700
		@maxAmount += 6700
	}
	RESOURCE
	{
		name = Supplies
		amount = 500
		maxAmount = 1000
	}
	RESOURCE
	{
		name = Machinery
		amount = 0
		maxAmount = 360
	}
	MODULE:NEEDS[USILifeSupport]
	{
		name = USI_SwapController 
		ResourceCosts = Machinery,150,ElectricCharge,135
	}
	MODULE
	{
		name = USI_SwappableBay
		bayName = Bay 1
		moduleIndex = 0
	}
	MODULE
	{
		name = USI_Converter
		UseSpecialistBonus = false
	}

	MODULE
	{
		name = USILS_LifeSupportRecyclerSwapOption
		CrewCapacity = 5
		RecyclePercent = .75
		ConverterName = Life Support
		tag = Life Support
		StartActionName = Start Life Support
		StopActionName = Stop Life Support

		INPUT_RESOURCE
		{
			ResourceName = ElectricCharge
			Ratio = 4.7
		}
	}

	MODULE
	{
		name = USILS_HabitationSwapOption
		BaseKerbalMonths = 22
		CrewCapacity = 5
		BaseHabMultiplier = 0
		ConverterName = Habitat
		StartActionName = Start Habitat
		StopActionName = Stop Habitat
		INPUT_RESOURCE
		{
			ResourceName = ElectricCharge
			Ratio = 0.394
		}
	}
	MODULE
	{
		name = USILS_HabitationSwapOption
		ConverterName = Hab-Command
		StartActionName = Start Command
		StopActionName = Stop Command		

		BaseKerbalMonths = 2
		CrewCapacity = 5
		BaseHabMultiplier = 1.95

		INPUT_RESOURCE
		{
			ResourceName = ElectricCharge
			Ratio = 1.235
		}
		INPUT_RESOURCE
		{
			ResourceName = Machinery
			Ratio = 0.00001
		}
	}
}

// Adds habitation to saturn planetary flyby module
@PART[bluedog_Saturn_VFB_MissionModule]:NEEDS[USILifeSupport]:FOR[Bluedog_DB]
{
	@cost += 4495 // Supplies *$2.5 + Feritilizer*$2 + Machinery * $15.8
	RESOURCE
	{
		name = Supplies
		amount = 250
		maxAmount = 250
	}
	RESOURCE
	{
		name = Mulch
		amount = 0
		maxAmount = 25
	}
	RESOURCE
	{
		name = Fertilizer
		amount = 0
		maxAmount = 750
	}
	RESOURCE
	{
		name = Machinery
		amount = 0
		maxAmount = 150
	}
	MODULE:NEEDS[USILifeSupport]
	{
		name = USI_SwapController 
		ResourceCosts = Machinery,150,ElectricCharge,135
	}
	MODULE
	{
		name = USI_SwapController
	}
	MODULE
	{
		name = USI_SwappableBay
		bayName = Bay 1
		moduleIndex = 0
	}
	MODULE
	{
		name = USI_Converter
		UseSpecialistBonus = false
	}
	MODULE
	{
		name = USILS_LifeSupportRecyclerSwapOption
		ConverterName = Recycler
		StartActionName = Start Life Support
		StopActionName = Stop Life Support

		CrewCapacity = 3
		RecyclePercent = 0.85

		INPUT_RESOURCE
		{
			ResourceName = ElectricCharge
			Ratio = 1
		}
	}
	MODULE
	{
		name = USILS_HabitationSwapOption
		BaseKerbalMonths = 20
		CrewCapacity = 3
		BaseHabMultiplier = 0
		ConverterName = Habitat
		StartActionName = Start Habitat
		StopActionName = Stop Habitat
		INPUT_RESOURCE
		{
			ResourceName = ElectricCharge
			Ratio = 0.394
		}
	}
	MODULE
	{
		name = USI_ConverterSwapOption
		ConverterName = Agroponics
		StartActionName = Start Agroponics
		StopActionName = Stop Agroponics

		INPUT_RESOURCE
		{
			ResourceName = Mulch
			Ratio =  0.00120000
		}
		INPUT_RESOURCE
		{
			ResourceName = Fertilizer
			Ratio =  0.00012000
		}
		OUTPUT_RESOURCE
		{
			ResourceName = Supplies
			Ratio = 0.00132000
			DumpExcess = False
		}
		INPUT_RESOURCE
		{
			ResourceName = ElectricCharge
			Ratio = 2.64
		}
	}
}

@PART[bluedog_LEM_Ascent_Cockpit]:NEEDS[USILifeSupport]:FOR[Bluedog_DB]
{
	@cost += 812 // Supplies *$2.5
	RESOURCE
	{
		name = Supplies
		amount = 125
		maxAmount = 325
	}
}
Edited by Marcelo Silveira

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Marcelo Silveira said:

Saturn Flyby Mission Module, 250 kg of supplies + up to 750 kg of fertiliser, 150kg of machinery. It can be used as a recycler, living quartes or Agroponics module.

My only question/concern about this is, did this calculation factor in a direct flight to Eve and back or does it have quite a bit of wiggle room Given KSP's poor ability to plan complicated launches?  For that matter are ALL the Intergalactic Planetary *dang you Beastie Boys!*  parts so equipped?

Beyond that, I have seen the the hard work you have done here and in other mods supporting the USI Lifesuport changes.  THANKS!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Pappystein said:

So I am going to guess here because It looks like we are seeing an engineering diagram/artwork (4 side views)...  I think you have 2 variants.  White, and Black and White.  but really Cobaltwolf will have to confirm.   Pay attention to the nose cone in the pictures.  you can see the upper Seperation motor 3 of the views... (center left, Center Right and Right)  That tells me the SRM is just rotated for each image. 

@CobaltWolf  I love how these integrate with the core stage.   I assume that is a new decoupler for the SRMs... It isn't by chance built into the SRM itself is it?   I am curious what kind of awesome wizardry you are using to make such a decoupler both attach and work (given what we "know" about KSP & Decouplers.)

I see you went with the mid/late style conic bottom TVC tank.  I have been unable to find proof but I think that bottom conic part is actually a tank extension (Some of the heavier Titan IVas flew with and the lighter ones did not is my only proof.)   I prefer this look over the hollow bottomed look of the flat bottomed TVC tanks...  It does not look like something is missing to me (obviously that is what I think when I look at the Flat bottomed TVC tanks.)   Thanks for that design choice!   By the looks of these Dev photos you will need to purchase inbox protection because when they release Realism Overhaul etc will want to come knocking and filling up your mail boxes :) for all the Titans! (If they haven't already)   :D

*EDIT*  Oh and I didn't notice this without blowing the picture up.  The Detonation cord/range safety destruct on the SRMs is awesome!  It will make it easy to ensure the Separation cone is lined up correctly with the UA-120x (assuming similar split between the nosecone and the SRM like previous generation.)

Yes, they're just 4 copies of the same booster, rotated 90 degrees each.

I'm planning on trying to make something like the Falcon Heavy decoupler for Tundra, except it would have a switcher for the different booster lengths.

The design of the TVC tank isn't finalized.

The det cord strips were necessary for breaking up the UVs.

6 hours ago, Mudwig said:

The real ones were painted differently depending on which side they were on, so I ( perhaps wrongly ) was assuming that'd be the case here.

I think I simply misunderstood the post about the TVC being switchable as being the model rather than the texture. I know the TVC fluid is necessary for the real deal boosters to function, but in game it doesn't matter at all. The TVC tanks are purely cosmetic.

As far as I can tell, the side with the TVC tank has a longer stripe than the side opposite. I believe the boosters have identical paint schemes, it's just the one side is rotated 180 degrees relative to the other.

And yeah, the switch is going to be strips/white segments, and then I suppose orange/white/creamsicle for the TVC tank. So I suppose... still 6 variants? :)

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.