CobaltWolf

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

Recommended Posts

On 7/15/2019 at 3:32 PM, CobaltWolf said:

 

Anyone remember the FASA Mini Goo? I sure miss it... hey, what's this? Oh, just a turd observation experiment...

RcQABU9.png

 

Any-chance of a Goo for Too?  

I love how you have made your goo purple.   too bad it would be "tough" to animate the goo to do different things when you do experiments at different locations.    (Shiver in the cold on Kerbin or Layhey,  fill the whole thing when in deep space,   etc....)

 

On the subject of the Lander...   a 1.875m cargo module 2 to 2.5x the length of the lander (roller doors instead of shuttle type swinging doors would be awesome if possible.) might be a great way to get the lander and Gemini in a single stack to Mun/Minimus.   Alternatively launch 2 rockets, one a Titan IIIC(23) derived rocket with lander and a good comm unit on the Transtage... Place in orbit of Mun.   The Transtage becomes a relay sat.  the Second being a Titan IIIC(23) with a payload of a 2nd Transtage with Gemini attached. 

IDK it is a Cobalt decision (we can do the 2 rocket launch today... could even do it with an Atlas-Vega or Atlas Centaur. )   

On the subject of the Legs/Aux tanks/RCS that are modeled for the lander.  They look very good.    

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kerbin Orbit Rendezvous approach also works, and is cheaper if Funds is a thing in your career game.  In the meantime, I've also used proc fairings to fake a Lander Adapter Module or Near Future (at least I think it's NF) has some neat stackable cargo bays with rotating doors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An open cockpit light lander could also be made into a dedicated Minmus lander (tuned for 2.5x/JNSQ), while the closed cockpit (the existing one) could be for the Mun. Also, could we get parts for some of the other unbuilt Saturns (namely the C-3 and some of the INTs and MLVs), though some of these would require the HG-3, which you have said in the past would be difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, hieywiey said:

An open cockpit light lander could also be made into a dedicated Minmus lander (tuned for 2.5x/JNSQ), while the closed cockpit (the existing one) could be for the Mun. Also, could we get parts for some of the other unbuilt Saturns (namely the C-3 and some of the INTs and MLVs), though some of these would require the HG-3, which you have said in the past would be difficult.

I assume you've already checked the BDB Extras folder?  There are MM patches in there for stretched Saturn tankage that you can use to build pre and post-Apollo programme Saturn variants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Dragon01 said:

Not currently registered on Github, sorry. That said, it's not exactly rocket science. :) I could PM you a config if you really want (that said, I don't have BDB on my old install, so I won't be able to do that until I've moved my dev stuff over to the new one). 

You should take more interest in IVAs in general - people do appreciate a well-made one, contrary to a popular misconception. I wish I could say I can help you spruce it up to make it really shine, but my KSP install is in a bit of a disarray, and I have a backlog anyway (that said, once that's done, I do want to take a look at both the mini lander and Apollo).

Yeah even if you could PM it that would be great. :)

I'm just not that interested in them. They're really time consuming, and not being able to work fast enough to keep up with what catches my attention is already a major source of stress for me.

 

12 hours ago, Pappystein said:

Sokay... so I already have a Science probe based on Titan I (old model) in the Extras folder... and I like the crash, survive and THEN run science features of it.   However I am all fore this... except I would reverse the Parachute and Heat shield.   Make the expansion part the chute holder and the return curve the actual parachute (neatly nestled in the 1.5-0.625 adapter (IIRC the Mk-IV should be 0.625, not 0.9375... but you have the refs I don't)

If the mass was balanced about the geometric center (top to bottom) the part stack would fall NARROWEST first...  The wider area acts like an air-brake and slows the whole stack down.... insignificantly but it does.   Further, aerodynamically, if you weight the section you have labeled Heat Shield more to allow it to lead, you would have to use a SAS or similar controls to keep the probe stack steady.   Unless it is so heavy to that end that there is almost zero mass in the upper parts.

Now I LIKE your ideas for a return capsule... However it feels big then.   Any thoughts to reviving your return capsule mod to use newer parts/process/rules?   

I could see that updated with the features of the later stock science grabber part (that way to large cubical rectangle thingie that I keep burying in my Gemini and Mercury/stock Mk1 capsules.)   Then that set of parts would become useful again (currently you have to stuff experiments in those parts and they are hard to use/do.)     *EDIT ADDED AFTER THIS POINT*  If those parts were smaller (Parachute, Probecore/science grabber, heat shield and custom decoupler) you could honestly make some of the early KH film sats with only a few additional parts....

Yeah, when I made the mini return pod the experiment storage functionality wasn't in game yet so I had to take what I could get. I plan on finishing these parts out, not remaking the mini mod.

 

11 hours ago, Pappystein said:

Any-chance of a Goo for Too?  

I love how you have made your goo purple.   too bad it would be "tough" to animate the goo to do different things when you do experiments at different locations.    (Shiver in the cold on Kerbin or Layhey,  fill the whole thing when in deep space,   etc....)

On the subject of the Lander...   a 1.875m cargo module 2 to 2.5x the length of the lander (roller doors instead of shuttle type swinging doors would be awesome if possible.) might be a great way to get the lander and Gemini in a single stack to Mun/Minimus.   Alternatively launch 2 rockets, one a Titan IIIC(23) derived rocket with lander and a good comm unit on the Transtage... Place in orbit of Mun.   The Transtage becomes a relay sat.  the Second being a Titan IIIC(23) with a payload of a 2nd Transtage with Gemini attached. 

IDK it is a Cobalt decision (we can do the 2 rocket launch today... could even do it with an Atlas-Vega or Atlas Centaur. )   

On the subject of the Legs/Aux tanks/RCS that are modeled for the lander.  They look very good.   

Goo for Too??

I might be able to animate it to at least look like it's floating, I need to get this stuff over to my main dev PC so I can see it in Unity before I make any more decisions on it. It's supposed to match the Restock Mystery Goo look in the end.

Unfortunately, I just can't get the lander to fit within 1.875m. I wish it did, but at the end of the day this isn't based on the Langley Lander so much as "trying to make a better Mk1 Lander Can" - at least, that was the original point of the pod all those years ago. But I don't feel too bad, because that's all the more reason to use the new Titan fairing bases :) Titan 3E feels appropriate.

I want to see if we can get abort modes on the UA120 SRBs that activate additional thrustTransforms on the top of the rocket.

 

5 hours ago, Friznit said:

Kerbin Orbit Rendezvous approach also works, and is cheaper if Funds is a thing in your career game.  In the meantime, I've also used proc fairings to fake a Lander Adapter Module or Near Future (at least I think it's NF) has some neat stackable cargo bays with rotating doors.

4 hours ago, hieywiey said:

An open cockpit light lander could also be made into a dedicated Minmus lander (tuned for 2.5x/JNSQ), while the closed cockpit (the existing one) could be for the Mun. Also, could we get parts for some of the other unbuilt Saturns (namely the C-3 and some of the INTs and MLVs), though some of these would require the HG-3, which you have said in the past would be difficult.

1 hour ago, Friznit said:

I assume you've already checked the BDB Extras folder?  There are MM patches in there for stretched Saturn tankage that you can use to build pre and post-Apollo programme Saturn variants.

No promises anything in the Extras folder keeps working, they're pretty unmaintained.

Yeah, the HG-3 has like... nothing available on it to model off of. It's a silly engine :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it helps, you can try modeling an IVA as a "shell", with no built-in equipment. I noticed many of them have various bits of equipment modeled into the main mesh. That's not really a good thing. Make the simplest interior mesh you can. It needs interior walls, consoles (not the gaming/control kind, just bits of structure you place displays on) and windows. Nothing else. You can then use props, such as Nertea's Near Future Props pack, to fill it with equipment. If you want to put in something that's not in prop library, make it as a prop. It allows it to be much more easily reused between IVAs, and frees up space on texture sheet for the main mesh. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The HG-3 probably looked like the middle picture on an Animorphs cover between a J-2 and a RS-25.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi folks,

Some content has been removed, due to going off-topic and derailing the thread into arguing about what people should or shouldn't be posting.  Please try to stay on topic, folks, and remember that unless you're a moderator, it's not your place to tell anyone what to do or what not to do.

If you see someone doing something that you believe is so inappropriate that it's actually breaking forum rules, then please just report the post and do not otherwise respond or attempt to enforce the rules yourself.

If you see someone doing something that you believe is objectionable for some reason but not actually against the rules... then you can ignore them if you like, but please don't attempt to lecture or criticize.  It never ends well, regardless of the merits of the case.

To summarize the discussion on IVAs in this mod thus far:

  • @CobaltWolf has indicated that he's not interested in spending significant time or effort on IVAs.  That's entirely his prerogative, since of course "because I'm the author and I don't wanna" is the only reason that any modder needs.  And we all understand this (right?).  So, it would be inappropriate to pester him to do things he doesn't want to do.  So please don't do that.
  • He has also indicated a potential willingness to make fixes to IVAs, particularly if someone can hand a fix to him.  So it's appropriate for people to do that, as long as it's within what the author has indicated a willingness to consider.
  • Helpful advice (e.g. "here's a way to make it easier") is perfectly reasonable... as long as it doesn't include pressuring (e.g. "you should do this because it's easy").

Please don't attempt to carry the argument further, and thank you for your understanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've tried reinstalling both the mod and the game a couple of times, but the new Transtage part isn't showing up in the part list, despite its' config file being there. I fully understand the development build is for testing, but this has only started occurring after installing the latest development version.

Share this post


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

I've tried reinstalling both the mod and the game a couple of times, but the new Transtage part isn't showing up in the part list, despite its' config file being there. I fully understand the development build is for testing, but this has only started occurring after installing the latest development version.

Was this on a fresh ksp install? Because I’ve had problems only if replacing one bdb folder with a newer one sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jall said:

Was this on a fresh ksp install? Because I’ve had problems only if replacing one bdb folder with a newer one sometimes.

Modded, then completely new install. I redownloaded the mod a few times.

Share this post


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

I've tried reinstalling both the mod and the game a couple of times, but the new Transtage part isn't showing up in the part list, despite its' config file being there. I fully understand the development build is for testing, but this has only started occurring after installing the latest development version.

6 minutes ago, Jall said:

Was this on a fresh ksp install? Because I’ve had problems only if replacing one bdb folder with a newer one sometimes.

4 minutes ago, sslaptnhablhat said:

Modded, then completely new install. I redownloaded the mod a few times.

Hmm, you know that the Transtage is only one part now and not two?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CobaltWolf said:

Hmm, you know that the Transtage is only one part now and not two?

Yup, I was using it with the new Titan rockets for a while. I decided to reinstall KSP to try out some new mods today but in the most recent development build the new Transtage has stopped showing up in the parts list.

Share this post


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

Hmm, you know that the Transtage is only one part now and not two?

It might be about time to start removing the old Titan parts from the game. I know that’s why I had an issue finding the new Titan IV parts in the VAB a little while back. Deleted the old ones and the new ones just popped up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In, completely different news, the Apollo's nose is going to look better soon. This is a little fix I've been thinking about for a while, that actually will make the docking port more flexible as well!

w1hlIrv.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think you could do the HG-3 taking a lot of artistic freedom, since documentation is so sparse non-existent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, hieywiey said:

Do you think you could do the HG-3 taking a lot of artistic freedom, since documentation is so sparse non-existent?

I don't think so. I'm generally not a creative person, believe it or not, and I struggle in voids of information like we have with the HG-3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CobaltWolf said:

I don't think so. I'm generally not a creative person, believe it or not, and I struggle in voids of information like we have with the HG-3.

I'd honestly be fine with one that's just a J-2S with a different .cfg file, if that's possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, hieywiey said:

(namely the C-3 and some of the INTs and MLVs),

You can actually make a C-3 with the parts made for the S-IVC.   The 2x engine mount with J-2s, and the Extension tank for S-IVC are actually the "Right" size for the 1st generation C-3's S-III stage    At that juncture C-3 was S-1(4x E-1 Engines) S-3 (2x J-2 engines small tank), S-IV or S-IVB (Payload dependant not cost dependant.)  and "Big Centaur"   Big Centaur was canceled before the 2nd Centaur prototype flew and was never fleshed out/explained better than "a bigger Centaur"   A lot of people assume the S-IV stage is "Big centaur" but the Big Centaur was to use the RL12 engine which was 10% bigger (dimensionally) than RL10 and had a thrust similar to the much later RL10A3 (IIRC it might have been an earlier RL10 upgrade!)

SO:   A 1960 or earlier C-3 rocket was a Cluster tank with either 4 E-1s or 8 H-1 engines, followed by a mini stage (S-III) with 2x J-2 engines on a small Hydrolox tank) with S-IV or S-IVB depending on the payload for the upper stage.   Please note that at this juncture S-IVB was an S-IV with a single J-2... it was later upgraded to the large tank S-IVB we know and love today!    The early problems at P&W with the J-2 engine (Hydrolox isn't as simple as a Hydrogen powered Jet engine after all) delayed the J-2 several years and resulted in the more common S-I, S-II, S-IV for C-3 in 1961

And yes, the only reason Pratt and Whitney won the J-2 contract was because of their Project Sunburn (a Hydrogen powered Jet engine) had more hours of "safe" operation than Aerojet did with the Hydrolox LR-87... well that at the thrust level requirements it would opperate at, the LR-87 would have required 2x chambers per engine complicating the arrangements for multi engine setups and just taking up extra space in general....

 

Share this post


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

Yeah, when I made the mini return pod the experiment storage functionality wasn't in game yet so I had to take what I could get. I plan on finishing these parts out, not remaking the mini mod. 

Goo for Too??

Yeah, the HG-3 has like... nothing available on it to model off of. It's a silly engine :)

1) fair nuf...   I was just thinking that with a minimal of parts you could make the entire corona family using the already in game parts as a basis (Agena + the Mini return capsule)   I DO NOT want you to do more work than you already have to so just take it as an idea if you ever get board

2)  can you tell I have worked almost 30 hours in 2 days?   Goo for Two would have been more appropriate...  AKA a single part with 2 Goo experiments.

3) I agree it is a Silly engine...   But I might have a way to make a visually distinctive engine that is obvious in  it's J-2 heritage.   Think J-2S combustion chamber and pipes scaled up ~8%   Add an external turbopump ala RD-191 and use a solid wall nozzle like the RS-25 uses for the extension portion only of the bell.  If it is a crap idea, ignore it... if it gives you an idea, use it when you feel you have the time.    

 

2 hours ago, hieywiey said:

I'd honestly be fine with one that's just a J-2S with a different .cfg file, if that's possible.

This is already in the Extras folder under Pafftek Saturn MLV.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Pappystein said:

[snip]

Also, what is the large object at the top of the HG-3 in this diagram? (from astronautix.com) This could make it very "visually distinctive." I assume it is plumbing, turbopumps, or a gearbox of some kind.

satupeng.gif

If the information on it isn't available, it could always be made into just generic foil (of course with the new reflective shaders), like often seen in Falcon 9 launches on the second stage.

Falcon-9-upper-stage-Iridium2-SpaceX.jpg

Edited by hieywiey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, hieywiey said:

Also, what is the large object at the top of the HG-3 in this diagram? (from astronautix.com) This could make it very "visually distinctive." I assume it is plumbing, turbopumps, or a gearbox of some kind.

satupeng.gif

 

 

I have a total WAG on that one.    A Huge Turbopump or plumbing that wraps around the combustion chamber

Share this post


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

You can actually make a C-3 with the parts made for the S-IVC.   The 2x engine mount with J-2s, and the Extension tank for S-IVC are actually the "Right" size for the 1st generation C-3's S-III stage    At that juncture C-3 was S-1(4x E-1 Engines) S-3 (2x J-2 engines small tank), S-IV or S-IVB (Payload dependant not cost dependant.)  and "Big Centaur"   Big Centaur was canceled before the 2nd Centaur prototype flew and was never fleshed out/explained better than "a bigger Centaur"   A lot of people assume the S-IV stage is "Big centaur" but the Big Centaur was to use the RL12 engine which was 10% bigger (dimensionally) than RL10 and had a thrust similar to the much later RL10A3 (IIRC it might have been an earlier RL10 upgrade!)

SO:   A 1960 or earlier C-3 rocket was a Cluster tank with either 4 E-1s or 8 H-1 engines, followed by a mini stage (S-III) with 2x J-2 engines on a small Hydrolox tank) with S-IV or S-IVB depending on the payload for the upper stage.   Please note that at this juncture S-IVB was an S-IV with a single J-2... it was later upgraded to the large tank S-IVB we know and love today!    The early problems at P&W with the J-2 engine (Hydrolox isn't as simple as a Hydrogen powered Jet engine after all) delayed the J-2 several years and resulted in the more common S-I, S-II, S-IV for C-3 in 1961

And yes, the only reason Pratt and Whitney won the J-2 contract was because of their Project Sunburn (a Hydrogen powered Jet engine) had more hours of "safe" operation than Aerojet did with the Hydrolox LR-87... well that at the thrust level requirements it would opperate at, the LR-87 would have required 2x chambers per engine complicating the arrangements for multi engine setups and just taking up extra space in general....

 

You have an impressively encyclopedic knowledge of US space rocket history but where do you find this stuff?  I'm been trying to flesh out the wiki with details of some of the more interesting early concepts that can be built with BDB parts but information is scarce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, hieywiey said:

I'd honestly be fine with one that's just a J-2S with a different .cfg file, if that's possible.

11 hours ago, Pappystein said:

1) fair nuf...   I was just thinking that with a minimal of parts you could make the entire corona family using the already in game parts as a basis (Agena + the Mini return capsule)   I DO NOT want you to do more work than you already have to so just take it as an idea if you ever get board

2)  can you tell I have worked almost 30 hours in 2 days?   Goo for Two would have been more appropriate...  AKA a single part with 2 Goo experiments.

3) I agree it is a Silly engine...   But I might have a way to make a visually distinctive engine that is obvious in  it's J-2 heritage.   Think J-2S combustion chamber and pipes scaled up ~8%   Add an external turbopump ala RD-191 and use a solid wall nozzle like the RS-25 uses for the extension portion only of the bell.  If it is a crap idea, ignore it... if it gives you an idea, use it when you feel you have the time.    

 

This is already in the Extras folder under Pafftek Saturn MLV.

Like Pappy said, it's in the Pafftek folder. I don't like adding parts that are just the same model with different stats, but he doesn't mind :P

I know that feeling, sometime's my partner's nursing shifts are brutal. Idk about that but it's not a bad idea.

Idk, maybe I'll look at the HG-3 again sometime. I think I care a little less since I feel like it takes away from the weirder J-2 variants - I think I'd like to encourage the use of those more. But that's not a bad way to think of the HG-3 visually. So... maybe? I want to get the J-2s in game first and then we'll see. I think I might be more likely to do an F-1B than an HG-3 at this point, and that's a pretty far shot on its own.

 

11 hours ago, hieywiey said:

Also, what is the large object at the top of the HG-3 in this diagram? (from astronautix.com) This could make it very "visually distinctive." I assume it is plumbing, turbopumps, or a gearbox of some kind.

If the information on it isn't available, it could always be made into just generic foil (of course with the new reflective shaders), like often seen in Falcon 9 launches on the second stage.

11 hours ago, Pappystein said:

I have a total WAG on that one.    A Huge Turbopump or plumbing that wraps around the combustion chamber

There's actually a slightly better version of that diagram in this document, but it doesn't have any more clues as to what it would look like.

x4pcwy8.png

 

5 hours ago, Friznit said:

You have an impressively encyclopedic knowledge of US space rocket history but where do you find this stuff?  I'm been trying to flesh out the wiki with details of some of the more interesting early concepts that can be built with BDB parts but information is scarce.

On thing I'll chime in here with, since I catch @Pappystein doing it a lot, and I definitely do it too - but always make sure you check a source and link to it if you can when answering questions. I make a lot of incorrect assumptions based on partial information that turns out to be wrong. For example, I only recently realized the Saturn ullage motors detached and was very surprised. But someone linked to a document and now I know the answer for certain. :)

 

Some more stuff to show... I am not around my main dev PC enough, so the backlog of parts that need to get in game is growing... but, people were talking to me about probe RCS, and I've been meaning to give BDB users some more options on that front. Here are the new RCS options, with a MIP probe core for scale. I need to do a couple small RCS tanks to go with them. I think, I'll let this stuff unlock relatively early, since the big limiting factor early on will be the part count limits.

rXNi9GV.png

 

I also wanted to touch base re: Gemini stuff. I don't want to drag this update out too long, but I also want to make sure there's some exciting new payloads to go with the new parts.

To that end, I think I've narrowed it down to two new Gemini variants (this is just for now) - the cylindrical (Titan) Big G, and the Gemini Ferry (the two vehicles in the middle, basically).

Conical (Saturn) Big G is being left out for now - someone pointed out that, with all the discussion of scaling Saturn differently in the future, I don't want to be locked into a 3.75m conical SM if Saturn changes to 4.25m or whatever.

Similarly, the Lunar Orbit / Lunar Recon Gemini (far right) is cool, but really just a curiosity and not something worth killing myself over right now.

veGFrk4.png
 

 

So yeah, update is still going strong, my IRL schedule went from being wide open last week to crazy right now, so productivity will go down for a bit, but I'm feeling good about the progress on this update. I haven't had a lot of time at my main dev PC (at least, time where I'm not dying inside) so there's quite a backlog of stuff to finish / get in game. The Titan stuff is mostly done, I'm trying to not kill myself with going all ADHD as the dev cycle wears on and get too ambitious. I'm not giving an update on the MOS / MOL stuff right now but be aware there might be some word on that sometime soon. If they're not in this update, I'll probably make them part of the next update. For now, here's what I have to finish (off the top of my head):

  • The last of the Titan parts - a dedicated UA120 parachute nose cap, SOLTANs, another adapter here and there.
  • More Titan textures - Need to have alternate Titan 1 textures, CT3 version of the upper stage, etc. If there's any I'm missing please say something.
  • A bunch more LDC parts - at least half a dozen, most of those still need to get modeled and textured.
  • Helios probe parts - these shouldn't be awful to make for what its worth.
  • New Saturn engines - mostly textured, going to be a lot of work to get in game.
  • Gemini Lander - these parts are mostly textured now, need to get them in game.
  • Big G and Gemini Ferry - shouldn't be too hard.
  • Finish the Apollo nose fix.
  • Finish these new probe parts.

Again, MOL stuff, don't know what I'm going to do there. You'll note I didn't mention Mars Observer, I decided to drop it from the roadmap. It really just didn't fit with BDB stylistically, would have been a ton of work to do, and I figured people would rather see me finish the Gemini Lander. So, to be clear, we're still literally MONTHS away from this update being done but progress has been good. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has the Hokulani science lab been removed? I added Bluedog to a new 1.7.3 install with some other mods and I can't find it anywhere. It's possible I've missed it but I spent an hour looking through every node.

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.