CobaltWolf

[1.7.3-1.10.1] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.6.3 "титан" HOTFIX 2/Aug/2020)

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Pappystein said:

Are you using Engine Ignitor?   Cause there is an optional patch for that.  

I doubt you are using the Hypergolic Patch so my next question is what is the fuel load and what the heck is that on the side (SRM or aux tank?)

 

Lastly, and I get this looking at the picture.   Did you use the separate skirt and engine combo or did you use B9PS to switch to that engine/skirt combo?  

No engine ignitor.

Fuel load is a regular LFO.

That's a SRB.

 

I've used B9PS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, biohazard15 said:

Not yet. Actually, I'm thinking of starting a new one - with BARIS instead of OhScrap. 

I am actually thinking about what I want my mod list to be on my next playthrough....  and I am thinking about going back to SSTU + BDB + Benjee10 mods.  

Something feels off with Tantares.... While Beale is a master artist and has some amazing work,  It does not feel right to me (IDK Why I feel this way I can't put my finger on it.)   So SSTU will provide the Soviet/Russian components for my AB-Historic ISS build (if it works out it will be a bit of a surprise we will leave it at that.)   So that means I both loose and Gain fidelity in the Soviet/Russian part models.    SSTU uses more generic "block" assembly parts for the various FGB devices where Tantares uses more correct individual "blocks" with a slightly higher detail level for building the parts.    But SSTU grants more versions at a click of a button (instead of searching for 10 minutes for the "Right part") 

Anyway good luck!

 

19 minutes ago, Darkherring said:

No engine ignitor.

Fuel load is a regular LFO.

That's a SRB.

 

I've used B9PS.

Isn't CRP supposed to introduce failures?   Could this just be a failure?   IDK so I am asking what is probably an unlearned question.

Do you have this problem with OTHER Multi-Mode engines (check the LR91 by itself with a tank...   Then check a single F-1....  etc etc...   All of those are Multi Mode Engines.  I am curious if CRP does not support B9PS for Multi Mode engines

 

 

 

Edited by Pappystein

Share this post


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

Your work is amazing Cobalt! I'm not suggesting anything! But do you plan to continue working on KH? 

p.s. Sorry if the question has already been asked.

I plan on cleaning up and adding a bit more to the existing ones - the Gambit 3 Block 2 and onward need solar panels for example, and I want to make some more AFTRACK parts (ie subsatellites). Other stuff just caught my inspiration lately. :)

 

3 hours ago, Pappystein said:

So Cobalt.   Vega Optimized?   What are you going to name the big bell 405-H2?   Illia?   :P

I figure Decker needs his girlfriend after all :)  And she won Miss India BITD.

I honestly haven't given Vega any more of a look since the last set of pictures I posted :) But sure. I don't watch Trek so I think the names were suggested to me.

 

4 hours ago, Darkherring said:

I'm having problem with Prometheus engines. They don't generate any thrust. I have the CRP installed. Any idea what is wrong?

uhhhh

 

Working on some necessary parts for Lunar Orbiter - the unique fairing base and decoupler! The latter will be necessary for using it in the historical "fold under" configuration. The side-mount panels will still be available. :)

EDIT: slightly more up to date image

2yJ0Kk8.png

Edited by CobaltWolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

raw

Off to Duna with the magical power of IONS

Here is a shot of the front of the probe:

raw

The launcher is a rather boring Delta

raw

Edited by CDSlice
Added another image of the probe

Share this post


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

The launcher is a rather boring Delta

raw

Nice Probe but a question.   Your "Boring" Delta is half height.   I was wondering if you A) knew about the 2 tank setup and decided to forgo it or B) didn't need the extra fuel.

8 hours ago, Darkherring said:

@Pappystein i had the same problem with one of the LH2O engine. One of the early ones.

If the LH2 engine was also a LR87 (and not a RL10) then you are likely having issues between CRP and B9PS with the multi-engine configs that BDB now uses.  

 

Further the picture you posted SHOWS you have engine Igniter (or a similar mod) installed.    Ignitions Left = 2!

Check to see that you didn't accidentally install a BDB_Extra patch for Engine Igniter.  Other mods MIGHT latch onto that patch.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some highlights from today's stream:

8e9lTrf.png

L2nxVlI.png

mRDTwka.png

KHqnNJ8.png

 

More pics:

Spoiler

VQQ7ViH.png

aQUv668.png

tUohIyb.png

paqW58b.png

 

 

Share this post


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

Nice Probe but a question.   Your "Boring" Delta is half height.   I was wondering if you A) knew about the 2 tank setup and decided to forgo it or B) didn't need the extra fuel.

 

I actually wasn't 100% sure if those two tanks went together, but for this rocket the extra fuel wasn't needed. What was needed was a different antenna because that one from Restock+ doesn't have close to enough power to get a connection from JNSQ Duna. :( What's weird is that the stock version of that antenna has a significantly higher range, so IDK why the Restock+ antennas are so weak with JNSQ.

I guess I'll need to send a relay sat out to Duna at the next transfer window if I want to get any of that science because that probe doesn't have anywhere close to enough dV to come back to Kerbin.

My Eve version though uses a different BDB antenna that has plenty of range. :)

raw

raw

BDB ion engines with Real Plume are so beautiful. :D

Share this post


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

Working on some necessary parts for Lunar Orbiter - the unique fairing base and decoupler! The latter will be necessary for using it in the historical "fold under" configuration. The side-mount panels will still be available. :)

*Snippity Snap*

The amount of detail on that is amazing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Darkherring said:

I'm having problem with Prometheus engines. They don't generate any thrust. I have the CRP installed. Any idea what is wrong?

You seem to have a mod that is controlling ignition limits, I assume its something to do with scrapyard since its under a reliability tab? A screenshot of your gamedata folder (so we can see installed mods) and your module manager config cache (GameData/ModuleManager.ConfigCache) would be helpful in diagnosing the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Breeze said:

Your work is amazing Cobalt! I'm not suggesting anything! But do you plan to continue working on KH? 

p.s. Sorry if the question has already been asked.US-Spy-Satellites.jpg

One of them had the BUS-1 thing and I remember how it was proposed to be used on Space Station Alpha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a problem with the current state of BDB in conjunction with Real Fuels.
I notice that B9 is coming up with a lot of initialization errors on ModuleB9PartSwitch (moduleID='engineSwitch') when I installed the optional RF patch for BDB.
All the engines that have a engine subtype, like the RL10 having the RL10-A4 engine subtype, or the RS27 having the RS27A engine subtype, throw up this error. Something that I did not have with 1.6.1.
Do I need to report this to the owners of RF and RFstockalike too?

KPS LOG: https://drive.google.com/open?id=10C-Y8Z9fx4C2Ap4xToo6E8aOxxhd5W4v

Share this post


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

Something feels off with Tantares.... While Beale is a master artist and has some amazing work,  It does not feel right to me (IDK Why I feel this way I can't put my finger on it.)   So SSTU will provide the Soviet/Russian components for my AB-Historic ISS build (if it works out it will be a bit of a surprise we will leave it at that.)   So that means I both loose and Gain fidelity in the Soviet/Russian part models.    SSTU uses more generic "block" assembly parts for the various FGB devices where Tantares uses more correct individual "blocks" with a slightly higher detail level for building the parts.    But SSTU grants more versions at a click of a button (instead of searching for 10 minutes for the "Right part") 

SSTU mixes too many stuff for my liking. My default setup are "space program"-based mods - BDB (augmented with ReDIRECT) + Tantares + KNES (and a bunch of packs like Coatl and NF for non-launcher parts). One of the reasons for this is that I like to roleplay a bit - when I need a new launcher\satellite, I organize a "competition" of sorts between programs (stock is also considered a separate program). The rule is that I can use only parts from the respective mod (i.e. no BDB\Tantares mix). Exceptions do apply, of course (stuff like launch clamps, struts and Klaw are free for all to use, as generally the science parts). This offers some small, but quite fun challenges.

Tried BARIS on a new save, BTW. Went back to OhScrap and old save after a couple of hours. BARIS is either bugged (I used 1.9.0 for 1.7.3) or it's me who can't get it to work properly. Part conditions jump from excellent to poor and back randomly, static tests and successful flights doesn't seem to register properly, etc etc. OhScrap is far from ideal ("SRB failed to ignite" is a certified nightmare material), but at least it works for me.

Share this post


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

Further the picture you posted SHOWS you have engine Igniter (or a similar mod) installed.    Ignitions Left = 2!

Check to see that you didn't accidentally install a BDB_Extra patch for Engine Igniter.  Other mods MIGHT latch onto that patch.

 

 

6 hours ago, Zorg said:

You seem to have a mod that is controlling ignition limits, I assume its something to do with scrapyard since its under a reliability tab? A screenshot of your gamedata folder (so we can see installed mods) and your module manager config cache (GameData/ModuleManager.ConfigCache) would be helpful in diagnosing the problem.

The ignition amount comes from Kerbalism. And I'm quite sure its not the reason of the problem, as it shows the ignition problems differently.

Here is the Game Data

Spoiler

NYPW1eL.png

And here is the Config Cache https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_rMb598a9sitD6LNMMobFbOS2RkGH5vO/view?usp=sharing



I've got something similiar with Asteria-A engine. The main engine doesn't work, but the vernier thrusters work fine
 

Spoiler

GbSTmDK.jpg

 

Edited by Darkherring

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, biohazard15 said:

Tried BARIS on a new save, BTW. Went back to OhScrap and old save after a couple of hours. BARIS is either bugged (I used 1.9.0 for 1.7.3) or it's me who can't get it to work properly. Part conditions jump from excellent to poor and back randomly, static tests and successful flights doesn't seem to register properly, etc etc. OhScrap is far from ideal ("SRB failed to ignite" is a certified nightmare material), but at least it works for me.

Aaaand the reward for loyalty is: LF leak on Apollo SM halfway to Minmus. I just love this game :D Also, I swear number 6 is like 13 to kerbals. Everytime I launch mission number 6, there are problems. That was Apollo 6. SCANSat 6 - somewhat botched trans-Minmus injection, followed by solar panel failure (a huge deal for this particular series, since it uses ion thruster). Surveyor 6 sample return lander (Minmus again!) - still sits there, with broken ascent engine. Or maybe it's just Minmus...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apollo Structural Adapter:

 

QHqsn58.png

w03q2Jm.png

nAu2BeZ.png

pjVpea3.png

The "big" node is bugged - it's higher (or lower, depending on orientation) than it should be, which results in what you see on screenshots.

 

Also, it is named "Apollo Structural Adapter", despite the fact that I don't use real names patch.

Edited by biohazard15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Darkherring said:

Hmm unfortunately I wasnt able to identify the problem from this. Could you try launching a craft with one of those problem engines, try to use it, then quit and send me your outputlog.txt (player.log if on 1.8). Just in case there is something useful there.

However the easiest way to solve your problem would probably be for you to eliminate mods one by one (starting with the mods more likely to mess around with engines and stuff) until it starts working. Then we can see what and how the engines are being affected and if there is a solution.

Share this post


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

@Darkherring I'm sorry but I personally don't have any idea. I really don't play the game outside of making stuff for it so I'm about four years out of date for identifying that sort of mod conflict :(

 

Dev stream booting up - let's get Lunar Orbiter to the moon!

You never actually play?? Why go to all the effort of doing a major mod like this if you cannot sit down, chill and just have fun. This isn't even a mod anymore. It's a free expansion pack. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dave1904 said:

You never actually play?? Why go to all the effort of doing a major mod like this if you cannot sit down, chill and just have fun. This isn't even a mod anymore. It's a free expansion pack.

But then I don't have time to make stuff

 

 

B3jgmHo.png
BRpfVa2.png
W0NVcp1.png
jaO8GwL.png
UPGHy4t.png
YQ8QHiu.png
WNXrS6Y.png
2WI6lTr.png
vp9C9uN.png
UzDhFye.png
fR7VmQQ.png
4hnF02N.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CobaltWolf said:

But then I don't have time to make stuff

 

 

B3jgmHo.png
BRpfVa2.png
W0NVcp1.png
jaO8GwL.png
UPGHy4t.png
YQ8QHiu.png
WNXrS6Y.png
2WI6lTr.png
vp9C9uN.png
UzDhFye.png
fR7VmQQ.png
4hnF02N.png

You're work as always is excellent, do you already work professionally as a 3d artist? If not have you considered  applying to star theory to work on ksp2? You're work here would more than serve as a portfolio 

Edited by ltajax
Typo

Share this post


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

You're work as always is excellent, do you already work professionally as a 3d artist? If not have you considered  applying to star theory to work on ksp2? You're work here would more than serve as a portfolio 

I actually do work as a 3D artist for an engineering firm, but what I do there is pretty different than KSP stuff. In any case I don't exactly envy the work culture and compensation in the game industry. :)

 

Alouette test launch - I apparently didn't get pics of the payload separations, but this is the probe that goes on top of that dual payload adapter I made recently. :)

D1mG2xL.png
I7TRs2X.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, dave1904 said:

You never actually play?? Why go to all the effort of doing a major mod like this if you cannot sit down, chill and just have fun. This isn't even a mod anymore. It's a free expansion pack.

For some people, Building a game is more fun than playing it.    I personally think they are KRAZY but hey,  I do the same thing (Just on a much smaller and not really released [aka my use only] level)  

So, A)  Never be afraid of people who like to build stuff.

and B) never look down on a gifted builder like CobaltWolf.      Cause if it isn't fun for them then no free expansion for us!  

 

Oh and to be clear I am not saying you are or anyone else is looking down at Cobalt... we except for those people taller than him... But that is another story.    I am just saying we are blessed to have someone who LIKES to build this stuff and seems to have fun in our community.    My "paid hobby" has me in lots of peoples homes and any that have even a remote interest in Space/Science how the world works... Well I recommend them to KSP and BDB in KSP!    Simply because Cobalt has a relatively quickly growing to HIGHLY (for KSP) realistic set of US Rockets (were all my clients live) and between the discussions on this forum and how helpful this community tries to be.   It is a good place to learn and grow.     I really love when client's email me at my work e-mail address about KSP questions instead of the questions I get paid to answer!  Oops forgot my Supervisor is one of the people I gave this recomendation to.... You don't see that boss!

 

Seriously though I know I have said it before and I don't ever want to Sound like a broke Record.  Thank you Cobalt, for your work, and your blood, sweat and tears you have put into this game (not to mention the effort!)

Edited by Pappystein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@CobaltWolf Thank you for your tremendous hard work from everybody at SH. I am finally using your excellent new Titan models, and I have a bit of feedback. Ed Kyle at SpaceLaunchReport suggests the Barbarian was not just a warmed over LDC Titan, but actually used a new core size (19 feet, equivalent to 3.475 Kerbal Meters) and 5x dual nozzle LR-87-AJ-11s. I've been able to make a version with 4x LR-87-AJ-11s, but TweakScale isn't playing well at scaling the 3.125 (Kb) m parts to 3.475 m. In fact, the model doesn't snap properly and when you hit "launch" there are large gaps. How easy would it be to simply scale these parts according to the Barbarian drawing composited by Kyle?

Titan-Barbarian.jpg

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.