# [1.8.1-1.11.2] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.7.3 "Огромный" 19/Apr/2021)

## Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Carni35 said:

Hi !

As said earlier, I play real historical missions with BDB in  a 2.5 scaled system.

I heard about change the size of real playloads to match with the scale. It is just 1/4 of the real weight ? If not, is there a formula to do the math ?

Thanks

25% is a reasonable approximation, but it's not exact and it's further complicated by the fact that sometimes different modders have used different scaling methods and most round to KSP friendly diameters. That means nearly every part would ideally be scaled by a slightly different amount.

To get the correct mass for a scaled item in KSP, simply multiply by the scale factor cubed.

Lets say you have a rocket stage, with a mass of 200,000 kg, that has a 4m diameter in real life and you're scaling by 0.625.

0.625x4.0=2.5

This is a nice, KSP friendly diameter, so no rounding is necessary.

So, the formula in Excel ( or similar programs, like Open Office Calc or even the Windows calculator app ) would be:

"=200,000*(2.5/4.0)^3" - using the part specific specific scaling factor.

or

"200,000*0.625^3" - using the general scaling factor.

This gives you a KSP scaled mass of 48,828.125 kg. It would be about 24.4% of real scale, rather than 25%.

##### Share on other sites

Thanks @Mudwig !

As you said 25 percent seem be a reasonable approcximation

But it's always cool to have an Idea about the maths

##### Share on other sites
15 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

Hmm, I'd hoped that the long B9 switches of both the straight tanks would be enough to be right for the Delta II? They're a little plain in the blue texture variant though, will need to address that...

They're a little short, more like Delta I, if anything. What are your intended configs for the tanks? There's Thor, Long Tank Thor (Thorad), ELTT (Delta I), and EELTT (Delta II).

##### Share on other sites
9 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

You're not the first person to report something like that, but I have no clue what would cause it.

Looking in a save file where I placed a vessel with one of your working antenna and one of the non working versions, there seems to be missing "module" data in the file. E.g. the one that works has "can transmit" or something similar (i'm at work so not 100% sure :-) ) whereas the other one doesn't.

Hope that helps

J

##### Share on other sites
10 hours ago, GoldForest said:

Well something must have gone wrong during unity exporting, 'cause they are no where near the same length.

Daleth tanks left - Fenris stretched tanks right.

The Fenris tanks also lower the ribbed section at least a meter or two. .

It's not till I add the Fenris-400 tank that the Fenris Delta II becomes as long as the total length of the Daleth II first stage.

6 hours ago, Dragon01 said:

They're a little short, more like Delta I, if anything. What are your intended configs for the tanks? There's Thor, Long Tank Thor (Thorad), ELTT (Delta I), and EELTT (Delta II).

You're using the ELTT variant of the lower tank and the EELTT variant of the upper tank?

If so then yeah, I definitely messed it up somehow. Weird, I literally added together the lengths of the two Daleth tanks, subtracted the length of the ELTT lower tank to determine how long the length of the EELTT upper tank.

@Dragon the basic idea is the same as for Titan, just trying to embed it in B9 switches instead of separate parts. An upper and lower tank for the first stage. Stretch both to get the longest core (EELTT), stretch just the lower to get the intermediate (ELTT) and keep them both short for the shortest (LTT)

3 hours ago, serjames said:

Looking in a save file where I placed a vessel with one of your working antenna and one of the non working versions, there seems to be missing "module" data in the file. E.g. the one that works has "can transmit" or something similar (i'm at work so not 100% sure :-) ) whereas the other one doesn't.

Hope that helps

J

Well the problem is those parts, like specifically the Scimitar antenna, definitely haven't changed in years and definitely worked. So I have no idea what would be going on. My first thought was maybe you had RemoteTech installed... but while I don't know if there's working RemoteTech configs for the Scimitar, I know there definitely hasn't been a RemoteTech compatibility update since before the Sonne antennas were added.

If you have the time, can you follow as much as the post linked below as possible? (I swear I'm not trying to be rude by just linking it - I am so bad at giving support I had to look it up myself and it turns out some things I was going to ask for are incorrect anyways so glad I looked!)

##### Share on other sites

Hi Cobalt, thanks for looking into this and I appreciate it's a right pain in the proverbial to sift through these files.

I've followed the advice and attached the player.log file:

and a save here

I appreciate I'm running quite a lot of mods, but NOT Remotetech. It's worth mentioning my US probes from Raidernick are also no longer functioning as Comms satellites either, so it must be something that has changed with the way they work in game. The odd thing is some of you antennae work, most do not. :shrug. It's a bugger as it means my SPACE empire has come to a screeching halt as the comms relays are all knackered :-)

are

##### Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, serjames said:

Hi Cobalt, thanks for looking into this and I appreciate it's a right pain in the proverbial to sift through these files.

I've followed the advice and attached the player.log file:

and a save here

I appreciate I'm running quite a lot of mods, but NOT Remotetech. It's worth mentioning my US probes from Raidernick are also no longer functioning as Comms satellites either, so it must be something that has changed with the way they work in game. The odd thing is some of you antennae work, most do not. :shrug. It's a bugger as it means my SPACE empire has come to a screeching halt as the comms relays are all knackered :-)

are

Looks like a patch in Research Bodies is declaring :FOR[RemoteTech]

a FOR module manager pass should only be used by the mod in question, ie, only patches inside RemoteTech should use FOR[RemoteTech]. Because unlike AFTER etc, FOR brings the mod into existence as far as MM is considered.

So basically once ResearchBodies ran its FOR[RemoteTech] all the other patches in other mods like BDB and others that had a NEEDS[RemoteTech] got activated (even though RemoteTech isnt actually installed). This should be reported on the research bodies thread or github (if no one else already has).

Edit: In the meantime you can look for the offending patch inside Research Bodiess and delete it.

Gamedata/REPOSoftTech/ResearchBodies/ResearchBodiesMMRemoteTech.cfg

Edited by Zorg
##### Share on other sites

Zorg, Superstar !

Do I delete that entire CFG file or just the FOR statement inside ?

##### Share on other sites
Just now, serjames said:

Zorg, Superstar !

Do I delete that entire CFG file or just the FOR statement inside ?

Since you're not using remote tech, there's no harm in deleting the entire cfg. Replacing the FOR with a NEEDS would also fix it but no real point for you.

##### Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, serjames said:

Zorg, Superstar !

Do I delete that entire CFG file or just the FOR statement inside ?

I'd just dump the whole thing since you don't use RT.

##### Share on other sites

Brilliant, just commented out the filename, so will try again now.. Very much appreciated chaps

YEP THAT'S SORTED THE BD ONE AND THE RN ONES !!!

Wierd as I am running the exact same mod setup... maybe the load order is different? Anyway all solved :-)

Edited by serjames
##### Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, serjames said:

Wierd as I am running the exact same mod setup... maybe the load order is different? Anyway all solved :-)

Like I said, if a MM patch has a FOR in the specifier, that causes the mod the "exist" within the MM patch order. So even though remote tech wasn't installed, the FOR[RemoteTech] caused every single patch that has NEEDS[RemoteTech] to activate becuase MM now thinks RemoteTech is installed.

The Remote tech compatibility patches in BDB (with the NEEDS) basically deletes the stock ModuleDataTransmitter, which is fine when RT is installed but definitely not when its not actually installed!

##### Share on other sites

^That was already reported as an issue on Github:
https://github.com/JPLRepo/ResearchBodies/issues/48

##### Share on other sites
13 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

You're using the ELTT variant of the lower tank and the EELTT variant of the upper tank?

If so then yeah, I definitely messed it up somehow. Weird, I literally added together the lengths of the two Daleth tanks, subtracted the length of the ELTT lower tank to determine how long the length of the EELTT upper tank.

Yes, both tanks are the stretched variant.

##### Share on other sites

Doing a little test of IDCSP. The antenna strength will be buffed so that it can be used just short of GEO (right now it falls short).

##### Share on other sites
On 11/13/2019 at 1:28 PM, serjames said:

Brilliant, just commented out the filename, so will try again now.. Very much appreciated chaps

YEP THAT'S SORTED THE BD ONE AND THE RN ONES !!!

Wierd as I am running the exact same mod setup... maybe the load order is different? Anyway all solved :-)

15 hours ago, GoldForest said:

Yes, both tanks are the stretched variant.

Yeah that's probably just me being a big dum then.... dang. Ok. Well, I literally cannot fix it until like a week from today since I have to go innawoods and try to get enough food to last through the winter.

Ranger Block 1, Block 2, Block 3 and Mariner 2.

Quick mockup of Mariner B - would people want to see it? Note how it reuses some experiments from Ranger Block 2 and Mariner 2

##### Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CobaltWolf said:

Quick mockup of Mariner B - would people want to see it? Note how it reuses some experiments from Ranger Block 2 and Mariner 2

heck yes!  Ranger and Mariner would be a great think to have in KSP

##### Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Marcelo Silveira said:

heck yes!  Ranger and Mariner would be a great think to have in KSP

All three Ranger series and Mariner 2 are getting added - I was asking if people had any particular feelings about including Mariner B. If nobody cares I'm not going to kill myself getting a few more parts in. But, if people think they'll find use for them... well, it's only a few more parts. The extra parts would be... probably the magnetometer/truss, solar panels, and the double level Ranger bus.

##### Share on other sites

Of course it'd be useful.  That truss, in particular, but the magnetometer will be nice to have, as well (more science is always good).

##### Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Zorg said:

Doing a little test of IDCSP. The antenna strength will be buffed so that it can be used just short of GEO (right now it falls short).

So I did a test flight or 2 of them today myself in a Stock (ish) KSP system.   First off could not figure out how to do the outer rank.  2ndly I was right that the Mercury Separation motor works great (you mount it IN the White tail section or your rocket is upside down.)  I have a Constellation of 4 of these circling the Mun and with the Agena I used to launch them in a 90 degree orbit, they almost always allow communication back to Kerbin.    I also deployed 6 of these in at STOCK Geo.   And yes they are WEAK but they DO WORK.   (So yes PLEASE buff the antenna as I will be going back to JNSQ for my 1.8x playthough once it is up and running on 1.8.)

I have no pictures because I am messing with KS3P ATM and not happy with the results I am getting (over-saturated Color,  Green has too high of a luminosity and Red is too narrow of a color band...  Also have several FOV related issues....   But that is a different story and KS3P is on my back burner as I solve other problems.)

@CobaltWolf  Thanks for getting the 8096 Big Bell LR81s in the game!  I used the excess ISP to launch my Mun bound Agena IDCSP bus from a Thor (Well XELT "Delta II" first stage without a delta Upper stage) Agena....   Thanks to direct ascent and Gravity capture by the Mun I had plenty of fuel for my 58km Circular IDCSP orbit for a 4 sat deployment.   Admittedly it was luck that the Agena was captured... But I had enough fuel left over to perform two orbital maneuvers (bigger orbit) + (Incliation 90 degree change.)

Is there a mod that lets you calculate all your burns/captures/slingshots?  I have tried several different ones in the past but they all made to too complicated for me to plan and launch a fleet of Rockets.   I am looking for something to manage my launch window planning and calculate direct ascents to various planets (without all the stupid wasted fuel on Orbiting before transferring....)     Heck for all I know I am just using the mods I have wrong!

##### Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CobaltWolf said:

All three Ranger series and Mariner 2 are getting added - I was asking if people had any particular feelings about including Mariner B. If nobody cares I'm not going to kill myself getting a few more parts in. But, if people think they'll find use for them... well, it's only a few more parts. The extra parts would be... probably the magnetometer/truss, solar panels, and the double level Ranger bus.

Personally, I love the idea of the Hypothetical parts... But 1) I prefer tracking Solar panels and IIRC the same panel in a tracking for is already in Coatal...   Except they don't have the folding extensions (they are one part not 3 that unfold for the panel itself)  And 2) while I can think of uses for 2 lvl Ranger Bus, I don't think I have ever used ranger's existing bus... but maybe ONCE.   So the way I see it... If a Mod that *YOU* like and endorse has the parts or a reasonable facsimile... Why waste the effort.

Like I said, I am ALL for more parts.   But my play-style has very little to do with real Satellites and Space probes...   I build what I want/need and don't care if it is historically accurate....    But I DO Like the level of Historical Accurateness brought to your newer parts Cobalt...   I appreciate and thank you for your efforts.   I just like making my one history with historically accurate parts I guess...  Sort of my own Alt History without a POD named?

Of the parts you are showing in the drawing a Telescopic Magnetometer is the only one that would interest me.... The Folding ones tend to cause me problems...  Esp your original one which unfolds 1/2 the way in one direction... and THEN unfolds the other 1/2 in the opposite direction... BOOM my lander blew up because it was flipped over by the magnetometer!

##### Share on other sites
9 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

Quick mockup of Mariner B - would people want to see it?

The more the mariner

5 hours ago, Pappystein said:

First off could not figure out how to do the outer rank

You just turn them sideways and surface attach them to the side. Note the alignment of the white "feet"

##### Share on other sites

Been enjoying this mod for a long time and I'm finally getting around to building a MOS based space station. The androgynous docking port works beautifully, but I'm wondering how to use the fork and ring type docking ports. Many thanks

##### Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ShermanF said:

Been enjoying this mod for a long time and I'm finally getting around to building a MOS based space station. The androgynous docking port works beautifully, but I'm wondering how to use the fork and ring type docking ports. Many thanks

Extend forks, soft dock, retract forks to lock them in.

##### Share on other sites

And the rings? I'm not getting a connection by doing anything I've tried so far with the bolts. I'm not even getting any Docking Acquire Force.

Edited by ShermanF
Extra information

## 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.

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

Only 75 emoji are allowed.