Jump to content

[1.12.x] Tundra Exploration - v7.0 (Nov 5th, 2023) - (Re)Stockalike SpaceX Falcon 9, (Crew) Dragon (XL) & Haven-1!


Damon

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, HotVector said:

And do you have a reason for it only having a 10 crew capacity? I am pretty sure the real BFS has 40 cabins allowing a maximum of 100 people to be on the ship.

8 hours ago, infinite_monkey said:

What about the stock lab (MPL-LG-2) for reference? It has 3 stories and only 2 seats, but I think could easily hold 24 or at least 16 - and that's for a 2.5m part.

Parts in KSP are smaller than what they may be analogous to IRL (associated with planets being as small s they are in stock scale). The actual BFS also needs to have a lot of internal space that won't be immediately occupied by sardines strapped to the can. IRL, humans need a lot of room to move around and do and use things to maintain their sanity, and will be riding in the BFS for months at a time. Interplanetary BFS cannot be compared to a jumbo airplane where it's perfectly fine to have as many seats as possible as in that case, people are only in there for a few hours at a time.

If/when it comes to life support mods, the unused volume can be accounted for in an extra buff to the habitation configs.

In the case of the stock science lab, consider that the kerbals would want to store a lot of experiment hardware in there, or occupy a fair portion of the internal space with deployed internal hardware from each compartment containing possibly dozens of unique things. I fully understand your concern but like I state above, the kerbals will (realistically) be in there a long time and will need breathing room. Also, packing kerbals into a science lab for the sake of having lots of kerbals on a ship just sounds wrong to me.

15 hours ago, Janus92 said:

That looks great!

I was experimenting with putting in a ModuleAeroSurface part to make the fins act like a Speedbrake controllable by SAS, but I can't manage to get this working. I read somewhere that transformName = should reference to the "moving part" (I don't know what it's called in it's hierarchy), but it doesn't move or work at all actually. Any tips to get it basically working?

I was wondering what the current options are to make the Fins into control surfaces or speedbrakes? In one of his newer videos about the BFR, Everyday-Astronaut put some actual side-mounted (and 5x accelerated) speedbrakes on to control the attitude with SAS, which works wonderfully.

There must be a way to make it working with this BFR.

In addition to Damon's answer to this, I think ModuleAeroSurface requires the fins to animate in such away that they occupy more volume and expose more frontal area without merely rotating.

 

8 hours ago, damonvv said:

But I want to create a place where Kerbals can survive for a long period of time, so they need plenty of room and things to do while on a trip to Duna :) 

This. See my first few paragraphs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BRAAAP_STUTUTU said:

is it just me or do the mothra fuel tanks have a very low fuel to mass ratio? a single FLT800 gives more deltaV than the far longer big mothra tank...

I have raised this issue before:

Although it seems I had the reverse...

Spoiler

e2JhiXl.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Marandil said:

I have raised this issue befor

Although it seems I had the reverse...

  Reveal hidden contents

e2JhiXl.png

 

A yes, I already fixed that but totally forgot to put it on github! Will do tonight

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, JadeOfMaar said:

In addition to Damon's answer to this, I think ModuleAeroSurface requires the fins to animate in such away that they occupy more volume and expose more frontal area without merely rotating.

Yes, and I realized later, one also needs the SAS to point down for it to work. And I guess one can't mount an invisible speedbrake within KSP's limitations. It's pretty well balanced now anyway , from landing with little fuel to full tanks, I've been able to land the thing on the landing pad (once i figured out to not fold the wrong fins at the wrong time:confused:)

Still not sure if you could make a control surface out of it though (but I'm pretty sure that SAS won't handle it correctly). We'd need a custom built auto-pilot for that:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has somebody tested this on 1.5 yet?

 

12 hours ago, JadeOfMaar said:

In the case of the stock science lab, consider that the kerbals would want to store a lot of experiment hardware in there, or occupy a fair portion of the internal space with deployed internal hardware from each compartment containing possibly dozens of unique things. I fully understand your concern but like I state above, the kerbals will (realistically) be in there a long time and will need breathing room. Also, packing kerbals into a science lab for the sake of having lots of kerbals on a ship just sounds wrong to me.

I never meant to actually use the lab - this was from a pure design reference view. The lab seemed pretty similar to the SpaceX design of the crew cabin part, with a central corridor (which might be wider in the real thing and act as some kind of sports area) and 3 stories. The new BFR has 6 stories for cabins, 5 m wide (in order to be to scale, it would need to be 6 m). In contrast to the SpaceX design, in which 3 stories have the full diameter before the nose begins to shrink, here it's only 1, but still. Dividing each story into just 2 cabins instead of 12, like the windows would suggest, you would still have 12 cabins. Given a 2 m wide central corridor, it would give an area 8m² for the largest cabins on the bottom. That's a lot of private area for a Kerbal. The ISS has virtually 0.

But I'm sure @damonvv will make a gorgeous IVA :)

For me, 8 Kerbals is fine anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just tested the latest beta. I have the Retractable Lifting Surface Module installed, but the fins don't seem to be moving. Do I miss some other mod or some settings?

For the aft cargo bays, some attachment points would come in handy.

I tried @Nessus_'s suggestion about the rescalefactor. For me, this would be the perfect size. It even fixed the problem with the internal hatch being obstructed. For some reason though, the attachment nodes initially were all messed up. After launching with just the command pod and then going back to the VAB, it magically fixed itself. Let's hope it stays that way...

L6w8IFn.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, infinite_monkey said:

Just tested the latest beta. I have the Retractable Lifting Surface Module installed, but the fins don't seem to be moving. Do I miss some other mod or some settings?

For the aft cargo bays, some attachment points would come in handy.

I tried @Nessus_'s suggestion about the rescalefactor. For me, this would be the perfect size. It even fixed the problem with the internal hatch being obstructed. For some reason though, the attachment nodes initially were all messed up. After launching with just the command pod and then going back to the VAB, it magically fixed itself. Let's hope it stays that way...


The fins still need to be moved via the action group keys, sorry.
Will think about the cargo bay node points :) 

And aside from visual compatibility with BDB in it beeing a smaller Dia then the Saturn V, there's also the point that many other mods have a 5m and 7,5m standard. Having a 5m BFR makes it alot more versatile in combination with other mods. A 6m doesnt fit in anywhere and would feel weird alongside BDB.
- @Tiankay

^And I agree on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, damonvv said:

The fins still need to be moved via the action group keys, sorry.

Oh, so what's the difference then? Was there no aerodynamic effect at all in the previous version?

 

3 hours ago, damonvv said:

Will think about the cargo bay node points :) 

Thanks :) I just noticed they're in the "Aerodynamics" category. They should probably go to "Containers", since that is where the other KIS containers are.

 

3 hours ago, damonvv said:

And aside from visual compatibility with BDB in it beeing a smaller Dia then the Saturn V, there's also the point that many other mods have a 5m and 7,5m standard. Having a 5m BFR makes it alot more versatile in combination with other mods. A 6m doesnt fit in anywhere and would feel weird alongside BDB.
- @Tiankay

^And I agree on that.

Well, I respect your opinion. For anyone who wants to be able to have a bigger version, here's a little config you can drop somewhere in your GameData folder. It needs TweakScale in order to work. It has 100% (Tundra Exploration default), 120% (to scale) and 180% (real size; that thing is ENORMOUS).

Spoiler

SCALETYPE
{
    name = TweakScale
    freeScale = false
    scaleFactors = 1.0, 1.2, 1.8
    scaleNames = 100%, 120%, 180%
    defaultScale = 1.0
}

@PART[TE_18_BF*]!MODULE[TweakScale]
{
     MODULE
    {
        name = TweakScale
        type = TweakScale
        defaultScale = 1
    }
}

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it possible to make a USI Kontainer that fits perfectly inside the cargo BFS(when it comes out, of course)? Or is there a procedural USI kontainer? Would be really useful to fill up all that space. And how is the progress going on the cargo and tanker versions?

@damonvv I just had an idea on how you should go about the cargo and tanker versions of the BFS - just make one cargo version(like you did before) and make a fuel tank that fits perfectly inside the cargo BFS, instead of a separate BFS tanker.

And how is the IVA going?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, HotVector said:

Is it possible to make a USI Kontainer that fits perfectly inside the cargo BFS(when it comes out, of course)?

It is, and it's very easy. Just take a config from aft cargo pod (when it comes out) and replace the KIS module with USI kontainer module (e. g. from MKS 1.25m round container). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, HotVector said:

Is it possible to make a USI Kontainer that fits perfectly inside the cargo BFS(when it comes out, of course)? Or is there a procedural USI kontainer? Would be really useful to fill up all that space. And how is the progress going on the cargo and tanker versions?

v

On 10/15/2018 at 7:36 PM, damonvv said:

BFS tankers and cargo pods are a low priority to me right now. Fully focused on IVA at this moment.

On 10/7/2018 at 10:05 PM, damonvv said:

ATP cargo that supports multiple mods

-------------------------

4 hours ago, HotVector said:

@damonvv I just had an idea on how you should go about the cargo and tanker versions of the BFS - just make one cargo version(like you did before) and make a fuel tank that fits perfectly inside the cargo BFS, instead of a separate BFS tanker.

It will save me a ton of texture space to just make a commandpod that can only carry fuel.
-------------------------

4 hours ago, HotVector said:

And how is the IVA going?

IVAs are very time consuming. With the little time I have per day, it's a slow process. So I will take my time on this one. (Same goes with the dragon IVA revamp).
--------------------------

17 hours ago, infinite_monkey said:

Oh, so what's the difference then? Was there no aerodynamic effect at all in the previous version?

Nope not at all! This way it is the only way I can have flappy wings and let them create lift/drag based on their position.
--------------------------

17 hours ago, infinite_monkey said:

Thanks :) I just noticed they're in the "Aerodynamics" category. They should probably go to "Containers", since that is where the other KIS containers are.

I knew I forgot something.. I saw it was in the aero tab but I forgot the name for the containers one. Then I left it in.. whoops!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Quoniam Kerman said:

Left picture should ne taken around the Mun so you can send it to Elon... Or just send him this one as well as an encouragement.

I got you. I will try to take some screenshots when I get home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Loving the update to the 2018. 

Possible bug for you :

I use latest Kerbalism (along with loads of other mods!), and was using the space around the engine shroud on the BFS. before latest release it was ideal space for attaching food storage, some RTG'soptions. Now only works with 2x Radial Symmetry, all the rest only shows one of whatever you want to attach, and frame rate drops from 100fps to 3 instantly. Only item I found that still acts normally is the cube girder, and the effect still applies to anything you attach to it.  The Cargo Pod works as intended and can go up to 8x symmetry - so maybe it's something to do with how the shroud and cargo pod interact that's blocking out the rest? 

 

I know that you are focused on the IVA right now - so cargo pods are low priority, but would be a nice touch to be able to use them for the various life support mods like Kerbalism etc? Or is that something that can be added myself for private use, or could share the resulting tweak with you? 

Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...