WE NEED NEW RUSSIAN STOCK SPACE PARTS

[Jebihean Kerman]

We Need New Russian / soviet Parts Like Soyuz Stock And LK Lander Pod stock and New Russian Probes plus New Rocket Parts to Make porton And N1 Rocket this Can Be A DLC Called Kerbal Russian Expation to add new parts i think you should work with tantares and soviet parts because there parts look like stock parts ( but not soviet parts there look moded )and you should work together and make it more realisct. Squad please make new russian parts so we dont have to spend Hours on just the capusle or lander .

[Snark]

Hello, and welcome to the forums!

Moving to Suggestions.

[Xd the great]

On 10/19/2019 at 9:50 PM, Jebihean Kerman said:

We Need New Russian / soviet Parts Like Soyuz Stock And LK Lander Pod stock and New Russian Probes plus New Rocket Parts to Make porton And N1 Rocket this Can Be A DLC Called Kerbal Russian Expation to add new parts i think you should work with tantares and soviet parts because there parts look like stock parts ( but not soviet parts there look moded )and you should work together and make it more realisct. Squad please make new russian parts so we dont have to spend Hours on just the capusle or lander .

Making History DLC has parts for this.

[micha]

5 minutes ago, Xd the great said:

Making History DLC has parts for this.

No it doesn't.  MH has some Vostok/Voskhod parts (not even a full set) and no Soyuz at all.  Even worse, in the early game when you unlock them and would use them you don't have fairings which are practically essential. No idea how new players are supposed to use them.  I expect they get frustrated trying to launch and then just ignore them.  Later in the game they're mostly outclassed.

It would be nice to have some kerbalised equivalents of the Russian parts in stock to complement the American Mercury/Gemini/Apollo parts.

[Xd the great]

15 minutes ago, micha said:

No it doesn't.  MH has some Vostok/Voskhod parts (not even a full set) and no Soyuz at all.  Even worse, in the early game when you unlock them and would use them you don't have fairings which are practically essential. No idea how new players are supposed to use them.  I expect they get frustrated trying to launch and then just ignore them.  Later in the game they're mostly outclassed.

It would be nice to have some kerbalised equivalents of the Russian parts in stock to complement the American Mercury/Gemini/Apollo parts.

Those side boosters are soyuz though.

I do agree that more soviet rockets like the Proton M will be nice.

[Streetwind]

4 hours ago, micha said:

Even worse, in the early game when you unlock them and would use them you don't have fairings which are practically essential. No idea how new players are supposed to use them. 

The pods are actually not that draggy. You can put them on top of a rocket in the same way you use a mk1 pod, and it will work. I've done so, and although there were differences in performance, they didn't break stuff.

My bigger problem is that the mk1 pod is flat-out superior in many early-game use cases. I mostly ignore the first two bubble pods for that reason. I do use the three-man variant for Mun landers later-on, though, since it is cheaper and more compact than the mk3 pod.

[VoidSquid]

There's the Tantares mod, actually two mods:

 

[kerbiloid]

The curved parts of unusual shape (Soyuz the Ship, Soyuz the Rocket/R-7, N-1, LK) belong to the Korolev bureau design style only.
And this is the lesser part of the Soviet/Russian spacetech.

All others developers (Chelomei, Yangel/Utkin, Glushko, Makeev) used traditional technologically proper cylinders and cones, sometimes spherical segments.
And this is much greater part of the Soviet/Russian spacetech.
They don't differ from the American or European designs, and from the stock parts of KSP. And they fit/match the American design, sizes, scales very close. Much closer than they do to the Korolev's bureau designs.
Buran in its late design had a shape of Space Shuttle, so there is no need in two part sets, too.
We may speculate about historical reasons, but the fact is that "95%" of world space tech looks Kerbal, not curved.

***

The Korolev's parts were made curved forcedly, for some historical reasons not important in KSP.
The R-7 was originally a pack of five R-5 (far descendant of V-2 design), so its side boosters are shaped like 4 old sci-fi spacerockets put aside the central core.
The central core is concave just to fit them.
All of them are just ~2.2 meters wide (narrower than Gemini, a little wider than Mercury) because they are a bunch of overgrown single-stage tactical/cruise missiles of the early times.
It was not designed for space, it was designed to deliver a single ~4 Mt _warhead gift of light and warmness with a bunch of existing cruise missiles.
Just it appeared to be enough capable to put in LEO a crewed ship if extend it a little by adding a 3rd stage, still 2.x m wide.

Any cargo of the R-7 family should fit that ~2.5 m limit in diameter, so it can't exceed the ~7 t limit of payload, and it can't fit any other rocket as a part due to its specific curved shape.
It has many systems simplified, requiring the specific launchpad mechanization incompatible with any other rocket.

It's popular due to its extremely polished technical simplicity, but there is no reason to add its parts except in an early history mod or DLC dedicated to late 1940s tech, not in stock.
You don't need it unless you have to reuse something V-2-like for bigger designs, and in stock KSP you don't.
Even modern future designs of Soyuz are cylindric, not curved.
There is absolutely no reason to make the rocket parts curved except that, it was not a question of choice.

**

Vostok originally should have another shape. It's a descendant of Korabl-Sputnik (Ship-Satellite) project, and its original shape was more conical, closer to the Laika's biosat.
Later it evolved into a shape with rertrorocket appartment strapped to it from beneath.
Its spherical capsule was chosen just because they weren't sure if they can aerodynamically stabilize a conical one in proper direction, so they made it spherical and covered with ablator all its surface. This is not what they dreamed about.
As they weren't sure if they can successfully land it by chute, they equipped it with already tested ejection seat.
So, in stock KSP you don't need spherical capsules, conical are good enough, put an ejection seat into Mk1/Mercury if you wish acrobatics.
You anyway can't use the spherical one for anything else except the only early ship design (and some photo and bio sats having the Vostok design).

***

Soyuz uses similar 2 m sphere as a habitat (and as a lab in early flights).
It's limited with 6 t mass and 2 m wide capsules into which you can put 2 (if apply some pressure - 3) crewmen.
Its cabin has special niches to keep RCS fuel tank outside of the cabin, and two greater ones to keep parachutes inside the capsule but outside the cabin.
It has to have a jettisonnable periscope to dock, and it requires a special niche in the shroud to let that periscope not fit the shroud diameter.

The only reason you may want the Soyuz capsule in KSP is that it can have hatches in both top and bottom (like in Soyuz-VI), to attach a habitat from any direction.
(Say, in Gemini you can have a bottom hatch but can't a top one, as its nose is too narrow.)
But due to its curvy shape you always need a shroud and a LES tower attached to that shroud (not to the ship).
In KSP you are not restricted with real diameters, you can just move Kerbals along the ship in any direction.

So, in KSP this adds nothing to gameplay but makes design unnecessary tricky. So, Soyuz is also a theme for a mod/DLC.

***

LK was a combination of same 2 m sphere with rather simplified chassis and absolutely rudimental docking abilities.
You had to have a sit by EVA crawling along the ship side, and the ship would dock it after the Moon by piercing a honeycomb with its docking stick. It didn't have a passive docking node due to both weight limitations and because it was designed before any Soyuz docking was performed.
It's a standalone single-use design incompatible with any other project. So, a theme for a mod/DLC.

***

Salyut (nee OPS Almaz), including Salyut-8 aka Mir is an honest cylindrical-conical-spherical design, not Korolev's one.
The same about Mir and Soviet/Russian ISS modules (nee same OPS Almaz and FGB of TKS).
All of them are fuel tanks of Proton and some other rockets. They have absolutely stockalike shape and need nothing to add.
(Unless you want a historical purity, but in that case you will anyway fail because they had very little common with their original purific designs).

***

N-1, if leave alone its engineering... unusualness... has five details looking cool.

1. Engine clusters.
Can be done by mods in KSP-1 and afaik exists in stock KSP-2.
In fact if add them as separate details can drop FPS due to 30 parts and 30 particle generators.
Would be added as an adjustable detail ("Ring of thrusters", "Kerbal thrusteRing"), no actual relation to N-1.

2. Conical shape.
Not very useful, caused only by keeping propellant components in spherical tanks.
Anyway, The  stock fuel tank parts should have an option "Cylindrical/Conical".
So no actual relation to N-1.

3. Spherical top.
Any stock fuel tank has it, just surrounded with a cylinder top.
The  stock fuel tank parts should have an option "Visible/invisible wall around the tank spherical top", and that part of tank should be a separate part of 3d model.
For all stock fuel tanks.
So no actual relation to N-1.

4. Cable/pipe boxes extruded along the sides.
Would be added as is. Like you puts struts and fuel pipe with mouse, but should stick to the nearest surface. So, no actual relation to N-1.

5. Wireframe-looking interstage.
Would/could/(I insist,)should be added as is, no actual relation to N-1. Of several diameters or adjustable size.

***

So, in fact all these curved parts aren't needed in stock KSP, but are nice in a historical pack.

Also the stock fuel tanks better should be more adjustable like described above, and wireframe-looking interstages added.

***

Also, another specific multivariant set of parts looks proper (for Soyuz-like habitats and DS-like satellite command pods).

A sphere cut in two parts. Sometimes a cylinder of same diameter connecting them.
Adjustment options:
1) a sphere (both halves connected)
2) two hemispheres connected with R/2 long cylinder
3) two hemispheres connected with R long cylinder
4) two hemispheres connected with 2 * R long cylinder

Diameters from 0.625 (for sats) to 1.875 (for Soyuz-like habitats), or maybe even larger.

Edited October 30, 2019 by kerbiloid

[VoidSquid]

Very good read, informative, comprehensive, thank you!

[Mikki]

Thank you @kerbiloid for this most informative explanation 

[Jebihean Kerman]

The tanares mod dont work for me is there any way to fix this tell me

Edited October 30, 2019 by Jebihean Kerman

[micha]

If we're talking mods (not stock, which was the OP's suggestion), there's also HGR (Home Grown Rockets) which adds a nice set of Soyuz-like parts for the 1.875m stack size.  unfortunately the current maintainer is against CKAN so it doesn't get as much exposure as it should get.

Just one minor correction: Soyuz has the vast majority of all actual human spaceflight to date... 

[kerbiloid]

Spoiler

8 hours ago, Jebihean Kerman said:

The tanares mod dont work for me is there any way to fix this tell me

Yesterday tried Tantares in 1.8.1, parts look existing and attachable. Maybe you should check if it's unpacked into correct directory (GameData/Tantares, GameData/TantaresLV).

 

[Jebihean Kerman]

i will try

 

[Motokid600]

Speaking of which. And sorry for the digression, but why do we already have three of the same Russian themed pods? They have differnent stats, but they're the same model. Not something id expect from stock parts. Id gladly trade two of those for what the OP proposes.

Edited October 31, 2019 by Motokid600

[Cavscout74]

5 minutes ago, Motokid600 said:

Speaking of which. And sorry for the digression, but why do we already have three of the same Russian themed pods? They have differnent stats, but they're the same model. Not something id expect from stock parts. Id gladly trade two of those for what the OP proposes.

I can somewhat understand using the same model for the 1 & 2 man varieties, but for the 3-man they really should have used a new model - something like the Soyuz descent module rather than a sphere.

I also find it strange that the R-7 equivalent parts (RV-1 Cub vernier & RK-7 Kodiak) unlock as high or higher in the tech tree than most 2.5m parts.

[Pds314]

On 10/29/2019 at 8:47 PM, micha said:

No it doesn't.  MH has some Vostok/Voskhod parts (not even a full set) and no Soyuz at all.  Even worse, in the early game when you unlock them and would use them you don't have fairings which are practically essential. No idea how new players are supposed to use them.  I expect they get frustrated trying to launch and then just ignore them.  Later in the game they're mostly outclassed.

It would be nice to have some kerbalised equivalents of the Russian parts in stock to complement the American Mercury/Gemini/Apollo parts.

My biggest issue in a new game with the soviet-style pods is that, while the integrated heatshield and decouplers and the weight savings help too, they have no integrated reaction wheels, and dedicated reaction wheel parts aren't available immediately.

I definitely support more soviet-themed parts. Whatever the method. Currently the stock game has a lot of clearly American parts. A mercury capsule, an Apollo capsule. An SLS lower stage engine combo, an SSME, shuttle tank part variant ogive cones.. Yes, making history does have some Soviet themed parts, but I give exactly no credit for three capsules exactly the same shape and size. That counts as one part with functional color scheme variants. Next we have the 1.875m conformal cone tank. Again very cool but we've reached a count of two. I'm not sure if I should count the bobcat as a Soviet part since it does not play especially well with the aforementioned conformal tank.

Edited October 31, 2019 by Pds314

[kerbiloid]

Making History or stock could include the set of parts representing the very first version of the Soviet manned spaceship, tested on Belka & Strelka as Sputnik-5..
This is how originally the first spaceship should look like, before they reworked it in Vostok.
 

Spoiler

Total mass = 4540 kg.
Cabin mass (the conical/cylindric part inside the external hull, with the square window) = 2500 kg
Equipment, including power sources (electricity, RCS, retrorocket, sensors) = 1477 kg.
Radio communication on 19.995 MHz.
Orbit altitude ~310 x 370 km (Earth, not Kerbin), inclination 69°.

The external hullis more or less similar to the R-7 warhead (one of) shape.
It separates from the upper stage which keeps moving on close orbit.

The first flight is known as Sputnik-4.
307x690 km orbit, a human mannequin onboard.
Due to some problems with orientation on deorbiting, missed a little and hit the street in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manitowoc,_Wisconsin

The second flight is known as Sputnik-5.
306x339 km orbit,
In the capsule: Belka & Strelka and 12 mice, and inferior beings (bugs, seed, microbes).
Outside the cabin, in the expendable pressurized box: 28 mice and 2 rats volunteered for science.

RCS nozzles use compressed gas (nitrogen? helium?).
Fuel cells and a pair of unfoldable rounded solar panels looking like a disk 1 m in diameter on a stick or a labris.

Orientation in orbit: one radial axis towards the Earth, another radial axis perpendicular to the orbit plane, main axis perpendicular to them both.

After 18 turns in LEO and deorbiting with internal retrorockets, the capsule with dawgz and 12 mice separated from the hull and airbraked at 10 g max.
At 7..8 km altitude the capsule door jettisonned, and the dogbox was jettisonned out and parachuted.
(So the human seat should do).
The capsule parachuted aside, too, at safe landing speed.

Missed 10 km from the estimated point.

***

So, why not add this, too.

[TK-313]

11 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

This is how originally the first spaceship should look like, before they reworked it in Vostok.

I'm sorry, but you're very wrong in naming that cylindrical part a pre-Vostok ship. The images you quote show a life support pod for two dogs that was installed in the place of the ejection seat on the Vostok unmanned prototypes (which actually were designated Ship-Satellite/Korabl-Sputnik as well as Sputnik-4, 5-1, 5, 6, 7-1, 9 and 10, to be exact. The "-1" numbers were used for failed missions to reserve the "clear" designation for successful ones. Weird, I know). All in all, this is very much a Vostok thing.

[kerbiloid]

6 hours ago, TK-313 said:

I'm sorry, but you're very wrong in naming that cylindrical part a pre-Vostok ship.

This is what the early design of the Soviet manned spaceship looked like and was tested, before it was replaced with the later one, named Vostok.

[TK-313]

8 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

This is what the early design of the Soviet manned spaceship looked like and was tested, before it was replaced with the later one, named Vostok.

Once again, this is not a spaceship. It is what took the place of the ejection seat on Vostok's prototypes - an ejectable animal container. This page goes into more detail about this piece of equipment, Google Translate help you if you don't know Russian.

[kerbiloid]

4 minutes ago, TK-313 said:

Once again, this is not a spaceship. It is what took the place of the ejection seat on Vostok's prototypes - an ejectable animal container. This page goes into more detail about this piece of equipment, Google Translate help you if you don't know Russian.

Probably, you would read a little more about the early years of the Soviet space project.
It was exactly what the first spaceship originally should be, there are paintings.

Edited November 8, 2019 by kerbiloid

[TK-313]

10 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

It was exactly what the first spaceship originally should be.

Please do provide the basis of your statement as I have provided mine. Also, please do explain your distrust to the soviet book the text of which is provided on that page.

P.S. If by "paintings" you mean the schematics you quote, please do take your time to check the link I have posted above, it is to the book they are taken from. You will see they are in the section named "Ejectable animal container", which describes said container in fine detail.

Edited November 8, 2019 by TK-313

[kerbiloid]

19 minutes ago, TK-313 said:

Please do provide the basis of your statement as I have provided mine. Also, please do explain your distrust to the soviet book the text of which is provided on that page.

P.S. If by "paintings" you mean the schematics you quote, please do take your time to check the link I have posted above, it is to the book they are taken from. You will see they are in the section named "Ejectable animal container", which describes said container in fine detail.

These image links are from that link as you can see.
Schematics of a manned version is available in books, will try to provide one, but not promise.
As you can read in Russian, meanwhile you can read https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Спутник-4

Also you can read this https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Спутник_(космическая_программа)
and see that since Sputnik-4 they are named "корабль-спутник", not just "спутник", because they are parts of the early spaceship program.

Edited November 8, 2019 by kerbiloid

[TK-313]

19 minutes ago, kerbiloid said:

These image links are from that link as you can see.
Schematics of a manned version is available in books, will try to provide one, but not promise.
As you can read in Russian, meanwhile you can read https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Спутник-4

Waiting for them most eagerly, they might seriously change what I know about early spaceflight in USSR. However, I have to note that literally the second sentence on the Russian wiki notes that "it was designed for human spaceflight and was the first prototype of the Vostok ship-satellite, on which such flight was performed for the first time"

Meanwhile, here are a few photos of Belka and Strelka's ejectable container (Sputnik-5 mission) as exhibited in the Cosmonautics museum in Moscow - and a Vostok ejection seat for comparison.

Spoiler

 

Edited November 8, 2019 by TK-313