Jump to content

Buffalo 2 Modular Space Exploration Vehicle


Angel-125
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 11/30/2022 at 11:23 PM, Ooglak Kerman said:

@RobFalcon you've likely had the opportunity to have a taste of tasty delicious D-I water.  Tell @JadeOfMaar your thoughts?

Actually, no.  We had a different system on mine.  Though I don't recall anything particularly bad about the water.  :) 

CO2 control, though, was a slightly different matter.  Anything you brought aboard for a particular underway had an... entertaining smell when you got home.  Can't really describe it.  Just called it, "Boat SmellTM".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mmm.. Amine!  Yeah, I came home from a long deployment with my seabag.  Mom opened it and nearly retched.

We were discussing the various forms of water.  H2O, D2O, T2O.  Fully deionized H2O is narsty.  You don't want to drink it since it will leech minerals out of you rikki-tik. 

When did you ride this boat of which you speak.  A designation comes to mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite a few Sailors following this thread!  I was an avionics tech with HSL-49 at NAS North Island from 2006 to 2011 with deployments aboard the USS Crommelin (FFG-37) in 2007-8 and aboard the USS Chancellorsville (CG-62) in 2009, and at FRC West at NAS Lemoore from 2011 to 2013 when I got out as an AT1(AW).  I never did have the pleasure of boarding a sub, but the frigate I deployed on definitely left us with its own kind of "boat smell."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Ooglak Kerman said:

Mmm.. Amine!  Yeah, I came home from a long deployment with my seabag.  Mom opened it and nearly retched.

We were discussing the various forms of water.  H2O, D2O, T2O.  Fully deionized H2O is narsty.  You don't want to drink it since it will leech minerals out of you rikki-tik. 

When did you ride this boat of which you speak.  A designation comes to mind.

LOL. Monoethanolamine (MEA). The MEA tanks on 688s were over the XOs stateroom, so the joke was that was why all the XOs were bald. :D

I used to drink DI (de-ionized, <0.1 ppm dissolved solids) water all the time. I stood Engineroom Forward watch almost the entire time I was on the boat. I was in charge of the Quality Assurance program for M-Div, I wrote almost every single work package for every job that we did on steam systems, seawater systems, nuclear systems, etc. So ERF had almost nothing to do, it was about two minutes worth of logs every hour, and almost no maintenance items, so I would spend the rest of my watch time writing work packages. The secondary sample sink was down there, with a tap off of the DI water system, so if I got thirsty I would just fill a coffee mug up with DI water. You could definitely taste the difference between that and potable water, DI water tastes kinda bland. But as long as that wasn't all you drank, you were fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/2/2022 at 12:34 AM, Ooglak Kerman said:

Mmm.. Amine!  Yeah, I came home from a long deployment with my seabag.  Mom opened it and nearly retched.

We were discussing the various forms of water.  H2O, D2O, T2O.  Fully deionized H2O is narsty.  You don't want to drink it since it will leech minerals out of you rikki-tik. 

When did you ride this boat of which you speak.  A designation comes to mind.

I was on USS New Hampshire, a Virginia-class, from '10-'13.  How about you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was one of them rider fellers that sat up in radio.  Rode all Los Angeles class boats during my time. Rode enough to get qualified on one of the runs.  Huh.. I had been retired almost 10 years when New Hampshire was launched.

Never got to drive one with bow planes.  I'd think they probably would do better at P.D. than with the fairwater planes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/2/2022 at 11:52 AM, Nizrael said:

Quite a few Sailors following this thread!  I was an avionics tech with HSL-49 at NAS North Island from 2006 to 2011 with deployments aboard the USS Crommelin (FFG-37) in 2007-8 and aboard the USS Chancellorsville (CG-62) in 2009, and at FRC West at NAS Lemoore from 2011 to 2013 when I got out as an AT1(AW).  I never did have the pleasure of boarding a sub, but the frigate I deployed on definitely left us with its own kind of "boat smell."

Honestly, the carriers weren't much better. Occasionally the bug juice and the water both took on a little bit of that JP-5 taste. I was on one of the last conventional carriers - maybe it was better on the nuke bird farms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/3/2022 at 8:11 PM, Ooglak Kerman said:

I was one of them rider fellers that sat up in radio.  Rode all Los Angeles class boats during my time. Rode enough to get qualified on one of the runs.  Huh.. I had been retired almost 10 years when New Hampshire was launched.

Never got to drive one with bow planes.  I'd think they probably would do better at P.D. than with the fairwater planes.

Couldn't tell you, I'm afraid.  I didn't get to drive, just gave the orders.  Main piece of equipment I got to use directly was the scope.  My guys and I came to an agreement; if the officer is turning the valves, we've got problems.  :D

One new addition to the herd to show off!

uyhpup3.png

Say hello to the Recon Buffalo!  Designed to haul a supercomputer to a particular anomalous reading.  :)  She can cruise easily at an altitude of 5 km at about 190-200 m/s, and has pretty decent range.  Engines are from Airplane Plus.  (My wife describes her as, "SO CUTE!!")  Could've stood to have more electrical capacity, as she couldn't get far into the research cycle before running out, but she's surprisingly easy to fly.   Recommend disabling the inboard ailerons, though.  Had a strange issue partway to my destination.  Takeoff and landing were manual, but the cruise was done with MechJeb.  MJ gave minimal complaints, even at 4x time acceleration, apart from the aforementioned aileron debacle.

I'm still working on the Higgs Bison amphibious version.  My initial attempt using pontoons was not as stable as I would've hoped, so I switched to making a submarine with wheels.  Running on the surface, Higgs Mk2 works pretty well.  Still working on stability when submerged.

The irony of this is not lost on me.

More additions as they emerge!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, RobFalcon said:

Couldn't tell you, I'm afraid.  I didn't get to drive, just gave the orders.  Main piece of equipment I got to use directly was the scope.  My guys and I came to an agreement; if the officer is turning the valves, we've got problems.  :D

One new addition to the herd to show off!

uyhpup3.png

Say hello to the Recon Buffalo!  Designed to haul a supercomputer to a particular anomalous reading.  :)  She can cruise easily at an altitude of 5 km at about 190-200 m/s, and has pretty decent range.  Engines are from Airplane Plus.  (My wife describes her as, "SO CUTE!!")  Could've stood to have more electrical capacity, as she couldn't get far into the research cycle before running out, but she's surprisingly easy to fly.   Recommend disabling the inboard ailerons, though.  Had a strange issue partway to my destination.  Takeoff and landing were manual, but the cruise was done with MechJeb.  MJ gave minimal complaints, even at 4x time acceleration, apart from the aforementioned aileron debacle.

I'm still working on the Higgs Bison amphibious version.  My initial attempt using pontoons was not as stable as I would've hoped, so I switched to making a submarine with wheels.  Running on the surface, Higgs Mk2 works pretty well.  Still working on stability when submerged.

The irony of this is not lost on me.

More additions as they emerge!

Omfg, that's cool. I need to use buffalo for more planes.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I noticed that there is a config inside the Buffalo2 files that allows parts with ModuleInventoryPart to effectively also have ModuleCargoPart. How hard would it be to give this to, say, all the Pathfinder and/or stonk parts? Would it be possible to make a variant/modification of KSP_PartVolume that uses the new system instead?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MoonstreamInSpace said:

I noticed that there is a config inside the Buffalo2 files that allows parts with ModuleInventoryPart to effectively also have ModuleCargoPart. How hard would it be to give this to, say, all the Pathfinder and/or stonk parts? Would it be possible to make a variant/modification of KSP_PartVolume that uses the new system instead?

That ModuleStorablePart comes from Sandcastle, so any parts that have ModuleCargoPart would would need a ModuleManager patch to replace it with ModuleStorablePart. You'd have to make the patch so that it applies only if Sandcastle is installed, and it would have to be applied after KSP_PartVolume. Other than that, it would be straightforward to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Angel-125 said:

That ModuleStorablePart comes from Sandcastle, so any parts that have ModuleCargoPart would would need a ModuleManager patch to replace it with ModuleStorablePart. You'd have to make the patch so that it applies only if Sandcastle is installed, and it would have to be applied after KSP_PartVolume. Other than that, it would be straightforward to do.

Gotcha, thank you for clarifying that! Is there an easy way to get/estimate the volume of a part?

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...