Jump to content

Recommended Posts

4437295_m.png

4437330_m.png

4437333_m.png

4437336_m.png

Since software development Rockets for "RSS" suspended I decided to make "stock version." Rocket has four versions. As there is a beta version of "Apollo",at a Denny's on the LEM, you can perform "Apollo Mission".

4437393_m.png

WARNING:

1. Possible conflict with the addon "World space"

2. Apollo has no internal IVA,has no docking port,has no parachute (use the Mk-2 R)

3. Rocket does not work with the FAR, (first stage outputs almost Rocket into orbit)

it will be corrections in a special version for FAR.

4.In add-on has a powerful Struts, fasten them all motors and stages.

Please report bugs you find, I have not much time to check all...

Interesting Addons:

-Downloading LEM from Denny, you can perform a full "Apollo Mission".

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/70557-APOLLO-LEM-OLDD-%28Odd-Looking-Devices-by-DennyTX%29-present-%28v-0-23-03-03-14%29

-Great FASA tower, suitable for Rocket.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/71032-FASA-Launch-Towers

I'm waiting for your advice, criticism, bug reports,and suggestions for the future.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/16y2xlekl2xki6a/1jzuxr-zlP/SATURN%20V.zip

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great release. I'll soon send you some tips on how to improve the rocket. Also, get in contact with Nazari and ask him for realistic effects. It's possible to make custom smoke now, so you could have really nice F-1 effects. J-2 had no smoke, being somewhat similar to SSME (also a hydrolox engine), but fainter and without the "blue bit" inside the flame, and LM and CSM engines (as well as S-IVB APS) should resemble OMS effects on the CSS (they're also small hypergolics). For retros and ullage rockets, I dunno, but they're all solid, except the APS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I started testing it, two small comments;

I think that standard IVA for mk1-2 pod woudl be better as placeholder for apollo capsule.

Also, for some reason part catalogue dont properly tags all parts.

edit:

CM service module needs additional attachment points on bottom, to attach it to top of LEM fairing.

Right now i have to use struts, otherwise CM breaks away from rocket immediatly.

Edited by kiwiak
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I played around with it again and here are some comments:

- S-IVB decoupler used during LEM extraction has too high decoupling force. It ejects LM from S-IVB while, at least on apollo 13 movie LM was gently released and than moved away using CM rcs

- Adding decoupling module to CM engine woudl be nice. Now to separate CM from LM still attached to S-IVB i have to use some stock decouplr that gets in way during docking.

- LM doesnt have torque and relies on rcs, so shoudl CM capsule. I have to turn off it anyway, because when i use it ships start to wobble like crazy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed you're using a lot of real geometry to convey detail. That's a big no-no. All those modelled rivets, etc. on the engines or command pod are just killing performance and don't even look better than a decent texture.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong. Polygons don't decrease performance, textures do. Graphics in general are non-critical in KSP, memory is. And that's why what he's doing is the optimal way of modeling parts. Lots of polies, simple textures.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Wrong. Polygons don't decrease performance, textures do. Graphics in general are non-critical in KSP, memory is. And that's why what he's doing is the optimal way of modeling parts. Lots of polies, simple textures.

Then something is dragging down performance, as those parts lagged the hell out of my PC. And my point about a nice texture (doesn't even have to be that high-res) looking better than polygon details still stands, at least that's how I see it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is, to get high detail, you need high resolution, and that does ​cause problems with KSP. Polygon details are almost certainly not the reason.

However, I didn't test the latest version, so perhaps it's got some custom colliders. Those do drag performance down very, very quickly with rising polygon count.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

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...