[1.12.X] Tantares - Stockalike Soyuz and MIR [26.0][18.12.2023][Soyuz Revamp Again]

[Beale]

On 7/9/2021 at 6:43 AM, nothingSpecial said:

i'd say go for two only. having three of them was insanity even in real context (i, uh, would say that voskhod-1 was the most dangerous spacecraft in the whole history). replicas needs aside, it will compete somewhat with tantares in career.

 

on the other hand, inserting three kerbals in a spherical tin can is so damn kerbal - i can imagine the line of reasoning here: "they can bear that so that's okay". its funny so maybe acceptable with a side dish of replica, but do not overstress yourself if you can't place all of them.

 

out of presented options id say couch is better, and small amount of clipping (if they wont like go through each other's cameras in first person view) is even good - it will look like they sit in cramped capsule, it's exactly what is needed?

 

but bottom line is do not overstress yourself.

 

personally i would be perfectly fine with two  crew voskhod-1 and one crew voskhod-2 (it's not like i have never done one kerballed evas, even on voskhods made of your previous incarnations of vostok).

 

btw, will it be named cassiopeia? pegasus? perseus? medusa?

also, in the case you do choose to make a three crew capsule in a couch sitting, make the central seat be the last one taken. a little bit of comfort!

oh, and another thought: you can also try to place one kerbal in inverted position (head where legs of others are). not sure if it will give more space, but at least eyes wouldn't get pushed out of poor fella's eyesockets during liftoff...

Just now, NiL said:

I personally feel like 2 seats is enough.  With 3 seats it would overlap with Soyuz too much, and 2 seats are not only plenty enough to recreate Voskhod mission profile, but would also make this into a sort of gameplay analogue for MH Gemini pod. 3-manned Voskhod will be essential only for EXTREME history nerds, and they could easily add a missing seat via .cfg editing... By the way, speaking of which, a 3-man IVA (seing as it is already sort of in-game) could be made into an extra option coming with github download. A triangle pattern is, IMO, better in this case as it looks more realistic (as realistic as THAT can look lol), and does not, again, overlap visually with Souz which has, as i remember, a "couch" layout.

On 7/8/2021 at 7:36 PM, MashAndBangers said:

I'm fine with just 2.  Voskhod 1 was the only 3 person mission for the Voskhod programme.  Voskhod 2 was of course 2 person, and the canceled missions were mostly 2 person, with a 1 person mission thrown in there. 

On 7/8/2021 at 6:41 PM, Spaceman.Spiff said:

Could you have the third kerbal on the opposite side of the capsule facing the other two?

Thanks very kindly for all the feedback!

Well, in the end - two is probably the best option.

 

 

 

woah what's this

on git now

https://github.com/Tantares/Tantares

 

 

[NiL]

1 minute ago, Beale said:

Oh no, how could this even happen!?. 
 

[MashAndBangers]

39 minutes ago, Beale said:

woah what's this

The BDB vs Tantares Spy Wars begin.

[KeaKaka]

5 hours ago, Beale said:

woah what's this

on git now

https://github.com/Tantares/Tantares

Hey, has anyone made SCANsat configs for Almaz-T?

EDIT: Bion?

Edited July 11, 2021 by KeaKaka

[MashAndBangers]

From what I can tell looking at Soyuz/R7 images, the size of the core stage never changed.  Meaning the top diameter never changed.  For KSP, that would be the 1.5m diameter top.

The Vostok upper stage was inline with the top of the core stage... which would be 1.5m in KSP.  The vostok upper stage in KSP is set to 1m at the moment.  This all means the Vostok, Voskhod, and Zenit are undersized for the scaling.

 

This would mean extra work to scale what's already been revamped.  This includes the IVA... But, with a bigger Voskhod, we can maybe fit 3 kerbals in there?

on the flip side, we do have that 1.5m to 1m taper tank we can use.  I don't know, this all depends on if Beale is even enjoying do the Vostok, Voskhod, and Zenit.  In the end, we can make an MM Patch to resize everything (not sure about the IVA), and let that be that.

 

Side note, looks like Squad's Vostok and Voskhod pods were set to the right size all along....

[Minmus Taster]

HE MADE A ZENIT BY MISTAKE?!?!?!?! HOW DOES THAT HAPPEN OMG

[MashAndBangers]

Did some experiments with rescaling.  Is fun!

[Beale]

11 hours ago, MashAndBangers said:

From what I can tell looking at Soyuz/R7 images, the size of the core stage never changed.  Meaning the top diameter never changed.  For KSP, that would be the 1.5m diameter top.

The Vostok upper stage was inline with the top of the core stage... which would be 1.5m in KSP.  The vostok upper stage in KSP is set to 1m at the moment.  This all means the Vostok, Voskhod, and Zenit are undersized for the scaling.

 

This would mean extra work to scale what's already been revamped.  This includes the IVA... But, with a bigger Voskhod, we can maybe fit 3 kerbals in there?

on the flip side, we do have that 1.5m to 1m taper tank we can use.  I don't know, this all depends on if Beale is even enjoying do the Vostok, Voskhod, and Zenit.  In the end, we can make an MM Patch to resize everything (not sure about the IVA), and let that be that.

 

Side note, looks like Squad's Vostok and Voskhod pods were set to the right size all along....

Vostok scaling is quite difficult due to how KSP sizes work, and there is no exact neat answer (without making a bunch of weird one-size parts that are not very useful).

I think you might be getting your numbers confused (the size category vs. the actual measurements) here is an example:

overlaid:

Considering Vostok is something you are starting with, I don't think it makes good gameplay sense to have it at any size larger than 1.25m.

BDB and a few other mods use 1.5m (size 1.2) parts, but it's too late in the day for Tantares to use this, it would involve revamping a huge amount of stuff. Let's see what's best in KSP2.

11 hours ago, KeaKaka said:

Hey, has anyone made SCANsat configs for Almaz-T?

EDIT: Bion?

some of the TantaresSP parts have scansat plugins, but I don't think Almaz does.

Edited July 11, 2021 by Beale

[MashAndBangers]

7 hours ago, Beale said:

I think you might be getting your numbers confused (the size category vs. the actual measurements) here is an example:

ugh, forgot about "1m ksp is 1.25m".  I meant 1.75m.  Anyway, I can MM patch the parts to be the size I feel they look best at.  Is no big deal comrade.

Do you have a diagram showing the Soyuz space craft size?  I was looking for a size comparison between soyuz and vostok, but Google failed me.

 

Screenshot Tax:

Edited July 11, 2021 by MashAndBangers

[Beale]

4 hours ago, MashAndBangers said:

ugh, forgot about "1m ksp is 1.25m".  I meant 1.75m.  Anyway, I can MM patch the parts to be the size I feel they look best at.  Is no big deal comrade.

Do you have a diagram showing the Soyuz space craft size?  I was looking for a size comparison between soyuz and vostok, but Google failed me.

 

Screenshot Tax:

This smells like Gemini!

 

Yes for comparison, I scaled these both to IRL scale:

Soyuz is smaller than you think!

Edited July 11, 2021 by Beale

[MashAndBangers]

Just now, Beale said:

This smells like Gemini!

shhh

Just now, Beale said:

Soyuz is smaller than you think!

Thank you!

[Beccab]

TMK-1/MaVr spacecraft https://falsesteps.wordpress.com/2016/04/30/tmk-1mavr-red-planet/
Duna flyby:


Eve flyby



Return to Kerbin:

[davidy12]

1 hour ago, Beccab said:

TMK-1/MaVr spacecraft https://falsesteps.wordpress.com/2016/04/30/tmk-1mavr-red-planet/
Return to Kerbin:

So that's how they'd get back to Earth.

[Beccab]

8 minutes ago, davidy12 said:

So that's how they'd get back to Earth.

Yep! According to what I read the descent capsule stays nested in the aft section of the spacecraft before reentry, but the capsule in particular Astronautix says was different - a reverse soyuz, made like the US Corona capsules. Maybe because of higher reentry speed, idk

[OKB-279]

4 hours ago, Beccab said:

TMK-1/MaVr spacecraft https://falsesteps.wordpress.com/2016/04/30/tmk-1mavr-red-planet/
Duna flyby:


Eve flyby



Return to Kerbin:

amazing use of the new part revamp and failed soviet martian projects, is there some where to download this craft? i would love to test it out

[MashAndBangers]

Beale demands even more screenshots!

Red Hot Nickle Voskhod Ball.

Awkward fairing go!

Edited July 11, 2021 by MashAndBangers

[Dev_135]

Hey Beale! Having issues currently with the progress craft. The exterior stowage boxes, descent module, and orbital module are both fully tan. Is this a common issue with dependencies that are needed?

[CollectingSP]

On 7/10/2021 at 5:03 PM, KeaKaka said:

Bion

Oh god if this is bion I can’t wait

 

(EDIT: I was incorrect. It’s not bion)

Edited July 12, 2021 by CollectingSP

[GoldForest]

 

Because we need more curse in our diets. 

[OrdinaryKerman]

25 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

 

Because we need more curse in our diets. 

AAAH

[TaintedLion]

7 hours ago, GoldForest said:

 

Because we need more curse in our diets. 

This is like the opposite of kosher.

[TantaresBestMod]

This is my favorite mod for KSP. I'm bored playing without it, when is the update? I would also like to support your creativity, where can I do this?

[nothingSpecial]

okay ive played a little bit with it and love the models!

there are, though, some things, im pretty sure you are aware of them but in the case you didn't... first i thought that old parts didn't get their localizations because those were used for the new parts, and they are semi-depreciated, and that's okay. but then as i got to surface attachible parts (spherical tanks and antennae), ive seen that they too have lost localization strings.

(also models are transparent from the undersides but i think you already know that)

 

also which chute should go under the backup retrorocket?

[GoldForest]

55 minutes ago, TantaresBestMod said:

This is my favorite mod for KSP. I'm bored playing without it, when is the update? I would also like to support your creativity, where can I do this?

All the Tantares mods work in 1.12.1

5 minutes ago, nothingSpecial said:

okay ive played a little bit with it and love the models!

there are, though, some things, im pretty sure you are aware of them but in the case you didn't... first i thought that old parts didn't get their localizations because those were used for the new parts, and they are semi-depreciated, and that's okay. but then as i got to surface attachible parts (spherical tanks and antennae), ive seen that they too have lost localization strings.

(also models are transparent from the undersides but i think you already know that)

 

also which chute should go under the backup retrorocket?

Some of the parts with #Loc_???? are old and depreciated. If there's a new part with the #Loc_ that means Beale hasn't made the config official yet and it's just has a basic config to get the part in game.  You have to kind of comb through the parts right now and figure out which parts are new and which are old.

Beale does the transparent parts on purpose as they are just going to be a generic part texture. Don't worry, it will get fixed soon. 

As for the chute, technically no chute goes under the retrorocket. But if you're going to add a chute, the only chute that goes under it is the Andromeda Size 0 Parachute. It's the only chute that fits Andromeda AFIAK. But it has no node for the retrorocket. @Beale Is the parachute supposed to have a node for the retrorocket or do we have to sacrifice the chute for the rocket?

[Beale]

On 7/12/2021 at 12:42 AM, MashAndBangers said:

Beale demands even more screenshots!

 

Red Hot Nickle Voskhod Ball.

Awkward fairing go!

Nice!

Would be nice to have a certain fairings....

On 7/12/2021 at 1:05 AM, Dev_135 said:

Hey Beale! Having issues currently with the progress craft. The exterior stowage boxes, descent module, and orbital module are both fully tan. Is this a common issue with dependencies that are needed?

not sure I understand fully.

If you are using the WIP release from github clone to zip, you will need B9 part switch.

3 hours ago, nothingSpecial said:

okay ive played a little bit with it and love the models!

there are, though, some things, im pretty sure you are aware of them but in the case you didn't... first i thought that old parts didn't get their localizations because those were used for the new parts, and they are semi-depreciated, and that's okay. but then as i got to surface attachible parts (spherical tanks and antennae), ive seen that they too have lost localization strings.

(also models are transparent from the undersides but i think you already know that)

 

also which chute should go under the backup retrorocket?

Not to worry - normal part of WIP releases, all of these will eventually be resolved.

You can track progress here:

https://github.com/Tantares/Tantares/projects/11

3 hours ago, GoldForest said:

As for the chute, technically no chute goes under the retrorocket. But if you're going to add a chute, the only chute that goes under it is the Andromeda Size 0 Parachute. It's the only chute that fits Andromeda AFIAK. But it has no node for the retrorocket. @Beale Is the parachute supposed to have a node for the retrorocket or do we have to sacrifice the chute for the rocket?

A specific parachute was made for Voskhod:

However, in the end this part was identical in dimensions / colour / function to the existing Soyuz parachute. So to prevent redundant parts, the Soyuz chute will just be moved a tech tree node down to live with the Voskhod parts.

On 7/11/2021 at 7:55 PM, Beccab said:

TMK-1/MaVr spacecraft https://falsesteps.wordpress.com/2016/04/30/tmk-1mavr-red-planet/
Duna flyby:


Eve flyby



Return to Kerbin:

 

Absolutely breathtaking, probably a contender for the favourite thing I've seen using my parts!

 

 

Edited July 13, 2021 by Beale