Jump to content

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

Beale

By Beale
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

Yorick1234

Yorick1234

Posted
Posted

Is there a premade Connected Living Space patch for Tantares? Because I'm now in the process of adding the parts myself that I see missing CLS metadata like docking ports, docking parachutes and unmanned station modules, but that takes a lot of time and game restarts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NonWonderDog

NonWonderDog

Posted
Posted (edited)

What's everyone's problem with the 0.9375 m docking ports? That's the ring diameter on the stock docking ports -- these just don't have the flared base to bring them out to 1.25 m. In fact, I would have hardly batted an eye if you had just flat-out called these "1.25 m docking ports".

See:

IOTOSFa.jpg

They don't actually mate that way in game, though, since they're set to dock to 0.625m ports instead of 1.25m ports (a mistake?). You can fix that, of course:


@PART[Tantares_DockingMechanism_A|Tantares_DockingMechanism_B]:BEFORE[AdpativeDockingNode]
{
    @MODULE[ModuleDockingNode] {
        @nodeType = size1
    }
}

Going in the other direction -- if you have AdaptiveDockingNode installed, this config will make the male and female ports dock only with each other. In this case they won't dock with androgynous ports any more.


@PART[Tantares_Port_A|Tantares_DockingMechanism_A|Alnair_Port_A|Agena_Port_A]:AFTER[AdaptiveDockingNode]
{
    @MODULE[ModuleAdaptiveDockingNode] {
        %Gender = male
    }
}

@PART[Tantares_Port_B|Tantares_DockingMechanism_B|Alnair_Port_B]:AFTER[AdaptiveDockingNode]
{
    @MODULE[ModuleAdaptiveDockingNode] {
        %Gender = female
    }
}

Use both configs, and 0.625 m probes only mate with 0.625 m drogues, and 0.9375 m probes only mate with 0.9375 m drogues.

Personally, I vote for banishing the 0.625 m docking ports entirely -- a Kerbal can't fit through them. There are a lot of parts to change, though...

And while I'm making wishes, I wish for a 0.9375 m duplicate of the Advanced Grabbing Unit that looks like Kontakt. :)

Edited by NonWonderDog
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foxxonius Augustus

Foxxonius Augustus

Posted
Posted

At the risk of getting on a band wagon, I am finding the new .9m parts really hard to work with. Don't get me wrong they do look cool and certainly more comfortable for kerbals to fit through. The problem I have comes from them not really fitting in well with other parts. We only have one dedicated adapter, one that was really only made with one spot in one spacecraft in mind. If we could get a re-proportioned flat adapter, or better two, one to 1.25 and one to 2.5 or 1.8 that wold make it much easier to use the .9m docking ports with, well, everything really. The other option would be done is to make a version of the .9m docking ports that have 1.25m bases, like what we have for the old .625 ports (same size port but with inbuilt adapter) for use with things other than the Tantares OM and top of Vega. To be honest though, the second solution seems unsatisfying. I really think we need .9-1.25 and .9-1.8 flat adapters to regain the lego feel that I for one have fallen in love with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nothingSpecial

nothingSpecial

Posted
Posted

Loving revamped Soyuz so far. And - first in a while - really satisfied with existing textures. And I wanted APAS for eternity.

The only problem - I can't really think of a good mission right now, so I just looked at it in VAB snd called that a day.

Still nice job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Niemand303

Niemand303

Posted
Posted
My Tantares parachutes don't work. They open but they don't slow down my capsule. I have real chute. Have i overseen something?

Remove partDataBase.cfg from root KSP folder, it will work then.

I'm beginning to wonder if we need a bigger 6 way node with those bigger docking ports

It works ok with the new ports, just use offset tool to slightly put them inside, it fits like a charm. :)

Aaand Expedition-1 arrives to my new revamped ISS!

7A4kWzrWeP0.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Revenant503

Revenant503

Posted
Posted
Tried it, but still the parachutes have no effect :(

Removing Real chute it works, adding it ...dont work...

Out of curiosity do you have Venns revamp and FAR installed?

I noticed VSR and real chute don't seem to get along and FAR was having a weird effect on top of those two (which admittedly was probably me seeing something that wasn't the so I'd try pulling out VSR first)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nothingSpecial

nothingSpecial

Posted
Posted

Okay, testing new Tantares.

I have bad news and good ones.

Good news - it looks goddamn gorgeous. Having .9375 hatch between return module and orbital module would make it even better but will clutter things a lot.

Bad news - if I use Tavio to make more or less Soyuz LV replica, it spawns lots of smoke around launchpad and won't ever start physics.

Here is my GameData folder:

bc7af7d94a27dde1dca10f9c1cdc1d47.png

Don't know what can make the conflict.

I resorted to using HGR 1.875m R-7-alike, it's a little bit overpowered for 1.25 Tantares but I really like the resulting stubby look.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pTrevTrevs

pTrevTrevs

Posted
Posted
Talking about part alternatives... I prefer having all of them! My new ISS has APAS 1.25m as American CBM and 0.9375m APAS as a true Russian APAS. 0.625m one can be used for Gemini, for instance.

http://cs628424.vk.me/v628424511/4c3d/A_ufTtwY0ws.jpg

http://cs628424.vk.me/v628424511/4c3d/A_ufTtwY0ws.jpg

Ah, I remember the last time I tried to construct an ISS. It got to Expedition 3 before I quit. So, I had added everything up to Pirs, except Canadarm 2. I had to quit in late July because marching band got in the way of everything and consumed all my time. With new KSP updates, and a lack of time to play the game, the station fell into obselecense, until, finally, the save was lost in the switch to a newer patch.

Your station looks great! PMAs look a little long, but everything else is perfect. After I'm done with Mir, I think I want to try and finally complete an ISS build. Thanks for the inspiration!

How do you keep your station from going into uncontrollable oscillations whenever you spin it? Assemblies that big tend to require excessive struts, reaction wheels, and/or RCS to keep it stable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pTrevTrevs

pTrevTrevs

Posted
Posted
I use timewarp!

Well, that works, but if I want to move the station into a particular attitude, it is often difficult due to all the flexible docking connections and other weak spots in the structure.

I nearly lost my first ISS right after I docked Zvezda because it started flexing so violently that the game wouldn't allow time warp to engage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Niemand303

Niemand303

Posted
Posted
How do you keep your station from going into uncontrollable oscillations whenever you spin it? Assemblies that big tend to require excessive struts, reaction wheels, and/or RCS to keep it stable.

Disable all the reaction wheels, use RCS only and do all the maneuvers slowly. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CrisK

CrisK

Posted
Posted
Okay, testing new Tantares.

I have bad news and good ones.

Good news - it looks goddamn gorgeous. Having .9375 hatch between return module and orbital module would make it even better but will clutter things a lot.

Bad news - if I use Tavio to make more or less Soyuz LV replica, it spawns lots of smoke around launchpad and won't ever start physics.

Here is my GameData folder:

http://i.gyazo.com/bc7af7d94a27dde1dca10f9c1cdc1d47.png

Don't know what can make the conflict.

I resorted to using HGR 1.875m R-7-alike, it's a little bit overpowered for 1.25 Tantares but I really like the resulting stubby look.

This bug is fixed in the configs that I released for TantaresLV. Beale has the fixes, but he has been very busy with the release of the Soyuz stuff. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beale

Beale

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Not the biggest fan of the superfluous stripes and such on the body, particularly on the top of the first stage. Honestly, I think Proton could be a bit lighter in color, and have more contrast in bricks, but I don't think it needs stripes.

On another note, I've started working on TMA! It's not too hard, since I'm largely copy-pasting from my old .psd files, but I'm looking to make it look even nicer. Progress-TMA will be totally unchanged, since Beale did not remodel the Progress parts.

http://i.imgur.com/LMXkkff.png

Looks very nice, sorry you are having some issues with it.

I'll try to revive the Green alternatives soon.

Stripes is the new style of your parts isn't it ? :) I really like it.

My apologizes if this has already been said, I have issues with the tanta dishes, they doesn't clip anywhere and the bug seems to occur with the IGLA too sometimes, I don't have all the tantares parts installed but the SOYUZ and SALYUT folder are kept intact. How can I fix it ?

Thanks!

The issue, I'm not sure I understand, picture?

Is there a premade Connected Living Space patch for Tantares? Because I'm now in the process of adding the parts myself that I see missing CLS metadata like docking ports, docking parachutes and unmanned station modules, but that takes a lot of time and game restarts.

Not for a long time, sorry :)

Can't be sure what is causing the issue of yours.

What's everyone's problem with the 0.9375 m docking ports? That's the ring diameter on the stock docking ports -- these just don't have the flared base to bring them out to 1.25 m. In fact, I would have hardly batted an eye if you had just flat-out called these "1.25 m docking ports".

See:

http://i.imgur.com/IOTOSFa.jpg

They don't actually mate that way in game, though, since they're set to dock to 0.625m ports instead of 1.25m ports (a mistake?). You can fix that, of course:


@PART[Tantares_DockingMechanism_A|Tantares_DockingMechanism_B]:BEFORE[AdpativeDockingNode]
{
    @MODULE[ModuleDockingNode] {
        @nodeType = size1
    }
}

Going in the other direction -- if you have AdaptiveDockingNode installed, this config will make the male and female ports dock only with each other. In this case they won't dock with androgynous ports any more.


@PART[Tantares_Port_A|Tantares_DockingMechanism_A|Alnair_Port_A|Agena_Port_A]:AFTER[AdaptiveDockingNode]
{
    @MODULE[ModuleAdaptiveDockingNode] {
        %Gender = male
    }
}

@PART[Tantares_Port_B|Tantares_DockingMechanism_B|Alnair_Port_B]:AFTER[AdaptiveDockingNode]
{
    @MODULE[ModuleAdaptiveDockingNode] {
        %Gender = female
    }
}

Use both configs, and 0.625 m probes only mate with 0.625 m drogues, and 0.9375 m probes only mate with 0.9375 m drogues.

Personally, I vote for banishing the 0.625 m docking ports entirely -- a Kerbal can't fit through them. There are a lot of parts to change, though...

And while I'm making wishes, I wish for a 0.9375 m duplicate of the Advanced Grabbing Unit that looks like Kontakt. :)

Fixed, the nodes are now size 1 (And fixed their descriptions). :)

And... Kontakt grabber unit, maybe not. But a Philae like part to go with Fobos Grunt? Hmmm...

At the risk of getting on a band wagon, I am finding the new .9m parts really hard to work with. Don't get me wrong they do look cool and certainly more comfortable for kerbals to fit through. The problem I have comes from them not really fitting in well with other parts. We only have one dedicated adapter, one that was really only made with one spot in one spacecraft in mind. If we could get a re-proportioned flat adapter, or better two, one to 1.25 and one to 2.5 or 1.8 that wold make it much easier to use the .9m docking ports with, well, everything really. The other option would be done is to make a version of the .9m docking ports that have 1.25m bases, like what we have for the old .625 ports (same size port but with inbuilt adapter) for use with things other than the Tantares OM and top of Vega. To be honest though, the second solution seems unsatisfying. I really think we need .9-1.25 and .9-1.8 flat adapters to regain the lego feel that I for one have fallen in love with.

A thin adapter... yes this would be good. :) Nice idea.

The existing adapter also could be given a simpler texture that is less specific to TKS.

Loving revamped Soyuz so far. And - first in a while - really satisfied with existing textures. And I wanted APAS for eternity.

The only problem - I can't really think of a good mission right now, so I just looked at it in VAB snd called that a day.

Still nice job.

Do project Daedalus. :wink:

Talking about part alternatives... I prefer having all of them! My new ISS has APAS 1.25m as American CBM and 0.9375m APAS as a true Russian APAS. 0.625m one can be used for Gemini, for instance.

http://cs628424.vk.me/v628424511/4c3d/A_ufTtwY0ws.jpg

http://cs628424.vk.me/v628424511/4c3d/A_ufTtwY0ws.jpg

Very nice!

The transition things on the US segment, I like it.

Excuse me mod author? I was looking at some amazingly beautiful screenshots with much older Tantares ships/parts and I really want to play around with them! By any chance can you release some of your older stuff but revamp them to work in the newer editions of KSP's Aerodynamics? :D

Previous versions are available through KerbalStuff.

Okay, testing new Tantares.

I have bad news and good ones.

Good news - it looks goddamn gorgeous. Having .9375 hatch between return module and orbital module would make it even better but will clutter things a lot.

Bad news - if I use Tavio to make more or less Soyuz LV replica, it spawns lots of smoke around launchpad and won't ever start physics.

Here is my GameData folder:

http://i.gyazo.com/bc7af7d94a27dde1dca10f9c1cdc1d47.png

Don't know what can make the conflict.

I resorted to using HGR 1.875m R-7-alike, it's a little bit overpowered for 1.25 Tantares but I really like the resulting stubby look.

This bug is fixed in the configs that I released for TantaresLV. Beale has the fixes, but he has been very busy with the release of the Soyuz stuff. :D

I'm currently working through the configs, can't say I'll be using all of your changes as a few of them irk me a little, but should be done soon, the bug fixes are very helpful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CrisK

CrisK

Posted
Posted

I'm currently working through the configs, can't say I'll be using all of your changes as a few of them irk me a little...

...a few of them irk me a little...

...a few of them irk me a little...

...a few of them irk me a little...

And that's when the tears started flowing. ;.;

No problem, buddy Beale! Use what you like, throw away the rest. Tantares and TantaresLV are almost bug-free already because of your hard work. :D I am just happy that some of what I did was useful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nothingSpecial

nothingSpecial

Posted
Posted

Do project Daedalus. :wink:

Okay. I don't know what exactly I will fuse, but I'll try to fuse something to propel spacecraft out of Kerbol system using Tantares. Right now I'm trying to make a little competing space stations, USSR-themed (mostly Tantares) and USA-themed (mostly not Tantares).
I'm currently working through the configs, can't say I'll be using all of your changes as a few of them irk me a little, but should be done soon, the bug fixes are very helpful.
This bug is fixed in the configs that I released for TantaresLV. Beale has the fixes, but he has been very busy with the release of the Soyuz stuff. :D
Yeah, and after some testing ans space station building I can say that problem is in the CEM(B) engine; and the more engines used the more the lag before physics start - I thought it won't with four of them but test craft with one of them allows me to launch itself after 10s.

I can make LV using only CEM(u), with additional engines (Way-something-ers, surface-attachable) it has plenty o' kick to put filled Proton into my main working orbit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gristle

Gristle

Posted
Posted
Ah, I remember the last time I tried to construct an ISS. It got to Expedition 3 before I quit. So, I had added everything up to Pirs, except Canadarm 2. I had to quit in late July because marching band got in the way of everything and consumed all my time. With new KSP updates, and a lack of time to play the game, the station fell into obselecense, until, finally, the save was lost in the switch to a newer patch.

Your station looks great! PMAs look a little long, but everything else is perfect. After I'm done with Mir, I think I want to try and finally complete an ISS build. Thanks for the inspiration!

How do you keep your station from going into uncontrollable oscillations whenever you spin it? Assemblies that big tend to require excessive struts, reaction wheels, and/or RCS to keep it stable.

I turn of all but 1 or 2 reaction wheels near a guesstimate of the center of mass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Beale

Beale

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Yeah, and after some testing ans space station building I can say that problem is in the CEM(B) engine; and the more engines used the more the lag before physics start - I thought it won't with four of them but test craft with one of them allows me to launch itself after 10s.

I can make LV using only CEM(u), with additional engines (Way-something-ers, surface-attachable) it has plenty o' kick to put filled Proton into my main working orbit.

The problem with the SURF-FX module is, like the lab module it's index sensitive. Easy mistake to miss when setting the effect up (I think it was Urist?).

Anyway, almost applied all of the needed launch vehicle fixes.

It was once blue, but now it is black.

I feel the need to make it after reading the sad story of the British Space Programme.

Small project while I decide what to do next. Probably won't release as part of TantaresLV...

91dd875c1d.jpg

4b4882caab.jpg

IRL Example

Black_Knight_Rocket_Edinburgh.JPG

Edited by Beale
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
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...