Beale

[1.7.X] Tantares - Stockalike Soyuz and MIR [19.0][22/09/2019]

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Beale said:

It's usefullness in 1X KSP is questionable, but the LK has suffered for a long time in 2.5X, QSRSS and JNSQ, so hopefully this will give it the edge there.

I'm really excited about having this for 2.5x. Thanks very much for your work.

Also, feedback on the "new 1.5m era" Soyuz stuff. It's fantastic. Textures all round look great, engine effects get a thumbs up too. And the sound choice is excellent.

10/10.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, Barzon Kerman said:

IK @Beale put this in accidentally, but it looks amazing! Are you doing the Service module aswell? Or is that Dylan's job?

Probably myself, but we will see in due time! :) 

18 hours ago, Tyko said:

Could you imagine being a cosmonaut, having the engineers show you this craft and explain you're going another planet in something that looks as rickety as that? OMG they had guts to even consider it. The Apollo lander was pretty pieced together looking too, but at least it had more substance and you weren't going alone.

The LK is very constrained compared to the LM for sure, but it had a few tricks up its sleeve, notably a backup engine and (I think) greater ability when it comes to landing on slopes (You kind of had to commit to the landing wherever you ended up). :) 

15 hours ago, TK-313 said:

Hm, I just found a ton of excellent quatity LK photos (the one in them is a testing stand put into a museum). Couple pics here and a whole lot more down the link below:

https://selena-luna.ru/russkie-na-lune/fotografii-korablya-lk-1-dlya-oblyota-luny/

Hope these will be of some use!

P.S. So the "hat" did have roll control thrusters ;-)

P.P.S. This ship doesn't seem to have the upper half of the ladder, though. Apparently it went to another unit:

From the amazing London exhibit :) I missed it only narrowly.

Many thanks! For sure will put roll control in both this and the LOK forward unit.

10 hours ago, Daniel Prates said:

Cool. And to think that thing came close to being the first manned moonlander... Leonov was supposed to be the man, right?

That's the guy!

9 hours ago, Fly Angry said:

I'm really excited about having this for 2.5x. Thanks very much for your work.

Also, feedback on the "new 1.5m era" Soyuz stuff. It's fantastic. Textures all round look great, engine effects get a thumbs up too. And the sound choice is excellent.

10/10.

Very kind, many thanks!

Edited by Beale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, TK-313 said:

12-8.jpg33-2.jpg

Those are great images! I was lucky enough to see the beast itself in London a few years back and one thing that the images never really show is the real scale of it. It's small for a lunar lander for sure but much bigger and more imposing in person than it looks in the photos. 

One thing I have wondered and haven't really been able to find an answer to is whether the flown LKs looked like this (bare metal) or if they had thermal blankets over them as with Soyuz. I suppose that might influence how you would go about texturing it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, benjee10 said:

Those are great images! I was lucky enough to see the beast itself in London a few years back and one thing that the images never really show is the real scale of it. It's small for a lunar lander for sure but much bigger and more imposing in person than it looks in the photos. 

One thing I have wondered and haven't really been able to find an answer to is whether the flown LKs looked like this (bare metal) or if they had thermal blankets over them as with Soyuz. I suppose that might influence how you would go about texturing it. 

Short answer: yes. They would have had thermal blankets. It's similar to the F-1 - no museum pieces show them with the thermal batting, so almost no depictions of them show them correctly. The LK has the added disadvantage of being a piece of soviet space hardware which tend to be even harder to dig up information on.

8Xpv30i.png

IQihDA3.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any news on RealPlume config updates? A good few engines are still missing them, although I don't know who's in charge of maintaining said configs.

It's not a massive problem since the existing plumes are nice, but I was just wondering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, benjee10 said:

the images never really show is the real scale of it

Would be interesting if somebody posted a picture of it with someone beside it. I searched and found none. @TK-313 I mean someone standing up straight. Do you have one?

Edited by Daniel Prates

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Is there a reason that the R-7 parts got moved to fuel systems in the tech tree, other than to group them with Making History parts? For career play, I think it would be good to move them back to their original position. I know everyone's career experience is different, but I find that I've already completed the historical equivalents of notable R-7 family missions (like Sputnik and Luna) by the time that node could be unlocked.

EDIT: I wonder if using the upgrade system to note the change from the RD-107/108 to RD-107A/108A would help call out the transition from early R-7 rockets to later ones.

EDIT2: While I don't have my install with me, I believe that thr Soyuz capsule parts unlock on the 45 Sci tier, which means that the capsules are getting unlocked earlier than the craft the carried them. 

 

Edited by Machinique

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, benjee10 said:

Those are great images! I was lucky enough to see the beast itself in London a few years back and one thing that the images never really show is the real scale of it. It's small for a lunar lander for sure but much bigger and more imposing in person than it looks in the photos. 

One thing I have wondered and haven't really been able to find an answer to is whether the flown LKs looked like this (bare metal) or if they had thermal blankets over them as with Soyuz. I suppose that might influence how you would go about texturing it. 

4 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

Short answer: yes. They would have had thermal blankets. It's similar to the F-1 - no museum pieces show them with the thermal batting, so almost no depictions of them show them correctly. The LK has the added disadvantage of being a piece of soviet space hardware which tend to be even harder to dig up information on.

 

 

It's frustrating that the flight pictures just don't exist. I often wonder if the VA would have blankets also.
Hard to tell from what little I can find:

TKS_3.jpg

1 hour ago, Daniel Prates said:

Would be interesting if somebody posted a picture of it with someone beside it. I searched and found none. @TK-313 I mean someone standing up straight. Do you have one?

Not perfect, but here are some people at floor level nearby.

25iht-cosmonauts25-articleLarge.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp

26 minutes ago, Machinique said:

Is there a reason that the R-7 parts got moved to fuel systems in the tech tree, other than to group them with Making History parts? For career play, I think it would be good to move them back to their original position. I know everyone's career experience is different, but I find that I've already completed the historical equivalents of notable R-7 family missions (like Sputnik and Luna) by the time that node could be unlocked.

EDIT: I wonder if using the upgrade system to note the change from the RD-107/108 to RD-107A/108A would help call out the transition from early R-7 rockets to later ones.

 

I have to admit I don't keep the MH history parts around - which node are they in? I will move them there.

Edited by Beale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will get back to you on that. I think there may be a difference between the dev build and last release. It looks like they're unlocked from the start in dev build, although i need to verify that any CTT patches aren't moving things around for me.

My general concern would be to make sure that it'd be possible to do a 2.5x historical Soviet campaign without having to resort to frankenstein builds. I think that tier 1-2 is the appropriate place for that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I need to admit i also think Tech Tree need a review. Like Kosmos part are late on the TechTree, i could generally make an R7 and soyuz or an LK before a small Kosmos1.    I don't think that was supposed to be like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Machinique said:

I will get back to you on that. I think there may be a difference between the dev build and last release. It looks like they're unlocked from the start in dev build, although i need to verify that any CTT patches aren't moving things around for me.

My general concern would be to make sure that it'd be possible to do a 2.5x historical Soviet campaign without having to resort to frankenstein builds. I think that tier 1-2 is the appropriate place for that. 

3 hours ago, Well said:

I need to admit i also think Tech Tree need a review. Like Kosmos part are late on the TechTree, i could generally make an R7 and soyuz or an LK before a small Kosmos1.    I don't think that was supposed to be like that.

Okay nice concepts,  so how about:

Tier 1
R7 and basic engines (ISP nerfed to... 280?, thrust reduced)

Tier 2
Vostok / Luna
Kosmos 2I

Tier 3
Soyuz (Upgrade engines with part upgrade system).
Kosmos 3M

Tier 4...
Same as currently for the rest of parts.

This keeps things available at the right time frame, and gives you a choice between heavier and lighter rockets.

 

 

I have been distracted with a silly little planet mod, so excuse the slow progress :)

PodNbuL.pngEYQynCc.png9vHjtbs.png

But...

QblyD0q.pngojbjB1u.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, Beale said:

But...

QblyD0q.png

 

There's one they fear. In their tongue it is Лунный корабль

What are these planets ? Tell us more please, I am always glad to see new planets :3

ps : it's been a while and your mods are better than ever :)

 

Edited by spacecookie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds good.

Current RD-107/108 ISP is 288/320. According to the wiki, original ISP was ~257/313, and then ~263/320. I assume that the current ISP numbers come from your testing, so that sounds like a proportional decrease.

Also, the new LK looks great!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, GJdude said:

Any news on RealPlume config updates? A good few engines are still missing them, although I don't know who's in charge of maintaining said configs.

It's not a massive problem since the existing plumes are nice, but I was just wondering.

No one is in charge per se, Beale doesnt use RealPlume so it's up to the community to submit pull requests for compatibility on Github. I have opened a PR for the new Soyuz engines although thats not been merged yet. What other engines are missing? If I have time I might see if I can do some configs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, spacecookie said:

 

There's one they fear. In their tongue it is Лунный корабль

What are these planets ? Tell us more please, I am always glad to see new planets :3

ps : it's been a while and your mods are better than ever :)

 

Thanks! Nice to see you around again.

Planets, well, we will see eventually.

17 hours ago, Machinique said:

That sounds good.

Current RD-107/108 ISP is 288/320. According to the wiki, original ISP was ~257/313, and then ~263/320. I assume that the current ISP numbers come from your testing, so that sounds like a proportional decrease.

Also, the new LK looks great!

Many thanks.

13 hours ago, Zorg said:

No one is in charge per se, Beale doesnt use RealPlume so it's up to the community to submit pull requests for compatibility on Github. I have opened a PR for the new Soyuz engines although thats not been merged yet. What other engines are missing? If I have time I might see if I can do some configs.

Let me fix that! :)

 

 

 

Preferred Soyuz rocket alternate scheme?

Added poll.

kisspng-r-7-semyorka-rocket-sputnik-1-intercontinental-bal-soyuzfg-5b1cd220173e74.2637572615286154560952.jpg

FI6s3N9.png

Edited by Beale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why are you making us choose Beale ;.;

ps. I think theres an issue with the polls where if you voted on an earlier question you cant respond to newly added ones...

I guess if you forced me to choose I would go with green (and then bother Drakenex until he adds Cream to Tantares in colours :P )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Yeah i think the polls is broken @Beale, i also can't choose

I love green, but this  "Offwhite/Cream" look also interesting 

Edited by Well

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Zorg said:

Why are you making us choose Beale ;.;

I guess if you forced me to choose I would go with green (and then bother Drakenex until he adds Cream to Tantares in colours :P )

Needs a little restraint unfortunately - the alternate scheme requires two 2048x2048 textures, or 10MB, so just one is quite hefty.

50 minutes ago, Well said:

Yeah i think the polls is broken @Beale, i also can't choose

1 hour ago, Zorg said:

ps. I think theres an issue with the polls where if you voted on an earlier question you cant respond to newly added ones...

How strange, I have recreated the question entirely, hopefully this works.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Beale said:

Needs a little restraint unfortunately - the alternate scheme requires two 2048x2048 textures, or 10MB, so just one is quite hefty.

Haha I understand, Tantares in colours has it place therefore for those of us who lack all restraint.

2 minutes ago, Beale said:

How strange, I have recreated the question entirely, hopefully this works.

Yup it works now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted for green. I really like the cream color, but I think that green will look better in game and will mesh better with other mods.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Difficult choice tbh. But Vanilla caramel for me, because it’s the tastiest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Tantares 17.2

Just a quick fix release.

- Removed Cygnus
- Fixed Soyuz Green

LOK craft file uploaded.

x0egQCR.pngXiLeKzz.png

LreheIo.png

Edited by Beale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/4/2019 at 2:01 PM, TK-313 said:

It does fit the 1.5 m variant perfectly. Honestly, the only reason 1.5m is not the main variant of the Soyuz rocket is that it doesn't divide cleanly by Squad's 1.25m.

Except that is like saying Movies don't divide equally into 30 Frame rate of TVs (24 for movies....US ATSC/NTSC TV formats.) Just alter your reference to a different number (60 frame potential aka 120Hz) and you solve without hard math.

24 and 30 both go into 120 evenly.  

In the case of KSP if you use the reference number of 0.125 for your base measurement (several mods use this size for small probes.) then both 1.25 and 1.5 are valid numbers.

====================================================================================================================================================

 

On a more up to date note.  @Beale, I love the Cream/buff/white Colors for the R-7 in your concept graphic, but I have to go with Green.  Simple reason,  Many R-7 Satellite launches WERE green at least according to Bill Gunston's books on space, satellites and whatnot (Salamander book so pretty thin on techie detail and more to get kids/adults interested in his subjects without all the engineering/history.   

Unfortunately that was a library book and one the library no longer has on it's shelves (dK if it was worn out or some one kept it....)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I second @Well for the crème dessert color, it's far tastiest ;)

Share this post


Link to post
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.