Jump to content
[[Template core/front/profile/profileHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Posts posted by CardBoardBoxProcessor

  1. Agreed, masterful stuff there, CBBP. For a 2.5-diameter tank, will you still be releasing four engines mounted together in the future, or is the smaller size becoming standard?

    well what with the engines decent thrust they are capable of both. These are in the middle of 1.25m and 2.5m engines. the Nk-33 being more 1.25m. You can easily use adapters though. Hopefully now that my game works right i can release some save files with some rockets in them.

  2. Even though we quarrel sometimes, mostly do to misunderstandings, I am glad he is in the team. while he also made this awesome description he is great to ping ideas off.

    Though at first glance it might appear related to the RD-33Nk, the RD-275K is vastly different in form and role. This engine is designed for efficiency, rather than unrestricted power. Its chamber and preburner utilize a completely different profile to assure stable, high-pressure combustion for little change in ISp throughout all atmospheric conditions. A high pressure turbopump, complimented by a booster pump on all feed lines increases efficiency in exchange for lost thrust, making this engine a great choice for a sustainer engine.

    a photo from the Kosmos Design Bureau Scrap Book. A picture of an old N-1 mock up (from its obvious lack thin sheet metal and truss construction) being tested for Pad integration :)

    N-1_MockUp.png

  3. I'll be coming up with a Soyuz-style launcher for you guys. . . using a bit o' mods though to fit more nicely with the ultra-clean 210s. But for now. . . I gotta sleep. My mom's gonna kill me if she hears a rocket launch. ;.;

    RD-210 is getting changed a bit and renamed soon-ish

    I wish I was a Kerbal so I could stare at those monopropellent tanks, scream WHY and drop dead on the spot.

    (This overwhelms me.)

    not sure I understand. is this good or bad?

  4. I'm looking forward to the tanks, the engines look amazing don't get me wrong, but they seem a little off compared to others parts from parts from the AIES, NP ect. packs. Keep up the stellar work guys :)

    ha. like I would want any of my stuff to remotely resemble Np. I decided to not bother making it look like stock or any other mods. If they don't like it oh well. Sure I could easily simplify it all and make it look like stock. tha would be a cake walk. But I refuse to do such things as more detail looks alot cooler IMO.

  5. Nothing wrong with it, it's excellent for oddly shaped payloads, and your stations (especially with Balka panels) are just that. While other parts fit into standard fairings, Balka is too wide for even the expanded 3.75m KW fairing. Also, Procedural Fairings completely eliminate the need for standard fairings, saving memory.

    pictures and a link if you would.

    So i made it so all strut connectors can be jettisoned. 100%. anchors and all if wanted lol.

  6. Hey CBBP, did you ever consider making the UR-700? One of my personal favorites. It's modular like the rest of the Kosmos parts, it's short and stubby so it's more "kerbal sized". If you combine it with the LK-700, Kosmos would have a full "suite", with lifters, landers and station parts.

    ur700all.jpg

    lk70068.jpg

    http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/ur700.htm

    If nothing else, I'd love to have landing legs in the style of the LK-700.

    The old Angara stuff provided parts to allow you to make an UR-700 style lifter. they worked quite nice actually. Since I favored UR-700 more at the time for is practicality and modularity I still do. So when ever 3m parts are developed I would definitely like to make the stuff to do it again. I definitely like the big boy toy Rd-270 and RD-0120 engines. Currently trying to set about standards for things.

×
×
  • Create New...