CobaltWolf

"Active Seismic Experiment" aka a mortar, used on Apollo 14 and 16

Working on more surface experiments! https://www.twitch.tv/cobaltwolfy

Got a bit more work done, the UV telescope is mostly finished! See you all on stream tomorrow!

So I didn't know I was doing this 24 hours ago, but here we are. Stay tuned, streaming again tomorrow.

So, I was thinking about that "utilization" and "focusing on stuff in line with KSP1's gameplay" discussion, and also thinking about ALSEP at the same time, and now I'm streaming?

I agree that we should focus on utilization, payloads, and stuff to do once you get somewhere. Start with your last question about KSP2 - well, like you said it's still in the future and we don't know what it will be like. But judging from what we DO know, things like surface bases, rovers, etc will be much more fleshed out in KSP2. Once we've ported the existing parts over, I'm definitely interested in expanding based on lunar/martian surface base proposals. That's a long way off however, and I'm holding off until we have more info about how those systems work, and how to create new 'parts' for them. Similarly, rovers in KSP 1 suuuuuuck to make parts for, so I'm holding off on those for now - but we have a bunch of different rover designs we can attempt in KSP2. So, broadly speaking, I think our (my) content for the rest of KSP1 will follow these lines: Things that are suitable for KSP1 - landers, small surface habs, things like that. Nothing that needs new gameplay systems to work (as compared to full bases, which I'd want to try and implement via KSP2's colony system maybe?). So stuff that only adds relatively basic missions, like the I-class CSMs with the KH7 camera, those would be good for KSP1. Focus on having the groundwork laid for KSP2 - things like interplanetary transfer vehicles, orbital tugs, upgraded LMs that could serve as scouting/survey missions. I could see us taking elements from IPP but I'm not really interested in doing the entire thing. You might think of that stuff as like... IPP, but in an Apollo/Saturn centric timeline. My point is, we'd like to flesh out the parts you'd use to get to the point of developing early permanent lunar/martian bases. These are things that ARE doable in KSP1. Focus on CSM/LM follow-on stuff - I'd like to keep expanding and developing these part sets, rather than adding new families. So if something is CSM but with X, cool. Something like the Advanced Crew Vehicle from ETS, which shares little to nothing with the CSM and would essentially be another purpose built part family, is kind of a non-starter for me. I will say, I have very little CSM stuff left to make, based on the documents I have. It was relatively static, compared to the proposals for the Saturns and LM. Making sure that models/assets are up to snuff. Things like the current Atlas parts need a large pass and wouldn't be worth porting as-is. Getting those out of the way will be a big help. As of right now, we don't have much info on what will be required for porting to KSP2. There's going to be a lot of stuff missing - certainly no B9PS at release - so we'll have to play things by ear. It probably won't be for like, a year after KSP2 comes out (at minimum) before BDB, as it exists now, is fully ported. At least I'll have a head start on being the definitive USA part mod Responding to these more specifically: 1), 2), 3) LM Taxi, Shelter, Truck, and Lab are priorities for the next update. I definitely want to put them in. 4) See above, I'd like to hold off on making rovers until KSP2, since the implementation of wheels hopefully won't be... badS but without the bad if you know what I mean. I really hope you can have stupidly flexible suspension and proper traction like in the trailer. 5) I'm actually not sure what you mean? 6) Yes, we're looking into it. I know Zorg has plans, and the LM-Lab might also include a 'short' descent module that more just acts as an experiment mounting truss. 7) Some amount of LASS/ALSS will probably make it in, but again, I might hold off in hopes that I can make a much more interesting and fleshed out experience in KSP2. 8) So, I always was interested in doing those? But the problem you run into - and this goes for a lot of early proposal type stuff - they're just not that detailed. if you took the 1962 model and "finished" designing it, it wouldn't look the same. That's my hang up with that sort of work, doing the early conceptual stuff like that. The Alternate Apollo LM is great, but you can see what I mean - it's not nearly as detailed as our LM. I'm not knocking mcdouble, I'm saying he put in basically all the detail that was available on that OG LM. 9) We were discussing this in the dev chat the other day. It's a possibility; it got pretty far along and there's some good documentation. Finishing off by listing out some stuff I know we're seriously looking into: As stated, the AAP LM variants. Zorg's looking to expand the nuclear engine stable, maybe including a BDB NERVA (finally!) "Orbital Launch" concepts - basically, docking a payload and 1-3 S-IVBs in orbit and then doing a departure burn. This would include aft-to-nose docking for S-IVBs. Some way of controlling or eliminating boiloff, probably at the cost of EC. Zorg has a number of Skylab-adjacent things to look into, like EOSS and I can't remember what else. Revamp of the cylindrical Big G service module. I was thinking about making something like the Orbiting Primate Spacecraft, but re-imagining it as maybe like, a long term Mystery Goo research facility? (I'm don't like actually depicting animals in KSP, it feels like it darkens the tone a bit too much. The Goo, with it's gregarious personality and possible... alive-ness, is usually used as a substitute, since it doesn't seem to mind)

Yeah we'd be focusing on all that sort of stuff vs launchers.

We need to get a list together of what we want to include, for scope reasons if nothing else. We uh, haven't yet. Myself and Zorg are likely going to continue working on alternate Apollo/Saturn/LM/Skylab stuff. Invader has their own focus with the probes that they're also going to be working on. There's a lot of really interesting stuff we can do, so it's more a matter of figuring out priorities. Hopefully we'll be able to talk about it with some more confidence soon.

Indeed. I just haven't shown them since they're only blocked in. Maybe (up to Zorg), but not for this update. We're more or less content locked for the Apollo/Saturn update, pretty much just waiting on the conical Big G and Pegasus satellite. Once this release is out we can go kind of crazy.

We're adding one based on the Apollo tower, it's in one of the pics I posted. Pain. Isn't that just supposed to be one of the standard IPP cylindrical modules with legs on the bottom?

It mates to the S-IVB, so 4.25m. That's why I waited so long to make the Big G service module - I knew it would be dependent on the S-IVB.

Big G wouldn't have ever launched on Saturn 1B. It would've either been some Titan variant (IIIM or IIIG which is a "wide" Titan), Saturn INT-11 (Saturn 1 with UA120s) or Saturn INT-20 (S-IVB + S-1C). Honestly? Given how marginal the Saturn 1B is on performance, I'm ok with pushing players to just upgrade to something a bit more substantial for alt hist stuff.

Some more update images on the Big G. It's going to have it's own upgraded parachutes and nose, since that was a complaint a lot of people shared about the current half-implemented Big G.

mayhaps, some Big G development, I shall stream (for only 1-2 hrs)

i have a vewwy good fwiend in wome named Biggus Geeus (he has a wife, u know) He needs to wait for the next dev cycle

I thought the GEM-60XLs we made were essentially the same thing? I don't see why not? But I'm not in a rush to work with the Gemini stuff right now, I'd have to dig those files up. Though, I guess since I'm doing the Big G I'll have to find all that stuff anyways... (speaking of Big G, small update below) I don't think that's user error, Zorg will have to take a look. He's still balancing the Skylab parts so this is good feedback. Let us know if there's any other issues like this where values need to be adjusted.

Delta was a NASA-only rocket. Thor-Agena continued to fly, and upgrades like the straight-wall tank, better engines, and Castor boosters were developed for the USAF under the "Thorad" (THOR ADvanced) program. These changes were then incrementally applied to the NASA Delta's 1-2 years down the line. There's also a handful of NASA Thor-Agena launches, but they're fairly rare. This page is a good run through the history: https://www.spacelaunchreport.com/thorflew.html

Yes, it has a retro section and an equipment section, like the Gemini. Yes, I plan to revamp that as well to include a proper retro section, etc. No, they wouldn't be covered in the kapton tape. They're meant to be the same as the SMs.

Stream over for the day, got thinking about other chores I need to do. Some good progress on Big G, I think it'll look great once I finish transferring all the different kinds of details from the Gemini SM.

Dev stream going live again, working on Big G some more now that we have a properly sized Saturn.

Booting up the first dev stream in a while, going to work on the Apollo RCS parts and then hopefully some more things after. https://www.twitch.tv/cobaltwolfy

I can't believe I actually made this extremely blursed part...

Does the "Fore by Throttle" feature for RCS not work for that? I am considering adding 3 retro solids to this heatshield, just to make it like... the ultimate one. Regarding this design, I think the idea is the stroke of the pistons absorbs the impact to... 'safe' levels.

So, good news / bad news. I am still procrastinating on getting the RCS in game, but on the plus side I made this.

Honestly insane Thanks for reposting this actually, I meant to respond the first time and never got around to it (sorry! ) 1) I'd personally rather not because I hate working on the BPC and don't want to have to make a version for a different umbilical. But we can discuss it internally. 2) I kinda made that with the 3.75m switch in the S-IVB IU part. We can see about making a scaled down version of that? The side count would be wrong though... 3) Would have to ask @Jso 4) Same as 1, the LES stuff is sort of hanging together from a thread since we reused the old PEBKAC tower. I, uh, actually seem to have misplaced the files for it. I think I can find them but yeah. Gonna be real here - I'm feeling lazy and don't really want to have to go back and make that change unless there's a really strong push for it. So you're probably fine. Maybe some day, but it wouldn't be for years