Jump to content

Saltshaker

Members
  • Posts

    363
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Saltshaker

  1. 3 minutes ago, RaiderMan said:

    what booster is required to put a polyus into orbit? I have now spent two hours fighting with a modified proton k, and finally a proton k with SRB strap ons, and still cannot manage to manhandle this bloody thing up.

    Mounting it on an Energia core with 4 Zenit boosters should work, whether the Polyus is strapped to the side (historical) or placed on top (non-historical).

  2.  

    3 hours ago, Barzon Kerman said:

    *snip*

    All the tanks for each booster could be merged into a single part, that can change into each different tank required for the launcher. It would certainly reduce part list clutter a huge amount. E.g The Titan tanks could all be a single part, then change for each iteration, stage, and tank length.

    Yes, I believe someone by the name of Gotmachine was working on B9 part switch configs to do exactly that but he seems to have stopped working on it.

  3. 43 minutes ago, [email protected] said:

    I still want the Nova though, cause its cool. show me what you will with the Saturn MLV, the Nova still out-classes it

    I must concede to you on the latter point, but Cobalt has said he will not be doing Nova/Saturn C-8 because there are so many possible configurations to choose from. And even then, any chance he would make it would have to wait until the Saturn parts revamp, the date(s) of which are still in the future (think 2020-ish).

  4. 2 hours ago, hieywiey said:

    I noticed that there is no 6-engine mount for the MS-IC, is this planned? Because several Saturn MLV concepts cannot be built as the TWR is below 1 with only 5 F-1s. Also, could we get lighter Saturn V tanks without insulation (orange)? Sending large  spacecraft to Laythe via gravity assists (Galileo/Cassini-like trajectory) in my 2.5x career is just barely possible with even a Saturn V with a MS-IC with 5 F-1s, 4 Titan IVB SRMU strapons, a MS-II with 7 HG-3s, and a S-IVC with 2 HG-3s. 

    Now, I can't address the former point, but I highly recommend using F-1As instead of F-1s and SMURFF to help repair KSP's broken wet-dry mass ratios. Also, try multiple launches to assemble the interplanetary craft, so you don't have to design such a large launch vehicle.

  5. 1 hour ago, Beale said:

    *snip*

    So I am now shutting down for maintenance over the Christmas period. Work resumes whenever!

    Enjoy your time out of work / school and have a good time :) 

    54940d138b430.gif

    Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good night! 2018 has been an amazing year for Tantares, and I can't wait to see what 2019 brings for us all. Thank you so much for your amazing parts, Beale, and I hope that Christmas gives you a well-deserved break.

  6. 7 hours ago, Beale said:

    This is awesome! I always loved the Kistler :o

     

    Re: Development - I have a dilemma, how many of you still play previous versions? I can introduce multi-direction folding igla antenna for maximum versatility, but these would be best served as part variants, breaking compatibility for older versions (KSP 1.3.1, etc.)

    They could also be separate parts, there are essentially three variants for each antenna system.

    • Telescopic extending
    • Forward folding, dish stowed facing outwards
    • Backwards folding, dish stowed facing inwards

    I would highly recommend adding in B9 Part Switch subtypes for not only previous KSP versions, but also 1.4 onward. This would also simplify future problems related to cryogenic ockets as the stock variant switcher can't change the contents of a tank, which would make it easier to implement cryogens in Tantares (such as Energia). Even better, if you converted all switching  across versions, you'd only have to maintain B9 Part Switch configs instead of B9PS and stock variants.

×
×
  • Create New...