Zorg

What exactly is the H-2 again? I think I was told at some point but forgotten. Its a hard topic to search, since H2 rocket engine leads to stuff related to the Japanese rocket Because I am considering RS-X for the atlas revamp.

Are you playing with life support? I managed to get to LKO in JNSQ 120x120 at 90 deg just now with 50m/s left. Orbital config of the CSM, abort tower jettisoned immediately after S4B sep. 100m/s pitch start, 0.5deg/s pitch rate The performance is very marginal though. 50 m/s spare at the end. And its not enough to meet the Apollo 7 equivalent 128x146km 32 deg orbit. We may need to do something here but will probably need to wait for JSO to take a closer look. edit: On the other hand... it seems to comfortably get into orbit in KSRSS launching from Kennedy.

if you play with stock make sure you don't install install the mod "stock waterfall effects". That should be all I think. if you play with restock make sure you dont install "waterfall restock". In addition go to realplume-stockConfigs/Restock and remove !WaterfallRestock from the NEEDS lines for all engines. eg: @PART[liquidEngine3_v2]:NEEDS[ReStock,!WaterfallRestock]:AFTER[ReStock] to @PART[liquidEngine3_v2]:NEEDS[ReStock]:AFTER[ReStock] You need to do the same for any other mods you might have that have waterfall deconflicting syntax like this. For examples Knes, Tantares etc.

JNSQ is I believe slightly more demanding as its 2.7x scale vs 2.5x on KSRSS. Anyway we still use JNSQ for balance reference. We're just about to start seriously working on that.

BDB avoids getting patched with the CryoTanks boiloff module in favour of our own. If you have cryo cooling on BDB stuff it must be a 3rd party patch from some other mod.

Yeah this is how its supposed to work as it is providing thermal shielding in addition to MM protection and so would provide some boiloff mitigation. Im just starting to take a close look at Skylab balancing and it looks like the necessary module for linking boiloff to the insulation isn't in there on the lightweight wet workshop (VFB version) but it IS there on the regular wet workshop (but misconfigured). Will add it to the VFB one and balancing needs to be looked at for the WWS too. But dont expect miracles. Realistically we should probably be looking at something similar to Centaur D. I will assume the shielding on the wet workshop versions has extra insulation over and above the historical version for the liquid hydrogen.

We dont have an HG3 variant. Perhaps there was once something by Pappystein in Extras but if there was hes removed that too. The non deployable ones certainly could be. They were made around the time we were just getting the hang of b9 module switching and hadnt fully committed to it for everything I guess. It would be a craft breaking change unnecessarily though. On the other hand the Saturn update is a breaking change anyway since many of the new Saturn parts use the same Part Names as the old ones. The screenshots from Starhelperdude are correct. For anything else you can keep an eye on this: https://github.com/friznit/Unofficial-BDB-Wiki/issues/60 Keep in mind these are still WIP and will be completed and added to the main wiki once released.

The module manager stuff looks ok to me tbh. Did you manage to fix it? Strongly suspect b9ps not working somehow as mentioned the other day.

1/2 Saturn I block II (SA5) fairing. IRL this was a Jupiter nose cone and mass simulator but a fairing in that style is probably more useful. On github now as subtype on the generic 2.5m fairing base. At a glance this seems doable, will check on it.

Personally I recommend Waterfall (which is mesh based just like the stuff shown here) and use Realplume for SRB smoke. You can install both together.

Its a bit late right now for me but will check on it tomorrow. However, in the meantime please check if your B9PS is up to date and installed correctly.

might be able to check if you post your modulemanager.log and modulemanager.configcache Would also double check the BDB install itself

I'll put that down as a maybe in the future. It couldnt be a SAF at any rate, it would need to use the BDB SLA module to work properly. Just based on that image theres also a couple of additional things I want to clarify regarding the fairing decisions. Firstly the extended 6.7m (s4b diameter) faring with the shape of the SLA doesnt seem too plausible extended since the separation plane of the SLA panels are something like over here The short version which can be considered an SLA capped off but an extended version of that doesnt really work. We do still have the capped SLA part but to be honest if this were built IRL it would almost certainly be the Skylab fairing which already existed, was purpose built as a fairing as was easily adjustable in length. (eg Voyager 73 would have launched in a version of that fairing). Secondly on the subject of the 10m fairing again if it had been built, it would most likely have a biconic profile similar to Skylab. Despite the prevalence of Saturn MLV depictions with conic fairings (most probably due to Astronautix illustrations), actual MLV documents show biconics. These fairings do take up a lot of texture room as well and so using the more realistic historical assets saves a lot of space.

Multibody wide fairing now available. Its a fairing switch on the S4B base.

Theres been no changes to those plumes and they're still working on my end.

Its probably worth remembering the majority of BDB users (even if they dont all post in the forum thread) are using the release and not the development branches off of github. with the Apollo parts in the current release I used to build the CSM first, then attach the SLA, then either build the LM from the descent engine up or bring it in as a sub assembly (again needing to reroot it to the engine so it can be attached). With the upcoming update we have a better solution were the descent stage itself become the attachment point for starting to build the the LM.

Maybe a little cap or something could be made. lets see. Anyway did a pass on S4B to finish up the SOFI stuff

SOFI is now available for the S1E/F tankage Unfortunately the UVs didnt work out for the LRB tank. But I added the copper switch to it.

SII SOFI variant on github now. SOFI variant for S1E/F and also a extra pass on the S4B will be coming up soon too.

This is so good!

Sure thing you can use all of them. The set includes parts to make 3 different OAO models. They each use a common probe core in the middle, the same RCS boom, tar trackers and solar panels (OAO 1 uses a b9 variant of the upper panels) OAO-1 and OAO-2 use a common AOO-OSA "Smithson" Secondary Telescope (bluedog_OAO_SAO_instrument) at the bottom and AOO-WPE "Marquette" Ultraviolet Telescope (bluedog_OAO_WEP_instrument) at the top. OAO-3 uses AOO-WPE "Bentham" Advanced Ultraviolet Telescope (bluedog_OAO3_PEP_instrument) at the top and AOO-MPC "Roman 3" Service Module (bluedog_OAO3_serviceModule) at the bottom. You can leave out the OAO-1/2 specific parts if you're not interested in those. However, I just realised there is a slight issue with you adopting this model for inclusion in Cacteye. The solar panels use a custom module ModuleBdbSymmetricalPart to enable automatic mirroring of the solar panel. It basically enables a flipped alternate mesh and suncatcher when the part is used in 2x symmetry. You can choose to roll your own version of the module, the source is on our github. I dont know anything about the coding side so if you had any questions about it you would need to ask @Jso who takes care of that. But I expect you wouldn't have much trouble with it. Alternatively I can export dedicated Left and Right versions of the upper and lower panels, it shouldn't be much trouble to do so and I can do that sometime in the upcoming week if that's how you would prefer it. (end user would need to be more careful with placement of each side) Of course we could also just do a compatibility patch for BDB (in fact I will certainly do that once your configs are done), but its a huge mod and I'm sure people who just want cool telescopes would find value in a standalone version of the OAO within Cacteye.

Oh I hadnt had a chance to look at github. But yes the Agena engine ignitor configs are set up so that only the A and B sub types require ullage. Using b9 module switching we are able to vary the ullage requirements and ignition limits for different subtypes. I'll take a look at the sources in the github issue, we could theoretically make the 8096 require ullage but have 8096 HDA (later model) not need it. But frankly though it seems simple, going into the model and adding an alternate RCS configuration into the rack, and dealing with the AO from adding that to mesh etc is probably more bother than anyone wants to deal with right now given so many other things pending.

Sure happy to give permission if you want to borrow the model Edit: or rather feel free to use it, its creative commons But let me know if you need anything in particular.

Do you have these documents? iirc we looked into this and found the Agena D engine did not require ullage due to a special sump tank it had. (rather the stage had). This is a review of the existing Agena D from Shuttle Agena Study Final Report NTRS 19720013179. Of course this could be a later development and earlier Agena D's did not have it?

The reason why there is an extension switch at all is to allow for real world configurations. In game this is Short : no segments Medium: 1 segment, short extension Long: 1 segment, long extension If you want to stick with realism keep in mind there are some other fairings IRL that supported extensions including the Titan IV/Delta IV metal fairing, the Titan standard fairing etc.