-
Posts
2,288 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Everything posted by Zorg
-
Some more PBR in game tests Another M1 pic because I love how this picture in particular turned out. Especially the variation in surface smoothness on the nozzle. Control over the surface like this is just as important as distinguishing between metal and non metal in PBR workflows and is a huge venue for more creativity. We're using the alpha channel of the main texture for smoothness which is also used for specular in the legacy shader but the effect is more subtle on the legacy shaders. Point being we're able to rework the content of the alpha channel, optimising for PBR, without ruining the look for people still using the legacy shaders (you might even see small improvements) Anyways I've also been working on the nukes Emissive to heat discolouration transition
-
Its not actually any American engine so you can use whatever that suits the role. I expect it leans on Japanese know how on expander cycle engines so the RL10 seemed a decent rough analogue. I don't think it was pressure fed or gas gen though I could be wrong. Still given the excess 800m/s I expect you could get away with a much lower performance engine. Either way making sure to use methalox and a small stage and you should be able to get it working. As mentioned this isnt really an official accurate build because its not fully fleshed out. For me this is good enough.
-
Keep in mind the IRL J1 specification was 3 tons to LEO and 1 ton to SSO. Your upper stage is probably too big. I was able to comfortably get 2.7 tons into LEO with 800m/s spare albeit with low but manageable lift off TWR of 1:1.1. This was launching from the cape in KSRSS. The upper stage was a methalox SOT Agena with 6 of the smaller tanks which kind of loosely represents the construction of the stage. I used a methalox converted RL10. Im not sure if its accurate to the expected performance but I dont have a lot of info on the upper stage engine. Its good enough for me for a loosely defined concept.
-
I think the tank length is off in your build? The basic core represents 16.891m of IRL height including the skirt and engines. We need to add an additional 9.373m of IRL height to get to 26.264m at the centaur interstage (per Ed Kyle). The specific scaling factor that brings the Atlas diameter to 1.875m in game is IRL x 0.6152 so we need 9.373x0.6152 = 5.77m of extension tanks. So an Atlas I extension (3.23m) + 2xSLV-3B extensions (1.17m) gets you pretty close at 5.57m of extension tanks. I found you can rotate the H2s enough to hide any clipping from the side of the skirt. Just a bit of ugliness at the bottom. And yeah I agree its better to replace the LR105 with an H1D for usability. The skirt separated cleanly for me. The build spreadsheet is now pretty close to final for this release I think. With most of the viable non historical builds included and all the historical builds except for Burner II in there. And updated Burner II kit that fits inside 1.25m is something I want to do but might not make it into this update. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QKUCvDAlZr2Li7REsgmhNlqYa59Yy76t1sbaCrnTXrI/edit?gid=0#gid=0
-
It should. This is the build guide based on the measurements I have from Ed Kyle etc. This can be found in the issues page of the BDB wiki and is the basis for the upcoming wiki and craft file update. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1QKUCvDAlZr2Li7REsgmhNlqYa59Yy76t1sbaCrnTXrI/edit?gid=0#gid=0
-
Centaur Forward Load Reactor is now on the github. Attach to the new hidden middle node on the Centaur III fuel tank and set the auto deploy altitude to 1-2km above the fairing deploy alt. EDIT: someone found a CAD image of the FLR buried in the payload adapter section of the atlas manual so I've updated the part with a few extra details
-
You're still looking at Deffered's automatic conversion. The old specular channels are being reworked as dedicated smoothness maps and there are still a few inconsistencies Im working on. For the textures to be loaded into dedicated PBR shaders together with the newly added metalicity maps you need to wait for a new update to Shabby to be publicly available.
-
Added a few new parts OV1 1.25m fairing base OV1 1.25m SAF fairing (available on some of the other 1.25m fairing bases too) 1.25m structural adapter - the black part below the fairing. Can be optionally used as an interstage too and the white variant for SGS is also available. The SGS fairing is a longer version of the MSD one and that fairing will be made soon. new dual and triple OV1 decoupler All the OV1 parts have been rescaled smaller The propulsion kit now has posigrade RCS
-
Alright so OV1 Originally intended to be piggy backed on ABRES suborbital test launches, the Atlas Retained Structure side mount pod was to be used. I was in a rush and forgot but these would have been Atlas D launches. After a couple of launches they moved to dedicated launches and the dual ARS nose pod was made. Some launches used a Scientific Passenger Pod (which is still pending) while one combined side mount ARS with the dual nose pod. A couple of others just used the dual nose pod by itself. https://space.skyrocket.de/doc_lau_det/atlas-d_ov1.htm Subsequently it moved to Atlas E/F and used a regular fairing with either a 2x or 3x payload adapter. This fairing will be made soon. https://space.skyrocket.de/doc_lau_det/atlas-ef_ov1.htm I've pushed an update changing the OV1-1 experiment and all the parts should now be in the Basic Science tier tech wise. I think its in a generally usable state now. I will also be updating the propulsion kit model shortly with posigrade thrusters based on new information. Right now they only have side facing thrusters for roll, pitch and yaw.
-
OV1 stuff on github but in very early state. The ARS side pod (and derived dual nose pod) are done but the regular fairing is still pending. The probes dont have reaction wheels or rcs but OV1-10 has a weak reaction wheel in the magnetometer to represent gravity gradient stabilisation. It also needs the opposing boom on the other side to function (science wise that is). uh I'll write a bit more on these parts later but its late now
-
Not really. No one on the team is a particularly big FAM fan. The designs in that show are fine for what they are in the show but compared to IRL designs, IRL concepts and well thought out alternate history concepts such as from ETS, they are really not all that plausible and wouldn't fit in with what we have in that sense. Why make half baked hollywood designs when we have a plethora of real concepts such as the various LM derivatives cobalt added? I think we all agree the initial Jamestown module and interior looks cool though but there are no current plans to actually make it. If something from FAM ever makes it to BDB thats probably the only thing that has any chance at all.