TimothyC
-
Posts
229 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by TimothyC
-
-
On 9/3/2017 at 6:11 PM, Z3R0_0NL1N3 said:
Do the LRBs have a parachute return system? Were they ever designed to have one, since salt water isn't the greatest thing on engines. It would be nice for balance, I think, either way.
The final/definitive version of the LRBs modeled here (the late 1990s saw flyback LRBs proposed, but did not receive the serious consideration the earlier ones from the 1988-1991 time period received) called for a production run of 28 LRBs per year (14 flights per year was considered the post-Challenger max), with no reuse as it wasn't cost effective. Economies of production were expected to drive costs down (28 tank sets and 113 STME/RS-68 analogs per year lets you set up a true assembly line).
-
49 minutes ago, MaverickSawyer said:
Okay, deleted existing copy in my install and replaced it with a freshly downloaded copy from the git... problem persists with the off-axis thrust.
Remember to delete the cached parts config.
-
59 minutes ago, Gordon Dry said:
Why is the hatch obstructed? (all 4 hatches on the station are)?
As you have discovered, the hatch on the airlock is located on the end of the part and is axial relative to the part's orientation.
-
3 hours ago, gc1ceo said:
I would think the issue of the Delta IV would be whatever or not you want to design your own Common Booster Core rocket as part of the BDB package.
The fact is, Cobalt doesn't like large SOFI covered tanks, hence no Delta IV.
-
5 hours ago, SQUAD said:
For this model, we will be adding in stock mesh switching support (including appropriate things like drag cubes, mass, and colliders specific to the swapped mesh)
Will this feature (stock mesh switching) be included in a future release of the stock game, or will it only be available for players that have the DLC?
I suppose what I am asking is if said switching will be available for moders to use in place of the various mods that do this already.
-
On 5/26/2017 at 8:14 PM, SQUAD said:
Finally, to conclude this week’s issue, the artists spent this week continuing with new parts for the expansion, including a Voskhod-2 style expandable airlock, check it out!
Does this mean that there is a Vostok/Voskhod unique parachute part, or will it be integrated into the capsule?
-
48 minutes ago, TheRedTom said:
Hey @CobaltWolf, I know you plan to make a number of Castor variants with Moar Solids, but I wondered, is Antares (and it's Castor) within the scope of this mod?
The Castor-30 that Antares uses is already included in the mod.
For the Antares first stages, that would require parts that are not on the BDB roadmap at this time.
Edit: Well, sort of. The NK-33 engines would have about the same amount of thrust as the E-1s would have, and there is 2.5m tankage on the roadmap (for Kolyma's Shadow's Miranda launcher). -
2 hours ago, Pappystein said:
Doth mine eyes deceive? Is that a new CSM for Gemini?... or is the perspective angle, just causing a "fatter" appearance?
It is new, and offers a proper base for a 1.875m docking port. It also works as a good MOL/MOS adapter.
-
BDB, Tantares, and Probes Plus!
Gemini update.
-
@akron I love the Barquetta for moving around the small truss segments from Tantares.
-
6 hours ago, minepagan said:
*Two or 3 SSMEs
The US Space and Rocket Center has a Shuttle C engine block hidden behind a building, and it has mounting points for up to 3 engines.
Correct. I'll fix that typo. What is on display is the Shuttle Main Propulsion Test Article (MPTA-98), which was used as the engineering mockup of the Shuttle-C from 1988 to 1990.
-
On 4/26/2017 at 6:23 PM, Avalon304 said:
Just noticed that the Shuttle-C craft only has 2 STMEs on it, was this intended?
EDIT: Also, would it be possible to get a flat Shuttle-C style butt (sorta like the Buran butt?)
Basic Shuttle-C designs would have supported either two or three SSMEs, or eventually two STMEs.
-
Not a fan of the scratches. -
35 minutes ago, Z3R0_0NL1N3 said:
Is the control Shuttle-C nose going to include RCS? I don't know if the original had planned to, and I don't know what the purpose of the Shuttle-C would've been much IRL. I would figure it would be a good counterpart to the Progress, but to dock to a station it'd need forward RCS.
The fundamental idea behind Shuttle-C was to offer the ability to launch longer (82 foot bay vs 60 foot bay) and heavier (75 ton vs 32.5 ton), and more volatile (Centaur G Prime) payloads into orbit without any changes to the shuttle's processing flows or infrastructure. Cheep (less than a billion USD in early 1990s money) and easy heavy lift for the 1990s. Without a major client that was willing to help fund development, the program died.
A fun side note is that with three SSMEs, Shuttle-C could have lifted 25 tons on a dog-leg launch out of the cape to Polar orbit. It could have also lifted 50 tons to the same 98 degree, 110nmi orbit from Vandenberg, demonstrating the payload hit you take for dog-leg launches. -
1 hour ago, Mattgearhead said:
Maybe I missed it, but were the SIV-B APS units changed from being RCS blocks and monoprop engines to just RCS blocks?
Yes, that changed happened a while back. Useful to avoid running your monoprop dry.
-
56 minutes ago, JPLRepo said:
Not that I really want to enter into the debate here. But I'd take another look. Maybe compare another part that appears on both vessels.. say an antenna?
There is perspective playing with your eyes here.Hm. Best guess I can come up with is that we're getting a folding part, but one that only allows for surface attached parts, no nodes, which will make me sad that I can't stick an experiment storage container on my LRV. If parts with nodes can be moved, then we've got a replacement for IR.
-
-
1 hour ago, dave1904 said:
Messed around with blender and added seats. I used the seat model using props with the positions from https://mods.curse.com/ksp-mods/kerbal/235281-seat-mk3-cockpit to make it an 8 seater maybe you could have it set up like this. Thank you btw man!! http://prntscr.com/er95in Here is a screenshot
Historically, more seats were added to the mid deck, not the flight deck (up to 7 seats on the Mid deck for STS-400, and a fourth seat on both STS-61A and STS-71).
-
-
-
-
Secret Project, or so I'm told.
-
Question: Is the list going to be updated, because I got the forum to generate a listing of all members by rep: Linky, I ask because the top few have changed a bit.
-
@hraban is there a reason your CRV / Lock-Mart CEV was removed from 1.8.2?
[WIP] Coatl Aerospace ProbesPlus Dev Thread [Beta] 10/19/2020 (1.8-1.10)
in KSP1 Mod Development
Posted
Come join Akron's stream!