Pappystein

This is the drawing I am basing my Designs on.... I think that is from Gunter's page but I have not found it there (just parts of it like I posted above for the SPP.) I found this in a KSP forum months ago.... The only real changes I have made is I didn't launch a Centrifuge module... since, in my opinion it could cause weird issues with the rest of the station. and I used the HABtech2 extended node instead of the Node 3... giving a little space to allow for better docking. Beyond that and not having launched the DC, RM1 or RM2... Not using a Space shuttle to make any of this.... It is pretty much that design. Oh no robotic arms since I tend to break things with them. I should add, I posted more detail on the International Segment over on the Habtech2 forum chain:

First, KSP 1.12.1 broke the full up ISS I was building. The whole "can't strut across a docking port...." Ugh... I already posted this in Tantares, I am posting here and amplfiying what I did differently with the Habtech2 parts... Esp since there seems to be no Habitation module... that never launched to the ISS... As you can see, I made the missing Habitation module out of Benjee10's new Planetside base mod: My next mission is to launch a bunch of Pteron Micro shuttles as escape boats. I figured out that a SOCK + Energya would launch 2 per launch and have a safety factor on the off chance something happens... where a rocket launch would be cheaper, the pilot is strapped into the Pteron.... And Since Energya has payload capacity to spare, I could make it mostly recoverable. I recovered one of the two RD-0120s and both of the RD-0122s I flew on my test flight. Mixing the two engines gave more control-ability during post booster flight. I try to run a 100% recoverable space program. Including Deorbit function for all satellites in Kerbin orbit. I do this because years ago I lost a spacestation to orbital debris from a launch that happend 3 in game years prior.

So, after my Epic explosion when my ISS met KSP 1.12.1..... A new, more complete ISS with a better, read that as more accurate, placement of the un-launched modules. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_Power_Platform https://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sdat/spp.htm Yes I built this station with Quantum Struts. Needed to after the explosion in my old station because my then TKS derived SPP literally struck the Skylab I had docked to the OTHER END of the station.... Talk about bad physics shift! Now only the Solar wings wobble a little when they move too fast (after a timewarp on the station for example. The Solar Wings are the only part not quantum strutted. As Before I built this with a ton of flights of Various BDB Transtage tugs on CH4 powered Titan LDCs. For some reason, I am guessing due to the fuel being the wrong type (Hypergolic improves performance over LFO), I can't get Proton to lift a large station component to the 500km orbit I am using for my ISS. The best I can do with proton is 130-150km depending on payload mass. One of my next projects will be to convert the Proton to either AZ50/NTO or UDMH/IRFNA-3(If I can figure out that fuel ratio... AZ50 is EASIER if not correct for anything but Titan.)

mcdouble is the creator of the GE Apollo D2 mod. Not the BDB team. It is correctly sized to fly on a Titan which IS in the BDB mod so..... If GE would have had it's way (and if Hydrolox AJ-10s were a good design choice) we would have ignored MSFC and launched to the moon on the Titan rocket. But in the end. Early Centaur launches exploded because no one realized what they were doing with Hydrolxo fuel. Glad we didn't choose it but it is an amusing and fun What IF. Personally I consider it the "not-father" of Soyuz. The Soyuz design was not solidified until after the GE proposal made its way into public record. But to be clear I don't think Soyuz is a copy of the D2... rather, the Soviet engineers were working to a similar set of goals as what the GE team was working towards. And using a Fairing instead of an extra layer of skin like the D2 does probably saved several hundred KG of mass.

Ahh the best Ford (Naval Designation F4D hence Ford) Too bad that no aerodynamics (stock or FAR) will properly replicate the manta ray shaped Delta wing's unique flying characteristics. It's nearly identical child the F5D Skylancer, could have had a really good career outside of NASA but in the end it was the early test mule aircraft for NASA, before the T-38s arrived... One resides today at the Neil Armstrong Air and Space Museum (he flew a lot of NASA missions in it.) Suprisingly, the Test pilot who said the Navy didn't need it was Alan Sheppard. On the exact same engine as the F4D the F5D prototypes could fly well above mach 1. The main differences? Longer fuselage and the wing fitness ratio were slimmed down. + Area Rule. The main reasons for the cancellation; 1) the ACTIVE RADAR AIM-7B Sparrow II that was the reason for this aircraft's existance was too far ahead of it's time, and the Aircraft's guidance radar was too small to guide the AIM-7C/D/E Sparrow III missile effectively. 2) The F8U (you probably know it as it's post 1964 designation of F-8) Crusader was entering production. And the Crusader was equal or better in every respect except 1. 3) probably most importantly, Ed Heinemann had pretty much designed every Aircraft on the US Navy's Carrier decks at this juncture. His A1D (A-1) Skyraider (also called Able Dog due to the designation), A3D (A-3) Skywarrior (also called All 3 Dead because of no ejection seats by USN REQUIREMENTS), his A4D (A-4) Skyhawk, and his F-4D (F-6) Skyray were all on the carrier decks. Had the F5D gone into production it is likely too many congress critters would have cried fowl. The only Standouts not made by Ed Heinemann and Douglas El Segundo for the US Navy at this juncture were the helicopters (the domain of Sikorsky for the most part) and the S1F Guardian or S2F Tracer and the Tracer derived WF-1 AWACS (needless to say that was called Willie Fudd) Re the AIM-7B Sparrow II: It wasn't until the 1980s that the US perfected an Active Radar homing seeker head for an Air to Air missile of 203mm / 8" or smaller diameter. The 6" AIM-120A AMRAAM (Advanced Medium Ranged Air to Air Missile) The AIM-7B's 8" Diameter didn't have enough room for the vacuum tubes and first generation transistors, in the quantity needed to detect and guide on only ENEMY targets. The First Active radar Homing missile to enter service was the US Navy's AIM-54C (the AIM-54A did not have Active radar homing per RELIABLE public domain sources.) That was 15" or almost 5x the volume of the AIM-7B for the same length.

Yes there WERE plans for a "Recoverable" Shuttle Centaur. I do not have much if any documentation but it would have been based on the Centaur then standard D.1x tankage but slightly shortened. Insulation was no discussed in what I have read but I am going to assume SOFI like the only slightly latter D.2. the Avionics section would be all new and there would be manipulator arm attachments so the stage could be grabbed and brought back into the cargo bay. I believe lockdown was by two clevis type "hitches" for and aft. Incidentally, IIRC this was the Centaur R.1S proposal. That is Recoverable, version 1, by Space Shuttle (R.1S) But I could be wrong. I keep having AR.1 pop in my head as I type this (don't have my docs handy to look this up ATM)

Mmm, I do love to fly my USS Enterprise-Moonraker Refit Shuttle on Energia I found it works best if you add the extra tank that is from the Energia M (I think.) That provides enough fuel for a full load shuttle to get into orbit and the Energia, with a small GCU can self de-orbit. I do this to boost Orbital altitude with either Kerbolrise or SOCKS. Now if someone would come out with a Mod that makes Using the Canadarm easy. I gave up on BG and IR. Then I would use the Shuttle to build my ISS... not just retreive space junk. FWIW, I used the above mentioned stretched Energia + Enterprise to launch Zarya and Zvezda to build my last ISS. 500km orbit JNSQ

If you updated BDB, did you include the BDB Extras folder for REALNAMES. Without that folder, which is under BDB extras, you won't have real names. You do not need ALL the extras in the extras folder (you can pick and choose which ones to install.) I strongly suggest adding Sandstone and MLV in however But that is self serving since I made both of those This is in my GameData folder. Two BDB folders, BDB and BDB_Extras And here are the only sub-folders I run (I took the Titan AJ9 folder and made my own file to add some other Titan engine variants or that would be here too!)

Pyewacket (it is a singular name that was accidentally separated to create the code name as an after effect,) was conceived at Convair Pomona (a division of Convair Missiles not represented in BDB!) They are known for the 5T missiles. Terrier Talos and Tarter all entered services and are sometimes called the 3T missiles. Typhoon and Triton never entered service, with Triton being too advanced 20 years after it was conceived and replaced by SLBMs. Typhoon being replaced by Standard and AEGIS as vacuum tube computers couldn't keep up with a saturation attack and advances in Solid rockets, in no small part due to efforts on the Titan Space launcher, Polaris and even Tiny Tim allowed for a smaller sized rocket to have the same performance. And yes, any of you Naval weapons geeks out there... I did lump Bendix in with Convair Pomona That is because, Convair Pomona and Bendix made the missiles, All 5 of those T Series of missiles evolved out of Project Bumblebee and were designed by many of the same engineers, from one missile to the next, and Convair Pomona was a subcontractor for some of the Talos parts and Vis-a-versa Ok Snippet in history aside, Where did you get the parts to make that beautiful rocket? And can I have some? ALSO isn't that supposed to be a modified Centaur, What caused you to use LR81s (8048?) on the upper stage? I should mention, Pyewacket was also supposed to be the AAM for defending my Avatar. I have never delved far into the program other than the AAM portion prior to today but it appears that all the interest in "Flying Saucers" in the 1950s corresponds with the Pye Wacket program.

That would explain ALL the problems (the LES is ON the Docking port for Saturn, My ISS is turning into a Spaghetti - athon in space.... Damn, I may need to download whatever the current KJR is called...again... It has always caused issues in my playthroughs in the past (I am very VERY good at finding edge cases that programmers fail to take into account!)

So fun question given I just started playing in 1.12.x Are you running 1.12? Autostruts do not seem to work in old saves updated to 1.12 it seems. IDK, I haven't reaserched this but my ISS is flopping arround in space since I upgraded to 1.12.... The SSP's solar wing was rotating along the axis of the bulk of the station and that induced some HUGE bending movements about the Harmony Node (does not help that it is part heavy and that there is a Skylab at the other end from the SPP.

A couple of things, You are missing a Great shuttle mod... in Kerbolrise. But Beyond that, where is ALL the Shuttle mods button? There are things in each Shuttle mod I use (I have SOCKS, CA and Kerbolrise) that I use on each shuttle I launch. Picking one is.... Umm slightly painful? Then again I find the Shuttle nearly useless given the poor controls for robotics in either KSP BG or IR. So While fun to fly... not a really useful part set. Heck I would still fly Kerbal Shuttle Orbiter (KSO) if it was fixed. Pteron is my "emergency escape" shuttle for any serious stations I am building in LKO.

Did you Autostrut to HEAVIEST (not root)? Alternatively , are you using a non standard docking port? Anything NOT the BDB Drogue port is non standard and issues CAN happen with them (I sometimes have issues with the APAS and the LES for example.) In my case I find the issues involved I am clipping something that the LES shield is touching.... OR I somehow have it attached at the wrong place. *GOES TO DEV THREAD* Hmm No new Apollo CSM... Nope, no launching rockets here then decides to fly a Titan V-CH4 to the ISS to place another solar wing on board.

It has already been mentioned Auto-strut is your friend with the LES especially but 100% of a Saturn V needs Auto-strut. If you don't normally use Auto Strut, I have had the best luck by alternating (Heaviest, and Root) working from the Bottom of the rocket. LES always gets strutted to Heaviest!

I know a lot of people have had success using PVG in JNSQ and stock KSP with the Titan Rockets. I have not. So I just straight up don't use it. I am posting this to say, A) yes it can be used in various types of KSP playthroughs, not limited to RSS/RO, But also to say that it CAN be problematic and not everyone will get it working. IF you are one of the lucky people to get it working reliably... Congrats! If you are like me, it is worth it to try it at least to see if you can get it working......

awe, I missed the stream! Work is looking good (watchin the replay.)

So the "SPP" analog looks like it is a kitbash of Tantares and SSTU parts. SSTU follows 1.25m sizing unfortunately or the SSTU DOS series of parts would make the Russian segment SIMPLE to make vs Tantares. The Solar wing on the end decidedly looks like SSTU's power module solar array. The rest of the "stand out" parts all look like they are from the Kissler mod (which I have not downloaded or played with.)

Thanks for the reply. I have recently upgraded my internet speed and didn't notice that it had downgraded... so fast since I didn't want to blow my "Full spec proposed ISS + extras" build I am working on.... I didn't load KSP to even check. Again Appreciate it!

That is just Lazy Talk! You HAVE to make it like they did in the oldendays. GUESSWORK And yes, your Wiki is awesome. And yes, I can get too lazy to look at it sometimes... And yes I have been using it for my "Full Proposed" ISS. Oh And yes, Suggestion coming in on your wiki before you probably read this!

Trying to roll back to 1.11.2 as many of the mods I use are not 1.12 compliant yet.... get this message on steam: I had forgotten to "un-live" my updates again by switching to 1.11.2 in this tab while 1.11.2 was still the "main" version. I reached out to steam before posting here and they said that ; "The issue you are describing seems to be an issue with the game itself and its available beta builds." Basically throwing me to Steamsupport. But I know the forums are generally the best way to crowdsource solutions so here I am. Any Help would be appreciated

I knew the Thor Delta NASA/USAF relationship was clear as mud. But I thought it was clearer than this And I learned something new (yay!) I have read pretty much all of Ed Kyle's posts in SLV Library as well as NASASpaceflight, but I have never cottoned on to the Thor Advanced name. I don't know why, I always thought it meant Thor Agena A to D. Guess that explains why some of my "Thorad" Agena D launches didn't make orbit in JNSQ.... the payload was too heavy and the setup was to lacking in fuel and thrust, because I built the wrong rocket.

eh, 2 things there. 1) Put the LR-101 on the OTHER node (you are putting it on the left I think and it needs to be attached at the right side... Course if your on the backside of the rocket that is opposite. If it goes on wrong, just re attach with the other node. Problem fixed unless you try to rotate them manually. 2) Um the engine fairing is the same color as the rocket... until the blue deltas. Under the rather poor photo quality of that (White balance, Color Saturation and stupid museum "dramatic lighting" all playing a part in that,) it is almost impossible to tell what the color is. But no matter what color you think it is, I can tell you it isn't one that actually flew on a real rocket... it is a preservative infused coating designed to preserve the rocket, it is not the original type of paint which would oxidize and deteriorate quickly as on the as flown Thor rockets. oh and 3) while the Museum has a placard for the Agena Upper stage in front of it, that is defiantly a Thor rocket... one of the launchers of Agena (as the combination being sometimes called Thorad.)

One word describes this.... Mommy! Ok several more. AWESOME. I can not wait. Pioneer Orbiter tanks and engine, reminds me of the same generation's Titan Satellite Launch Dispenser..... Abet scaled down with the flat plate on the wrong side. And the relatively obvious questions, The aux pack (the lopsided lobe,) is it going to be B9PartSwitch-able, a Separate part or is the whole core a single part? Cause I think that would be a new great general purpose 6 sided Probe core. The RCS on the Dish, will that be part of the dish, or a separate part? I would say I know the feeling.... But after a while you almost get used to it. You have no energy... and all you want to do is play stupid games to occupy your mind with the mindless.... Then even that is too much effort. wait, what do you mean I was building an "Full proposed" ISS???!!! I don't remember that! Anyway, Here is hoping there is a light at the end of the tunnel. That your brain isn't fed to the illithids... and that you have some time to decompress.

you mean the USAF Roundel on the Left wing? and aft fuselage? There are several mods that have had them from time to time, Don't know if any of the current "Sticker" mods have em however. But the correct term is Roundel. Not flag. (the USAF Flag is a Eagle on a Shield with a bunch of stars on a field of blue)

1) Are you talking MODERN USAF logos (like seen on TV,) or the Real USAF flag? 2) I recognize the X-20 for the nose. What other parts did you use. Also Did you break mach 10 (3410m/s)? 80km?