[1.12.5] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.13.0 "Забытый" 13/Aug/2023)

[Taco Salad]

We have the SNAP-29. The S-IVB tank-wrapper RTG.. But could we get a parts-switch for a radiator less version for general use? Rather like the flat form-factor of it.

[CobaltWolf]

2 hours ago, The Dressian Exploder said:

Just out of curiosity, how will the parts be split? This is personally how I would've done it, but then again I don't really know how large the parts are or if something like this even works at all

Bearing in mind this isn't really an actual suggestion, how are you splitting them up?

Honestly? Great question, I'd love people's input on this - again, bearing in mind, that none of these parts have "standard" cross sections, so interfacing with other part families is a bit off the table unfortunately...

 

 

• Nose - will have the functionality from the stock Fly-by-Wire part.
  • Also includes a switch for the early (spike) and late (Q-ball) model nose.
• Cockpit - not sure how to break this part up, or rather, if I should. I could see splitting it at the front of the canopy, which would leave a dedicated gear and RCS part to go between the cockpit and nose.
  • The cockpit includes the APU generators and a small cargo bay which will have some dedicated experiments made for it
  • Here is the current cockpit part on it's own. The question is whether this should have the front 1/3 or so split off.
  • Alright, already gotten some significant feedback off-forum about this. I'm going to split the gear/RCS and the cockpit. So here's what the cockpit itself looks like now.
• Fuselage - the big kahuna. No good way to split this up IMO. It's never going to match other bulkhead profiles.
  • Will include at least one length switch to represent the X-15A-2, but I don't think I want to add more.
• Engine - One of the only parts that will be normal, since it should have a 1.25m attachment ring.
  • I think this will be a dedicated "X-15 engine" part with the early dual XLR-11 config, the XLR-99, and the XLR-99 with extension for the delta wing variant.
• As you said, other parts like the wings are fairly self explanatory. The only notable thing is that the control surfaces for the vertical stabilizers will be separate parts, with the bottom one having a decoupler and parachute for recovery like the real thing.

 

Anyone have thoughts? Particularly any that aren't asking me to rip things apart and do a lot more work, which I kind of figure the reaction to this will be?

Edited April 5 by CobaltWolf

[Pappystein]

Just now, CobaltWolf said:

Honestly? Great question, I'd love people's input on this - again, bearing in mind, that none of these parts have "standard" cross sections, so interfacing with other part families is a bit off the table unfortunately...

 

 

• Nose - will have the functionality from the stock Fly-by-Wire part.
  • Also includes a switch for the early (spike) and late (Q-ball) model nose.
• Cockpit - not sure how to break this part up, or rather, if I should. I could see splitting it at the front of the canopy, which would leave a dedicated gear and RCS part to go between the cockpit and nose.
  • The cockpit includes the APU generators and a small cargo bay which will have some dedicated experiments made for it
  • Here is the current cockpit part on it's own. The question is whether this should have the front 1/3 or so split off.
• Fuselage - the big kahuna. No good way to split this up IMO. It's never going to match other bulkhead profiles.
  • Will include at least one length switch to represent the X-15A-2, but I don't think I want to add more.
• Engine - One of the only parts that will be normal, since it should have a 1.25m attachment ring.
  • I think this will be a dedicated "X-15 engine" part with the early dual XLR-11 config, the XLR-99, and the XLR-99 with extension for the delta wing variant.
• As you said, other parts like the wings are fairly self explanatory. The only notable thing is that the control surfaces for the vertical stabilizers will be separate parts, with the bottom one having a decoupler and parachute for recovery like the real thing.

 

Anyone have thoughts? Particularly any that aren't asking me to rip things apart and do a lot more work, which I kind of figure the reaction to this will be?

Other than ONE suggestion of an additional non X-15 part to interface with part of the X-15?   I think you are go for launch FULL SEND

The suggested part is a 0.9375-1.25m re-sizable cone, angle matched to the X-15 nose probe, that terminates in the correct diameter for the nosecone.   Would allow other rockets to use that 2 part Nose-cone / Probe core (If I am remembering the correct part you referenced.)   Cone should color switch the same colors as X-15.  Yes extra work but rather low hanging fruit given the plethora of other similar structures made in the past I would think.

[AmateurAstronaut1969]

17 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

Honestly? Great question, I'd love people's input on this - again, bearing in mind, that none of these parts have "standard" cross sections, so interfacing with other part families is a bit off the table unfortunately...

 

 

• Nose - will have the functionality from the stock Fly-by-Wire part.
  • Also includes a switch for the early (spike) and late (Q-ball) model nose.
• Cockpit - not sure how to break this part up, or rather, if I should. I could see splitting it at the front of the canopy, which would leave a dedicated gear and RCS part to go between the cockpit and nose.
  • The cockpit includes the APU generators and a small cargo bay which will have some dedicated experiments made for it
  • Here is the current cockpit part on it's own. The question is whether this should have the front 1/3 or so split off.
• Fuselage - the big kahuna. No good way to split this up IMO. It's never going to match other bulkhead profiles.
  • Will include at least one length switch to represent the X-15A-2, but I don't think I want to add more.
• Engine - One of the only parts that will be normal, since it should have a 1.25m attachment ring.
  • I think this will be a dedicated "X-15 engine" part with the early dual XLR-11 config, the XLR-99, and the XLR-99 with extension for the delta wing variant.
• As you said, other parts like the wings are fairly self explanatory. The only notable thing is that the control surfaces for the vertical stabilizers will be separate parts, with the bottom one having a decoupler and parachute for recovery like the real thing.

 

Anyone have thoughts? Particularly any that aren't asking me to rip things apart and do a lot more work, which I kind of figure the reaction to this will be?

For the most part I think that’s all great, the X-15 is a really bespoke shape, so there isn’t crazy amounts of stuff you could do to make it usable in lots of situations

It could be nice if you did the gear parts as depthmask parts, so they can be used on other stuff and still have the open gear bay, but if that’s not something you wanna do, then I would say keep it a part of the cockpit

Also, since the shape is very particular, if you weren’t gonna do already, it would be nice to have nodes for all the stuff like gears and wings etc etc

Edited April 5 by AmateurAstronaut1969

[Kochi]

15 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

Honestly? Great question, I'd love people's input on this - again, bearing in mind, that none of these parts have "standard" cross sections, so interfacing with other part families is a bit off the table unfortunately...

 

 

• Nose - will have the functionality from the stock Fly-by-Wire part.
  • Also includes a switch for the early (spike) and late (Q-ball) model nose.
• Cockpit - not sure how to break this part up, or rather, if I should. I could see splitting it at the front of the canopy, which would leave a dedicated gear and RCS part to go between the cockpit and nose.
  • The cockpit includes the APU generators and a small cargo bay which will have some dedicated experiments made for it
  • Here is the current cockpit part on it's own. The question is whether this should have the front 1/3 or so split off.
  • Alright, already gotten some significant feedback off-forum about this. I'm going to split the gear/RCS and the cockpit. So here's what the cockpit itself looks like now.
• Fuselage - the big kahuna. No good way to split this up IMO. It's never going to match other bulkhead profiles.
  • Will include at least one length switch to represent the X-15A-2, but I don't think I want to add more.
• Engine - One of the only parts that will be normal, since it should have a 1.25m attachment ring.
  • I think this will be a dedicated "X-15 engine" part with the early dual XLR-11 config, the XLR-99, and the XLR-99 with extension for the delta wing variant.
• As you said, other parts like the wings are fairly self explanatory. The only notable thing is that the control surfaces for the vertical stabilizers will be separate parts, with the bottom one having a decoupler and parachute for recovery like the real thing.

 

Anyone have thoughts? Particularly any that aren't asking me to rip things apart and do a lot more work, which I kind of figure the reaction to this will be?

Yea sound good to me

 

[Pappystein]

Just now, AmateurAstronaut1969 said:

For the most part I think that’s all great, the X-15 is a really bespoke shape, so there isn’t crazy amounts of stuff you could do to make it usable in lots of situations

It could be nice if you did the gear parts as depthmask parts, so they can be used on other stuff and still have the open gear bay, but if that’s not something you wanna do, then I would say keep it a part of the cockpit

Depth-masking won't work since the Door for the gear well is part of the gear.  It would break the (I assume) already done annimations

 

[AmateurAstronaut1969]

5 minutes ago, Pappystein said:

Depth-masking won't work since the Door for the gear well is part of the gear.  It would break the (I assume) already done annimations

 

Ah I see, yeah probably just stick the gear as part of the cockpit then

[CobaltWolf]

18 minutes ago, AmateurAstronaut1969 said:

Also, since the shape is very particular, if you weren’t gonna do already, it would be nice to have nodes for all the stuff like gears and wings etc etc

Yeah everything will have attach nodes for ease of assembly

[dangaffa]

3 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

Honestly? Great question, I'd love people's input on this - again, bearing in mind, that none of these parts have "standard" cross sections, so interfacing with other part families is a bit off the table unfortunately...

 

 

• Nose - will have the functionality from the stock Fly-by-Wire part.
  • Also includes a switch for the early (spike) and late (Q-ball) model nose.
• Cockpit - not sure how to break this part up, or rather, if I should. I could see splitting it at the front of the canopy, which would leave a dedicated gear and RCS part to go between the cockpit and nose.
  • The cockpit includes the APU generators and a small cargo bay which will have some dedicated experiments made for it
  • Here is the current cockpit part on it's own. The question is whether this should have the front 1/3 or so split off.
  • Alright, already gotten some significant feedback off-forum about this. I'm going to split the gear/RCS and the cockpit. So here's what the cockpit itself looks like now.
• Fuselage - the big kahuna. No good way to split this up IMO. It's never going to match other bulkhead profiles.
  • Will include at least one length switch to represent the X-15A-2, but I don't think I want to add more.
• Engine - One of the only parts that will be normal, since it should have a 1.25m attachment ring.
  • I think this will be a dedicated "X-15 engine" part with the early dual XLR-11 config, the XLR-99, and the XLR-99 with extension for the delta wing variant.
• As you said, other parts like the wings are fairly self explanatory. The only notable thing is that the control surfaces for the vertical stabilizers will be separate parts, with the bottom one having a decoupler and parachute for recovery like the real thing.

 

Anyone have thoughts? Particularly any that aren't asking me to rip things apart and do a lot more work, which I kind of figure the reaction to this will be?

Might be a tad silly, but would there be a way to get a "X-15 cross section to larger diameter" adapter, for top mounting it on something like a Titan or Saturn?

[Redleg1]

My two cents are to just make the whole thing one complete part to make it simple and reduce bloat in the part browser and maybe decrease its memory footprint? At least for me I mostly play with BDB parts as their intended complete design rather than using them Lego style. 

[barleybun]

6 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

Honestly? Great question, I'd love people's input on this - again, bearing in mind, that none of these parts have "standard" cross sections, so interfacing with other part families is a bit off the table unfortunately...

 

 

• Nose - will have the functionality from the stock Fly-by-Wire part.
  • Also includes a switch for the early (spike) and late (Q-ball) model nose.
• Cockpit - not sure how to break this part up, or rather, if I should. I could see splitting it at the front of the canopy, which would leave a dedicated gear and RCS part to go between the cockpit and nose.
  • The cockpit includes the APU generators and a small cargo bay which will have some dedicated experiments made for it
  • Here is the current cockpit part on it's own. The question is whether this should have the front 1/3 or so split off.
  • Alright, already gotten some significant feedback off-forum about this. I'm going to split the gear/RCS and the cockpit. So here's what the cockpit itself looks like now.
• Fuselage - the big kahuna. No good way to split this up IMO. It's never going to match other bulkhead profiles.
  • Will include at least one length switch to represent the X-15A-2, but I don't think I want to add more.
• Engine - One of the only parts that will be normal, since it should have a 1.25m attachment ring.
  • I think this will be a dedicated "X-15 engine" part with the early dual XLR-11 config, the XLR-99, and the XLR-99 with extension for the delta wing variant.
• As you said, other parts like the wings are fairly self explanatory. The only notable thing is that the control surfaces for the vertical stabilizers will be separate parts, with the bottom one having a decoupler and parachute for recovery like the real thing.

 

Anyone have thoughts? Particularly any that aren't asking me to rip things apart and do a lot more work, which I kind of figure the reaction to this will be?

my one thing would be to add adapters between the custom fuselage and common part diameters, as well as an adapter for the end section. other than that i've got nothing

[Zorg]

Some more Atlas updates.

Got Atlas II (technically Atlas IIAS with the ring for the boosters but its going to be a combined variant as it will be wasteful otherwise). Middle is SLV3 which has a longer left side avionics pod than Atlas D and LV3 (on the left).

Atlas III

Since its not been seen in a little while :P

[AdrianDogmeat]

1 hour ago, Zorg said:

Some more Atlas updates.

Got Atlas II (technically Atlas IIAS with the ring for the boosters but its going to be a combined variant as it will be wasteful otherwise). Middle is SLV3 which has a longer left side avionics pod than Atlas D and LV3 (on the left).

Atlas III

Since its not been seen in a little while

Hot damn...

[zw_45]

11 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

Honestly? Great question, I'd love people's input on this - again, bearing in mind, that none of these parts have "standard" cross sections, so interfacing with other part families is a bit off the table unfortunately...

 

 

• Nose - will have the functionality from the stock Fly-by-Wire part.
  • Also includes a switch for the early (spike) and late (Q-ball) model nose.
• Cockpit - not sure how to break this part up, or rather, if I should. I could see splitting it at the front of the canopy, which would leave a dedicated gear and RCS part to go between the cockpit and nose.
  • The cockpit includes the APU generators and a small cargo bay which will have some dedicated experiments made for it
  • Here is the current cockpit part on it's own. The question is whether this should have the front 1/3 or so split off.
  • Alright, already gotten some significant feedback off-forum about this. I'm going to split the gear/RCS and the cockpit. So here's what the cockpit itself looks like now.
• Fuselage - the big kahuna. No good way to split this up IMO. It's never going to match other bulkhead profiles.
  • Will include at least one length switch to represent the X-15A-2, but I don't think I want to add more.
• Engine - One of the only parts that will be normal, since it should have a 1.25m attachment ring.
  • I think this will be a dedicated "X-15 engine" part with the early dual XLR-11 config, the XLR-99, and the XLR-99 with extension for the delta wing variant.
• As you said, other parts like the wings are fairly self explanatory. The only notable thing is that the control surfaces for the vertical stabilizers will be separate parts, with the bottom one having a decoupler and parachute for recovery like the real thing.

 

Anyone have thoughts? Particularly any that aren't asking me to rip things apart and do a lot more work, which I kind of figure the reaction to this will be?

I’m wondering how big the cross section is compared with stock mk2 fuselage? Any chance to get a universal engine mount to fit other engines inside this airplane?

[kspbutitscursed]

8 hours ago, Zorg said:

Some more Atlas updates.

Got Atlas II (technically Atlas IIAS with the ring for the boosters but its going to be a combined variant as it will be wasteful otherwise). Middle is SLV3 which has a longer left side avionics pod than Atlas D and LV3 (on the left).

Atlas III

Since its not been seen in a little while

God Damn 

WOW

 

[Mrbruh]

Why am I’m getting immense lag spikes when I use Bluedogs parts when I use other mod parts  or stock parts it doesn't lag as much as the blue dog mod?? 

[Cheesecake]

12 hours ago, Zorg said:

Some more Atlas updates.

Got Atlas II (technically Atlas IIAS with the ring for the boosters but its going to be a combined variant as it will be wasteful otherwise). Middle is SLV3 which has a longer left side avionics pod than Atlas D and LV3 (on the left).

Atlas III

Since its not been seen in a little while

The Atlas alone will be worth playing KSP again... Very good work.

[Gupyzer0]

4 hours ago, Mrbruh said:

Why am I’m getting immense lag spikes when I use Bluedogs parts when I use other mod parts  or stock parts it doesn't lag as much as the blue dog mod?? 

Uhmmm . . . What's you hardware? I run BDB in a very very bad PC (I5 + 5GB ram + GeForce 710 1GB) and can launch a Saturn V without problems or significant lag using JNSQ + Kerbalism.

---------------------------------

@CobaltWolf Any pictures of the "extras" (science experiments) you talked about earlier?, the X-15 sure looks fine!

Edited April 6 by Gupyzer0

[biohazard15]

5 hours ago, Mrbruh said:

Why am I’m getting immense lag spikes when I use Bluedogs parts when I use other mod parts  or stock parts it doesn't lag as much as the blue dog mod?? 

Welcome to the forums!

I had noticeable lag with some BDB parts (mainly Saturn V) when I used DangIt mod. If you use it, try to uninstall it.

[Mrbruh]

9 hours ago, Gupyzer0 said:

Uhmmm . . . What's you hardware? I run BDB in a very very bad PC (I5 + 5GB ram + GeForce 710 1GB) and can launch a Saturn V without problems or significant lag using JNSQ + Kerbalism.

---------------------------------

@CobaltWolf Any pictures of the "extras" (science experiments) you talked about earlier?, the X-15 sure looks fine!

I don’t think hardware is the issue because I have many shaders on and parralax, they run good but somehow when I use the Saturn v rocket (Apollo 11) it goes to like 3-9 fps I’m trynna figure out this and I have other mods that run completely fine 

[Pudgemountain]

On 4/3/2024 at 12:26 PM, CobaltWolf said:

Incase of emergency. Your space pencil can double act as a flotation device.

[Pappystein]

On 4/5/2024 at 5:26 PM, Zorg said:

Some more Atlas updates.

The Russians Engines are coming to take me away,
Haha, they´re coming to take me away,
Ho ho, hee hee, ha ha,
To the happy home with Atlas' and stars
And chirping birds and basket weavers
Who sit and smile and
Twiddle their thumbs and toes
And they´re coming to take me away,
HAHAAAAAAAAA

 

*based on the 1966 song by "Napoleon XIV" Aka Jerry Samuels; They're comming to take me away!

 

Joking aside This stuff looks Great Zorg!

Edited April 7 by Pappystein

[Entr8899]

On 4/5/2024 at 10:26 PM, Zorg said:

Some more Atlas updates.

Got Atlas II (technically Atlas IIAS with the ring for the boosters but its going to be a combined variant as it will be wasteful otherwise). Middle is SLV3 which has a longer left side avionics pod than Atlas D and LV3 (on the left).

Atlas III

Since its not been seen in a little while

The Rus-glish is killing me

[Publius Kerman]

I've got a few question and please don't take this wrong way, I by no means am asking as to be insulting. I am also a bit new to the modding scene, so please also excuse my lack of knowledge.

How is scaling done in BDB and what size Universe are the default parts scaled? I see no RSS MM patches in the BDB Compatibility folder, does this mean the default scaling for BDB is RSS size or are the parts scaled by RO, because I can't find RSS patches for BDB? If BDB isn't scaled to RSS, does that mean any install with RSS and not RO have terribly under powered engines? Lastly, why wouldn't you just divide the values for performance by 1/9th the real life counterparts and make those the default values for the parts and then add MM patches in the Compatibility folder for JNSQ(multiply by 2.7 on said performance values) and RSS(again just multiply by scale) and one for 2.5 if using Rescale, or conversely make MM patches that have those values divided for Stock with MM exclusions for any mod that resizes the Universe. This way your parts would be perfectly balanced no matter what size universe is being used.

I love your parts, and would absolutely be using them over FASA in any custom mod install if they scaled correctly.

P.S. That X-15 looks great, can't wait.

Edited April 8 by Publius Kerman

[Rodger]

1 hour ago, Publius Kerman said:

I've got a few question and please don't take this wrong way, I by no means am asking as to be insulting. I am also a bit new to the modding scene, so please also excuse my lack of knowledge.

How is scaling done in BDB and what size Universe are the default parts scaled? I see no RSS MM patches in the BDB Compatibility folder, does this mean the default scaling for BDB is RSS size or are the parts scaled by RO, because I can't find RSS patches for BDB? If BDB isn't scaled to RSS, does that mean any install with RSS and not RO have terribly under powered engines? Lastly, why wouldn't you just divide the values for performance by 1/9th the real life counterparts and make those the default values for the parts and then add MM patches in the Compatibility folder for JNSQ(multiply by 2.7 on said performance values) and RSS(again just multiply by scale) and one for 2.5 if using Rescale, or conversely make MM patches that have those values divided for Stock with MM exclusions for any mod that resizes the Universe. This way your parts would be perfectly balanced no matter what size universe is being used.

I love your parts, and would absolutely be using them over FASA in any custom mod install if they scaled correctly.

P.S. That X-15 looks great, can't wait.

The parts are scaled like stock ksp, which is .625x give or take, with engine performance being 25% irl thrust, and quite heavy dry mass for tankage. This ends up being “overpowered” for stock scale (just like stock parts are), and ideal for 2.5-2.7x scale.

BDB isn’t made for RO, so we don’t provide any scaling patches for RO/RSS, that’s all done on the RO team’s side, and its a fair bit more complicated than just a scale multiplier. RO uses entirely different custom systems for engines and resources, and there’s likely mass ratio changes for tankage too.

There should be some BDB RO patches out there, though from what I’ve heard they are unfinished. (The only help I can offer is if you try them and get a missing resource definition error on startup, you can press esc to skip the error instead of closing ksp)