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

[KeaKaka]

34D-IUS

Edited July 28 by KeaKaka
oh llok nwe page

[GoldForest]

@Rodger @Zorg Not sure if this is a config problem or a texture problem, but the Atlas LV3 and Atlas II lose their shininess for the bottom 2/3rds of the tank. 

Atlas D for reference. 

Atlas LV3. Notice how after Ring 5 from the top it goes matte? 

Same issue with Atlas II. 

[Rodger]

On 7/26/2024 at 4:07 PM, GoldForest said:

Speaking of Mariner, @Rodger Got a request. The Mariner 2 solar panels have a base version and an extended version, both supply the same amount of EC. Could we get a little more EC out of the extended version? The base EC for the Mariner 2 default is 0.4. I think 0.5 for the extended version makes sense. The default version is made up of 4 segments while the extended is 5 segments. 0.1 EC per segment. 

Just checked, they actually should switch already - check the charge rates in flight with full sun exposure. There's just no feedback in the part switch, which I will add:

44 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

@Rodger @Zorg Not sure if this is a config problem or a texture problem, but the Atlas LV3 and Atlas II lose their shininess for the bottom 2/3rds of the tank.

I wouldn't say they "go matte", but there does seem to be a slight different in spec over the different variants. It's just due to the textures, the materials all have the same _Shininess value, so up to Zorg if they want to update them. I also presume you're using deferred in these pictures, which will amplify the visible difference in different spec values.

Edited July 28 by Rodger

[GoldForest]

16 minutes ago, Rodger said:

Just checked, they actually should switch already - check the charge rates in flight with full sun exposure. There's just no feedback in the part switch, which I will add:

I wouldn't say they "go matte", but there does seem to be a slight different in spec over the different variants. It's just due to the textures, the materials all have the same _Shininess value, so up to Zorg if they want to update them. I also presume you're using deferred in these pictures, which will amplify the visible difference in different spec values.

Ah, gotcha. Thanks. 

As for using deferred, I am. 

[DaveyJ576]

5 hours ago, Rodger said:

Just checked, they actually should switch already - check the charge rates in flight with full sun exposure. There's just no feedback in the part switch, which I will add:

I wouldn't say they "go matte", but there does seem to be a slight different in spec over the different variants. It's just due to the textures, the materials all have the same _Shininess value, so up to Zorg if they want to update them. I also presume you're using deferred in these pictures, which will amplify the visible difference in different spec values.

Okay, I missed something a ways back… what exactly is “deferred”? I have seen it referred to in Barking Owl Bureau as well. Is it a setting? Thanks.

[Entr8899]

It's been real quiet here, almost too quiet...

[OrbitalManeuvers]

11 minutes ago, DaveyJ576 said:

what exactly is “deferred”?

https://github.com/LGhassen/Deferred

 

[CobaltWolf]

1 hour ago, Entr8899 said:

It's been real quiet here, almost too quiet...

I did a dev stream yesterday with Rodger clearing out a bunch of outstanding GH issues, but apart from that I've been kind of... busy...

 

I also started on the SRMU variant of the Titan SRB nose, a bit of low-ish hanging fruit that I think was really missing from the part set.
 

[ra4nd0m]

5 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

I also started on the SRMU variant of the Titan SRB nose, a bit of low-ish hanging fruit that I think was really missing from the part set.

Unfinished Viking stares at you from the closet and thinking dark things...

Edited July 28 by ra4nd0m

[kspbutitscursed]

3 hours ago, ra4nd0m said:

Unfinished Viking stares at you from the closet and thinking dark things...

Real

im still hanging in here for it

[Zorg]

20 hours ago, GoldForest said:

@Rodger @Zorg Not sure if this is a config problem or a texture problem, but the Atlas LV3 and Atlas II lose their shininess for the bottom 2/3rds of the tank. 

Atlas D for reference. 

Atlas LV3. Notice how after Ring 5 from the top it goes matte? 

Same issue with Atlas II. 

It’s just a very small difference in spec value being exacerbated by Deffereds automated shader conversion. Ultimately the atlas PBR textures would make this redundant. Once those textures are done you would want to use them with deferred. 

Edited July 29 by Zorg

[KeaKaka]

[GoldForest]

@Rodger Is the Titan I interstage going to be added to the interstage group or the 1.5 to 1.875 structural adapter? Or did you forget about the Titan I interstage? 

Also, there's a typo with two parts. The Titan I 1.25 to 1.5 structural adapter and the 1.5 to 1.875 structural adapter both call them Titan II parts in the IRL name. 

For anyone who uses the Titan I, the Carrack 1.5 structural interstage works great for the Titan I for now. The only problem is the Carrack is white and not silver. 

Edited July 29 by GoldForest

[GoldForest]

Nimbus I launched aboard a Castor Boosted Titan I by Wikipedia. Yes, I did the meme. Sue me.

Also, my TUFX button has disappeared... don't know why. 

Full album: Imgur: The magic of the Internet

Edited July 29 by GoldForest

[Rodger]

6 hours ago, GoldForest said:

@Rodger Is the Titan I interstage going to be added to the interstage group or the 1.5 to 1.875 structural adapter? Or did you forget about the Titan I interstage? 

Also, there's a typo with two parts. The Titan I 1.25 to 1.5 structural adapter and the 1.5 to 1.875 structural adapter both call them Titan II parts in the IRL name. 

For anyone who uses the Titan I, the Carrack 1.5 structural interstage works great for the Titan I for now. The only problem is the Carrack is white and not silver. 

This should be the guy

Also those two parts are for Titan II, they're adapters for the mk6 reentry vehicle on the Titan II ICBM

Edited July 29 by Rodger
Titan 2 adapters

[GoldForest]

11 minutes ago, Rodger said:

This should be the guy

Turns out I'm just blind then, sorry lol.

[Pappystein]

3 hours ago, GoldForest said:

Turns out I'm just blind then, sorry lol.

Not everything is tagged right in the Dev build currently,  Also not everything is up to date on the BDB Category kit in extras.   It will come soon(TM) I am sure

[Rodger]

Something I'd like some feedback on from anyone - what search terms do you tend to use?

Do you use rocket family names (real or kerbal)? If a related upper stage has a different name, would you still want it showing up? (showing centaurs when searching atlas? sergeants when searching juno?)

Specific part names (RL20, AJ260)

Sizes in ingame-meters (1.5, 1875 or 1.875?) or perhaps general descriptors (small tiny big)? Bulkhead profile?? (size0p5, size2, 3p2, these generally aren't actually tags so shouldn't work lol)

Fuel types? (monoprop, cryo, liquid, solid? shortened versions like 'lho' or 'lfo'?)

Functionality descriptors? (solar, structural, adapter, antenna, airlock, interstage, motor, engine) What about if this is not the primary function of the part, like an interstage that includes separation motors, should that show up with 'motor'? or would you use interstage and motor together to narrow your search down?

Functionality synonyms? (panel, communication, control, booster, split, remote, radial)

Do you combine multiple search terms? (saturn interstage, or number designations like mariner 2, vs mariner2 or just mariner)

Do you finish typing the search terms, or just type the first part?

A long term project is going to be updating the tags, as having so many does add lag to the search system, and they basically all need certain match-condition symbols added to them to help make the search more reliable. I presume family name is the most popular kind of search, and functionality searches the least common. However I could see functionality be useful if combined with a main search term too, so maybe people use it like that?

The aim is to remove tags if possible, but obviously ones that actually get use will stay. The only ones I'm really looking at removing are most functionality synonyms, and size general descriptors.

 

Edited July 30 by Rodger

[Pappystein]

24 minutes ago, Rodger said:

Something I'd like some feedback on from anyone - what search terms do you tend to use?

Do you use rocket family names (real or kerbal)? If a related upper stage has a different name, would you still want it showing up? (showing centaurs when searching atlas? sergeants when searching juno?)

Specific part names (RL20, AJ260)

Sizes in ingame-meters (1.5, 1875 or 1.875?) or perhaps general descriptors (small tiny big)? Bulkhead profile?? (size0p5, size2, 3p2, these generally aren't actually tags so shouldn't work lol)

Fuel types? (monoprop, cryo, liquid, solid? shortened versions like 'lho' or 'lfo'?)

Functionality descriptors? (solar, structural, adapter, antenna, airlock, interstage, motor, engine) What about if this is not the primary function of the part, like an interstage that includes separation motors, should that show up with 'motor'? or would you use interstage and motor together to narrow your search down?

Functionality synonyms? (panel, communication, control, booster, split, remote, radial)

Do you combine multiple search terms? (saturn interstage, or number designations like mariner 2, vs mariner2 or just mariner)

Do you finish typing the search terms, or just type the first part?

A long term project is going to be updating the tags, as having so many does add lag to the search system, and they basically all need certain match-condition symbols added to them to help make the search more reliable. I presume family name is the most popular kind of search, and functionality searches the least common. However I could see functionality be useful if combined with a main search term too, so maybe people use it like that?

The aim is to remove tags if possible, but obviously ones that actually get use will stay. The only ones I'm really looking at removing are most functionality synonyms, and size general descriptors.

 

First off, prior to CCK extras files for BlueDog I was using the search bar all the time and it took forever.

I search by Real-world names of Rockets, CMs and Engines.  I do have the realNames patch installed in my BDB Extras folder a must for me.

Now that the CCK patch is in the Extras, I use that for the first tier searching (tanks and CM)  I still search engines in the search by name

F-1,RL10, AJ-10 etc

It gets really weird because no two mod creators utilize the same nomenclature for tagging, let alone naming

EG BDB utilized in game meters for stage sizes.    Other mods measure things in IRL diameter,   Bulkhead size etc.   So this makes searching harder across various mods.
 

What I would prefer is to search by name or by in game diameter for all mods   Realworld names for realworld things

*Edited*
Sorry didn't answer all the questions!

Fuel types,  Asside from Monopropellant I have never personally searched for Fuel.

I do not combine or over-narrow my search.   Searching for Titan will get me all the Titan Interstages for example  Searching for Saturn will give me all the saturn.  In the case of Saturn alone, I will search SAturn S-II or Saturn S-IV.  Only because Saturn has more parts in it than any other Rocket Family in BDB.

 

Edited July 30 by Pappystein

[GoldForest]

1 hour ago, Rodger said:

Something I'd like some feedback on from anyone - what search terms do you tend to use?

Do you use rocket family names (real or kerbal)? If a related upper stage has a different name, would you still want it showing up? (showing centaurs when searching atlas? sergeants when searching juno?)

Specific part names (RL20, AJ260)

Sizes in ingame-meters (1.5, 1875 or 1.875?) or perhaps general descriptors (small tiny big)? Bulkhead profile?? (size0p5, size2, 3p2, these generally aren't actually tags so shouldn't work lol)

Fuel types? (monoprop, cryo, liquid, solid? shortened versions like 'lho' or 'lfo'?)

Functionality descriptors? (solar, structural, adapter, antenna, airlock, interstage, motor, engine) What about if this is not the primary function of the part, like an interstage that includes separation motors, should that show up with 'motor'? or would you use interstage and motor together to narrow your search down?

Functionality synonyms? (panel, communication, control, booster, split, remote, radial)

Do you combine multiple search terms? (saturn interstage, or number designations like mariner 2, vs mariner2 or just mariner)

Do you finish typing the search terms, or just type the first part?

A long term project is going to be updating the tags, as having so many does add lag to the search system, and they basically all need certain match-condition symbols added to them to help make the search more reliable. I presume family name is the most popular kind of search, and functionality searches the least common. However I could see functionality be useful if combined with a main search term too, so maybe people use it like that?

The aim is to remove tags if possible, but obviously ones that actually get use will stay. The only ones I'm really looking at removing are most functionality synonyms, and size general descriptors.

 

I do use IRL rocket family names, and would like related upper stages to appear. 

I do search specific parts sometimes. RL10, RS-68, etc.

I use KSP sizes in search, especially the more obscure ones like 0.9875 and 1.5.

Once in a while I'll need specific fuel types, so I'll search for them.

I don't search for functionality. 

I do combine search terms. Specifically for probes and spacecraft. I.e. Specific Mariners.

I write out the whole term. 

[KeaKaka]

15 hours ago, Rodger said:

This should be the guy

Also those two parts are for Titan II, they're adapters for the mk6 reentry vehicle on the Titan II ICBM

what mod add those little tags that tell you the part's diameter?

[Rodger]

20 minutes ago, KeaKaka said:

what mod add those little tags that tell you the part's diameter?

Something in testing, and not fully released yet. Once it is ready however, I’ll be highly recommending it, its amazing 

[bigyihsuan]

2 hours ago, Rodger said:

Something I'd like some feedback on from anyone - what search terms do you tend to use?

Do you use rocket family names (real or kerbal)? If a related upper stage has a different name, would you still want it showing up? (showing centaurs when searching atlas? sergeants when searching juno?)

Specific part names (RL20, AJ260)

Sizes in ingame-meters (1.5, 1875 or 1.875?) or perhaps general descriptors (small tiny big)? Bulkhead profile?? (size0p5, size2, 3p2, these generally aren't actually tags so shouldn't work lol)

Fuel types? (monoprop, cryo, liquid, solid? shortened versions like 'lho' or 'lfo'?)

Functionality descriptors? (solar, structural, adapter, antenna, airlock, interstage, motor, engine) What about if this is not the primary function of the part, like an interstage that includes separation motors, should that show up with 'motor'? or would you use interstage and motor together to narrow your search down?

Functionality synonyms? (panel, communication, control, booster, split, remote, radial)

Do you combine multiple search terms? (saturn interstage, or number designations like mariner 2, vs mariner2 or just mariner)

Do you finish typing the search terms, or just type the first part?

A long term project is going to be updating the tags, as having so many does add lag to the search system, and they basically all need certain match-condition symbols added to them to help make the search more reliable. I presume family name is the most popular kind of search, and functionality searches the least common. However I could see functionality be useful if combined with a main search term too, so maybe people use it like that?

The aim is to remove tags if possible, but obviously ones that actually get use will stay. The only ones I'm really looking at removing are most functionality synonyms, and size general descriptors.

 

I mainly use the Community Category Kit tabs and that covers 90% of my use cases. The other 9% is searching by mission/probe name and the 1% is by a series of parts (usually station parts like the Gemini station stuff and Skylab).

I'd be nice to see Centaurs with Atlases etc when searched, even better if it shows up in the CCK tab.

It would also be nice to search for specific stages, so if I search "saturn ii" it should show all the parts related to the Saturn II stage (tank, adapters, couplers, docking ports, RCS, etc).

[GoldForest]

1 hour ago, Rodger said:

Something in testing, and not fully released yet. Once it is ready however, I’ll be highly recommending it, its amazing 

Can you talk about it or are you under NDA?

If you can talk about it in a limited fashion, what other features does the mod have? 

Also, I just noticed something. Not all the Titan SRBs have nodes at the base of them. While it makes sense for the side attached ones not to have a bottom node, I think the inline versions at least should have nodes. Would it be possible to get those for all of them?

Edited July 30 by GoldForest

[Rodger]

30 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

Can you talk about it or are you under NDA?

If you can talk about it in a limited fashion, what other features does the mod have? 

This is why there's been a lot of "update bulkhead profile" github pushes over the last few weeks lol