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

[Guest]

Yet they got the job done.

Just ran a Gemini launch, targeted 250km orbit, verified using a Prometheus II first stage tank and engine on identical ascent profile. Performance was 15% below that of the Prom I tank and engine. Target orbit missed. If that's by design, I'll work from there.

EDIT: Obviously I need to gain a better understanding of the way your mod is structured and set aside my preconceived notions. I admire the work you've put into bringing this mod into being, and I will continue to support your efforts wholeheartedly.

Edited July 17, 2016 by Jack Wolfe
Mea culpa

[123nick]

hey for some reason the prometheus i-640 perses engine doesent show any FX . no plume, no sound, nothing. im using real plume and hot rockets , so that may cause it but im sure i have similar issues without those 2.

[CobaltWolf]

16 minutes ago, 123nick said:

hey for some reason the prometheus i-640 perses engine doesent show any FX . no plume, no sound, nothing. im using real plume and hot rockets , so that may cause it but im sure i have similar issues without those 2.

No idea.

UPDATE:

Centaur-D parts are steaming along. I might try and include them in the upcoming release. Here is the (mostly done) diffuse texture.

[Jso]

2 hours ago, 123nick said:

hey for some reason the prometheus i-640 perses engine doesent show any FX . no plume, no sound, nothing. im using real plume and hot rockets , so that may cause it but im sure i have similar issues without those 2.

We need a ksp.log for plume issues. Is it just that engine or all of them?

[123nick]

Just now, Jso said:

We need a ksp.log for plume issues. Is it just that engine or all of them?

the ros radial engine also has that problem.

 here is the ksp.log  https://gist.github.com/aa432adcf59b8af01f2d36c6139a5c1e 

if there is no evidence of a problem i can try too get a ksp.log after i reproduced the plume issue in flight

also, is it possible too just replace all the plumes with a stock plume or something? will removing hotrockets and smokescreen just fix it? i think hotrockets or something was a dependency in a mod.

[Jso]

1 hour ago, 123nick said:

the ros radial engine also has that problem.

 here is the ksp.log  https://gist.github.com/aa432adcf59b8af01f2d36c6139a5c1e 

if there is no evidence of a problem i can try too get a ksp.log after i reproduced the plume issue in flight

also, is it possible too just replace all the plumes with a stock plume or something? will removing hotrockets and smokescreen just fix it? i think hotrockets or something was a dependency in a mod.

Try it without HotRockets. You need Smokescreen for RealPlumes.

[123nick]

1 minute ago, Jso said:

Try it without HotRockets. You need Smokescreen for RealPlumes.

ok will do

[Jso]

4 minutes ago, 123nick said:

ok will do

Wait, you don't have a RealPlume folder in GameData.... standby.

[Kerbal01]

Not appearing on CKAN.

[123nick]

7 minutes ago, Jso said:

Wait, you don't have a RealPlume folder in GameData.... standby.

ok. ill just keep on doing other things not-related too BDB, like using the daedelus engine from KSP-IE. it just released a fix for usage with NF-E, so now it doesent isntantly overheat and explode.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, DarthVader said:

Not appearing on CKAN.

Take CKAN issues to the CKAN thread.

[Jso]

Just now, 123nick said:

ok. ill just keep on doing other things not-related too BDB, like using the daedelus engine from KSP-IE. it just released a fix for usage with NF-E, so now it doesent isntantly overheat and explode.

The OctoSat and WarpPlugin mods have incorrect configs for their plumes. The mod authors need to change the lines that read @PART[XYZ]:FOR[RealPlume]:NEEDS[SmokeScreen] to read @PART[XYZ]:NEEDS[RealPlume,SmokeScreen] instead.

Remove those two mods and see how it goes.

[123nick]

Just now, Jso said:

The OctoSat and WarpPlugin mods have incorrect configs for their plumes. The mod authors need to change the lines that read @PART[XYZ]:FOR[RealPlume]:NEEDS[SmokeScreen] to read @PART[XYZ]:NEEDS[RealPlume,SmokeScreen] instead.

Remove those two mods and see how it goes.

cant i just change the lines that read @PART[XYZ]:FOR[RealPlume]:NEEDS[SmokeScreen] to read @PART[XYZ]:NEEDS[RealPlume,SmokeScreen]  my self?

[Jso]

Just now, 123nick said:

cant i just change the lines that read @PART[XYZ]:FOR[RealPlume]:NEEDS[SmokeScreen] to read @PART[XYZ]:NEEDS[RealPlume,SmokeScreen]  my self?

Yes. Just make sure you get them all. It only takes one to screw up everything.

If you don't have RealPlume installed, and the text FOR[RealPlume] appears anywhere in your log you'll have problems.

[123nick]

Just now, Jso said:

Yes. Just make sure you get them all. It only takes one to screw up everything.

If you don't have RealPlume installed, and the text FOR[RealPlume] appears anywhere in your log you'll have problems.

ok, thanks.

[komodo]

Here's an 'odd one/I may be blind' sort of thing: We have a 1.5 m booster set for the Prometheus 1, but do we have a nosecone for it? I'm over here staring at a stack that would love to use them, but i'm fumbling for a cap.

(It's an appropriately super kitbashed stack at that, going to launch a soyuz/titan if it goes off right! )  

[CobaltWolf]

5 hours ago, komodo said:

Here's an 'odd one/I may be blind' sort of thing: We have a 1.5 m booster set for the Prometheus 1, but do we have a nosecone for it? I'm over here staring at a stack that would love to use them, but i'm fumbling for a cap.

(It's an appropriately super kitbashed stack at that, going to launch a soyuz/titan if it goes off right! )  

Yes, it looks similar to the 1.875m one but blunter.

14 hours ago, DarthVader said:

Not appearing on CKAN.

I don't believe we display compatibility with 1.1.3. We haven't updated yet.

[Slightlylyons]

On 7/14/2016 at 11:17 AM, CobaltWolf said:

it uses a variation of DMagic's code that he released for other mods to use. I'd try a fresh manual install of BDB 0.10.5 to make sure, otherwise we can look into it more.

Just wanted to touch base with you because I figured out the issue I was having. It was a mod conflict (sorta) the automated science sampler mod runs the experiment but doesn't trigger the animation, the science data then shows up but isn't recorded when you recover the vessel.

The work around is to not be lazy, recycle the experiment, and manually run it. As far as I'm concerned it's an issue with their mod, and I'll go mention it as a bug on their page at some point.

Edited July 18, 2016 by Slightlylyons

[CobaltWolf]

8 hours ago, Slightlylyons said:

Just wanted to touch base with you because I figured out the issue I was having. It was a mod conflict (sorta) the automated science sampler mod runs the experiment but doesn't trigger the animation, the science data then shows up but isn't recorded when you recover the vessel.

The work around is to not be lazy, recycle the experiment, and manually run it. As far as I'm concerned it's an issue with their mod, and I'll go mention it as a bug on their page at some point.

Awesome man! Thanks for swinging by, let me know if anything needs to be done on our end.

UPDATE:

Got the new Centaur D in game! Ran a quick test, featuring @akron's Pioneer/Quetzal parts.

EDIT:

On 7/15/2016 at 10:51 PM, Jack Wolfe said:

Just ran a Gemini launch, targeted 250km orbit, verified using a Prometheus II first stage tank and engine on identical ascent profile. Performance was 15% below that of the Prom I tank and engine. Target orbit missed. If that's by design, I'll work from there.

EDIT: Obviously I need to gain a better understanding of the way your mod is structured and set aside my preconceived notions. I admire the work you've put into bringing this mod into being, and I will continue to support your efforts wholeheartedly.

Didn't see this edit. I'm not sure. The Titan/Prometheus performance HAS seemed a bit out of whack for the last while. @Jso, any thoughts? Are they too big?

 

Edited July 18, 2016 by CobaltWolf

[Jso]

16 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

Didn't see this edit. I'm not sure. The Titan/Prometheus performance HAS seemed a bit out of whack for the last while. @Jso, any thoughts? Are they too big?

To be honest Titan/Gemini has been so thoroughly test flown I just discounted his comment. I'll try a few test flights in the morning if I get a chance. Maybe we broke something. What exactly do we think is wrong with it?

[CobaltWolf]

6 minutes ago, Jso said:

To be honest Titan/Gemini has been so thoroughly test flown I just discounted his comment. I'll try a few test flights in the morning if I get a chance. Maybe we broke something. What exactly do we think is wrong with it?

Did Titan just... suck? In real life? That it underperformed other launchers?

[Jso]

13 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

Did Titan just... suck? In real life? That it underperformed other launchers?

I believe the opposite is true. It's an OP beast. The payload (on earth) is limited by available deltav rather than what it can lift of the pad. It's downfall was being bit prone to explode, but that was a QA issue at the plant.

[akron]

I miss the blue in the old Centaur. Kinda made it stand out

Edited July 19, 2016 by akron

[CobaltWolf]

Meanwhile...

[TimothyC]

Go Kāne!