rasta013 Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 12 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said: Meanwhile... ....you're gonna make me check the repo 10 times a day to look for that even if I know it could be months away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted July 19, 2016 Author Share Posted July 19, 2016 51 minutes ago, rasta013 said: ....you're gonna make me check the repo 10 times a day to look for that even if I know it could be months away. How about this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Shutesie Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 1 minute ago, CobaltWolf said: ~snip~ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rasta013 Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 ATTENTION ALL BDB USERS The upcoming release will contain craft breaking changes to several parts. Below you will find a list of all parts with changes which will result in the loss of any craft containing them after updating. If you have ships, probes or stations containing any of these parts you should begin to take steps now in order to avoid any losses. Affected Parts Leo-M-ANC Aerodynamic Nose Cone Leo-M-63E "Vinci" Command Pod Leo-M-3VS "Botticelli" Crew Module Leo-M-KZR Heatshield Leo-M-7RC Landing Parachute System Leo-M-C32 Nose Docking Mechanism Leo-M-68V Reentry Reaction Thrusters Leo-M-5HA Radial Control Thruster Leo-M-O7N "Medici" Service Module Leo-M-59F Structural Plate Again, if you have any craft in service with any of these parts they WILL be destroyed when you upgrade to the latest version after release. Please make the necessary changes to avoid any losses and backup your save game prior to upgrading in case you miss any affected craft leading to a catastrophic loss. This is not a release announcement. This is a simple courtesy warning to allow you time to make arrangements for any active craft you have that could be affected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hraban Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 (edited) 9 hours ago, CobaltWolf said: Meanwhile... That you can certainly better.The ratio of diameter to height looks wrong with the capsule. The right angle is 32° 31' 32" or about 32°. The hatch is much too small for Kerbals with helmet. The docking probe looks like a hydraulic car-jack. ;) Edited July 19, 2016 by hraban Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jso Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 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. 14 hours 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? Seems fine to me, it goes like a bat out of hell, plenty of deltav. I put a Titan II GLV into a 250x250 orbit no problem. The new Centaur looks really nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, Jso said: Seems fine to me, it goes like a bat out of hell, plenty of deltav. I put a Titan II GLV into a 250x250 orbit no problem. The new Centaur looks really nice. I went back and adjusted my ascent profile 5 degrees shallower, and she made it to a 250x250 orbit at 0 degrees inclination with about half a teaspoon of fuel left in the tank. Right on the money. It's launching to other inclinations where she runs a little short. That's easy to compensate for. Thanks for double-checking things. Edited July 19, 2016 by Jack Wolfe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legoclone09 Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 @CobaltWolf Apollo looks amazing! I cannot wait! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted July 19, 2016 Author Share Posted July 19, 2016 1 hour ago, Jso said: Seems fine to me, it goes like a bat out of hell, plenty of deltav. I put a Titan II GLV into a 250x250 orbit no problem. The new Centaur looks really nice. 6 minutes ago, Jack Wolfe said: I went back and adjusted my ascent profile 5 degrees shallower, and she made it to a 250x250 orbit at 0 degrees inclination with about half a teaspoon of fuel left in the tank. Right on the money. It's launching to other inclinations where she runs a little short. That's easy to compensate for. Thanks for double-checking things. The Gemini GLV has just about exactly enough DeltaV IRL. What about the Titan 1 though? If its outperforming Titan 2 that's a problem. @hraban I haven't looked into the other things you notices, but the docking mechanism just had the general shape roughed in, I have to go back and add more detail. I'm struggling to not put too much detail in. I don't want to wind up like the FASA Apollo For those interested, some fun facts: the heat shield and capsule are indeed separate. The umbilical connects the capsule to the SM, and is not animated. I figured we all could deal with some visual clipping at separation. Its part of the decoupler, which is a separate part. The bottom of the ring of raised sections at the top of the SM is the bottom of the decoupler. Right now the complete CSM is something like 13 parts, though 4 of those are the RCS blocks. The service module is (unfortunately) one part, I couldnt find a satisfactory way to break it up. I'm not sure how the inside of the cargo bay segments will be modeled. The Block 3 SM will feature (as in ETS) a modified LEM Ascent Engine in place of the SPS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StarStreak2109 Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 *faints* Awesome stuff! Just discovered it recently, and it is awesome! Will you expand on the Atlas 5, i.e. boosters and stuff? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hraban Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 5 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said: @hraban I haven't looked into the other things you notices, but the docking mechanism just had the general shape roughed in, I have to go back and add more detail. I'm struggling to not put too much detail in. I don't want to wind up like the FASA Apollo Take it as a joke, I can live with your artistic freedom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jso Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 34 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said: What about the Titan 1 though? If its outperforming Titan 2 that's a problem. It's too big, but we knew that. I think you blamed it on bad source material. The Titan 1 engine is right where it should be relative to the 2 and 4 engines. I did not buff it to account for the vehicle being oversized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted July 19, 2016 Author Share Posted July 19, 2016 52 minutes ago, StarStreak2109 said: Awesome stuff! Just discovered it recently, and it is awesome! Will you expand on the Atlas 5, i.e. boosters and stuff? Yup! There is a (poorly updated) roadmap linked in the first post if you want to see more of what's to come. For Atlas V, the 5xx fairing base will come in the form of a special interstage adapter for Centaur (or something, I'm not sure if it matters, since you can just put the new 2.5m fairing base under the 1.875m interstage). And the boosters are/were modeled but I wasn't happy with the way they came out. Good news is they can be made in a solid afternoon if I set one aside. 48 minutes ago, hraban said: Take it as a joke, I can live with your artistic freedom. *shrug* ok! Just now, Jso said: It's too big, but we knew that. I think you blamed it on bad source material. The Titan 1 engine is right where it should be relative to the 2 and 4 engines. I did not buff it to account for the vehicle being oversized. hrmm. Maybe I'll try and take a look at the sizing again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legoclone09 Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 (edited) @CobaltWolf I'm trying to make a station with MOL but I need a docking area for Gemini, and I like what you have in the picture in the OP. How would I make that? I can't find the parts for adapters like that. Edited July 19, 2016 by legoclone09 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted July 19, 2016 Author Share Posted July 19, 2016 1 minute ago, legoclone09 said: @CobaltWolf I'm trying to make a station with MOL but I need a docking area for Gemini, and I like what you have in the picture in the OP. How would I make that? I can't find the parts for adapters like that. I used the radial structural nodes from stock. You could easily add a node_attach for the Agena docking cone using the coordinates for the bottom node, and then allow surface attach in the attach rules section. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legoclone09 Posted July 19, 2016 Share Posted July 19, 2016 3 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said: I used the radial structural nodes from stock. You could easily add a node_attach for the Agena docking cone using the coordinates for the bottom node, and then allow surface attach in the attach rules section. Thank you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted July 19, 2016 Author Share Posted July 19, 2016 1 minute ago, legoclone09 said: Thank you! Yeah, I didn't use any cheaty methods to put it together, but it occurs to me that the player wouldn't have that part yet in the tech tree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legoclone09 Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 (edited) Have some nice pictures! Edited July 20, 2016 by legoclone09 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 Possibilities... So many things to make... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StarStreak2109 Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 Praise Jeb for x64-support and 16 gigs of ram for all those awesome mods! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rory Yammomoto Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 On 18/07/2016 at 10:04 PM, CobaltWolf said: Meanwhile... how big is it? 187 cm? 250 cm? some other measurement? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 4 minutes ago, Rory Yammomoto said: how big is it? 187 cm? 250 cm? some other measurement? 400cm, obviously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rory Yammomoto Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 Just now, CobaltWolf said: 400cm, obviously. ok... going to need to make some adjustments to my rockets, then... (though, seriously, how big is it gonna be?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 2 minutes ago, Rory Yammomoto said: ok... going to need to make some adjustments to my rockets, then... (though, seriously, how big is it gonna be?) 2.5m. Same as stock Mk1-2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.