[1.12.5] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.14.0 "металл" 30/Sep/2024)

[Kalidor]

I stand corrected, the engines are the same size but seem to be different models.

Good picture here if you need one.

http://militaryhistory.x10.mx/images/ballistic_missiles/Atlas_D_cutaway.jpg

Note the vernier engines above the main drive, they were used to manouvrer...incidently the small engines in you PGM pack make good verniers

[CobaltWolf]

I stand corrected, the engines are the same size but seem to be different models.

Good picture here if you need one.

http://militaryhistory.x10.mx/images/ballistic_missiles/Atlas_D_cutaway.jpg

Note the vernier engines above the main drive, they were used to manouvrer...incidently the small engines in you PGM pack make good verniers

Thanks for the link! I'm probably still going to do Atlas verniers.

In other news, our science is now officially powered by DMagic Science Animate Generic! DMagic has very kindly updated the plugin to 1.0.4 and helped me get the micrometeoroid detector working. It also now has (almost) full (one for each body) sciencedefs, thanks to the help of 129828. There is still an issue with the animation but I think that needs to be fixed in Maya and re-export the part into Kerbal.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

You'll have to wait until the next update to see the rest. (un)fortunately this means I'm going to take a look at the other science instruments to see where I have opportunity to animate them. So the update is probably pushed back a bit... again. I also took a bit to update the Atlas some more. The sustainer engine is almost done, then the boosters... then, uh, the fuel tanks. And the other bits.

[VenomousRequiem]

Sorry for the silence, everyone. I'm currently busy this weekend, but I'll work on the Centaur when I get home. I've got the RL-10 done as well as a 1.875m fairing base.

I don't think anyone gave any feedback about making the CCB/Centaur interstage an optional fairing base with a max diameter of 3m if you want to do 5xx series Atlas Vs? How do we feel about that?

Also, looking good, Cobalt! I imagine you'll have a few new toys to show me when I get back?

[CobaltWolf]

venom, are you saying make the adapter a fairing base and if they don't want to use the fairing they just don't make one?

And I don't think there will be much to see that you don't know about. Today was a homework day except for the break I took to test dmagic's updates.

Edit: take a look at the CONTARES thread though.

EDIT2: Don't feel like bumping so have an edit. Got a little bit more done on Atlas I.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

EDIT3: Eh. Still not bumping. Geiger counter is about halfway textured. Figured I should probably keep working on stuff for the next update...

Edited October 18, 2015 by CobaltWolf

[129828]

the geigen counter looks really well made, I like that it looks like a real one.

I notice that you like to put external wires on your parts.

In real life they would not do it because of the danger of breaking, but i dont think jeb would want us to do it save, keep doing it this way

A small thing:

a lot of people find it easyer if the folder they download containt a folder gamedata, and that is what contains the mod

another small thing:

keep in mind of the van allen radiation belt when making the science defs:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Allen_radiation_belt

each planet has them, a lower orbit means particle A and another orbite means particle B

Edited October 19, 2015 by 129828

[davidy12]

Can't see the atlas for some reason.

- - - Updated - - -

NVM, now I can, looks good

- - - Updated - - -

PS: Didn't the atlas I have 2 vernier thrusters?

[CobaltWolf]

the geigen counter looks really well made, I like that it looks like a real one.

I notice that you like to put external wires on your parts.

In real life they would not do it because of the danger of breaking, but i dont think jeb would want us to do it save, keep doing it this way

A small thing:

a lot of people find it easyer if the folder they download containt a folder gamedata, and that is what contains the mod

another small thing:

keep in mind of the van allen radiation belt when making the science defs:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Allen_radiation_belt

each planet has them, a lower orbit means particle A and another orbite means particle B

In the order of your comments:

Yes! I looked for a while to find examples of geiger counter devices that weren't based on handheld units. The one in FASA, for example, is based on a very common design that comes up when you google 'geiger counter'. I wanted to do something a bit different.

I thought that exposed wires were unrealistic too but many early probes (on which my parts are largely based) had external wiring. I think nowadays all that stuff would be covered by thermal blankets.

I like the look when you have a probe bristling with experiments and they're all wired up. I have noticed I've been using it on all the experiments though. I think it's becoming a cop out technique since I can make them so quickly / easily.

The next release will be in that format, because Bluedog_DB will not be the only folder included.

NathanKell gave me permission to use the FASA sciencedefs for the geiger counter. Saves me having to write them and makes the two compatible. I already had a geiger counter on one of the antennas so I wanted to make sure I included a standalone one.

PS: Didn't the atlas I have 2 vernier thrusters?

They're not modeled yet. The only things in the Atlas images that aren't placeholders are the engines and the fairing, neither of which are done. I just have them in the scene for sizing / reference.

ANOTHER EDIT: I am probably going to release a folder here later today containing the new micrometeoroid detector and the related files. There is some sort of bug with it that has been difficult to consistently reproduce and I'd like to know if other people experience it.

Edited October 19, 2015 by CobaltWolf

[129828]

Well, i like the wires, they are not really a bad thing to do or to model, they give a nice touch to the models, a realler look.

Keep doing them, and maybe even include them into antenna models.

I never knew so many probes had external wires, I would think they would be internally, but the pictures prove it.

[CobaltWolf]

Well, i like the wires, they are not really a bad thing to do or to model, they give a nice touch to the models, a realler look.

Keep doing them, and maybe even include them into antenna models.

I never knew so many probes had external wires, I would think they would be internally, but the pictures prove it.

Yeah I was somewhat surprised too. But I kinda like the busy look you can get with them...

Thought I was getting close to release before remembering I still have to completely redo Explorer because it uses a texture that's no longer available. dern.

EDIT: I also cannot replicate the aforementioned bug with the MM detector except on a single craft file. I don't know what caused it but since I cannot replicate it again I am going to stop worrying about it. Once the release is out let me know if your experience any odd... behavior.

EDIT2: Proof of concept for how I want to design the new Explorer Probe. I'm kind of worried though - the probe is sort of a one-trick pony. Anyone have any ideas for how to make it more flexible / useful?

Edited October 19, 2015 by CobaltWolf

[davidy12]

Are you going to make a retro pack for the Mk1 capsule?

[CobaltWolf]

Are you going to make a retro pack for the Mk1 capsule?

Oh. Something special is happening for Mercury. But I am saving that for when I have something to show for it. May or may not get released with the Atlas I. Still just trying to finish the revamps.

Edited October 20, 2015 by CobaltWolf

[passinglurker]

EDIT2: Proof of concept for how I want to design the new Explorer Probe. I'm kind of worried though - the probe is sort of a one-trick pony. Anyone have any ideas for how to make it more flexible / useful?

http://i.imgur.com/SmMlT5M.png

two ways to approach the porblem come to mind.

A. extra bottom node with a size adapting sloped fairing configured to it to make any of these parts optionally mate smoothly with 0.625m parts (extra nodes don't cause drag btw it was an old modders tale that nathan kell debunked)

B. accept that historical antics generates some one trick ponies. avoid when you can. minimize the damage when you can't. in this case either make the texture as small as possible or map the part to a more useful parts texture to save ram.

Edited October 20, 2015 by passinglurker

[129828]

two ways to approach the porblem come to mind.

A. extra bottom node with a size adapting sloped fairing configured to it to make any of these parts optionally mate smoothly with 0.625m parts (extra nodes don't cause drag btw it was an old modders tale that nathan kell debunked)

B. accept that historical antics generates some one trick ponies. avoid when you can. minimize the damage when you can't. in this case either make the texture as small as possible or map the part to a more useful parts texture to save ram.

I agree with the fact that you could just accept it and move one.

Otherwise you could add small things like a low orbit ore scanner.

You dont need to add nodes but you could just give it a few extra things like the scanner or a temp scanner etc.

[CobaltWolf]

two ways to approach the porblem come to mind.

A. extra bottom node with a size adapting sloped fairing configured to it to make any of these parts optionally mate smoothly with 0.625m parts (extra nodes don't cause drag btw it was an old modders tale that nathan kell debunked)

B. accept that historical antics generates some one trick ponies. avoid when you can. minimize the damage when you can't. in this case either make the texture as small as possible or map the part to a more useful parts texture to save ram.

I agree with the fact that you could just accept it and move one.

Otherwise you could add small things like a low orbit ore scanner.

You dont need to add nodes but you could just give it a few extra things like the scanner or a temp scanner etc.

The texture uses one 512 map and one 256 map. I suppose I could resize the 512 to a 256 and see how it looks. Part of my issue is I like to get obscenely close to my crafts to ogle them while I play

The good news is that it should be sized to match the upcoming Taerobee WAC parts. So you will have a couple of .125m parts if you use both those mods together. The probe core already has a geiger counter, I was considering adding a thermometer since apparently Explorer I had one, albiet for measuring the internal temperature of the craft. The SRB has a stand-alone, non-animated version of the meteoroid detector experiment.

[passinglurker]

then I'd go with option A. think of it like this the russian inspired probe core is wide and fat and the american inspired probe core thin and tall (and it'd make for a spiffy pointy nose cone)

[CobaltWolf]

Yeah. I can easily reuse the texture from the Sergeant motor to make adapter fairings with extra nodes.

Was talking with Venom about centaur parts. Thoughts?

Edited October 20, 2015 by CobaltWolf
Yes, I did just edit the post to color match the image background with the forum background

[passinglurker]

how do you make all these spiffy infographics?

I can't say I know much about centaur despite my research tangents on sm-65 atlas but as a gameplay perspective if you want to shroud a cluster of independent engine parts I believe you'd need a procedural fairing not an auto fairing. Simpler would be just to do what HGR did and make the engines and mounting plate one 1.875m part. There would be a lot of texture commonality so it won't be taxing on ram to have two versions and it would still be the same number of parts to implement (engine and mount parts, vs single and dual engine parts). the 1.875m tanks would probably be more easily recognized and should have priority while the 2.5m can be improvised with stock tanks for the time being

[CobaltWolf]

how do you make all these spiffy infographics?

I can't say I know much about centaur despite my research tangents on sm-65 atlas but as a gameplay perspective if you want to shroud a cluster of independent engine parts I believe you'd need a procedural fairing not an auto fairing. Simpler would be just to do what HGR did and make the engines and mounting plate one 1.875m part. There would be a lot of texture commonality so it won't be taxing on ram to have two versions and it would still be the same number of parts to implement (engine and mount parts, vs single and dual engine parts). the 1.875m tanks would probably be more easily recognized and should have priority while the 2.5m can be improvised with stock tanks for the time being

I grab the reference pictures online and then make them in Photoshop. Took about 5 minutes. I'm a big fan of the 'picture speaks a thousand words' thing. The typeface is Agency FB.

You can make interstages using stock fairings can't you? So you should be covered. I was planning on doing it similar to how FASA did it, the mounting plate will have 3 nodes across the bottom and then have the extra node on the bottom for stack attachment. I want the RL-10 to be useable on other sizes - the thing about a lot of the 1.875m engines is you can make them useable on 1.25m if you don't include big tank butts. Which is something I'm already avoiding, and is somewhat necessary if you want two RL-10s, or fit 3 engines on the Atlas for example.

EDIT: My other thought was, if Centaur is going to have it's own appearance (still stockalike, but they'd fit together and be cohesive) then it would be best to have the whole set.

Thoughts on texture sizes: I'm still learning what is 'acceptable' for textures. Would I be able to do all the Atlas + centaur tank parts on one 1024 sheet, the engines for Atlas and Centaur on one 512 sheet, and then a 256 for a couple misc parts such as the Centaur fairing bases?

Edited October 20, 2015 by CobaltWolf

[passinglurker]

stock fairings don't come in 1.875m diameter like the original atlas-centaur. I think engine size versatility is a bit overrated though with all the parts you'd add to facilitate cluster assembly you could have a solution of equivalent size and greater intuitiveness by simply just making a whole new engine to fill the niche the cluster would cover.

right now the part bill for a Fasa-alike model kit comes to an engine, a 1.875m plate, and a 1.875m fairing

meanwhile the part bill for a stock-alike lego set would come to a 1.875m engine, the same engine in a dual configuration, and a 0.625m engine.

same number of parts but the stock alike ones are not interdependent on each other for relevance or function, are more intuitive and familiar to assemble, and involve less tab flipping to find because they are all found in in the engine tab. Sure these may seem like small perks but they add up.

[VenomousRequiem]

stock fairings don't come in 1.875m diameter like the original atlas-centaur. I think engine size versatility is a bit overrated though with all the parts you'd add to facilitate cluster assembly you could have a solution of equivalent size and greater intuitiveness by simply just making a whole new engine to fill the niche the cluster would cover.

right now the part bill for a Fasa-alike model kit comes to an engine, a 1.875m plate, and a 1.875m fairing

meanwhile the part bill for a stock-alike lego set would come to a 1.875m engine, the same engine in a dual configuration, and a 0.625m engine.

same number of parts but the stock alike ones are not interdependent on each other for relevance or function, are more intuitive and familiar to assemble, and involve less tab flipping to find because they are all found in in the engine tab. Sure these may seem like small perks but they add up.

If it makes you feel any better, I've already sent a model of a Centaur-style 1.875m fairing base.

[CobaltWolf]

stock fairings don't come in 1.875m diameter like the original atlas-centaur. I think engine size versatility is a bit overrated though with all the parts you'd add to facilitate cluster assembly you could have a solution of equivalent size and greater intuitiveness by simply just making a whole new engine to fill the niche the cluster would cover.

right now the part bill for a Fasa-alike model kit comes to an engine, a 1.875m plate, and a 1.875m fairing

meanwhile the part bill for a stock-alike lego set would come to a 1.875m engine, the same engine in a dual configuration, and a 0.625m engine.

same number of parts but the stock alike ones are not interdependent on each other for relevance or function, are more intuitive and familiar to assemble, and involve less tab flipping to find because they are all found in in the engine tab. Sure these may seem like small perks but they add up.

If it makes you feel any better, I've already sent a model of a Centaur-style 1.875m fairing base.

Ok I follow what you're saying.

I actually like that solution. So I only model one mounting plate, and one RL-10. Then reuse the meshes to make three parts. The two mounted RL-10s get an 1.875m fairing (and if you don't want it just use TweakableEverything) and the standalone gets... idk 1.25m.

But we do need a 1.875m fairing base anyways for the top of the part :3

[VenomousRequiem]

It's a good thing I've already modeled the fuel tank and the RL-10! Just split the adapter part from the fuel tank and use that...

And as I said, I already handled the 1.875m fairing base.

[passinglurker]

yup that is what I'm saying

ok so 1 extra part than for stockalike but the familiarity of assembly perks still apply and that's assuming there is a niche or need for the 1.25m version. So for the need of the 1.25m version it all comes down to its niche or rather following a convenient rule of thumb how much fuel does it need to burn for ~2 minutes? (give or take ~20seconds) for example the terrier uses a Fl-t400, and the lv-t30/45 both need x2 Fl-t800's (ones for atmos the others for vacuum)

[CobaltWolf]

yup that is what I'm saying

ok so 1 extra part than for stockalike but the familiarity of assembly perks still apply and that's assuming there is a niche or need for the 1.25m version. So for the need of the 1.25m version it all comes down to its niche or rather following a convenient rule of thumb how much fuel does it need to burn for ~2 minutes? (give or take ~20seconds) for example the terrier uses a Fl-t400, and the lv-t30/45 both need x2 Fl-t800's

Well, especially considering that with this setup you'd theoretically not be spending more than a couple KB on ram usage for the extra part, I'm not particularily concerned with making sure it has some sort of niche. If someone really doesn't want it then they can delete the cfg. I'm confused what the fuel for 2 minutes thing mean?

@Venom yes haha.

[passinglurker]

Well, especially considering that with this setup you'd theoretically not be spending more than a couple KB on ram usage for the extra part, I'm not particularily concerned with making sure it has some sort of niche. If someone really doesn't want it then they can delete the cfg. I'm confused what the fuel for 2 minutes thing mean?

@Venom yes haha.

its how long you have to burn for to make efficient use of a stock balanced LFO engine. Burn for to much less than that and your engine is over kill for the job and the same job can be done more efficiently with a smaller engine. There is a good write up here http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/136082-Rules-of-Thumb-for-Building-Cheap-and-Cheerful-Rockets-1-0-4

but if you're not concerned then it doesn't really matter