Stone Blue Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 40 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said: 2.5m. Same as stock Mk1-2. Ppp-shawww... Go BIGGER, or go home!!... lol j/k Nice work, Cobalt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rory Yammomoto Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 Ok, who's been working on the search tags? the Botticelli pod has 'loaf' and 'bread' tags? are all of the parts going to be searchable by typing in various foods/breads? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legoclone09 Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 7 minutes ago, Rory Yammomoto said: Ok, who's been working on the search tags? the Botticelli pod has 'loaf' and 'bread' tags? are all of the parts going to be searchable by typing in various foods/breads? @Bealehas been working on the Leo. Look at his profile picture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rory Yammomoto Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 7 minutes ago, legoclone09 said: @Bealehas been working on the Leo. Look at his profile picture. that makes sense now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 (edited) 45 minutes ago, Rory Yammomoto said: Ok, who's been working on the search tags? the Botticelli pod has 'loaf' and 'bread' tags? are all of the parts going to be searchable by typing in various foods/breads? 37 minutes ago, legoclone09 said: @Bealehas been working on the Leo. Look at his profile picture. EDIT: OMG its so big... Edited July 20, 2016 by CobaltWolf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimothyC Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 12 hours ago, CobaltWolf said: Kanaloa! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, TimothyC said: Kanaloa! heck yeah! Though I wonder, what was the launch configuration for AARDVK? Did it have an aerodynamic fairing cone on top of the cargo module? I can't imagine it was full enclosed. Anyways, I'll be trying to stream tonight! Maybe even start UV unwrapping? I had some questions for any helpful modders that might be happening by. Specifically, does stock support multiple parachute canopies in a single part? @Shadowmage sorry to pull you back but you know a lot about how awful the stock modules are. I've also been thinking about textures... Specifically, I think I might do a 1024 for the command module parts, and another for the service module stuff? That way I can guarantee the textures and normal maps as sharp as possible. In terms of design, I'm looking for areas where I can simplify the appearance somewhat, since the complexity needs to be reeled in to keep a stock aesthetic. Edited July 20, 2016 by CobaltWolf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wahgineer Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 Just remember, there are two versions of the Apollo capsule in ETS: the original, and the modified one, which has the extra module and can carry 5 kerbals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiscoSlelge Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 3 hours ago, CobaltWolf said: 400cm, obviously. 420cm* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Shutesie Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 3 minutes ago, DiscoSlelge said: 420cm* and the docking port is 69cm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, awsumindyman said: Just remember, there are two versions of the Apollo capsule in ETS: the original, and the modified one, which has the extra module and can carry 5 kerbals. Probably not going to do that. There is little to no external differences. Unless @e of pi shows up to justify it... Edited July 20, 2016 by CobaltWolf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiscoSlelge Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 2 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said: Probably not going to do that. There is little to no external differences. Unless @e_of_pi shows up to justify it... There's Gus in the first one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowmage Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 2 hours ago, CobaltWolf said: heck yeah! Though I wonder, what was the launch configuration for AARDVK? Did it have an aerodynamic fairing cone on top of the cargo module? I can't imagine it was full enclosed. Anyways, I'll be trying to stream tonight! Maybe even start UV unwrapping? I had some questions for any helpful modders that might be happening by. Specifically, does stock support multiple parachute canopies in a single part? @Shadowmage sorry to pull you back but you know a lot about how awful the stock modules are. I've also been thinking about textures... Specifically, I think I might do a 1024 for the command module parts, and another for the service module stuff? That way I can guarantee the textures and normal maps as sharp as possible. In terms of design, I'm looking for areas where I can simplify the appearance somewhat, since the complexity needs to be reeled in to keep a stock aesthetic. Multiple Canopies -- yes, but not independently animated, they all must reside on the same root transform and that root transform must be referenced as if it were a single canopy. So basically they all have to deploy from the same spot / meet at a central attach point (due to the swaying animation); you cannot have them deploy from different points on the part (again, due to the swaying animation). Sadly multiple stock parachute modules cannot reside on the same part, so there is no way to have one module responsible for an individual canopy in a stock setup -- the way they use drag-cubes means that only a single module can be in control of the current drag-cube state of the craft. As with the other stock modules, those limitations were one of the major factors for me writing my own parachute handling (the other being to remove the use of drag cubes and move to a physics based model for full compatibility with both stock and FAR). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 1 minute ago, Shadowmage said: Multiple Canopies -- yes, but not independently animated, they all must reside on the same root transform and that root transform must be referenced as if it were a single canopy. So basically they all have to deploy from the same spot / meet at a central attach point (due to the swaying animation); you cannot have them deploy from different points on the part (again, due to the swaying animation). Sadly multiple stock parachute modules cannot reside on the same part, so there is no way to have one module responsible for an individual canopy in a stock setup -- the way they use drag-cubes means that only a single module can be in control of the current drag-cube state of the craft. As with the other stock modules, those limitations were one of the major factors for me writing my own parachute handling (the other being to remove the use of drag cubes and move to a physics based model for full compatibility with both stock and FAR). Hrmm, that's disappointing. I don't want to wind up with a FASA-type setup where there is a parachute mount, cover, and then 3 attached chutes... I want to keep it one part. I think the first thing I'll do tonight is open up FASA and look at their Apollo again, just to confirm what I do/don't like about the way it's set up. I have no idea how I'm going to get around that stock limitation tho... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidy12 Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 (edited) 5 hours ago, awsumindyman said: Just remember, there are two versions of the Apollo capsule in ETS: the original, and the modified one, which has the extra module and can carry 5 kerbals. Actually, the block V can carry 5. The Blocks I-IV have an extra module (Similar to the Soyuz) and designed for LEO. Edited July 20, 2016 by davidy12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akron Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 ETS: The Original? Long day at work. Looking good so far Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 24 minutes ago, davidy12 said: Actually, the block V can carry 5. The Blocks I-IV have an extra module (Similar to the Soyuz) and designed for LEO. According to the wiki, block V carries 4, 3 and 4 carry 5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxxonius Augustus Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 8 minutes ago, davidy12 said: Actually, the block V can carry 5. The Blocks I-IV have an extra module (Similar to the Soyuz) and designed for LEO. Just a nitpick. Real world Apollo included Block I and Block II . Block I was used for the unmanned and the planed but unflown single man LEO missions. Block II was for for the lunar missions and was the only type to ever fly with a crew. In ETS there are 4 additional versions; Block III, Block III+, Block IV and Block V. Block III introduced the smaller, LEO only CSM but lacked the additional module. Block III+ introduced the small version of the Mission Module as well as the 5 astronaut capacity. Block IV flew with a full sized Mission Module. Lastly Block V ditched the extra module as it was supposed to be used with a lander also crew capacity went DOWN for 5 to 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akron Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 I'm very unfamiliar with ETS. How is it suggested for 5 astronauts to fit on the capsule? Are the other 2 seated in the orbital module? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted July 20, 2016 Author Share Posted July 20, 2016 Just now, akron said: I'm very unfamiliar with ETS. How is it suggested for 5 astronauts to fit on the capsule? Are the other 2 seated in the orbital module? Apollo could (barely) cram 5 people in, if you remove/shorten the shocks that cushion the crew couches during landing. In real life, this modificatoin was actually proposed, but it was supported by attaching retro rockets to soften the landing, and they would have landed in (iirc) the desert rather than the sea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VenomousRequiem Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 2 minutes ago, akron said: I'm very unfamiliar with ETS. How is it suggested for 5 astronauts to fit on the capsule? Are the other 2 seated in the orbital module? The orbital module gets dropped to burn up in the atmosphere... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akron Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 Just now, VenomousRequiem said: The orbital module gets dropped to burn up in the atmosphere... That's what I thought. I asked just in case. Just now, CobaltWolf said: Apollo could (barely) cram 5 people in, if you remove/shorten the shocks that cushion the crew couches during landing. In real life, this modificatoin was actually proposed, but it was supported by attaching retro rockets to soften the landing, and they would have landed in (iirc) the desert rather than the sea. Wow. I've seen Apollo 6 in person and it did not look like it could fit more than maybe 4 astronauts, even though it was mostly gutted (No seats, although I don't know if it flew with any since it was unmanned). I guess I can't picture it because recent spacecraft have flown with crew in a larger pressurized suit, like ACES in the shuttle flights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VenomousRequiem Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 The stream is up! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxxonius Augustus Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 16 minutes ago, akron said: That's what I thought. I asked just in case. Wow. I've seen Apollo 6 in person and it did not look like it could fit more than maybe 4 astronauts, even though it was mostly gutted (No seats, although I don't know if it flew with any since it was unmanned). I guess I can't picture it because recent spacecraft have flown with crew in a larger pressurized suit, like ACES in the shuttle flights. Just looking at it I can't work out how they would fit ether but if NASAs own study said it would work I guess I believe them... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slightlylyons Posted July 20, 2016 Share Posted July 20, 2016 4 minutes ago, Foxxonius Augustus said: Just looking at it I can't work out how they would fit ether but if NASAs own study said it would work I guess I believe them... I know Astronauts commented on how much more space the Apollo CM had over Gemini and they were able to actually move around and use the lower equipment bay for privacy. So I imagine if you nixed that you could stuff 5 guys in. 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.