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

[Barzon]

I think there is a bug with the docking ports, because when I attempted to dock an Apollo Block 5 to a Spacelab replica the kraken attacked and the station exploded.

[CobaltWolf]

12 hours ago, Dutchbook said:

If we look at the opening post and the bullet point list of what the BDB contains, it would make most sense to start from the top to the bottom.

By the way, as for the other subject: I’ve noticed the placeholder science descriptions that are currently there for a couple of experiments and I’d be happy to contribute there. For example, I can use the Apollo ALSEP data for a couple of the Mün observations. Where can I find a list of stuff that needs to be done

Gotcha. I'll see if I can whip some up tonight.

As for sciencedefs, here is an issue on Github but I'm not sure if there are more experiments that needed to be added to that list. Here is the file in question where the experiment result texts live. The syntax etc should be self explanatory. If you're not comfortable trying to make a pull request on Github that's fine, if you just send me a pastebin or something that is fine. I only ask that you keep the definitions kind of 'kerbal', with the tone similar to the stock science defs.

Edited March 26, 2018 by CobaltWolf

[JediRangerkendor]

When was the last time the manual got updated?

[hieywiey]

13 minutes ago, JediRangerkendor said:

When was the last time the manual got updated?

Don't you mean Manuel? Jokes aside, the last time it was updated was in 2016. This is because Kronal Vessel Viewer was not updated for a while, and I assume @CobaltWolf also just was more occupied with other things. @DiscoSlelge made most of it however, so reach out to him to find out.

[Scott Kerman]

i have a Bug with the J2 "Dnoces" Engines (both of them)

the speed is like 63696 - 39226

any Help?

[Barzon]

Can anyone help me with why the docking ports are freaking out. I posted a post about this earlier, but no-one seems to have noticed. Sorry if this appears rude.

[CobaltWolf]

On 3/24/2018 at 8:40 PM, captainradish said:

I love the MOL (and the general Gemini) stuff. I've not yet bothered updating all my missions to Apollo. The Gemini stuff is a lot cheaper and does most everything. The Gemini program was really interesting and could have become so much more than a steppingstone to Apollo.

(Getting to this somewhat late)

I've thought a lot about this, and definitely have been on both sides. In the end, I feel I've come down firmly on the side of Apollo, for a number of reasons. Simply put, yeah if you want basically a cramped 2-person capsule with some limited maneuvering ability, yeah Gemini is fine. But, Apollo is so far an above a more capable system I think that it definitely outpaces Gemini pretty quickly. There isn't really much you can do with Gemini past what it did IRL - certainly nothing that Apollo couldn't do better. Maybe there's a case for Big G, if you're just concerned about getting men/payload to stations. I've always been fascinated by the similarities between Big G and TKS. But, in general with Gemini you need to remember that all the 'what-ifs' for it are essentially McDonnell marketing materials that have survived in our memory, and almost none were seriously considered.

Actually, speaking of Big G, what are people's thoughts on how I should (eventually!) build it? I kind of default to assuming I'll do the conical one, but because our Saturn is a bit narrower than IRL, the proportions don't quite match. I've been able to find an image that can illustrate this. Now, remember the wall angle for the Big G is constant - the Gemini itself, the expanded crew capsule, and the service module all have the same slope. Because it has to meet a larger diameter IRL, the slope continues much further. In the image below, please imagine that the service module ends at the bottom of that middle band, the one with the tan RCS quads (sans thrusters). The net effect is the service module is maybe half as long as it should be.

Now, of course, there are other options. I could change the slope of the SM (not ideal either), I could go with the cylindrical-looking one which presents its own set of problems - that main body of the cylinder isn't 2.5m and certainly isn't 3.75m!

So, no real easy solution which is honestly we we don't have a Big G yet, but it's certainly something I'm interested in. Some might remember I said this would be the update where I finally finished the Gemini stuff... I guess that is still postponed.

Another question becomes, how will the rear docking port, with the long snoot adapter, work? I remember FASA having it as one part so that you could animate it extending. I don't see anything in any of the diagrams that show that sort of behavior - it seems to be fixed in the extended position. In general, if anyone has thoughts on this I'd also like to hear how you think the parts should be divided up. Remember that we already have the Big G crew capsule courtesy of @Beale.

 

8 hours ago, JediRangerkendor said:

When was the last time the manual got updated?

8 hours ago, hieywiey said:

Don't you mean Manuel? Jokes aside, the last time it was updated was in 2016. This is because Kronal Vessel Viewer was not updated for a while, and I assume @CobaltWolf also just was more occupied with other things. @DiscoSlelge made most of it however, so reach out to him to find out.

We have made some comments to ourselves about moving to maintaining the manual on our Github's wiki, but I don't think either myself or @Jso have sufficient time to take a crack at it at the moment.

 

On 3/26/2018 at 8:07 AM, Barzon Kerman said:

I think there is a bug with the docking ports, because when I attempted to dock an Apollo Block 5 to a Spacelab replica the kraken attacked and the station exploded.

1 hour ago, Barzon Kerman said:

Can anyone help me with why the docking ports are freaking out. I posted a post about this earlier, but no-one seems to have noticed. Sorry if this appears rude.

I didn't have much of an answer, do you have any more information? When did it happen (before hard dock, after hard dock...)? Usually stations tearing themselves apart is because you left too many reaction wheels / SAS modules enabled and they wind up fighting each other's forces and tearing the station apart.

[Barzon]

On 26/03/2018 at 1:07 PM, Barzon Kerman said:

I think there is a bug with the docking ports, because when I attempted to dock an Apollo Block 5 to a Spacelab replica the kraken attacked and the station exploded.

 I posted a post about the docking ports not working, does anyone know why they are not working?

[debaker02]

1 hour ago, CobaltWolf said:

(Getting to this somewhat late)

I've thought a lot about this, and definitely have been on both sides. In the end, I feel I've come down firmly on the side of Apollo,....

Also Gemini had a bunch of reliability issues.  In reality we should write new code to randomly disable thrusters and have like no nav capability or auto pilot functions lol.

Still my second favorite space craft though its just so cool looking.

Edited March 27, 2018 by debaker02
More to say

[Barzon]

3 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

I didn't have much of an answer, do you have any more information? When did it happen (before hard dock, after hard dock...)? Usually stations tearing themselves apart is because you left too many reaction wheels / SAS modules enabled and they wind up fighting each other's forces and tearing the station apart.

It happened just after hard dock. Normally I turn off RCS and SAS as soon as I dock.

[DiscoSlelge]

12 hours ago, JediRangerkendor said:

When was the last time the manual got updated?

I updated it last year it was for the 1.0 of BDB, a new update version is on the way but very slowly I have big stuff to handle before manuel, but as soon as possible I will update it.

[Abrecan]

4 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

Another question becomes, how will the rear docking port, with the long snoot adapter, work? I remember FASA having it as one part so that you could animate it extending. I don't see anything in any of the diagrams that show that sort of behavior - it seems to be fixed in the extended position. In general, if anyone has thoughts on this I'd also like to hear how you think the parts should be divided up. Remember that we already have the Big G crew capsule courtesy of @Beale.

if you need any help, this doc helped me with some of the questions I had. There seems to be more than one version for other uses http://mikejennebooks.com/downloads/GEMINI MORL FERRY.pdf

Also - Mooring a spacecraft would be a cool concept!

 

Edited March 27, 2018 by Abrecan

[CobaltWolf]

43 minutes ago, Abrecan said:

if you need any help, this doc helped me with some of the questions I had. There seems to be more than one version for other uses http://mikejennebooks.com/downloads/GEMINI MORL FERRY.pdf

Also - Mooring a spacecraft would be a cool concept!

W-whoa, @Foxxonius Augustus is that what I think it is? The missing PDF from 2 years ago?

[TimothyC]

3 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

W-whoa, @Foxxonius Augustus is that what I think it is? The missing PDF from 2 years ago?

It's the summary, which we had.

[SomeGuyNamedDave]

17 hours ago, debaker02 said:

Also Gemini had a bunch of reliability issues.  In reality we should write new code to randomly disable thrusters and have like no nav capability or auto pilot functions lol.

Still my second favorite space craft though its just so cool looking.

dangit is pretty good for that, you can change the chances of parts failing, dont know if it supports BDB, think it does

[Dutchbook]

On 26-3-2018 at 3:18 PM, CobaltWolf said:

Gotcha. I'll see if I can whip some up tonight.

As for sciencedefs, here is an issue on Github but I'm not sure if there are more experiments that needed to be added to that list. Here is the file in question where the experiment result texts live. The syntax etc should be self explanatory. If you're not comfortable trying to make a pull request on Github that's fine, if you just send me a pastebin or something that is fine. I only ask that you keep the definitions kind of 'kerbal', with the tone similar to the stock science defs.

Here is the file: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ihasb5p3k1rt2gw/ScienceDefs.cfg?dl=0

I've fleshed out the Orbital Sun Observations and filled the gaps in the Photographic Image Data. There should be no further holes left

About Big G: Your Saturn I has a diameter of 5.625m, right? I just did some 20% cutting (260 inch/660cm to 208 inch/528cm) of a drawing:
https://imgur.com/a/KHeNk

If you keep the radial the same, you should be able to implement the known Big G mock-up just fine, but have to remove the cargo bay and shorten the RCS ring. But that will also allow you to add mass to the RCS ring so the CoM for the entire BiG G moves backwards, towards the RCS thrusters.

[demibear]

I must say, the EP-25 works well for the Daleth 3 for a shroud. Naturally, it is overpowered for stock. haha

Album /a/IKbv0 will appear when post is submitted

Edited March 29, 2018 by demibear

[Foxxonius Augustus]

On 3/27/2018 at 3:25 PM, CobaltWolf said:

W-whoa, @Foxxonius Augustus is that what I think it is? The missing PDF from 2 years ago?

On 3/27/2018 at 6:59 PM, TimothyC said:

It's the summary, which we had.

I got excited for nothing...

[Pappystein]

Ok   So I have said most of what I want to say on BigG off forum but to answer a question Cobalt asked.   Make the Docking port mount at the rear fixed,   With a 2x engine mount to either side (splayed out 10 degrees please... no need to melt the docking port.)  Set a shroud around the whole assembly with a node floating below where the actual docking port would attach.   Depending on your final choice of SM(s) you may need to use B9 to switch between auto-shroud diameters (2.5-3.125-3.75m)

 

For those not in the know... there were AT-LEAST 4 different SMs proposed for BigG.  Including the Apollo Blk2 SM (the one that flew to the Mun)  Cobalt has highlighted the 2.5m with a 1.857m (BDB scale) SM and the 3.75m conic (again BDB scale.)   Personally I am a fan of the Conic to Cylinder @ 3.125m because should Cobalt or someone else later desire to make the 3.75m conic later many parts can be reused.

An Apollo SM on Big-G needs an adapter tank between the SM and the BigG-SM decoupler.   This is because the RCS in the nose of the capsule is for re-entry only.   So translation needs to be handled behind the CM.  And yes that means the quad R4D thrusters currently on the Apollo SM would need to be closer to the engine bell.

 

Oops forgot to mention The engines nodes should be capable of first Generation AJ-10 Able style motors.  Nothing bigger.  It is likely that the AJ-10-118F would have been tapped for this roll.

 

[MeekCJ]

On 3/27/2018 at 3:12 PM, CobaltWolf said:

Hi @CobaltWolf,

I have a suggestion for 3-4x additional parts which would I think would allow both the Big-G variants above to be recreated in KSP to a pretty good approximation.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1E5m6fRmHbDXWWLTO1_0whF7HUCioLVLP

The top variant of Big-G (to fit onto an SIVB upper stage) can be easily created I think with 1 extra part. Something like a Medici Service Module, with the profile of the SIVB interstage scaled down to a 3.75m opening diameter.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1DSsZWtD6on--PfDrNzaP631VaWHbDi9l

The lower / Space Taxi variant - I think my model is slightly too long but I would suggest a service module, similar to the Kane CSM, with a 2 kerbal crew capacity module in the rear for realistic docking operations. This could be a single part, or two parts for the Service Module and Crew Module elements respectively - for maximum reuse potential.

I don't know why but I've always thought the MOL docking ring most appropriate for the Space Taxi, although I don't have any evidence to support this.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1LwmxxIX9RoLcXEa_aaCyOsDzqcHOXscq

The final module I think could then be something similar to this Orbital Manoeuvring system (sorry I can't remember where its from - might be stock?), but scaled to the profile of the Inon adapter tank in the previous model. A monoprop engine cluster with monoprop CSM and docking module would then make a pretty good looking space taxi! :-)

 

Edit - I think there's enough variety in the Kane CSM module variants that you could get away with adding just a half-width orbital module without the tapered faces as a "CSM Crew Compartment Module" or something like that.

Edited March 29, 2018 by MeekCJ
Corrected number of parts estimate and added a suggestion

[Deltac]

On 3/27/2018 at 10:12 AM, CobaltWolf said:

Actually, speaking of Big G, what are people's thoughts on how I should (eventually!) build it?

Well step one would be building the actual Gemini service module   There's the orbital part which has oxygen and what not as well as the 2 big thrusters for maneuvering, and then that comes off to reveal 4 rocket motors that de-orbit the whole ship.

[Gordon Dry]

@CobaltWolf not sure what is triggering these:

NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object
  at BDB.ModuleBdbBoiloff.sunExposure () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
  at BDB.ModuleBdbBoiloff.Update () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 
 
(Filename:  Line: -1)

Log:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ndaev56f2rqa3lm/2018-03-29_1 KSP.log.7z?dl=1

btw I posted about another issue with Kerbalism and I will remove Procedural Parts and SmartTank in the next session...

[Barzon]

Can this be made compatible with RealChute?

[demibear]

I am having a strange bug/error when using the explorer probe and the small srbs by themselves on the launchpad. All is well for a few seconds before the staging and control disappears from the screen and the craft just endlessly drifts upwards, taken by aliens. 

The log just shows a constant spamming of something. There is a mention of modular flight integrator in it. I tried upgrading it to the latest dev build, but that seemed to do nothing. I am attaching the log file. I inserted alien to just before it started to make it easier to find.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1zk_AgjelWL3VTODT1NEWmM8XYqs4RdBZ

[Jso]

1 hour ago, demibear said:

I am having a strange bug/error when using the explorer probe and the small srbs by themselves on the launchpad. All is well for a few seconds before the staging and control disappears from the screen and the craft just endlessly drifts upwards, taken by aliens. 

The log just shows a constant spamming of something. There is a mention of modular flight integrator in it. I tried upgrading it to the latest dev build, but that seemed to do nothing. I am attaching the log file. I inserted alien to just before it started to make it easier to find.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1zk_AgjelWL3VTODT1NEWmM8XYqs4RdBZ

Try removing ModularFlightIntegrator and reinstalling it with the one that comes with Kopernicus. Failing that, try with no other mods but BDB and Kopernicus and their dependencies.