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

[CobaltWolf]

ＵＰDＡＴE  WGＥＮ?? 

[golkaidakhaana]

31 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

ＵＰDＡＴE  WGＥＮ?? 

owo

[eagle92lightning]

Started using this mod for the first time ever today, Deciding to go completely with this instead of RSS

[komodo]

6 hours ago, eagle92lightning said:

Started using this mod for the first time ever today, Deciding to go completely with this instead of RSS

It's not the same size as RSS, but the pack is balanced around (about) 3.2x rescale (I think, is it still such?) as far as performance goes. It also however scales upwards nicely if that is your preference.

(I always was a 6.4x'er, but i've been trying 3.2x this time around... It's sooo much easier to get around )

[Raptor22]

I've been playing one of the most recent dev versions (not THE most recent, but the one after you added the CoM switch, so if this is already fixed just let me know and I'll delete it), and the attach nodes on pretty much all of the Saturn stages appear to have been messed up. Parts are clipped in to each other, and I need to use the offset to fix it.

Again, this isn't the most recent dev version, however since you didn't really note anything about it on github I'm assuming that you haven't noticed it yet.

[komodo]

10 minutes ago, Raptor22 said:

and the attach nodes on pretty much all of the Saturn stages appear to have been messed up...

Again, this isn't the most recent dev version, however since you didn't really note anything about it on github I'm assuming that you haven't noticed it yet.

You may have/had one of the saturn rescale configs turned on/in your gamedata folder. That's the only thing that would really be able to do that from BDB that I can think of. (Especially if this isn't the latest version, this probably didn't go 'live' as depicted.)

Looking at the commits, there is a vague chance that a tweakscale config isn't working correctly, so you may check that out as well.

Edited December 22, 2018 by komodo

[pap1723]

1.7 update when? 

[Jso]

11 hours ago, Raptor22 said:

I've been playing one of the most recent dev versions (not THE most recent, but the one after you added the CoM switch, so if this is already fixed just let me know and I'll delete it), and the attach nodes on pretty much all of the Saturn stages appear to have been messed up. Parts are clipped in to each other, and I need to use the offset to fix it.

Again, this isn't the most recent dev version, however since you didn't really note anything about it on github I'm assuming that you haven't noticed it yet.

Komodo's right, that's what I would expect to see loading a normal scale Saturn craft file with the Saturn Rescale from extras. It's probably 2/3's fueled as well. Try building it from scratch.

[eagle92lightning]

Question, Ever thinking of adding a more accurate shuttle?

[Saltshaker]

7 hours ago, eagle92lightning said:

Question, Ever thinking of adding a more accurate shuttle?

@eagle92lightning

 

[BillKerman123]

I'm terrible at writing intros and stuff so I'll just get straight to it:

Basically, I think this mod is amazing as is, but there is still a lot of room for new features. Here are a few ideas I came up with:

1. We already have parts for Apollo-Venus / Apollo-Mars, but what about a set of parts for an Apollo-era Mars landing? So far I've come up with a few ideas. Keep in mind everything I am about to propose was designed in RO/RSS. The MEM (Mars Excursion Module) could just be a LEM with a larger descent stage and a heatshield (yes, I did the math and it works). As for the rest of the mission hardware needed, I've come up with a plan to use Saturn V Multibody's (Saturn V MLVs [yes I know MLV stands for 'Modified Launch Vehicle', but this ties in better to Eyes Turned Skywards, which BDB already incorperates]) to put a Mars lander, a refueling depot for the lander, and the Apollo-Mars orbiter into Martian orbit.  

Above you can see (left to right): A Saturn V MLV, the MEM with its de-orbit motor and its heatshield, the standalone MEM descent and ascent stages, and finally, the OPD (Orbital Propellant Depo). The OPD will also have habitation space so it can be the core module of a space station. I'll link more blueprints at the end of this post.

For reference, the Saturn V MLVs can put 45t on a Martian intercept.

First, two Saturn V MLVs put the MEM (without 30 tons of descent propellant [Aerozene50/NTO], its mass is 43 tons), and an OPD (which weighs 12 tons dry and has 30 tons of propellant) into Martian orbit (using aerobraking to capture). The MEM and OPD dock and the OPD fuels the MEM, then the MEM undocks and enters a close orbit with the OPD. Then two more Saturn V MLVs put two modified S-IVBs (added secondary propellant tanks [insulated], a heat shield, comms, radiators, docking ports, etc) into Martian orbit, each carrying 35 tons of propellant (LH2/LOX). The S-IVBs dock with the OPD and then wait.

Another Saturn V MLV puts an A-MS (Apollo-Mars spacecraft) with an added heatshield onto a Martian intercept trajectory (a fast transit on a free-return trajectory, this minimizes risk and the time the crew is in interplanetary space). The A-MS aerobrakes into Martian orbit discards it heatshield and docks with the OPD. The A-MS is then refueled (the A-MS needs 65 tons of propellant for Trans-Earth Injection) and the S-IVBs (S-IVB 1 is docked to the OPD, S-IVB 2 is docked to S-IVB 1) undock from the OPD and the MEM docks to the OPD. The crew then transfer to the MEM, undock, land on Mars, perform surface ops (probably at a prepositioned base) for 1.5 years (definitely at a prepositioned base), launch, dock with the OPD, and then transfer to the A-MS.

The A-MS then undocks and performs the Trans-Earth Injection burn (a fast transit trajectory). 150 to 300 days later, vehicle swings by the Earth. The Apollo CSM undocks, and captures into a highly elliptical orbit, from which it then enters the Earth atmosphere and splashes down in the Pacific.

I think something like this could tie in very well to BDB, and of course would require a minimal number of new parts.

2. The X-20. As far as I'm aware, there isn't a Dynasoar in BDB yet. The X-20 was an amazing concept and had a lot of really cool space station and Moon mission plans associated with it (seriously, take a look at some of the Moon mission plans using the X-20).

3. Gemini EOR (Earth orbit rendezvous) and the Saturn C-3 were really cool (and very Kerbal) mission ideas. Basically, two Saturn C-3s would put a Gemini spacecraft with a trans-Earth stage and light (like open-cockpit light) lander, and a Trans-Lunar Injection stage into Earth orbit. They then dock and head to the Moon. After capturing into lunar orbit, one astronaut head to the surface and back in the light lander. Then the Gemini spacecraft heads back to earth. In real life it was scaped due to is small scale (one person on the lunar surface for a couple of hours), and its complexity/level of risk. However, I think something like that would fit very well into KSP!

4. Moonlab / The ability to launch Skylab with fuel in it, and have living space after the fuel is depleted (you need this anyway for Apollo-Venus / Apollo-Mars). Basically, if you launched Skylab with fuel in it, it could get into lunar orbit. This was something they actually considered for the Apollo Applications Program. Unfortunately, it got scrapped. In KSP it might work quite well. To make it useful you could program a contract that says 'Conduct long-term experiments on Microgravity and exposure to deep-space radiation around the Moon Mun'. 

5. Nova. Do I really need to explain this?

6. Saturn-Shuttle. Basically, by replacing the SRBs on a shuttle with a modified S-IC (which would be reusable), you could increase payload capacity and crew safety. The main addition to BDB here would be the adapter to the shuttles external tank (the shuttle stack would be mounted atop the S-IC), and the reusability of the S-IC.

7. This one isn't new parts. I'm actually not even sure if its possible. Basically, you now how KSP has part windows, like 'Filter by Function' or 'Filter by Manufacturer'? Well, what if you created a custom one for BDB, and in it had sub-folders called 'Apollo' or 'Titan' or 'Skylab' etc. It could be really useful! 

I really hope you like some of these suggestions, if we're lucky we migh get some of them in BDB at some point!

Thanks, -BillKerman123

More blueprints: https://imgur.com/gallery/zK4qiie

Edited December 23, 2018 by BillKerman123
Adding new ideas.

[CobaltWolf]

On 12/20/2018 at 6:58 PM, eagle92lightning said:

Started using this mod for the first time ever today, Deciding to go completely with this instead of RSS

On 12/21/2018 at 1:33 AM, komodo said:

It's not the same size as RSS, but the pack is balanced around (about) 3.2x rescale (I think, is it still such?) as far as performance goes. It also however scales upwards nicely if that is your preference.

(I always was a 6.4x'er, but i've been trying 3.2x this time around... It's sooo much easier to get around )

I believe the consensus is that things are properly balanced for 2.5x, while 3.2x still mostly works but is much less forgiving. I believe there are instances of things working in 2.5x but underperforming in 3.2x, while other things overperform in 2.5x and perform correctly in 3.2x. That's mostly because not everything perfectly scales to KSP, so some things are overscaled (Vanguard, for instance) while some are underscaled (The Saturns are the biggest example, though they seem to work fine in 3.2x anyways....?)

 

18 hours ago, eagle92lightning said:

Question, Ever thinking of adding a more accurate shuttle?

10 hours ago, Saltshaker said:

@eagle92lightning

Yeah, I have no interest in doing Shuttle-related stuff especially when there are some great shuttle mods out there already.

 

5 hours ago, BillKerman123 said:

I'm terrible at writing intros and stuff so I'll just get straight to it:

Basically, I think this mod is amazing as is, but there is still a lot of room for new features. Here are a few ideas I came up with:

1. We already have parts for Apollo-Venus / Apollo-Mars, but what about a set of parts for an Apollo-era Mars landing? So far I've come up with a few ideas. Keep in mind everything I am about to propose was designed in RO/RSS. The MEM (Mars Excursion Module) could just be a LEM with a larger descent stage and a heatshield (yes, I did the math and it works). As for the rest of the mission hardware needed, I've come up with a plan to use Saturn V Multibody's (Saturn V MLVs [yes I know MLV stands for 'Modified Launch Vehicle', but this ties in better to Eyes Turned Skywards, which BDB already incorperates]) to put a Mars lander, a refueling depot for the lander, and the Apollo-Mars orbiter into Martian orbit. 

*snip to reduce quote length*

I think something like this could tie in very well to BDB, and of course would require a minimal number of new parts.

First off - welcome to the forums!

Secondly, I'm going to preface all this by saying the current plan for at least the next update or two is to continue revamping the stuff currently in the mod. I don't intend to start massive side projects like adding completely new part families for the time being, exceptions being maybe stuff that is already partially done that I want to finish and push out, which for example would be things like the Gemini Lander parts which are partially done. I actually wrote a fairly long post on the future of the mod several weeks ago.

Now, to answer your first suggestion - I'm actually a bit confused by this. Is it a real design, or something you came up with? I don't think I'd want to go through reentry in a LEM cockpit

 

5 hours ago, BillKerman123 said:

2. The X-20. As far as I'm aware, there isn't a Dynasoar in BDB yet. The X-20 was an amazing concept and had a lot of really cool space station and Moon mission plans associated with it (seriously, take a look at some of the Moon mission plans using the X-20).

I don't have any plans on making an X-20 (and I must laugh at Lunar X-20 considering how the real thing was barely even capable of multiple orbits and was less capable than Mercury in many ways), if only because I don't want to deal with things like aerodynamic surfaces, etc. There was a super nice BDB-alike X-20 being made but the creator seems to have left the KSP community.

 

5 hours ago, BillKerman123 said:

3. Gemini EOR (Earth orbit rendezvous) and the Saturn C-3 were really cool (and very Kerbal) mission ideas. Basically, two Saturn C-3s would put a Gemini spacecraft with a trans-Earth stage and light (like open-cockpit light) lander, and a Trans-Lunar Injection stage into Earth orbit. They then dock and head to the Moon. After capturing into lunar orbit, one astronaut head to the surface and back in the light lander. Then the Gemini spacecraft heads back to earth. In real life it was scaped due to is small scale (one person on the lunar surface for a couple of hours), and its complexity/level of risk. However, I think something like that would fit very well into KSP!

Saturn C-3 is super cool (though I have no idea what diameter I'd make it... I suppose it would be 5m if the Saturn V was remade at a proper 6.25m...) but not on my mind right now. The Gemini lander can actually exists in the mod (though it is my own take on the design, based on the stock Mk1 lander can) but currently lacks all the rest of the components it would need. So, 'some day'.

 

5 hours ago, BillKerman123 said:

4. Moonlab / The ability to launch Skylab with fuel in it, and have living space after the fuel is depleted (you need this anyway for Apollo-Venus / Apollo-Mars). Basically, if you launched Skylab with fuel in it, it could get into lunar orbit. This was something they actually considered for the Apollo Applications Program. Unfortunately, it got scrapped. In KSP it might work quite well. To make it useful you could program a contract that says 'Conduct long-term experiments on Microgravity and exposure to deep-space radiation around the Moon Mun'.

I was a bit confused, since we DO have wetlab setups for the orbital workshops... but then I realized that I don't think those have made it into a release yet. But they're coming!

 

5 hours ago, BillKerman123 said:

5. Nova. Do I really need to explain this?

I actually really don't want to add Nova - I don't want to add another part diameter that would be basically unique to BDB. Instead I want to focus more on plausible (so, not insane) upgrades to the Saturn V family, culminating in Comet Saturn or something like that. Things like uprated engine variants (some of which are already in the mod like the toroidal J-2s) and tank extensions, etc. Those are both more interesting to me and hopefully more flexible part families.

 

5 hours ago, BillKerman123 said:

6. Saturn-Shuttle. Basically, by replacing the SRBs on a shuttle with a modified S-IC (which would be reusable), you could increase payload capacity and crew safety. The main addition to BDB here would be the adapter to the shuttles external tank (the shuttle stack would be mounted atop the S-IC), and the reusability of the S-IC.

Sorry, as I mentioned above when I quoted another user, but Shuttle stuff just doesn't interest me.

 

5 hours ago, BillKerman123 said:

7. This one isn't new parts. I'm actually not even sure if its possible. Basically, you now how KSP has part windows, like 'Filter by Function' or 'Filter by Manufacturer'? Well, what if you created a custom one for BDB, and in it had sub-folders called 'Apollo' or 'Titan' or 'Skylab' etc. It could be really useful! 

I really hope you like some of these suggestions, if we're lucky we migh get some of them in BDB at some point!

Thanks, -BillKerman123

Last I checked (which was, admittedly, like 2 years ago at this point) that wasn't possible in Vanilla KSP. With that said, everything in BDB is tagged decently well so typing in the name of a real rocket or stage (S1C, for instance) should bring up all the relevant parts.

Edited December 23, 2018 by CobaltWolf

[hieywiey]

I noticed that there is no 6-engine mount for the MS-IC, is this planned? Because several Saturn MLV concepts cannot be built as the TWR is below 1 with only 5 F-1s. Also, could we get lighter Saturn V tanks without insulation (orange)? Sending large  spacecraft to Laythe via gravity assists (Galileo/Cassini-like trajectory) in my 2.5x career is just barely possible with even a Saturn V with a MS-IC with 5 F-1s, 4 Titan IVB SRMU strapons, a MS-II with 7 HG-3s, and a S-IVC with 2 HG-3s. 

Edited December 23, 2018 by hieywiey

[Saltshaker]

2 hours ago, hieywiey said:

I noticed that there is no 6-engine mount for the MS-IC, is this planned? Because several Saturn MLV concepts cannot be built as the TWR is below 1 with only 5 F-1s. Also, could we get lighter Saturn V tanks without insulation (orange)? Sending large  spacecraft to Laythe via gravity assists (Galileo/Cassini-like trajectory) in my 2.5x career is just barely possible with even a Saturn V with a MS-IC with 5 F-1s, 4 Titan IVB SRMU strapons, a MS-II with 7 HG-3s, and a S-IVC with 2 HG-3s. 

Now, I can't address the former point, but I highly recommend using F-1As instead of F-1s and SMURFF to help repair KSP's broken wet-dry mass ratios. Also, try multiple launches to assemble the interplanetary craft, so you don't have to design such a large launch vehicle.

[Pappystein]

4 hours ago, hieywiey said:

I noticed that there is no 6-engine mount for the MS-IC, is this planned? Because several Saturn MLV concepts cannot be built as the TWR is below 1 with only 5 F-1s. Also, could we get lighter Saturn V tanks without insulation (orange)? Sending large  spacecraft to Laythe via gravity assists (Galileo/Cassini-like trajectory) in my 2.5x career is just barely possible with even a Saturn V with a MS-IC with 5 F-1s, 4 Titan IVB SRMU strapons, a MS-II with 7 HG-3s, and a S-IVC with 2 HG-3s. 

On top of what Saltshaker has already said... And CobaltWolf above in the post above yours hieywiey, The Diameter of Saturn in the game currently causes some limitations.   A 6 engine mount just dose not work with a same scale F-1 engine on the current diameter.   To fit all the engines would have to hang OUTSIDE the engine mount..    I am sure someone could rig something up but it wouldn't  look right / the Engine bells would be able to hit each other....  

Further MOST of the MLV studies did NOT increase the number of F-1 engines... only a couple of them did and were quickly eliminated from contention (too much costs... MLV was all about using Existing Saturn Hardware and keeping costs down as much as possible while doing something new.    F-1A Engine was already developed prior to the point of MLV thus F-1A would be used for MOST of the proposals.  

 

Lastly, why not just strap some AJ-260s onto your MLV.... That is what they are there for (and Solid Saturn I but that is another conversation).   CobaltWolf did an AMAZING job making those beasts..   I have yet to need more than 2 of them for my biggest MLV launches...  And Best of all...  3 of them were ACTUALLY MADE and FIRED... so LIKE the F-1A they are a real world part available.   

 

[BillKerman123]

Thanks for replying! 

1. Yes, the Apollo-Mars surface missions are something I came up with. I was writing a paper (that I might not end up finishing) that discussed the best strategy to get to Mars, and I realized the plan I came up with could be easily(-ish) spun-off into the Apollo Era. 

1.1. Actually, you probably wouldn't need a whole new family of parts, in fact in hindsight, you might only need the MEM descent stage, the Mars Surface Base modules, and the Orbital Propellent Depo (which could probably be made out of existing parts). 

2. As far as I'm aware, the heatshield is wide enough to 'shadow' the LEM cockpit (I checked this with some of my friends at the British Interplanetary Society [yes they are actual rocket scientists] and they said it would be fine). Not that it wouldn't be a hair-raising ride, to say the least...

3. I agree, its a real shame that mod disappeared (at least I couldn't find it anywhere). As far as I can tell, there aren't really any good X-20 mods for KSP. I think Contares might have a good one, but I'm not sure.

4. Why is adding in a new part size a bad thing? I can't imagine it would take up much memory space, and it's not like Nova would need that many new parts. And besides, contrary to popular belief, Nova wasn't that insane of an idea (okay, it was a little insane...). It was basically just a scaled up Saturn V. 

5. You may change your mind on that when you see this photo:

LOOK AT HOW AMAZING THAT IS!

6. I think you can add categories manually, so there shouldn't be any reason it couldn't be done automatically. Though come to think of it, you're right - the part search function already has that taken care of.

 

I also thought of a new suggestion:

Ground bases and rovers for the Apollo Applications Program! That would be pretty cool to see.

Also: Nuclear rockets and Ion drives. Both of them did exist in the early post-Apollo era, so it's not too far fetched. Plus I really want to make a Saturn V MLV-N! (see photo below for reference)

And on the topic of nuclear rockets:

 

Edited December 24, 2018 by BillKerman123

[eagle92lightning]

8 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

The Saturns are the biggest example, though they seem to work fine in 3.2x anyways....?

That's is due to Wherner von Braun over engineering the crape out of those rockets, he wanted to use them to go to Mars. And I intend to use them so!

[Raptor22]

On 12/22/2018 at 6:16 AM, Jso said:

Komodo's right, that's what I would expect to see loading a normal scale Saturn craft file with the Saturn Rescale from extras. It's probably 2/3's fueled as well. Try building it from scratch.

Agh, son of a gun I did have the rescale on there! Sorry for not noticing.

[golkaidakhaana]

53 minutes ago, BillKerman123 said:

3. I agree, its a real shame that mod disappeared (at least I couldn't find it anywhere). As far as I can tell, there aren't really any good X-20 mods for KSP. I think Contares might have a good one, but I'm not sure.

Here ya go, I find LonesomeRobots to be vastly underappreciated.

[komodo]

On 12/23/2018 at 10:31 AM, CobaltWolf said:

I believe the consensus is that things are properly balanced for 2.5x, while 3.2x still mostly works but is much less forgiving.

I went back and looked, (and had a 'duh' moment) at the rescale patches included in BDB, and remembered the following.

On 12/23/2018 at 2:53 PM, Saltshaker said:

 ...SMURFF to help repair KSP's broken wet-dry mass ratios...

While this is true, please note that you can do whatever you want to SMURFF settings, but BDB will be specifically ignored by it: Instead, there is a MM patch in the compatibility/rescale folder that detects the system scaling in use and adjusts numbers around to suit. (All credit goes to @JSO.) CobaltWolf is correct, that a finer hand is needed for driving rockets at larger scales. :)

On 12/23/2018 at 10:31 AM, CobaltWolf said:

. Instead I want to focus more on plausible (so, not insane) upgrades to the Saturn V family

Is that a 4-S1C cluster first stage? I clearly need to expand my (not insane) horizons :D

23 hours ago, BillKerman123 said:

5. You may change your mind on that when you see this photo:

While I agree, the man has spoken. Having said that, if you look into this thread in the distant past, you will find photographic evidence that I once strapped a Buran orbiter to the side of a Saturn booster. It... worked as well as that could work. But, it did look cool. Being a Buran, it probably is pretty easy to search for in here tldr, it's currently possible* with the existing parts here, and those of Cormorant Aeronology. (* at least as of ~12-24 months ago.)

 

[Pappystein]

On 12/23/2018 at 7:09 PM, BillKerman123 said:

5. You may change your mind on that when you see this photo:

LOOK AT HOW AMAZING THAT IS!

 

I wanted to touch base on this.   Please PLEASE read

http://www.space-travel.com/reports/Cult_spacecraft_Part_One_The_Little_Spaceplane_That_Could_Not_999.html

Before you go further.  There is no way on this green and blue Earth that Saturn Shuttle would have flown as pictured in that photo.   The sucker would almost immediately Topple over into a tumble on launch.

The wings need to be in the back/bottom of a rocket.    Putting a shuttle on TOP of a rocket spells disaster.   This is SIMPLE Aerodynamics.  

The Whole point of that proposal was to "save money"   You need a pair of wings in each direction = to at least 1.5x the surface area generated by the Shuttle (Side, Top/Bottom) Probably closer to 4-5x the size.  You end up with wings bigger than my Avatar's (XB-70 Valkyrie)   There is no way something that large would A) Fit in the VAB, and more importantly B) somehow save money.   Cool Idea by some bean-counter who didn't know anything about aerodynamics.   Even the Pictures of the X-20 on top of Titan have control surfaces that are too small.

Now if they wanted to use 2x AJ-260s from Saturn to launch the Shuttle into space (probably Munar altitude....)  That might have been neat.........  Hmm... Turns on KSP

 

In the end.  Yes it LOOKS AMAZING.... Too bad it can not in any way, shape, or form, work as depicted... and MORE IMPORTANTLY too bad CobaltWolf does not like space shuttles/want to do a Space Shuttle mod.

[hieywiey]

Does BDB currently have the parts needed to make the Conestoga 1620? Info about this thing is really hard to come by.

Edited December 27, 2018 by hieywiey

[BillKerman123]

9 hours ago, Pappystein said:

Before you go further.  There is no way on this green and blue Earth that Saturn Shuttle would have flown as pictured in that photo.   The sucker would almost immediately Topple over into a tumble on launch.

The wings need to be in the back/bottom of a rocket.    Putting a shuttle on TOP of a rocket spells disaster.   This is SIMPLE Aerodynamics.  

The Whole point of that proposal was to "save money"   You need a pair of wings in each direction = to at least 1.5x the surface area generated by the Shuttle (Side, Top/Bottom) Probably closer to 4-5x the size.  You end up with wings bigger than my Avatar's (XB-70 Valkyrie)   There is no way something that large would A) Fit in the VAB, and more importantly B) somehow save money.   Cool Idea by some bean-counter who didn't know anything about aerodynamics.   Even the Pictures of the X-20 on top of Titan have control surfaces that are too small.

Now if they wanted to use 2x AJ-260s from Saturn to launch the Shuttle into space (probably Munar altitude....)  That might have been neat.........  Hmm... Turns on KSP

In the end.  Yes, it LOOKS AMAZING... Too bad it can not in any way, shape, or form, work as depicted... and MORE IMPORTANTLY too bad CobaltWolf does not like space shuttles/want to do a Space Shuttle mod.

 

Couldn't you use thrust vectoring (you might need up to 20* of gimbal though), grid fins on the S-IC, or the elevons on the shuttle for control? What if you used all of them?

[Jso]

4 hours ago, hieywiey said:

Does BDB currently have the parts needed to make the Conestoga 1620? Info about this thing is really hard to come by.

Sort of. It's a Star 48 plus up to 1 ton payload under the fairing. The Viklun-4688 fairing base tapers from 0.625 to 0.9375, but you could probably use a flat 1.25m fairing base with a flipped over 1.25-0.625 structural adapter. A single Dioscuri-4 Inline version for the core 3rd stage. The radial Dioscuri-4 doesn't have thrust vectoring, so you'll need 6 Dioscuri-4 Inline versions attached radially, and you'll need to find a nosecone you like for them (tweakscale helps). 4 light on the ground for stage 1, then 2 in the air for stage 2. You can also get away with the non-vectoring radial versions for the second stage and use the core stage's RCS for attitude control.

[Jso]

Working on some new engine effects for stock (not RealPlume). Much thanks to @JadeOfMaar for making these available.