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

[biohazard15]

On 3/16/2020 at 11:30 PM, CobaltWolf said:

Yeah I don't know... It kinda feels like ripping a bandaid. Might as well try and replace everything at once.

And yeah, that'll be the big limiting factor for Gemini recovery options and such. I don't really have any desire to integrate more dependencies.

Sigh.

Okay, then. I think I'll simply use the current dev build as a "feature complete" build and start a new career. Should last until actual 1.7.0 release, whenever it is.

Question: spin motor - how exactly it should be used? Do I even need it if I play with stock physics\RCS\SAS?

[Zorg]

Juno II fairing is no up on the github dev branch.

Its not 100% accurate in proportions since Juno II is slightly underscaled to fit 1.5m and the sergeants and Juno II payloads are sligthly overscaled. The fairing is sized to fit the Sergeant cluster and the largest of the probes (Explorer 11).

This fairing is not adjustable, it has a fixed length with just a deployable cone.

However, fret not! The same textures are used for a more generic use 0.9375m and 1.25m fairings but fully adjustable in length. (right and left)

 

[biohazard15]

49 minutes ago, biohazard15 said:

Question: spin motor - how exactly it should be used? Do I even need it if I play with stock physics\RCS\SAS?

Never mind, got it. Quite strange thingy that works quite strangely, but it seems to work. Although I would like to see an extra patch that re-adds reaction wheel functionality to early probes...

[Pappystein]

Ok so since I have been driving a "correcting" of the proper Titan Engine names... We have kind of hit a road block (this is for the BDB_Extras Realname patch)    Does anyone have, or know where a list of the entire Aerojet AJ23 engine family resides?    Astronautix contradicts itself one line to the next in the AJ23 family and the only thing on the BigBookOfWar is inclusion of the Ground start LR87-AJ-11's AJ23 designation

Best of all NRTS (the NASA research document server) only has 4 documents with AJ23 mentioned in them... ALL for SPACE SHUTTLE II (aka the Shuttle Replacement circa 1985)

 

Any help would be appreciated.   I have a list of the PRODUCTION AJ23s for the Titan (AJ23-130 to AJ23-144 I think as I am not currently looking at the list.)   I would like to have realistic AJ23 names for the Hypothetical engines (single bell, Hydrolox, LR87-Vacuum etc.)  for the Mod.

========================================CORRECTION==============================================

First I have verified the numbers I have with two fellow aviation historians that more than dabble in Rockets (I have had possession of this partial list for more than 10 years,)  and I need to correct myself.  I DO NOT know the AJ23 designations for the LR87-AJ-11A and the LR91-AJ-11A for the Titan IV.

I DO know the AJ23 designation for:

LR87-AJ-1, -AJ-3, -AJ-5, -AJ-7, -AJ-9, -AJ-11 Ground lit, -AJ-11 air start

LR91-AJ-1, through AJ-11

 

I POSSIBLY know the AJ23 designation for a single and TWIN bell Hydrolox ground start engines

I DO NOT KNOW any other AJ23 designation except those for the OME for Shuttle 2

IT APPEARS that Aerojet did not typically assign these numbers in sequential order.  

the M-1 Rocket engine appears to be apart of the AJ23 engine family as well (or at-least research engines in the AJ23 family were used to develop the M-1)

 

 

Edited March 17, 2020 by Pappystein

[biohazard15]

1.7.0 Juno upper stages (Sergeant clusters) need a huge (and I mean HUGE) nerf. Juno I can send Explorer 1 to Kerbin escape trajectory - on 2.5x rescale.

[Pappystein]

14 minutes ago, biohazard15 said:

1.7.0 Juno upper stages (Sergeant clusters) need a huge (and I mean HUGE) nerf. Juno I can send Explorer 1 to Kerbin escape trajectory - on 2.5x rescale.

No that is right... Because When you fly it from a proper Jupiter-C (Redstone) you can just get a ~300km orbit (if you are lucky....)  I tend to get very lopsided orbits

 

 

[biohazard15]

Last Mercury-related update apparently broke the airbrake (or whatever that thing is called) - it cannot be deployed, there are no relevant options in PAM.

[Rodger]

The airbrake is disabled now as it breaks the chute. It would need to be made into a seperate part to work again.

[ltajax]

4 hours ago, Pappystein said:

No that is right... Because When you fly it from a proper Jupiter-C (Redstone) you can just get a ~300km orbit (if you are lucky....)  I tend to get very lopsided orbits

 

 

Yeah if you check Wikipedia all the orbits for the first explorer missions where lopsided. 

Explorer 1

Perigee altitude 358 kilometers (222 mi)  89.5KM at JNSQ 2.7x scale

Apogee altitude 2,550 kilometers (1,580 mi) 637.5KM at JNSQ 2.7x scale

I'd recommend using JNSQ, its at 2.7x scale and everything works perfectly at that scale. If I burn the first stage till its empty I usually hit about 100 KM or more,  then fire the first Sergeant after hitting Apoapsis after using the RCS of the instrument section to align to the horizon. Burn the sergeants in sequence. Doing this I can usually fall into the orbital ranges similar to what the early explorers did

 

Edited March 18, 2020 by ltajax

[AlphaMensae]

That's how Explorer 1 discovered the radiation belt later named after Dr. Van Allen, with such a lopsided orbit that put the sat into the belt itself.  

[GJdude]

I've run into an issue with the geiger counter experiment on the dev build, it seems to give 3 out of 9 science on the first run of each experiment and then... No more than that, no matter how many times I repeat it on many different craft, which means [x] Science! won't shut up about the experiments being available. Isn't it only supposed to give 3 science in the first place? I'm running JNSQ, but I tried the master build on it and that worked just fine, so I think something with the max values might have gotten all janked up in the dev version. I haven't seen the same thing from any other experiments just yet.

[Zorg]

29 minutes ago, GJdude said:

I've run into an issue with the geiger counter experiment on the dev build, it seems to give 3 out of 9 science on the first run of each experiment and then... No more than that, no matter how many times I repeat it on many different craft, which means [x] Science! won't shut up about the experiments being available. Isn't it only supposed to give 3 science in the first place? I'm running JNSQ, but I tried the master build on it and that worked just fine, so I think something with the max values might have gotten all janked up in the dev version. I haven't seen the same thing from any other experiments just yet.

Yes this is deliberate, since there are a lot of new experiments all returning quite a lot of science, there is a total science cap on many of them. This limits the total science that can be gathered (even when returned).

This is done in the dmagic science module via totalScienceLevel and scienceValueRatio in the stock module.

[CobaltWolf]

14 hours ago, biohazard15 said:

Last Mercury-related update apparently broke the airbrake (or whatever that thing is called) - it cannot be deployed, there are no relevant options in PAM.

12 hours ago, Rodger said:

The airbrake is disabled now as it breaks the chute. It would need to be made into a seperate part to work again.

Air brake has been added back as a separate part. Actually, here's the notes from my last commit. This is on top of all the work @Jso has been doing refining the parts and adding features for things like sequential firing for the posigrade and retro motors (must be placed in symmetry, disabled by default)

- added a proper parachute bag to the mercury main chute
- Separated the air brake to a new part
- adjusted the RCS and reaction wheel power
- increased the capsule EC
- adjusted the attach node of the retro motors
- adjusted the alignments of the LES motors
- added cameraTransform to periscope
- added 80% length Atlas 1.25m adapter tank
- Tried fixing the jettison caps on the retros

 

1 hour ago, GJdude said:

I've run into an issue with the geiger counter experiment on the dev build, it seems to give 3 out of 9 science on the first run of each experiment and then... No more than that, no matter how many times I repeat it on many different craft, which means [x] Science! won't shut up about the experiments being available. Isn't it only supposed to give 3 science in the first place? I'm running JNSQ, but I tried the master build on it and that worked just fine, so I think something with the max values might have gotten all janked up in the dev version. I haven't seen the same thing from any other experiments just yet.

43 minutes ago, Zorg said:

Yes this is deliberate, since there are a lot of new experiments all returning quite a lot of science, there is a total science cap on many of them. This limits the total science that can be gathered (even when returned).

This is done in the dmagic science module via totalScienceLevel and scienceValueRatio in the stock module.

Indeed, we are adding a lot of new and duplicate experiments (someone try counting the number of magnetometers...), so we felt a good balance would be to let users get incremental amounts of the science with progressively better experiments.

 

 

Edited March 18, 2020 by CobaltWolf

[biohazard15]

21 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

Separated the air brake to a new part

Not sure if it even works - I mean, the capsule reorients itself, but I don't know if airbrake plays any part (it does the same without it). Would be more useful if it could be surface attached.

27 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

adjusted the RCS and reaction wheel power

Looks and feels fine now, thanks!

28 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

adjusted the attach node of the retro motors

First of all: retros spam NREs as soon as you pick them in editor.

Attach node is fine now, thanks for fixing it!

Sequential firing - I dunno... It works, but it violently throws you off course if you don't activate SAS in hold mode, preferably with active RCS.

 

[CobaltWolf]

6 minutes ago, biohazard15 said:

Not sure if it even works - I mean, the capsule reorients itself, but I don't know if airbrake plays any part (it does the same without it). Would be more useful if it could be surface attached.

Looks and feels fine now, thanks!
First of all: retros spam NREs as soon as you pick them in editor.

Attach node is fine now, thanks for fixing it!

Sequential firing - I dunno... It works, but it violently throws you off course if you don't activate SAS in hold mode, preferably with active RCS.

 

- Yeah, I think it needs to have a surface attach option just... y'know if anyone ever wanted to use it for something else. I'll let someone else test it. I don't care if it works so much as "I put effort into adding this detail and I'll be damned if I have to remove it"

- For the retros, alright... crap. It's a bit outside of my wheelhouse (I don't know a lot about actually getting stuff to work?) so that'll have to get fixed by someone. And yeah, I always have the SAS and RCS on for the burns... let me start up with RCS build aid and figure out what kind of torque we're getting. it should fire through the CoM.

[biohazard15]

7 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

y'know if anyone ever wanted to use it for something else.

One idea is to use it on X-20 (Moroz mod) - this particular plane could benefit from more control on reentry. Although it would need a mirrored model or a model without "comma".

[CobaltWolf]

3 minutes ago, biohazard15 said:

One idea is to use it on X-20 (Moroz mod) - this particular plane could benefit from more control on reentry. Although it would need a mirrored model or a model without "comma".

I can make the horizon scanner cover (that's what that is) toggleable no problem

[CobaltWolf]

Now on Github - Mercury paint scheme variants!

[Pappystein]

2 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

Oh!  I think I LOVE this color scheme!   

NICE!

 

[Big Katz]

I cant emphasize enough colbalt, These look AMAZING. Really some top notch work, some of the best texturing if not the best ever. Between you and baele on his product, you guys have made KDP alot better.

I do have a question as Ive been out of the loop. is there any update on a official release and how are the probes coming along? thankyou again.

[GJdude]

7 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

Indeed, we are adding a lot of new and duplicate experiments (someone try counting the number of magnetometers...), so we felt a good balance would be to let users get incremental amounts of the science with progressively better experiments.

I understand the change, but it's going to be a little irritating to have [x] Science! going off all the time for an experiment that can't progress the science it's alerting me about any further. Maybe ScienceAlert itself might yield better results, since I think it would let me filter experiments based on whether they've been done at all or not.

[MashAndBangers]

Screenshot tax.  Things are looking colorful!

[DiscoSlelge]

Had fun recreating a Little Joe I like with some stock and redstone parts, the boiler plate scheme is lovely for those kind of shots thank you ! <3

Edited March 19, 2020 by DiscoSlelge

[CobaltWolf]

2 hours ago, Big Katz said:

I cant emphasize enough colbalt, These look AMAZING. Really some top notch work, some of the best texturing if not the best ever. Between you and baele on his product, you guys have made KDP alot better.

I do have a question as Ive been out of the loop. is there any update on a official release and how are the probes coming along? thankyou again.

No real ETA yet. At the rate I'm making progress there's a lag while the fine tuning of the parts happens, and I feel like its kind of best to rip the bandaid with this stuff since there's so many interdependent parts. I know at this point I want to do Gemini, Centaur and Vega this update. And theres a bunch of misc stuff struggling behind like the Agena subsats.

Regarding the probes... You should make a side install and try the dev builds. Theres probably at least a hundred new probe parts.

[OrbitalManeuvers]

So, I took the JNSQ plunge. It's my first re-scale mod. Knowing that the BDB stuff fits into this scale well, I figured the best way to get a feel for it would be to go the NASA route, so I built and flew: MR-3, MA-6, Gemini 8 w/ATV, generic Surveyor (Atlas/Centaur), then Apollo 11. Flying these vehicles at this scale is kind of great.

Sad trombone on Surveyor mission attempts. The CA Landvermesser has about 800m/s in the solid rocket booster, and something like 700m/s with the verniers. These are stock scale numbers, yes? I don't know what better numbers for JNSQ would be, or how to figure that out. My understanding is that the Centaur puts the probe on a collision course with the moon, and the rest is done by the probe ... so that's a good deal more than 1500 at JNSQ scale, no?

Anyone else messed with this?