Starhelperdude Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 12 minutes ago, Clamp-o-Tron said: I think that's all there is, but it would be cool to make one up. Nert's Station Parts have similar posters in a few of the IVA's. whoah! I didn't know! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappystein Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 So, Before I post Titan IV and Commercial Titan 3 (CT3) I am trying to verify the data I have on the Aerojet AJ-11A family. I know there were FOUR(???? maybe 3?) versions of the AJ-11A. I have just been un-able to locate a single source. I am looking for a single source point to actually talk about the AJ-11A-01, -02, and 03 in relation to the base -11A engines. For what it is worth, most documents including the "launch planner guides" for both the Titan IV and the CT3 just state AJ-11. Both of those predate actual flights of either. I have lots of individual data points with AJ-11A being a significantly changed beast... just no one wants to agree on performance, mass, etc.... Then yesterday while surfing NASASpaceFlight.com I found many refrences to the sub variants. It would explain all the various data points I have been finding. If anyone has a link to any design documents that talks about the different sub versions of the Aerojet LR87-AJ-11A and the LR91-AJ-11A, I would appreciate a link. Feel free to PM me. Would really love actual Aerojet documents but I am desperate for anything even remotely credible at this juncture! If nothing else it could give me a spring board to "hard facts" THANKS IN ADVANCE (aka TIA!) In the end I would like to put to bed once and for all "what engine thrust is right" for the Titan CT3 and Titan IV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squeaker0704 Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 are we going to get the lunar roving vehicle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappystein Posted February 2, 2021 Share Posted February 2, 2021 8 minutes ago, squeaker0704 said: are we going to get the lunar roving vehicle While I am hopeful, A) I don't want to put words in the Dev's mouths and B) Stock wheels suck and all the good wheel mods haven't been updated since 1.8.1... So as I see it, I am going to hope for it, but I am not going to hold my breath for it. That is several new skill-sets that would have to be learned for essentially one thing. Sure that would allow the same skill-set to move onto other more advanced Lunar things... but still basically one thing for the next update's minimum potential list (replace all existing Saturn objects & functionality with newer better ones!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biohazard15 Posted February 3, 2021 Share Posted February 3, 2021 Seeing Pappystein's absolutely amazing posts about Titan history, I've decided to make something too. So here's the first Titan IIIB launch. Titan IIIB was developed for the next generation of spy satellites - KH-8 Gambit. First launch occured at the evening of 29 July of 1966, and was a success. First KH-8 was launched to 158x250x94.1deg orbit. That's what I'm aiming for. Go read Pappy's posts if you want to learn more about Titan III's history! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappystein Posted February 3, 2021 Share Posted February 3, 2021 1 minute ago, biohazard15 said: Seeing Pappystein's absolutely amazing posts about Titan history, I've decided to make something too. So here's the first Titan IIIB launch. Hide contents Titan IIIB was developed for the next generation of spy satellites - KH-8 Gambit. First launch occured at the evening of 29 July of 1966, and was a success. Go read Pappy's posts if you want to learn more about Titan III's history! A) Wow! thanks for the kind words! B) amazing set of pictures. A nice optimal looking launch! I want to thank you, as well as everyone else who is making beautiful rockets. Since returning from my "3 week vacation" also know as COVID Quarantine... I have had zero time to boot KSP... Well that and I still haven't figured out what mod is causing my game to spend 12 minutes booting (Sold state drive on a 64Gb i9 shouldn't take 12 minutes to boot!) All the beautiful pictures you all are posting is what inspires me to kludge together these historical synopsis of these rockets (or the parts.) While I am awaiting some hopeful answers on the Titan IV/CT3's engines... I am starting my next article. I am working on some BDB build-able (as is) what if Titan rockets. To be clear, these are completely my idea and not part of any historical proposal that I am aware of. After all, like many of you, I kind of play with mods like BDB to come up with my own "What IF?" plausible but not done rockets. Maybe between historical (as can be) rockets, ab-historical rockets and totally fictional rockets that we can make with the various parts we have in game... Just maybe we can inspire the next Ed Heinemann. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpacedInvader Posted February 3, 2021 Share Posted February 3, 2021 (edited) 17 hours ago, Zorg said: The Remote Tech configs are community maintained by BDB users since the authors dont use the mod. They are quite old so Im not surprised there are configs for parts that dont exist anymore. If you do make RT configs they would be appreciated though its worth saying you are like the 4th or 5th person to have announced such intentions over the last year You can share the complete files directly or make a pull request to the master branch on github. EDIT: Oh also worth mentioning now that I recall there in fact were some updates submitted by someone. They are on github and not released at the moment. You should look at these to ensure no duplication of effort. https://github.com/CobaltWolf/Bluedog-Design-Bureau/tree/master/Gamedata/Bluedog_DB/Compatibility/RemoteTech Couldn't figure out how to do a pull request so I'll just post it here as a zip. What these configs do: - Dynamically configure all antennas to RemoteTech omnis based on their prior vanilla CommNet configurations (those numbers were set for a reason, might as well utilize them) - Buff range of most omnis by 200% to account for RemoteTech's more restrictive standard range model. If you use the root range model, just use the recommended 0.5 worldscale - Nerf range on a few others because huge omni ranges felt unbalanced - Dishes are manually reconfigured from the initial omni state based on their intended mission profile (couldn't figure out a way to automatically configure dishes in a satisfactory way) - Probe cores are automatically configured to have the RemoteTech default 3km always-on antenna for pad control - Probes which are described as communications relays and had been configured already with improved internal antennas have retained those - Going forward, this should automatically configure all new omni antennas and probe cores correctly, with a need to manually patch dishes or special probes / pods (but all would still work as omnis / regular probe cores at least) If anyone spots any balance issues or other issues, I'd be happy to fix them and reupload if needed. The Files Edited February 3, 2021 by SpacedInvader Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorg Posted February 3, 2021 Share Posted February 3, 2021 17 minutes ago, SpacedInvader said: Couldn't figure out how to do a pull request so I'll just post it here as a zip. What these configs do: - Dynamically configure all antennas to RemoteTech omnis based on their prior vanilla CommNet configurations (those numbers were set for a reason, might as well utilize them) - Buff range of most omnis by 200% to account for RemoteTech's more restrictive standard range model. If you use the root range model, just use the recommended 0.5 worldscale - Dishes are manually reconfigured from the initial omni state based on their intended mission profile (couldn't figure out a way to automatically configure dishes in a satisfactory way) - Probe cores are automatically configured to have the RemoteTech default 3km always-on antenna for pad control - Probes which are described as communications relays and had been configured already with improved internal antennas have retained those - Going forward, this should automatically configure all new omni antennas and probe cores correctly, with a need to manually patch dishes or special probes / pods (but all would still work as omnis / regular probe cores at least) If anyone spots any balance issues or other issues, I'd be happy to fix them and reupload if needed. The Files Thanks. These are now on the Github master for anyone wishing to try them out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpacedInvader Posted February 3, 2021 Share Posted February 3, 2021 2 minutes ago, Zorg said: Thanks. These are now on the Github master for anyone wishing to try them out. Glad I could help Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted February 3, 2021 Share Posted February 3, 2021 Mercury Mini-Lab IVA. Featuring the beautiful travel posters of @DiscoSlelge ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minmus Taster Posted February 3, 2021 Share Posted February 3, 2021 5 minutes ago, Beale said: Mercury Mini-Lab IVA. Featuring the beautiful travel posters of @DiscoSlelge ! 20 years later: But soon he became obsessed.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorg Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 Preview of Hydyne and Alcolox waterfall plumes for redstone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minmus Taster Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 54 minutes ago, Zorg said: Preview of Hydyne and Alcolox waterfall plumes for redstone AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starhelperdude Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 1 minute ago, Minmus Taster said: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! lcohol plume and hydyne plumes are awsome! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmateurAstronaut1969 Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 Is There a Service Module For the Big G, or will I have to use Tweak Scale? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starhelperdude Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 theres the service module, build a regular gemini without decoupler and heatshield, add big-G crew compartment under it, add 2.5m Big-G decoupler under it, add the service module under it and add rcs, then you are pretty much done Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorg Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 8 minutes ago, Ollz said: Is There a Service Module For the Big G, or will I have to use Tweak Scale? \ The 1969 version is in game as above. The 1967 version for Saturn will come in the next major update probably. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappystein Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 3 hours ago, Zorg said: Preview of Hydyne and Alcolox waterfall plumes for redstone What kind of performance changes happen when switching to waterfall? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorg Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 Just now, Pappystein said: What kind of performance changes happen when switching to waterfall? I dont really know to be honest. I have a fairly powerful computer and im testing on a clean install so I cant see a performance difference. The idea behind Waterfall is that it should outperform particle plumes since you're scrolling textures on a mesh. However some of these plumes are using like 14 indidivual effects and Im not sure what the performance impact on a lower end PC would be. In theory it should still do better but I would be interested in feedback eventually when they make it to dev. (right now they are in a separate experimental feature branch, not the main master branch). Its also worth noting that particles are still better for SRB smoke, waterfall doesnt have a way to do that yet. Unfortunately SRB plumes are the most performance heavy type of particle plume. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmateurAstronaut1969 Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 1 hour ago, Zorg said: . The 1967 version for Saturn will come in the next major update probably. Ok thanks, it was the 67’ Version I was looking for, but the 69’ will do for now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted February 4, 2021 Author Share Posted February 4, 2021 1 hour ago, Ollz said: Ok thanks, it was the 67’ Version I was looking for, but the 69’ will do for now Big G '67 (conical Big G) needs to be scaled to the new Saturn parts, which will be bigger than currently. So I've been holding off on making it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappystein Posted February 4, 2021 Share Posted February 4, 2021 2 hours ago, CobaltWolf said: Big G '67 (conical Big G) needs to be scaled to the new Saturn parts, which will be bigger than currently. So I've been holding off on making it Going to have the "Aft" Pilot position (with a window?) Also I thought the 69 version would have been 3.125m. Most of the official drawings I have show it quite a bit bigger than the diameter of the BigG (but still a cylinder) Or is that yet another SM I am thinking of for the BigG? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted February 5, 2021 Author Share Posted February 5, 2021 17 hours ago, Pappystein said: Going to have the "Aft" Pilot position (with a window?) Also I thought the 69 version would have been 3.125m. Most of the official drawings I have show it quite a bit bigger than the diameter of the BigG (but still a cylinder) Or is that yet another SM I am thinking of for the BigG? I mean, yeah it'll need a pilot's window? And I tried it at 3.125m and the proportions were all whacky. It really needs to be more like the "expanded 2.5m" is is now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappystein Posted February 5, 2021 Share Posted February 5, 2021 24 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said: I mean, yeah it'll need a pilot's window? And I tried it at 3.125m and the proportions were all whacky. It really needs to be more like the "expanded 2.5m" is is now. Thanks. well that explains why I could never find it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted February 5, 2021 Author Share Posted February 5, 2021 4 hours ago, Pappystein said: Thanks. well that explains why I could never find it Think I found the issue - here's the one that "should" be 3.125m - see the launcher it's spec'd for? The current one in BDB is based more on this drawing (which is the cover art for the Big G '69 report, btw, so I trust it more) 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.