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

[OrdinaryKerman]

6 minutes ago, Beccab said:

Uuuuh good question, I kinda forgot the name . It was a small mod with only wheels in it and that also included some wooden ones for some reason, later I'll go search on the forum for it but if anyone has a clue please tell me

I think I found it

 

[Beccab]

2 minutes ago, OrdinaryKerman said:

I think I found it

 

Yup, that's the one

[DeadJohn]

@CobaltWolf @Zorg (and anyone else who might know)

I found what seemed like a bug with a few Mariner solar panels, but when I looked deeper I found different BDB solar panels are config'ed using different techniques, and therefore give different results with Kopernicus (KSRSS 2.5x in my case). Some panels contain an OUTPUT_RESOURCE block and other panels do not. It seems related to Zorg's post linked at the bottom.

The apparent bug: When I hover over the Mariner 10 panel in the VAB part list, the part window shows 5.0/sec charge rate. After I dragged the panel onto a ship, a mousewheel click only shows 1.0/sec. The Mariner 2 panel, meanwhile, shows only 0.4/sec in the part list, then becomes that same 1.0/sec. (Near Future Electrical shows both panels as 0.94/sec)

Some BDB solar panels are defined this way. They show the consistent values in the VAB part window and with a middle mouseclick:

    MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleDeployableSolarPanel
        <snipped for brevity>
        resourceName = ElectricCharge
        chargeRate = 0.28       

Others are defined this way. They always show 1.0/sec with a mousewheel click, regardless of their "rate = #.#" value (at least for the Mariner 2 and 10 panels I tested).

MODULE
    {
        name = ModuleDeployableSolarPanel
        <snipped for brevity>
        //resourceName = ElectricCharge
        //chargeRate = 1.05
        OUTPUT_RESOURCE
        {
            name = ElectricCharge
            rate = 0.4
        }

If you need a grunt to edit many BDB solar configs, I'm willing to be an edit monkey, as long as you experts let me know which way it should be done.

 

[Kass__XAP]

Testing the XLR-129 on the Space Shuttle. Conclusion? Low TWR & major gravity losses, but she is a beauty and an engine I will be using again on other vehicles.

 

[Beccab]

6 minutes ago, Pioneer_Steve said:

Testing the XLR-129 on the Space Shuttle. Conclusion? Low TWR & major gravity losses, but she is a beauty and an engine I will be using again on other vehicles.

 

Have you thought about using 4? Many Shuttle proposals used more than three after all

[Kass__XAP]

4 minutes ago, Beccab said:

Have you thought about using 4? Many Shuttle proposals used more than three after all

I would have used 4, but with nozzle extention it isn't very roomy.

[Zorg]

here's a good one, 11 XLR129 on the booster and 2 on the orbiter

[Beccab]

Complete Jamestown launch, from liftoff to landing

I gotta say that we really didn't have many details about the Jamestown launch apart from the landing video, so I have decided to go this way:
- Launch is unmanned so that the service module doesn't have to return to earth and uses its propellant to bring Jamestown into lunar orbit
- As it was derived from Skylab, I've made it the SIVB diameter
- the adapter carries the airlock and a drop tank used by Jamestown to do the first part of the landing sequence and finish the landing using the onboard fuel tanks, thus no need for a wet workshop

Liftoff:

Quote

Aerocovers detachment

Trans Lunar Injection

Trans Lunar Injected

Adapter open

Airlock grabbed

Moving into position

Docking and adapter expulsion

Service Module relocation and SIVB separation, everything is ready for inserting into lunar orbit now

Lunar landing

Quote

Slowdown for orbital insertion

Service module jettison

I...I'm not too sure how this manuevre is called, but reducing the velocity to target the landing spot

Drop tanks dropping

Approaching the border of the crater, reducing speed

Final approach

[TruthfulGnome]

31 minutes ago, Beccab said:

Complete Jamestown launch, from liftoff to landing

I gotta say that we really didn't have many details about the Jamestown launch apart from the landing video, so I have decided to go this way:
- Launch is unmanned so that the service module doesn't have to return to earth and uses its propellant to bring Jamestown into lunar orbit
- As it was derived from Skylab, I've made it the SIVB diameter
- the adapter carries the airlock and a drop tank used by Jamestown to do the first part of the landing sequence and finish the landing using the onboard fuel tanks, thus no need for a wet workshop

Liftoff:

Lunar landing

Jamestown my beloved

[Zorg]

53 minutes ago, Beccab said:

Complete Jamestown launch, from liftoff to landing

I gotta say that we really didn't have many details about the Jamestown launch apart from the landing video, so I have decided to go this way:
- Launch is unmanned so that the service module doesn't have to return to earth and uses its propellant to bring Jamestown into lunar orbit
- As it was derived from Skylab, I've made it the SIVB diameter
- the adapter carries the airlock and a drop tank used by Jamestown to do the first part of the landing sequence and finish the landing using the onboard fuel tanks, thus no need for a wet workshop

Liftoff:

Lunar landing

 

Very impressive! I somehow get the impression you may have put more thought into this than the show runners  

[TruthfulGnome]

1 hour ago, Beccab said:

Complete Jamestown launch, from liftoff to landing

I gotta say that we really didn't have many details about the Jamestown launch apart from the landing video, so I have decided to go this way:
- Launch is unmanned so that the service module doesn't have to return to earth and uses its propellant to bring Jamestown into lunar orbit
- As it was derived from Skylab, I've made it the SIVB diameter
- the adapter carries the airlock and a drop tank used by Jamestown to do the first part of the landing sequence and finish the landing using the onboard fuel tanks, thus no need for a wet workshop

Liftoff:

Lunar landing

Best Jamestown recreation i've seen but im pretty sure it would've been launched on a Saturn V without the S-ivb and just in a S-II fairing, and then one of the Apollo missions would've used crew to assemble the airlock

[Beccab]

Just now, TruthfulGnome said:

Best Jamestown recreation i've seen but im pretty sure it would've been launched on a Saturn V without the S-ivb and just in a S-II fairing, and then one of the Apollo missions would've used crew to assemble the airlock

I thought so too but the airlock is actually already attached when it lands, you can see it in the video at the end of the Apollo 15 episode.

Without an SIVB what does it use for the TLI though?

[MashAndBangers]

1 minute ago, Beccab said:

Without an SIVB what does it use for the TLI though?

Capitalism!

1 hour ago, Beccab said:

Aerocovers detachment

What mod has those Aerocovers like that?

[Beccab]

2 minutes ago, MashAndBangers said:

What mod has those Aerocovers like that?

None it's an NF Aeronautics double engine pod attached to a decoupler. As long as you don't put it on something too delicate it will be fine

Edited September 6, 2021 by Beccab

[MashAndBangers]

1 hour ago, Beccab said:

In this image, the covers for the Jamestown engines.  I downloaded NF (Near Future) Aeronautics, and the only thing double related is the dual engine pod, which looks nothing like those covers.

[Kass__XAP]

For the amount of time I've put into BDB, I don't think I ever launched the Delta IV Medium Bare.

Edited September 6, 2021 by Pioneer_Steve

[Beccab]

23 minutes ago, MashAndBangers said:

In this image, the covers for the Jamestown engines.  I downloaded NF (Near Future) Aeronautics, and the only thing double related is the dual engine pod, which looks nothing like those covers.

Not those pods, there is another line of side engine pods that allow you to attach engines while remaining streamlined, one being the single version and one being the dual one. I've tried looking on internet but i can't find pics or the exact name, but it's in the aerodynamics section and attaches radically 

[Starhelperdude]

3 hours ago, Pioneer_Steve said:

Testing the XLR-129 on the Space Shuttle. Conclusion? Low TWR & major gravity losses, but she is a beauty and an engine I will be using again on other vehicles.

 

I've tried that too, including with 2 normal size ones and 1 big nozzle one, and also with 3 offset big nozzle ones (which barely fit), overall they are  interesting on shuttle  to use but yeah they have TWR issues

[AmateurAstronaut1969]

A few things to show off, all using @Pioneer_Steve’s Amazing TUFX Configs.

Apollo 15 SIM bay Showoff

Apollo block IV upgrade

So as some of you may know, I’m recreating Space Station Freedom from ETS. It’s not the best time as all the new Saturn parts are coming out, but I’m not bothered. After playing with the new capsule, I can’t go back to using the old one, so until we get a block III service module made, I’m using this:

The Frankencapsule!

 

[Kass__XAP]

19 minutes ago, AmateurAstronaut1969 said:

A few things to show off, all using @Pioneer_Steve’s Amazing TUFX Configs.

Apollo 15 SIM bay Showoff

Apollo block IV upgrade

So as some of you may know, I’m recreating Space Station Freedom from ETS. It’s not the best time as all the new Saturn parts are coming out, but I’m not bothered. After playing with the new capsule, I can’t go back to using the old one, so until we get a block III service module made, I’m using this:

The Frankencapsule!

 

I'm glad to see them being used.

[wallum61]

26 minutes ago, AmateurAstronaut1969 said:

So as some of you may know, I’m recreating Space Station Freedom from ETS. It’s not the best time as all the new Saturn parts are coming out, but I’m not bothered. After playing with the new capsule, I can’t go back to using the old one, so until we get a block III service module made, I’m using this:

The Frankencapsule!

I was tinkering other day and the Universal Storage parts work very well for a Block III SM, especially since there are dedicated Apollo style textures

[Jcking]

There's always the AAP Block III SM (A block II SM with a fourth fuel cell, enlarged cryogenic tanks, and 2600 lbs of extra RCS propellant; allowing a 45 day stay in LEO or a 35 day stay in LLO).

[AmateurAstronaut1969]

14 minutes ago, Jcking said:

There's always the AAP Block III SM (A block II SM with a fourth fuel cell, enlarged cryogenic tanks, and 2600 lbs of extra RCS propellant; allowing a 45 day stay in LEO or a 35 day stay in LLO).

Good idea, but I’m recreating the eyes turned skywards Alt history, and it had a shortened SM with less fuel, the LM APS instead of the Apollo SPS, and batteries instead of a fuel cell

30 minutes ago, wallum61 said:

I was tinkering other day and the Universal Storage parts work very well for a Block III SM, especially since there are dedicated Apollo style textures

Maybe, I’ve played around with it before. It’s somewhat similar to the new parts, but different in a few ways

[pTrevTrevs]

1 hour ago, AmateurAstronaut1969 said:

Apollo block IV upgrade

So as some of you may know, I’m recreating Space Station Freedom from ETS. It’s not the best time as all the new Saturn parts are coming out, but I’m not bothered. After playing with the new capsule, I can’t go back to using the old one, so until we get a block III service module made, I’m using this:

Wait, are these new Apollo/Saturn parts functional enough to be used in normal gameplay? I thought they were still prototypes missing a lot of functionality.

[TruthfulGnome]

38 minutes ago, pTrevTrevs said:

Wait, are these new Apollo/Saturn parts functional enough to be used in normal gameplay? I thought they were still prototypes missing a lot of functionality.

Yeah they function pretty well, the only problem I've come across is the Saturn V causing tons of lag during launch