Zorg Posted June 19, 2022 Share Posted June 19, 2022 Rounding out the 25kW Power Module part set with a radiator. Available in tracking and non-tracking versions each with single or double variants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorg Posted June 19, 2022 Share Posted June 19, 2022 2 hours ago, JustDark said: Why Why? because of our rigorous testing regime Anyways I've fixed it but this may affect craft files and this variant had to be killed off. which is a shame but the 0.9375m variant has a 0.625 node too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jcking Posted June 19, 2022 Share Posted June 19, 2022 2 hours ago, JustDark said: Why The clipping is only visual and not with the actual collider of the interstage (further more that blanket bit clips with the stringer bit). the interstage still separates cleanly with the aft MDA if you used those ports and the 0.625 node. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorg Posted June 19, 2022 Share Posted June 19, 2022 What do people think? I can revert the fix but personally lean towards keeping the fix as I think more clearance is better and opens up more options... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpaceFace545 Posted June 19, 2022 Share Posted June 19, 2022 3 minutes ago, Zorg said: What do people think? I can revert the fix but personally lean towards keeping the fix as I think more clearance is better and opens up more options... You should make Saturn c8 isnteac Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shlyopa Posted June 19, 2022 Share Posted June 19, 2022 Why would someone need c8 when MLV exist? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beccab Posted June 19, 2022 Share Posted June 19, 2022 4 minutes ago, Zorg said: What do people think? I can revert the fix but personally lean towards keeping the fix as I think more clearance is better and opens up more options... Is it possible to have both as a B9 switch (kind of like the COM change on the capsules)? If not, I'd go for the new ones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorg Posted June 19, 2022 Share Posted June 19, 2022 1 minute ago, Beccab said: Is it possible to have both as a B9 switch (kind of like the COM change on the capsules)? If not, I'd go for the new ones that gonna get a little messy tbh with the changes I made to the mesh and the baked AO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donnager fan Posted June 19, 2022 Share Posted June 19, 2022 On 6/16/2022 at 6:59 PM, DeadJohn said: I asked a similar question 2 weeks ago. My quoted question and the answer is at the link below. My use differs. It makes an awesome 4-crew direct ascent 2.5x KSRSS Moon lander, able to do more biome hopping than the Apollo LEM, and needs a much smaller lifter than a full Saturn V. Screenshot below. (In contract mode, Apollo with full science instruments costs me 480k credits to put 2 crew on the Moon. Leo Direct Ascent only costs 134k, has more DV, puts 4 on Moon, and skips 2 docking operations.https://imgur.com/vYnEVK) Wow! That looks nice as a Gemini Lander, What launch Vehicle Did you use for this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pTrevTrevs Posted June 19, 2022 Share Posted June 19, 2022 5 hours ago, AlphaMensae said: LC-34 and 37 were deactivated as a cost-saving measure when the moon landings started as NASA's budget was already being slashed. LC-34 was of course later abandoned in place as a memorial to Apollo 1. Well, the other part of my decision to do this was that I want to fly shuttle missions from LC-39 and I couldn’t justify the idea of keeping those pads equipped with infrastructure for both Saturn and STS hardware. Hence the downsize to the original Saturn pads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starhelperdude Posted June 19, 2022 Share Posted June 19, 2022 1 hour ago, Shlyopa said: Why would someone need c8 when MLV exist? that's the point, there is no reason to have ''C-8 not-NOVA'' it's just, some people ask for it, just because they like this conceptual abomination of a rocket Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeadJohn Posted June 19, 2022 Share Posted June 19, 2022 1 hour ago, Zorg said: What do people think? I can revert the fix but personally lean towards keeping the fix as I think more clearance is better and opens up more options... but this may affect craft files It was such a minor issue that I prefer the old way to avoid breaking saved vessels and those already in orbit. In actual use the original part didn't have a decoupling problem during my [limited] testing. The docking ports can be offset in VAB if someone needs more visual clearance during decoupling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1124max Posted June 19, 2022 Share Posted June 19, 2022 2 hours ago, Zorg said: that gonna get a little messy tbh with the changes I made to the mesh and the baked AO. It's probably not worth the extra work, but perhaps a recessed node could help? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invaderchaos Posted June 19, 2022 Share Posted June 19, 2022 Made some craft to show off the new RTG's: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeadJohn Posted June 19, 2022 Share Posted June 19, 2022 (edited) 2 hours ago, donnager fan said: Wow! That looks nice as a Gemini Lander, What launch Vehicle Did you use for this? Customized Saturn IB. Picture below to show tanks and engines, with fairing ejected to make the lander visible. 1st stage "16K" tank uses the longest stretched variant to get extra fuel, and 5 Cordele engines borrowed from BDB Titan to get a good combination of DV and TWR. 2nd stage SIVB tank is unstretched. Mount has 2 engines for better TWR for circularization and lunar transfer. Reminder: this is with the Skyhawk Science System tech tree and 2.5x KSRSS. I've already unlocked many engine upgrades. Edited June 19, 2022 by DeadJohn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileo chiu Posted June 19, 2022 Share Posted June 19, 2022 4 hours ago, Zorg said: Why? because of our rigorous testing regime Anyways I've fixed it but this may affect craft files and this variant had to be killed off. which is a shame but the 0.9375m variant has a 0.625 node too there should be a in setted version Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RocketBoy1641 Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 6 hours ago, Zorg said: Why? because of our rigorous testing regime Anyways I've fixed it but this may affect craft files and this variant had to be killed off. which is a shame but the 0.9375m variant has a 0.625 node too If not switchable; I would go with the additional clearance. I have hung up and been unable to detach the interstage when I had a pair of Apollo style and a pair of Stock ports on this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldForest Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 @Zorg How about keeping the old style, but recessing the attachment point like on the LEM or Apollo Mission Modules? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RocketBoy1641 Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 23 hours ago, Jcking said: The MM shield has an auto deploy at altitude setting enabled by default. You turned that off too? I went back and checked with the deploy at altitude DISABLED and that resolved it. Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox62 Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 6 hours ago, Starhelperdude said: that's the point, there is no reason to have ''C-8 not-NOVA'' it's just, some people ask for it, just because they like this conceptual abomination of a rocket Well, my reason for sort of wanting it is more the first stage - because if you're doing stuff like single launch station flights to, say, Jool, I could see it being useful. Or if you're trying to assemble something for going to Grannus at JNSQ scale, and want to make sure you don't leave anything behind in the process - while having 6 Regors is good, 8 (or potentially more, with a more efficient layout) would be better for SHLLV applications, if nothing else because it would also enable a greater core diameter (and thus, more room for mounting SRBs/LRBs if required). That said, one option would be for someone to devise a mockup "C-8/Nova" configuration, possibly using Near Future LV parts to supply tanks of sufficient diameter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
septemberWaves Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 8 hours ago, Zorg said: What do people think? I can revert the fix but personally lean towards keeping the fix as I think more clearance is better and opens up more options... I think the fix is a huge improvement. Even though the previous clipping didn't affect the collider, it's still better for parts to not be visually clipping. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donnager fan Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 Thanks 6 hours ago, DeadJohn said: Customized Saturn IB. Picture below to show tanks and engines, with fairing ejected to make the lander visible. 1st stage "16K" tank uses the longest stretched variant to get extra fuel, and 5 Cordele engines borrowed from BDB Titan to get a good combination of DV and TWR. 2nd stage SIVB tank is unstretched. Mount has 2 engines for better TWR for circularization and lunar transfer. Reminder: this is with the Skyhawk Science System tech tree and 2.5x KSRSS. I've already unlocked many engine upgrades. Thanks! Btw no les? Also what is that adapter part? on the lander? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldForest Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 13 minutes ago, donnager fan said: Thanks Thanks! Btw no les? Also what is that adapter part? on the lander? Gemini didn't have an LES IRL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donnager fan Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 Just now, GoldForest said: Gemini didn't have an LES IRL. I thought that the advanced Gemini stuff had an LES Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldForest Posted June 20, 2022 Share Posted June 20, 2022 43 minutes ago, donnager fan said: I thought that the advanced Gemini stuff had an LES Big G is sometimes shown with a LES, but I don't think regular Gemini was going to get one. I could be wrong. 7 hours ago, DeadJohn said: I like how your pads are just floating on the water. Like NASA couldn't be bothered to terraform the marsh, so they just made man-made Islands and just transport all their rockets by barge. 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.