Jump to content

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


CobaltWolf

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Pappystein said:

I am running Cryotanks (Nertea) and a few other mods that may have added a straight water option to some of my tanks.

Pretty sure Skyhawk Science System adds that?

Edited by KeaKaka
oh llok nwe page
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/1/2024 at 4:30 PM, GoldForest said:

IRL? Rigidity. Able to handle heavier payloads without crushing under the weight. In Atlas V, at least the 5-meter fairing version, the weight of the payload is supported by the fairings iirc. So, they're able to put heavier loads on top of Centaur because Centaur isn't taking the full brunt of the weight. At least until fairing jettison, but at that point, they are near weightless. 

I'm aware that I would be more rigid. My point is that the increased dry mass with a monocoque tank and more powerful engine might have made the S-V pointless because the volume of fuel is no larger than Centaur-D. It might have been able to carry a heavier payload but not have had the energy to do much with it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, KeaKaka said:

Pretty sure Skyhawk Science System adds that?

Yeah, I don't know where I am getting the water options...   It isn't every part just SOME of them.  I don't Have Rational resources but I do have much of the "Near-Future" kit, and those add tank options to many things.  And who knows.  Maybe I somehow activated a Life support patch for Tank X or Y accidentally



This is the first time I did a CKAN install that actually worked so IDK *Shrug*   I wanted to give CKAN a fair shake before I continued to blast it :D 

 

5 minutes ago, dave1904 said:

I'm aware that I would be more rigid. My point is that the increased dry mass with a monocoque tank and more powerful engine might have made the S-V pointless because the volume of fuel is no larger than Centaur-D. It might have been able to carry a heavier payload but not have had the energy to do much with it. 

We are assuming the tank length is the same.   All the drawings for the Monocoque S-V stage I have predate the explosion of the Centaur Test article.  Everything after that explosion is just text-based conversations and engineering diagrams, not actual drawings.

Remember, Centaur D.1, as produced, is longer than the Centaur Test article.  So maybe the S-V tankage would also grow.     But in either case.  We are talking a few - a couple hundred m/s DV loss, not enough to necessarily want you to switch to something else.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Zorg said:

I've added the Atlas A nose cone which was not an RV just an aero nose cone probably with some instrumentation like pitot tubes. Functionally it has the optional lead ballast tank.

Cobalt has outlined why we are generally hesitant to add warhead parts. I dont judge people who are into all that and I do play some milsims myself but when it comes to KSP I like the "purer" more innocent spirit KSP and Kerbals represent for me. That said the mk II RV has a nice shape and was mostly a research vehicle. That part is a maybe and I might do it like the Titan II cone or as an atmospheric probe if I do go ahead. I have no interest in the mk3 and mk4 RVs though (pictured is a mk3 I think).

That is either/both a Mk3 or a Mk4  Sorry Didn't notice the bottom interface, that is the Mk3 as you summized.  The Mk4 has the same basic shape but it is both longer and thicker.   They were broadly similar in shape and somewhat interchangeable.   Mk2 is the short fat cone shaped "Heatsink" on early test Atlases... And they are mounted TAIL to the top of the rocket (the nose is buried in the rocket)

The 1960 Atlas F was supposed to have a bigger Mk4 (never designated as anything but "bigger Mk4"   because it was never needed)   That is in the drawing I posted 3 or 4 pages back.   Remember, Initially Atlas F was meant to throw a warhead that had twice the throwweight of the basic Mk4 because Convair was not read into the mass of the next generation Thermonuclear warhead (they didn't have a high enough security clearance.)   So the 1960 Atlas F was JUST A GUESS.    Turned out on a kiloton per pound weight, the next generation were significantly lighter.    Atlas F as built is just Atlas D/E but like 2 inches taller (changes to the tooling)

 

Edited by Pappystein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Titan launching X-20 Dyna-soar. Also, PSA. The reconfiguration of Titan parts has broken Pappystein's hypergolic patch. ATM, the LR-87 engines do not accept Hypergolic fuel, but the LR91 still does... for now. Check your fuel tanks and make sure they have the appropriate fuel! Or delete the patch from the extras folder for the time being.

I doubt we'll see an update to the Hypergolic patch until all this reconfiguration is done with, but feel free to prove me wrong Pappy. :P

Full album (It's a biggen.): Imgur: The magic of the Internet

H7m6ZaW.png

5SoRLyH.png

w7iAvou.png

NdPBKZS.png

ryWnXzN.png

kWezhbC.png

I7KDESg.png

CC7uOJQ.png

Edited by GoldForest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it isn't a priority for you at the moment, but is there any chance you could add a selection of generic probe solar panels based on real life spacecraft, similar to the ones in ProbesPlus? It would pair nicely with the selection of historic RTGs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, GoldForest said:

Titan launching X-20 Dyna-soar. Also, PSA. The reconfiguration of Titan parts has broken Pappystein's hypergolic patch. ATM, the LR-87 engines do not accept Hypergolic fuel, but the LR91 still does... for now. Check your fuel tanks and make sure they have the appropriate fuel! Or delete the patch from the extras folder for the time being.

I doubt we'll see an update to the Hypergolic patch until all this reconfiguration is done with, but feel free to prove me wrong Pappy. :P

CC7uOJQ.png

Two things:

1) YEs I figured that it would, I am going to start working on the patch today... might be a few days before it is complete for what is currently merged together.

2) The J20 engines for the X-20... did they allow you to actually fly it with a better semblance of control?

 

Oh PS  1 subA) I am going to go through and re-build my missing Titan engine patch right into the HypergolicBDB patchs.

 

 

Edited by Pappystein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Pappystein said:

Two things:

1) YEs I figured that it would, I am going to start working on the patch today... might be a few days before it is complete for what is currently merged together.

2) The J20 engines for the X-20... did they allow you to actually fly it with a better semblance of control?

 

Oh PS  1 subA) I am going to go through and re-build my missing Titan engine patch right into the HypergolicBDB patchs.

 

 

Yes, though slowly, sub 200 m/s. It can maintain 5000 meters no problem with AtmoAuto. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I have updated my personal copy of the Hypergolic Patch for the LR87 changes.   However LR91 changes are soon to be coming so I am not going to release it until they are merged together.

While I am working on updating this patch.   Is there any other Hypergolic Engine/tanks that you all have found that I missed?

Feedback from the general player base would be VERY HELPFUL!   Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, space-wizards said:

Not quite sure who manages the AJ9 patch, but the updated Titan engine parts are not compatible with that patch. Figured a heads up on that would be helpful to someone.

If it hasn't been fixed by the time I am done with the Hypergolic patch I will fix and PR it

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Taco Salad said:

Wait is there a radial construction port?

there is a whole set of them that came to BDB... a year or so ago.   Part of the NASA not ETS Saturn S-IVC upgrade kit.  Included the inline S-IVC docking ports as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Taco Salad said:

Wait is there a radial construction port?

ZCZv8gT.png

Well, Radial Docking Port Adapter. You'll need to put Apollo ports on it. It also comes in different sizes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

ZCZv8gT.png

Well, Radial Docking Port Adapter. You'll need to put Apollo ports on it. It also comes in different sizes.

OH I forgot about this part. Wish it was a docking piece itself instead of being a row of parts nodes. Though it's probably supposed to go with the flat construction ports that also got added, the small ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Taco Salad said:

OH I forgot about this part. Wish it was a docking piece itself instead of being a row of parts nodes. Though it's probably supposed to go with the flat construction ports that also got added, the small ones.

Oh, yeah, you are correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a Heads up for those of you, like me stalking the Github dev section.  Currently, on Github the LR87 engine has a variant that is functional but wrong (it is a new variant that still has all the info for an old variant)

Game should run fine with this but better for me to post about it than a bunch of others giving bug reports

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Taco Salad said:

OH I forgot about this part. Wish it was a docking piece itself instead of being a row of parts nodes. Though it's probably supposed to go with the flat construction ports that also got added, the small ones.

I think of the structure and the ports themselves as kind of one part; they just needed to be separate to have the length switches work. The other thing is it solves the issue of making sure multiple docking nodes can index correctly, since there's only a selection of pre-defined offsets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pappystein said:

Just a Heads up for those of you, like me stalking the Github dev section.  Currently, on Github the LR87 engine has a variant that is functional but wrong (it is a new variant that still has all the info for an old variant)

Game should run fine with this but better for me to post about it than a bunch of others giving bug reports

Should be all fixed up now, the LR87 AJ11A and the LH2 mode variants should be all set up and have waterfall patches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...