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

[GoldForest]

1 hour ago, slyfox023 said:

well considering they have a moon base, wouldn't that mean they would have a refueling set up already on the base? like they had landing pads and everything, yet forgot to make the fuel? and considering how the early stages of that base was made to get water and make fuel from liquid hydrogen, I'm pretty sure it would be realistic 

Of course they can refuel it, and they do. That's not the problem. The problem is that the LSAM doesn't realistically have enough fuel to get from the Moon Base to orbit, dock with the Space Shuttle (Not even going to get into how THAT's impossible.) and then deorbit and land back at the base. It has enough fuel to maybe, MAYBE, get into a low Moon orbit, but that's it.  They would more than likely be out of fuel at that point. And space shuttle can't refuel it, the space shuttle has no fuel transfer system., at least not for docked spacecraft. 

LSAM is unrealistic and impossible, both IRL and in KSP.

Edited July 13 by GoldForest

[biohazard15]

1 hour ago, Rodger said:

The main issue is I think the colliders would need changing for clearance with interstages, which is a little more involved than I’d want to get into. You can also currently disable the shroud in the PAW anyway (a stock feature), and offset tool a interstage upwards to fit too. But you may get some slight bumps on decoupling due to the colliders of the transtage not being set up for this, though it will kinda work.

The fact the transtage is an all-in-one part too with integrated engines also means there’s basically no difference in stability between a shroud or an interstage. There isn’t a low mass engine part sandwiched in the middle of the stack that an interstage would bypass.

Yeah, was afraid of possible shenanigans with it being AIO. I remember the heating problems when it was released (and my reports about it). Sad, but understandable.

Edited July 13 by biohazard15

[hugoraider]

2 hours ago, GoldForest said:

Of course they can refuel it, and they do. That's not the problem. The problem is that the LSAM doesn't realistically have enough fuel to get from the Moon Base to orbit, dock with the Space Shuttle (Not even going to get into how THAT's impossible.) and then deorbit and land back at the base. It has enough fuel to maybe, MAYBE, get into a low Moon orbit, but that's it.  They would more than likely be out of fuel at that point. And space shuttle can't refuel it, the space shuttle has no fuel transfer system., at least not for docked spacecraft. 

LSAM is unrealistic and impossible, both IRL and in KSP.

Yeah, it couldn't refuel with the shuttle, but what if you have a space station?

[GoldForest]

6 minutes ago, hugoraider said:

Yeah, it couldn't refuel with the shuttle, but what if you have a space station?

A space station could refuel it, yes, but the problem is the LSAM will use most if not all its fuel just to get into orbit. It wouldn't be able to rendezvous with the station, unless the station came to it. 

And that's not taking into account that the LSAM is LHO fueled instead of Hypergolic. Yeah, you could just keep water on the station and split the water to create hydrogen and oxygen, but that would take DAYS to refuel LSAM. 

Again, LSAM is an impossible design that only works in movie magic. 

Edited July 13 by GoldForest

[hugoraider]

35 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

A space station could refuel it, yes, but the problem is the LSAM will use most if not all its fuel just to get into orbit. It wouldn't be able to rendezvous with the station, unless the station came to it. 

And that's not taking into account that the LSAM is LHO fueled instead of Hypergolic. Yeah, you could just keep water on the station and split the water to create hydrogen and oxygen, but that would take DAYS to refuel LSAM. 

Again, LSAM is an impossible design that only works in movie magic. 

TBH my LSAM burns LFO, since I used 4 LEM descent engines for it and I have more than enough fuel to perform an orbital rendezvous with a station, though maybe a LHO fueled one wouldn't be able to make it. And to refuel at a station, we can have refuelling vessels.

[Cheesecake]

@Pappystein

Is your patch for hypergolic engines already working correctly? For example, the Transtage does not yet work for me because the tank contains Aerozine50+NTO, but the engine requires Aerozine50+NitrogenTetroxide.
Conversely, the Titan tanks contain Aerozine50+NitrogenTetroxide and the engines require Aerozine50+NTO.
I have installed Skyhawk Science System in parallel, but have completely deleted the BDB parts from the hypergolic patch.
I installed all 4 patches from the Pafftek folder as well as the Titan AJ-9 patch.
Everything from the current BDB-development-version.
Is it possible that the TankSwitch from Skyhawk plays a role here?

Edit: OK. I think it was related to Skyhawk. Fixed it by removing some configs in Skyhawk. But now I have another problem. Upgrading of the LR91 is impossible. There is only the Leto and Leto A config possible. Upgrades are not available.

 

Edited July 13 by Cheesecake

[Pappystein]

19 hours ago, ra4nd0m said:

Thanks, mate! THose words were the best thing that happend to me this month! I wish I could buy you a beer, or a can of soda, dunno what you enjoy...
Does anybody know who's responsible for CCK patch?  I think that either patch itself or tags on new atlas parts should be updated. This patch is a real life-saver and I really hope for the update.

Given how many changes going on in the Dev Build, Make certain you are also deleting BluedogDB from your GameData folder before installing the latest version!   This caught me out last week in the rapid changes to the Titan Engines!

5 hours ago, Cheesecake said:

@Pappystein

Is your patch for hypergolic engines already working correctly? For example, the Transtage does not yet work for me because the tank contains Aerozine50+NTO, but the engine requires Aerozine50+NitrogenTetroxide.
Conversely, the Titan tanks contain Aerozine50+NitrogenTetroxide and the engines require Aerozine50+NTO.
I have installed Skyhawk Science System in parallel, but have completely deleted the BDB parts from the hypergolic patch.
I installed all 4 patches from the Pafftek folder as well as the Titan AJ-9 patch.
Everything from the current BDB-development-version.
Is it possible that the TankSwitch from Skyhawk plays a role here?

Edit: OK. I think it was related to Skyhawk. Fixed it by removing some configs in Skyhawk. But now I have another problem. Upgrading of the LR91 is impossible. There is only the Leto and Leto A config possible. Upgrades are not available.

 

Yeah.  I probably need to go through and add !Skyhawk to EVERY line in those patches!      Skyhawk decided to integrate some of my patch Ideas into their mod using their fuel switchers.   <--TBC it was totally not a "Copy Pappystein's idea" type of situation

If you are playing in Science or Career, any Upgrades you have already passed, will not appear again

 

The Interesting thing is Skyhawk must be using their own fuel definitions because NitrogenTetroxide and even more appropriately Dinitrogen Tetroxide does not exist in CRP  But NTO, what I am using in my patch does.  (all three names are the same exact thing)

 

EDITED:
Although, I almost do not see the point since SSS seems to be mostly abandoned, with more and more errors piling up with various mods.

 

2nd Edit
PR has been pushed to the Github  Assume 24/48hours before it is included in BDB

 

 

Edited July 13 by Pappystein

[Zorg]

On 7/12/2024 at 12:57 PM, hugoraider said:

I'd love to see the LSAM too, but AFAIK it's not planned.

  

On 7/12/2024 at 3:21 AM, slyfox023 said:

I got a questions for the Devs, since you guys are about Alternate history, would it ever be a possibility that you guys would make "For All Mankind" parts at all?  

Not really. No one on the team is a particularly big FAM fan. The designs in that show are fine for what they are in the show but compared to IRL designs, IRL concepts and well thought out alternate history concepts such as from ETS, they are really not all that plausible and wouldn't fit in with what we have in that sense. Why make half baked hollywood designs when we have a plethora of real concepts such as the various LM derivatives cobalt added?

I think we all agree the initial Jamestown module and interior looks cool though but there are no current plans to actually make it. If something from FAM ever makes it to BDB thats probably the only thing that has any chance at all.

[Rodger]

6 hours ago, Pappystein said:

Yeah.  I probably need to go through and add !Skyhawk to EVERY line in those patches!      Skyhawk decided to integrate some of my patch Ideas into their mod using their fuel switchers.   <--TBC it was totally not a "Copy Pappystein's idea" type of situation

If you are playing in Science or Career, any Upgrades you have already passed, will not appear again

The Interesting thing is Skyhawk must be using their own fuel definitions because NitrogenTetroxide and even more appropriately Dinitrogen Tetroxide does not exist in CRP  But NTO, what I am using in my patch does.  (all three names are the same exact thing)

EDITED:
Although, I almost do not see the point since SSS seems to be mostly abandoned, with more and more errors piling up with various mods.

2nd Edit
PR has been pushed to the Github  Assume 24/48hours before it is included in BDB

@Cheesecake Since this has now been pulled into dev branch, the bdb hypergolic optional patch just isn’t active anymore with SSS, and you might as well just remove it. However since SSS hasn’t been updated in a while, it is absolutely going to be buggy with the updated titan engines in dev branch anyway, not to mention all the other changes and new parts added since SSS has last updated. I can’t currently recommend playing with SSS and BDB dev branch together.

[zakkpaz]

I’m having trouble with the X-15, most of the parts aren’t showing up in game anymore.

All the files are in the folder

[bigyihsuan]

20 hours ago, Rodger said:

The fact the transtage is an all-in-one part too with integrated engines

Idea: Split Transtage into 2 parts: the AJ10 variant and an integrated fuel tank containing everything else. This would allow for interstage stuff, and reduce certain headaches since Transtage is no longer an engine.

(this is not a serious suggestion but it would be cool)

Edited July 14 by bigyihsuan

[Rodger]

2 hours ago, zakkpaz said:

I’m having trouble with the X-15, most of the parts aren’t showing up in game anymore.

All the files are in the folder

You might need to install KSP Community Fixes, there seems to be an issue with one of the x15 textures, but having KSPCF allows it to load.

[zakkpaz]

52 minutes ago, Rodger said:

You might need to install KSP Community Fixes, there seems to be an issue with one of the x15 textures, but having KSPCF allows it to load.

Are you guys going to fix the texture or is this patch my only option?

I hate to ask you guys to do more more work, but i have way to many mods installed.

[Pappystein]

11 minutes ago, zakkpaz said:

Are you guys going to fix the texture or is this patch my only option?

I hate to ask you guys to do more more work, but i have way to many mods installed.

KSP Community fix repairs lots of bugs in Core KSP code... and optimizes Loading.  If you have "Lots of mods" you ABSOLUTELY WANT KSP-Community Fixes!  loading time is reduced on almost all installs (there are always exceptions.)

And I also recommend for lots of mods  the free (well they would love for you to pay for it but it is, last I checked, optional)  ProcessLasso.   Between those two my huge install only takes 4 minutes to load and process.   Without both It is close to 12 minutes... on a huge monster PC with only SSDs!

 

[Rodger]

It will get fixed when Cobalt is able to, but I also echo what Pappystein has said and 100% recommend KSPCF, in all cases.

Edited July 14 by Rodger

[Pappystein]

So I was asked in a Discord I am on, how I get into orbit so "consistantly"   Thought I would share my tricks with you with a moderately complicated Rocket to fly.    It is no Saturn IB but it is also not a simple Saturn V.

Rocket details for those that want:

Spoiler

Yes, that is a Titan LDC Core (all hydrolox All the time)  
Stage 0 is 4 of the new UA-1206F FULL SEGMENT SRMs  Thanks again to the Team for getting those in!
Stage 1 is a maximal Stretch Titan LDC first stage partset finished in nice SOFI because hey it is running LH-2/O
Stage 1's engines are the Pratt and Whitney RL20-P3 booster engines (4x)   I could have probably launched this rocket with JUST the core (1.25:1 TWR at Sea level) But decided needed the extra umpf (also I would have been short by about 100 dV for my desired 400km circular orbit.
Stage 2, again Stretched Titan LDC tanks is powered by 4x of the AJ23-173 (non USAF ordered LR87 LH2 Vacuum engine)
The MOL station consists of the KH-10 Dorian part, the 2 man lab and the 2 man Hab.   The Gemini in this instance is a Hitchhiker equiped Gemini with the "MOL TUG" SM instead of the USAF SM (Which I always have problems de-orbiting with)  Uses a RING and FORK docking port.
MOL station  has a single Transtage for it's Death by smooching the atmosphere at end of life.   (Deorbit burn)

Ok, now I know PVG is "more realistic"  But given all the errors MechJeb adds BACK into the navigation by over-correcting (PIO or in this case MJIO) I don't use it.  In fact I have NEVER EVER Sucessfully got a rocket into orbit with PVG.  (and I even tried the other day with the SRM1 Titan launch I posted (1 or 2 pages back)

So my setup is all displayed above.   First off I am using Engineer for all and Mechjeb for All (to avoid crazy add on things that looked cool in stock but now that we have "Porkalike" thanks to former Squad Modeler Porkjet, they look kinda janky.   And yes, you see both displays for MechJeb and Engineer Redux.   I utilize both because there are edge cases where one or the other will provide false information (rare now days) 

I fly the "Classic Ascent Profile" in Mechjeb's Ascent Guidance.   I set the Altitude (in this case 400km) I want to orbit at.  this will be a Zero eccentricicy Equator orbit.   then, after turning off Autostage (not a good thing for Titan-esk rockets where the next stage ignites so many seconds before previous stage burnout) and auto-deploy (it will deploy as soon as you are in space... including EVERYTHING not able to be deployed... great way to break your solar pannels.    Then I go down to EDIT ASCENT PATH and select it.

The Ascent Path is where most people go wrong with Mechjeb.   By default all you have is a slider that changes how quickly the rocket turns to get "level" with the ground.   But in altered, non stock scales you have to alter many paramaters in here.

Here is a close up,  of the Ascent Path Editor.  First off, I have DESELECTED "Automatic Altitude Turn"   Remember what I was saying about alternative scales.  If I left this on, my rocket would hit 60KM and then start burning trying to raise apogee while still well within the atmostphere... which leads to things getting very melty on the rocket!   Instead, I try to manually set this to 2/3rds of the difference between 90km and my desired altitude.  For ease of math, I just went with 300KM.  
Next, I adjust the slider for turn shape.  Slow-accelerating rockets (Saturn IB) need a STEEPER or Higher %

I tend to fly Saturn S-IB rockets with the slider all the way in the 90+% range (note how much "steeper" the red line is.   Now in the case of Saturn I set the end turn altitude to my Apogee altitude (so for this 400km orbit I would set the Turn End Altitude to 400km)

Hope this quick and dirty on how to get big complicated rockets into orbit is helpful to someone/any of you.

 

Spoiler

And now for something different!

When I first put this rocket on the pad, I realized I had several issues/missing parts.  So I decided to test the new Abort mode for the UA-120x series of SRMs...

THAT WORKED...   Co-incidentally I was so low, and the canceled thrust of the UA-1206Fs allowed them to land right as they ran out of fuel    All 4 SRMs survived... the main core went BOOM however
 

Second flight, coasting to Circulation (yes I put radiators on the 2nd stage!)

2nd Stage fully circularized with MOL at 400km,   setting up to do the return burn for the 2nd stage....   Don't be Like ESA and SpaceX... no litter of 2nd stage in space!   *sorry was that too soon?*  no not sorry!

Private Eyes, are Watching you!   KH-10 working end
 

Full stage in orbit looking NICE heading towards the light termination line

 

[Pappystein]

I will post a "Best practice" for Saturn IB tomorrow evening, I spent a lot of time getting it right today for 125km orbit... there is a lot of data to process and post... including a FTO! 

 

[Cheesecake]

11 hours ago, Rodger said:

@Cheesecake Since this has now been pulled into dev branch, the bdb hypergolic optional patch just isn’t active anymore with SSS, and you might as well just remove it. However since SSS hasn’t been updated in a while, it is absolutely going to be buggy with the updated titan engines in dev branch anyway, not to mention all the other changes and new parts added since SSS has last updated. I can’t currently recommend playing with SSS and BDB dev branch together.

@Rodgerand @PappysteinThanks for your help.

The main reason why i use SSS is that i also play with Kerbalism and the configs for BDB in Kerbalism are outdated. Unfortunately, I can't manage to extract the config from SSS and then use it in Kerbalism. One reason for this is the resource definitions.
Unfortunately, I have not yet found anyone who has updated configs.

[OrbitalManeuvers]

7 hours ago, Pappystein said:

In fact I have NEVER EVER Sucessfully got a rocket into orbit with PVG. 

This seems super odd to me, as I use PVG all the time, especially with BDB. Any chance you have a video of an attempt? 

[bigyihsuan]

9 hours ago, Pappystein said:

In fact I have NEVER EVER Sucessfully got a rocket into orbit with PVG.

I use PVG all the time, with the caveat that I'm doing it on scaled systems (2.5/2.7x and 10x), and often with Skyhawk hypergolics, Cryofuels, or Real Fuels. I've been able to get most of the implemented rockets in BDB to orbit just fine (Atlas-Agena/Centaur, Delta II, Saturn V, Saturn IC, and most variants of Titan are the most reliable ones). Most of the time I have to have a coast phase after the 1st or 2nd stages due to how small the planets are on 2.5/2.7x (not needed on 10x, with Real Fuels and such).

Most of my launch failures are due to the stack being wobbly (usually the Titan 2nd stage decoupler for some reason being really weak for a 1.825m part), staging SRBs too early, or setting the Atlas skirt auto-decoupler G force value too low (not enough TWR in the sustainer).

Are you doing it on 1x-scaled? What usually happens when you try to use PVG? (Are you using FAR?)

Edited July 14 by bigyihsuan

[Entr8899]

@CobaltWolfSeeing as the mod has Project Beacon, have you considered adding Explorer 9 and/or Project Echo? Giant balloons acting as relay sats would be so much fun...

[Pappystein]

7 hours ago, bigyihsuan said:

I use PVG all the time, with the caveat that I'm doing it on scaled systems (2.5/2.7x and 10x), and often with Skyhawk hypergolics, Cryofuels, or Real Fuels. I've been able to get most of the implemented rockets in BDB to orbit just fine (Atlas-Agena/Centaur, Delta II, Saturn V, Saturn IC, and most variants of Titan are the most reliable ones). Most of the time I have to have a coast phase after the 1st or 2nd stages due to how small the planets are on 2.5/2.7x (not needed on 10x, with Real Fuels and such).

Most of my launch failures are due to the stack being wobbly (usually the Titan 2nd stage decoupler for some reason being really weak for a 1.825m part), staging SRBs too early, or setting the Atlas skirt auto-decoupler G force value too low (not enough TWR in the sustainer).

Are you doing it on 1x-scaled? What usually happens when you try to use PVG? (Are you using FAR?)

 

9 hours ago, OrbitalManeuvers said:

This seems super odd to me, as I use PVG all the time, especially with BDB. Any chance you have a video of an attempt? 

Yeah, I am Using JNSQ so 2.7ish X, and I have no clue as to the cause.  I use the exact same Ascent settings that others use with the same setup and the same mods and rocket, they orbit, and mine goes sideways (as controlled by Mechjeb, not due to aerodynamics) in Atmo and breaks/burns up.  Or like the Titan SRM1 from a couple of days ago.   The SRM burnout is beyond where it thinks it should be, and it fails to be corrected... and the 2nd stage engine does not have enough thrust to cancel out the big negative vertical velocity because "we got to coast until we are back down to X altitude."    This is on multiple CLEAN installs.   I could put some effort into solving it, but why when Classic-Ascent works "100% of the time good enough?" 

 

But I appreciate both your concern and offers of help!  I really do!

 

 

 

11 hours ago, Cheesecake said:

@Rodgerand @PappysteinThanks for your help.

The main reason why i use SSS is that i also play with Kerbalism and the configs for BDB in Kerbalism are outdated. Unfortunately, I can't manage to extract the config from SSS and then use it in Kerbalism. One reason for this is the resource definitions.
Unfortunately, I have not yet found anyone who has updated configs.

I am not 100000% certain so please do not hold me to this.  But I thought, 10-15 pages back someone was talking about being "Almost done" with Kerbalism update for BDB....  

 

@bigyihsuan Didn't answer part of your question.  No, after all my attempts and tests in FAR, as well as the simplier NEAR, and then when looking for support being told to "go away" (dramatically oversimplifying here and this is not the time or place to re-hash)  But suffice to say, the error I was seeing combined with how I was treated.  I trust FAR as far as I can throw myself... and I can not do hand-stands

 

Is KSP1 Atmosphere 2.0 GREAT?  NO,  Is it better than most "non hyper realistic flight sims?"   You-betcha

 

Edited July 14 by Pappystein

[bigyihsuan]

1 hour ago, Pappystein said:

Yeah, I am Using JNSQ so 2.7ish X, and I have no clue as to the cause.  I use the exact same Ascent settings that others use with the same setup and the same mods and rocket, they orbit, and mine goes sideways (as controlled by Mechjeb, not due to aerodynamics) in Atmo and breaks/burns up. 

Going full sideways in the atmosphere is a sign of PVG pitching too fast because it thinks the predicted TWR is higher that it actually is. A fix for this is either-inclusive-or:

• increasing pitch start velocity (100m/s is what I use),
• decreasing pitch angle rate (0.5 deg/s usually, but 0.25 dec/s for rockets with particularly weak 2nd stages),
• or increasing final orbit altitude (200km for inclinations close to/perpendicular to KSC, 300-400km for inclinations that need a major dogleg, like RSS equatorial orbits).

Any or all of these can help, it'll need tuning for the specific rocket you're using.

Using the Attach Altitude option can also help, as that specifies the altitude the rocket will be when PVG finishes orbital insertion. (By default, PVG tries to finish orbital insertion at periapsis.)

1 hour ago, Pappystein said:

Or like the Titan SRM1 from a couple of days ago.   The SRM burnout is beyond where it thinks it should be, and it fails to be corrected...

I frequently use the Titan 3/4 stack with UA120s, and often the combined LR87 and SRBs' high TWR towards the end of the SRB burn tends to make the PVG pitch down too far. I highly recommend clicking the "Reset Guidance" button right after SRB separation to get the PVG to recalculate using the LR87 burn. This should get the rocket pitching back up to the correct attitude once it finishes recalculating. This also applies, but less so, to any other rocket with SRBs. For example, I usually don't have this problem with the Delta II with all 9 GEM boosters, but I do it anyway because it gives more accurate results.

Edited July 14 by bigyihsuan

[AdrianDogmeat]

Titan III Main Service Towers [SLC-40/SLC-41]

[Pappystein]

1 hour ago, bigyihsuan said:

Going full sideways in the atmosphere is a sign of PVG pitching too fast because it thinks the predicted TWR is higher that it actually is. A fix for this is either-inclusive-or:

• increasing pitch start velocity (100m/s is what I use),
• decreasing pitch angle rate (0.5 deg/s usually, but 0.25 dec/s for rockets with particularly weak 2nd stages),
• or increasing final orbit altitude (200km for inclinations close to/perpendicular to KSC, 300-400km for inclinations that need a major dogleg, like RSS equatorial orbits).

Any or all of these can help, it'll need tuning for the specific rocket you're using.

Using the Attach Altitude option can also help, as that specifies the altitude the rocket will be when PVG finishes orbital insertion. (By default, PVG tries to finish orbital insertion at periapsis.)

I frequently use the Titan 3/4 stack with UA120s, and often the combined LR87 and SRBs' high TWR towards the end of the SRB burn tends to make the PVG pitch down too far. I highly recommend clicking the "Reset Guidance" button right after SRB separation to get the PVG to recalculate using the LR87 burn. This should get the rocket pitching back up to the correct attitude once it finishes recalculating. This also applies, but less so, to any other rocket with SRBs. For example, I usually don't have this problem with the Delta II with all 9 GEM boosters, but I do it anyway because it gives more accurate results.

Helpful tips THANKS!

In my case, the sideways tends to happen when I am not at an Equatorial launch site.   It tries to Dog-Leg, in atmosphere and over Yaws.   But probably the same root cause.   I do use Periapsis only (Apoapsis is not set or set to the same as Periapsis.)  because Circular orbits are good And yes I fully agree on the tuning... which is where I get back to... "But Classic Ascent works good enough..." and with exceptions, rarely needs massive tuning...

Looking at you Saturn IB,   2.7x scale leaves you a little underwhelming due to scale-error.

FWIW, my best flight for the upcomming "Tutorial" on Saturn S-IB, which is utilizing the Hypergolic Fuel patch (meaning CSM fuel is denser) and I am launching a full Orbital setup with all the mono-propellant.)    That, and I will explain in details, has an Apoapsis at launch of 400km.  But I end up in a 150-170ish km orbit... With more than half the CSM fuel gone

But I will go into that latter tonight as I promised!