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

[Mudwig]

9 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

*Snoop*

I feel like I'm far more exited about the next update than the current one. I love the Titan/MOL stuff, but the early rockets have been in desperate need of some TLC for a good while now.

Any plans for TVC versions of the Castor boosters or at least Castor IVB? I've been using all solid launchers a lot recently ( Athena Ic FTW! ), but the lack of vectorable strap-ons smaller than GEM 40 can be a bit limiting.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Does anyone know of a mod that changes the propellant load slider to be more specific than the stock 10 point scale, like a 0-100% scale or something? Using apogee kick motors is so hard without being able to fine tune propellant loads.

[blowfish]

1 hour ago, CobaltWolf said:

Vega-Able

30 minutes ago, Pappystein said:

WOT!  

That actually makes more sense than JPL's 6K stage!

I think that's supposed to be Vanguard-Able (though I don't think they called it Able there)

[Jay The Amazing Toaster]

Loving the new LDC parts, there's plenty of lego-ability for me to create my own design. An entire LV based on J-2 technology (minus the booster )

First stage uses 3 J-2T's




Second stage utilizes the inflatable J-2X with atlas roll control thrusters.

[G'th]

[Pappystein]

4 hours ago, blowfish said:

I think that's supposed to be Vanguard-Able (though I don't think they called it Able there)

Maybe, maybe-not.  Either way.  It leads me to ideas...   Ideas that the Titan II Warhead ring skirt (the double curved 1.875m to 1.5m adapter)  will help with on-top of a rejuvenated Vega Upper stage!

And in the interim, after I get required mods updated to 1.8 I will use the Existing Vega parts to make my idea....  

 

 

[Zorg]

5 hours ago, Mudwig said:

Does anyone know of a mod that changes the propellant load slider to be more specific than the stock 10 point scale, like a 0-100% scale or something? Using apogee kick motors is so hard without being able to fine tune propellant loads.

You are using the shutdown feature arent you? I usually adjust prop load to a slight excess of what I need, try to shut down a couple of seconds before maneuver is completed and then trim velocity with payload rcs.

[Mudwig]

30 minutes ago, Zorg said:

You are using the shutdown feature arent you? I usually adjust prop load to a slight excess of what I need, try to shut down a couple of seconds before maneuver is completed and then trim velocity with payload rcs.

I don't use the shutdown feature at all because to me it feels like cheating.

I usually just try to get as close as I can and then use on-board propellant or RCS to make up the difference It's not always easy to do though because 1/10th of the propellant on some motors can mean a huge swing in delta V. With a tandem Star 48/37 setup or with IUS it's even worse because then you have 2 stages that aren't quite accurate enough and often an even bigger discrepancy to overcome.

Being able to just tweak propellant loads in 0.5% increments like the thrust slider would be so much better.

[NotABoomer]

@CobaltWolfis the mod updated? i want to know because i checked the change-a-log nothing new... is it a new update or im just feeling rusty

 

[Deltac]

2 hours ago, NotABoomer said:

@CobaltWolfis the mod updated? i want to know because i checked the change-a-log nothing new... is it a new update or im just feeling rusty

 

Cobalt puts new developments into the development branch on github.  So there's the release branch which is now old, and the development branch which has new stuff in it.  Soon Cobalt will release an update to the main branch, but you can download the development branch now and try it out.

I don't know if anything has been tested for 1.8 yet, that may be this weekend.

Remember, you can always download previous versions of KSP along with the current version.

[CobaltWolf]

14 hours ago, Pappystein said:

WOT!  

That actually makes more sense than JPL's 6K stage!

Are the new Castor 1 & 2s going to be more correct size or left at 0.625m?

13 hours ago, blowfish said:

I think that's supposed to be Vanguard-Able (though I don't think they called it Able there)

Yeah oops that's a typo there...

The Castor 1/2s are the correct size, I think it's about 0.5m diameter. They don't have inline versions so the size doesn't really matter.

 

14 hours ago, Mudwig said:

I feel like I'm far more exited about the next update than the current one. I love the Titan/MOL stuff, but the early rockets have been in desperate need of some TLC for a good while now.

Any plans for TVC versions of the Castor boosters or at least Castor IVB? I've been using all solid launchers a lot recently ( Athena Ic FTW! ), but the lack of vectorable strap-ons smaller than GEM 40 can be a bit limiting.

low key yeah, I'm really happy with how the current update came out but the early rockets are baaaaaaad and I'm glad they're getting replaced.

I was going to make a more proper Castor IV, I can try to make the IVB but remember it's inline. Why do you need TVC on such small strapons anyways, out of curiosity?

 

13 hours ago, Jay The Amazing Toaster said:

Loving the new LDC parts, there's plenty of lego-ability for me to create my own design. An entire LV based on J-2 technology (minus the booster )
First stage uses 3 J-2T's
Second stage utilizes the inflatable J-2X with atlas roll control thrusters.

That is a nice LV! I'm glad I added the SOFI variants for the LDC...

 

13 hours ago, G'th said:

~snip~

Very nice! Is that a 23G?

 

14 hours ago, Mudwig said:

Does anyone know of a mod that changes the propellant load slider to be more specific than the stock 10 point scale, like a 0-100% scale or something? Using apogee kick motors is so hard without being able to fine tune propellant loads.

8 hours ago, Zorg said:

You are using the shutdown feature arent you? I usually adjust prop load to a slight excess of what I need, try to shut down a couple of seconds before maneuver is completed and then trim velocity with payload rcs.

8 hours ago, Mudwig said:

I don't use the shutdown feature at all because to me it feels like cheating.

I usually just try to get as close as I can and then use on-board propellant or RCS to make up the difference It's not always easy to do though because 1/10th of the propellant on some motors can mean a huge swing in delta V. With a tandem Star 48/37 setup or with IUS it's even worse because then you have 2 stages that aren't quite accurate enough and often an even bigger discrepancy to overcome.

Being able to just tweak propellant loads in 0.5% increments like the thrust slider would be so much better.

I added the shutdown feature because it's supposed to be a game, and we don't have teams of people whose job it is to crunch numbers and plan things out. The intent is that it makes using vacuum solids more forgiving and viable than they would be otherwise.

With that said, I agree that it would be nice to have more control over the sliders.

 

5 hours ago, NotABoomer said:

@CobaltWolfis the mod updated? i want to know because i checked the change-a-log nothing new... is it a new update or im just feeling rusty

3 hours ago, Deltac said:

Cobalt puts new developments into the development branch on github.  So there's the release branch which is now old, and the development branch which has new stuff in it.  Soon Cobalt will release an update to the main branch, but you can download the development branch now and try it out.

I don't know if anything has been tested for 1.8 yet, that may be this weekend.

Remember, you can always download previous versions of KSP along with the current version.

Planning to release the update Friday night - there's just a few more housekeeping things I need to do for it.

[CobaltWolf]

Speaking of housekeeping... one of the things I have to do is make sure people know about all the stuff in this update!

Here's a taste of the release album I'm putting together... if anyone has some really nice high quality screenshots, please feel free to share!

 

[G'th]

2 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

Very nice! Is that a 23G?

Yep. Technically its a Titan III with an Agena-D but it seems like theres an adapter missing between the two sizes? I couldn't find one. 

[Zorg]

Just now, G'th said:

Yep. Technically its a Titan III with an Agena-D but it seems like theres an adapter missing between the two sizes? I couldn't find one. 

If you have an Agena inside the fairing that would make it a Titan 33B (or 34B if using stretched 1st stage).

[G'th]

3 minutes ago, Zorg said:

If you have an Agena inside the fairing that would make it a Titan 33B (or 34B if using stretched 1st stage).

Indeed. But from my knowledge the 33B looks like this:

 

Hence why mine looks closer to a 23. 

[Zorg]

Just now, G'th said:

Indeed. But from my knowledge the 33B looks like this:

 

Hence why mine looks closer to a 23. 

No that would be a 23B or 24B.

the 33B and 34B look like this. The agena is fully enclosed.

[G'th]

1 minute ago, Zorg said:

No that would be a 23B or 24B.

the 33B and 34B look like this. The agena is fully enclosed.

TIL

[Zorg]

2 minutes ago, G'th said:

TIL

The Titan pages on the wiki are actually quite comprehensive

https://github.com/friznit/Unofficial-BDB-Wiki/wiki/Prometheus-III

[G'th]

Just now, Zorg said:

The Titan pages on the wiki are actually quite comprehensive

https://github.com/friznit/Unofficial-BDB-Wiki/wiki/Prometheus-III

Indeed, though I didn't connect the two. I originally stepped up to the 23 (as the 1 couldn't get my payload where it needed to go) and as I couldn't find an adapter to connect to the Agena I just wrapped the whole thing in a fairing. Surprising to know I inadvertently created a real variant lol. 

[Guest]

4 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

I added the shutdown feature because it's supposed to be a game, and we don't have teams of people whose job it is to crunch numbers and plan things out. The intent is that it makes using vacuum solids more forgiving and viable than they would be otherwise.

With that said, I agree that it would be nice to have more control over the sliders.

TBH, I don't use the shutdown feature, either. Solids are supposed to be harder than liquids. It's not really that hard, it just requires a minimum of planning, and a liquid final stage to make the final correction (or to finish the burn, if the solid falls a bit short). As for precise input, this should help:

I never actually used it (just don't play that much anymore), but it should be there. It also helps not to burn your second stage to depletion, but rather make note of how much dV you have in the solid, and stage it away once you only need that much. Obviously it only work if the second stage is liquid. All-solid vehicles are a bit more challenging.

Edited October 19, 2019 by Guest

[Marcelo Silveira]

On 10/8/2019 at 9:54 AM, Zorg said:

If/when you get to doing the Atlas II-AS payload performance charts

I had some free time today and did the thing!

I had to redo some calculations because there was an engine rebalance, so the old delta-v maps are not as accurate. Keep in mind that I did not test this in ksp. So if something is too far off the calculated delta-v  , please tell me  

I will redo the delta-v maps fo the other Atlas versions (but not fat atlas for now)

[Zorg]

3 minutes ago, Marcelo Silveira said:

I had some free time today and did the thing!

I had to redo some calculations because there was an engine rebalance, so the old delta-v maps are not as accurate. Keep in mind that I did not test this in ksp. So if something is too far off the calculated delta-v  , please tell me  
 

I will redo the delta-v maps fo the other Atlas versions (but not fat atlas for now)

Yay, I love these!

[Stevphfeniey]

1 hour ago, Dragon01 said:

Solids are supposed to be harder than liquids

You know ironically IRL engineers choose to use solid kick motors because they’re mechanically simpler than liquid engines with fixed known dV requirements. ie: because they’re easier and more reliable than their liquid counterparts. 

[G'th]

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Stevphfeniey said:

You know ironically IRL engineers choose to use solid kick motors because they’re mechanically simpler than liquid engines with fixed known dV requirements. ie: because they’re easier and more reliable than their liquid counterparts. 

To build, not to use. They sacrifice flexibility and performance for lower cost and somewhat simpler design. In KSP, this is represented by much lower cost.

[Mudwig]

6 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

I was going to make a more proper Castor IV, I can try to make the IVB but remember it's inline. Why do you need TVC on such small strapons anyways, out of curiosity?

I've been using a Conestoga type thing with GEM-40s as a polar launch vehicle for SCANsat satellites and it's just a bit too much. One with Castor IVs would be about the right size. Castor IVBs were used both as the core and 4 of the 6 radial boosters on Conestoga 1620. It wouldn't have had any roll control otherwise. The real deal was a failure, but it works fine in KSP.  Almost all of what's needed is already there, Castor IVB is really the only thing missing.

It's one of those things that would be nice to have, but it's far from a necessity.

2 hours ago, Dragon01 said:

TBH, I don't use the shutdown feature, either. Solids are supposed to be harder than liquids. It's not really that hard, it just requires a minimum of planning, and a liquid final stage to make the final correction (or to finish the burn, if the solid falls a bit short). As for precise input, this should help:

I never actually used it (just don't play that much anymore), but it should be there. It also helps not to burn your second stage to depletion, but rather make note of how much dV you have in the solid, and stage it away once you only need that much. Obviously it only work if the second stage is liquid. All-solid vehicles are a bit more challenging.

You can't do keyed entry on propellant values. It's only available for things like thrust, and deploy limits.