[1.3.x] CONTARES 1.8.9 closed

[Jhorriga]

The construction manual doesn't even have all the crafts

[linuxgurugamer]

On 10/21/2017 at 3:57 AM, hraban said:

The problem of instability results in the use of FAR. FAR still does not get clear with one-part lifting objects, unless they move ballistically. On the other hand, I am unsure if the mod RetractableLifitingSurface, which is mandatory for Dreamcrusher, is compatible with FAR.

In the use of contares one-part spaceplanes, the use of FAR should be omitted.

An old, always recurring theme.

 the retractable lifting surface doesn't do anything about the wing lift all it does is control the retraction and expansion of a folding wing, and I believe it adjust the total lift.

I don't play with far, so I really don't know if it would work properly, If I get some time I will inquire about it.

[hraban]

8 hours ago, Jhorriga said:

The construction manual doesn't even have all the crafts

Correct

10 hours ago, Jhorriga said:

I want more craft files for things like pinbol, Hermes, Cst-100, and x-37B

I have already quit before going to school something to want and I'm reluctant to make something and occasionally i let myself be carried away to something wish because otherwise it's only with please.

[linuxgurugamer]

13 hours ago, Jhorriga said:

I want more craft files for things like pinbol, Hermes, Cst-100, and x-37B

 

It is not nice to say "I want" to a modder.

Modders do this for fun, not for profit.  In many cases, they are doing it for themselves, and choose to share what they do with the community.

When you start paying a modder for his time, you can then say "I want".  I hope you have lots of money, because paying somebody for this will cost you a lot more than you expect; it's not just 5 minutes work.  I'm talking about hundreds and thousands of dollars.

Until then, please take the phrase "I want" out of your vocabulary and replace it with something like "I'd like to suggest", and don't be offended if you are told no

[Jhorriga]

Ok. Sorry.

Anyways, could you by any chance complete the construction manual? I'd love to have the full thing.

[hraban]

15 minutes ago, Jhorriga said:

Ok. Sorry.

Anyways, could you by any chance complete the construction manual? I'd love to have the full thing.

The construction manual will not be continued in this form. It is easier to provide craft files.

A simplified print version with selected images as an eye-catcher, we will certainly give it again, but then each in the context of addons.

[Jhorriga]

Alright. You should make a seprate repository with all the craft files.

[hraban]

8 hours ago, Jhorriga said:

Alright. You should make a seprate repository with all the craft files.

Without words  

[Jhorriga]

It's not craft files for everything though. It doesn't have half of the spacecraft.

[hraban]

12 hours ago, Jhorriga said:

It's not craft files for everything though. It doesn't have half of the spacecraft.

Instead of a seemingly unhelpful one-liners, a list of the desired craft files would be helpful. Keep in mind that among other things, KSP is a construction game and it is not possible to provide all variants and combinations as Craft-Files. Use your imagination, templates in the form of blueprints, drawings and photographs to create your interpretations.
Complete startup configurations like PINBOL on FENIKS or RIVER are not available at all or only rarely from my hand anyway. The user should and must put a little work into his configurations.

[Jhorriga]

Okie. I'd like:

-CST-101

-X-37B

-River (with pod)

-Dragon 1

-Hermes

-Orion?

-CTV

-ATV

- FEDERAZIJA (with moon lander on launcher)

 

Edited November 4, 2017 by Jhorriga

[hraban]

23 minutes ago, Jhorriga said:

Okie. I'd like:

*snip*

As already written you have to assemble the start configuration yourself. Take advantage of the 'Contares construction manual' and the MERGE feature to load the components and get the desired startup configuration quickly.

In the file already provided, except for CD-HERMES and DRAGON 1, all 'missing' spaceships are included. A craft file for CD-HERMES has already been published and the configuration of the Aliyana 5 has been widely discussed. Dragon 1 was not implemented by Contares.

Download 'missing' Craft-Files here!

[hraban]

Second Version of CPTK gendered docking Node, inspired by Anatoly Zak's PRICHAL node module.

 

[vossiewulf]

I like the CST-101 pod, 6 Kerbals with not much weight and has matching heat shield and service module with a good lander engine. I made a basic tourist-lander with it.

There's only one problem, on reentry you need to come down on land. Because it sinks. Yes, sinks  Like it's made of solid lead. In fact, in one of three landing-sinkings, the pod hit the ocean bottom so hard the pressure vessel failed and tragically my flight crew was squished into mystery goo.

Luckily, it is a well-made and solidly-built pod, so unless the water is very deep where it builds up too much speed, we can still recover the vehicle fine once it settles on the bottom

Who needs submarine mods? But anyway, as always I guess I could be doing something wrong, but this looks like the pod's buoyancy isn't what is intended. 

[hraban]

9 hours ago, vossiewulf said:

I like the CST-101 pod, 6 Kerbals with not much weight and has matching heat shield and service module with a good lander engine. I made a basic tourist-lander with it.

(snip)

There's only one problem, on reentry you need to come down on land. Because it sinks. Yes, sinks  Like it's made of solid lead. In fact, in one of three landing-sinkings, the pod hit the ocean bottom so hard the pressure vessel failed and tragically my flight crew was squished into mystery goo.

Luckily, it is a well-made and solidly-built pod, so unless the water is very deep where it builds up too much speed, we can still recover the vehicle fine once it settles on the bottom

(snip)

Who needs submarine mods? But anyway, as always I guess I could be doing something wrong, but this looks like the pod's buoyancy isn't what is intended. 

That would not have happened if instead of unnecessary attachments the planned buoyancy bodies were attached and activated after the release of the heat shield. 

The buoyancy for all capsules was adjusted for the next release to the average abilities of the users. Should mean, the capsules which are actually intended for landings on land will not sink completely in the water.

Edited November 6, 2017 by hraban

[vossiewulf]

19 hours ago, hraban said:

That would not have happened if instead of unnecessary attachments the planned buoyancy bodies were attached and activated after the release of the heat shield. 

The buoyancy for all capsules was adjusted for the next release to the average abilities of the users. Should mean, the capsules which are actually intended for landings on land will not sink completely in the water.

Sigh  I had looked in your manufacturer parts list, I thought I had gotten all the CST parts, with the capsule and heat shield and service module. In my defense this would be the first capsule I have tried that required external flotation items to stop it from visiting Captain Nemo. It also provided some good amusement the first time I realized it was making no attempt to float whatsoever and my crew was going to participate in an unscheduled deep water science expedition.

As he dove though I wondered if space capsules would stand up to this, they're designed to handle a massive pressure differential but in the opposite direction.

I'm not sure I would change it, I don't think it's a skill thing but a simply not knowing thing  I think if you put **REQUIRES FLOTATION PARTS FOR WATER LANDINGS** in the description of those capsules that almost everyone would notice that. In other words I like that fact that you've set buoyancy correctly. I can either choose to put on flotation parts or design enough Dv to enable consistent land landings, or visit Captain Nemo, I hear he cooks a very good giant octopus steak. I like parts that force realistic design choices.

BTW, since everything I think is a problem turns out to be intended, I'll assume there's some reason for this too - for all three of those CST parts, the bottom node seems recessed - attaching a decoupler to the bottom of the service bay results in the decoupler disappearing below the engine, same thing with the heat shield. In both cases had to manually offset those decouplers to keep them from exploding everything when they stage. I guess maybe they are designed only to work with other CST parts in a specific order?

Edited November 7, 2017 by vossiewulf

[hraban]

1 hour ago, vossiewulf said:

Sigh  I had looked in your manufacturer parts list, I thought I had gotten all the CST parts, with the capsule and heat shield and service module. In my defense this would be the first capsule I have tried that required external flotation items to stop it from visiting Captain Nemo. It also provided some good amusement the first time I realized it was making no attempt to float whatsoever and my crew was going to participate in an unscheduled deep water science expedition.

As he dove though I wondered if space capsules would stand up to this, they're designed to handle a massive pressure differential but in the opposite direction.

I'm not sure I would change it, I don't think it's a skill thing but a simply not knowing thing  I think if you put **REQUIRES FLOTATION PARTS FOR WATER LANDINGS** in the description of those capsules that almost everyone would notice that. In other words I like that fact that you've set buoyancy correctly. I can either choose to put on flotation parts or design enough Dv to enable consistent land landings, or visit Captain Nemo, I hear he cooks a very good giant octopus steak. I like parts that force realistic design choices.

BTW, since everything I think is a problem turns out to be intended, I'll assume there's some reason for this too - for all three of those CST parts, the bottom node seems recessed - attaching a decoupler to the bottom of the service bay results in the decoupler disappearing below the engine, same thing with the heat shield. In both cases had to manually offset those decouplers to keep them from exploding everything when they stage. I guess maybe they are designed only to work with other CST parts in a specific order?

It is hard to always make it right and if you correct something on the user request, you will rarely get a thank you. Demanding and complaining is probably the most common reason for posts, unfortunately. That's why a thank you to you. Although I have a little difficulty translating your posts, it's fun to read them and pick up on one or the other idea or suggestion. As already mentioned several times English is not my strength and the descriptions of parts are still very simple, also in terms of the still to be realized localization.

If you feed the search function with the term 'CST-101' at least 8 components should appear. Alone the commando capsule consists, without consideration of the parachutes and buoyancy bodies on 4 components:

- Command capsule
- Parachute and droguechute protective cover
- nose cone
- Heat shield

In the bottom of the command capsule is installed the decoupler of the heat shield.
The heat shield contains the decoupler of the Service Module.

Contrary to typical stack decouplers, the Contares standard decouplers have an annular collision body and cause no problems when objects reach into the interior. That's why the 2.5m Contares standard decoupler is the right choice for the lower end of the CST-101 Service Module.

If you want to create a model-like replica that fits halfway into the concept of KSP, such adjustments are necessary and unavoidable.

Take a look at the Craft-Files

[hraban]

Docking control unit for Khi-Based Spacecrafts. Inspired by very difuse and pixeled pictures from Shenzhou.

 

[vossiewulf]

On 11/7/2017 at 10:52 AM, hraban said:

Docking control unit for Khi-Based Spacecrafts. Inspired by very difuse and pixeled pictures from Shenzhou.

Looks like you de-pixelated it pretty well

On 11/6/2017 at 11:48 PM, hraban said:

Take a look at the Craft-Files

I thought I had looked at those prior to building this, looked again, I don't see any that mention the CST-101. Can you point me to which one uses these parts? I'll go look in the manual too.

[hraban]

15 minutes ago, vossiewulf said:

Looks like you de-pixelated it pretty well

I thought I had looked at those prior to building this, looked again, I don't see any that mention the CST-101. Can you point me to which one uses these parts? I'll go look in the manual too.

In the zip file is a complete basic configuration including correct stage settings. However, you should also copy the Ships directory into the corresponding directory of one of your savegames. The model is saved as CST-101.

[vossiewulf]

1 hour ago, hraban said:

In the zip file is a complete basic configuration including correct stage settings. However, you should also copy the Ships directory into the corresponding directory of one of your savegames. The model is saved as CST-101.

Thanks again, but I'm sorry I must be blind and/or stupid, this is why I asked- I don't see anything saying CST-101 in the craft files. Then again this is a short break from working 18 hours yesterday and currently managing two significant work crises that should run into 18 hours today, so I have an excuse for being blind and stupid

[hraban]

38 minutes ago, vossiewulf said:

Thanks again, but I'm sorry I must be blind and/or stupid, this is why I asked- I don't see anything saying CST-101 in the craft files. Then again this is a short break from working 18 hours yesterday and currently managing two significant work crises that should run into 18 hours today, so I have an excuse for being blind and stupid

Take the File out of the download link HERE and unzip this file. You use an old Craft-File repository from Contares 1.8.8 release.

P.S.: No comment on stupidity and blindness

Edited November 8, 2017 by hraban

[vossiewulf]

16 minutes ago, hraban said:

P.S.: No comment on stupidity and blindness

[Ariellus]

Could be that its allready known but did not found it here.

There are 2 bugs in the H2/H3 1 stage tanks or booth are the same ^^

TechRequired = advFuelSystems not TechRequired = advFuelSystem or they will not show up in careermode

[hraban]

15 minutes ago, Ariellus said:

Could be that its allready known but did not found it here.

There are 2 bugs in the H2/H3 1 stage tanks or booth are the same ^^

TechRequired = advFuelSystems not TechRequired = advFuelSystem or they will not show up in careermode

Thanks. Will be fixed.