APOLLO (SATURN-V with F1 & J2, APOLLO CSM, LEM, LLRV). by OLDD (v.1.4. 09.05.14)

[Guest]

Well. this devices can be separate but how to use it? I dont know the way how to activate auxiliary engines before the ignition of main one. also i performed tests and with RCS onboard S-IVB becomes very manoeuvrable. But as i know S-IVB was very clumsy and slow device.

Action groups. I've been using Frizzank's APS on your S-IVB and it's best to assign engines to the action groups and give them a fixed thrust, so they can only be toggled on and off (like the real engines could, in fact, neither F-1 nor J-2 were throttleable, either). And don't worry about maneuverability if it bothers you, you can tone down thrust of the RCS.

[CaptRobau]

I can't get my Lunar Module balanced. Is there a correct build that makes sure the CoM matches the CoT? If not, why not just have ladder leg and the sensor legs be the same weight and add PhysicsSignificance = 0 to the brown ladder extension thing. That should make the CoM match the CoT.

[Motokid600]

Oh jeez that's right the docking port.. thanks Drnny ill try that next chance I get. And as for my other inquaries.. Is your SaturnV FAR compatible? Particularly the LES tower.. And is there a way to add RealChute compatibility?

[NavyGuy2007]

First I want to state that I love your Saturn 5, the S5 has always been one of my favorite rockets in history and its fun to fly it! My only issue is that it seams that the engines overheat a bit too quickly, especially the J2s on the SII stage, F1s on the S1C aren't too bad.

[DennyTX]

Oh jeez that's right the docking port.. thanks Drnny ill try that next chance I get. And as for my other inquaries.. Is your SaturnV FAR compatible? Particularly the LES tower.. And is there a way to add RealChute compatibility?

well, i never used FAR or RealChutes.

My curent tuning work are for EngineIgnitor.

What compability must be there? Tell me more and i'll look.

[Deltac]

well, i never used FAR or RealChutes.

My curent tuning work are for EngineIgnitor.

What compability must be there? Tell me more and i'll look.

For RealChute, there wouldn't really be anything you'd need to do, but because your Apollo Parachutes also have the floats, RealChute is having trouble dealing with it so far. Here's the post I made about it on RealChute. Still waiting on Stupid-Chris for any further advice. As far as I can tell, we might need the floats to be a separate part, but I'm not an expert on RealChute.

[Motokid600]

I'm not sure on the FAR compatibility. It needs it for me. This is a proper Saturn V so it should make a proper gravity turn. I can't stand the sight of 10km pitch overs. Especially with this. I'll pm Ferram ASAP.

[NeoMorph]

What altitude are you guys using for Lunar Orbit.... ie what proportion of the real thing are we using these days?

The Apollo program's Command/Service Module (CSM) remained in a lunar parking orbit while the Lunar Module (LM) landed. The combined CSM/LM would first enter an elliptical orbit, nominally 170 nautical miles (310 km; 200 mi) by 60 nautical miles (110 km; 69 mi), which was then changed to a circular parking orbit of about 60 nautical miles (110 km; 69 mi). Orbital periods vary according to the sum of apoapsis and periapsis, and for the CSM were about two hours. The LM began its landing sequence with a descent orbit with a periapsis of about 50,000 feet (15 km; 8.2 nmi), chosen to avoid hitting lunar mountains reaching heights of 20,000 feet (6.1 km; 3.3 nmi). After the second landing mission, the procedure was changed on Apollo 14 to save more of the LM fuel for its powered descent, by using the CSM's fuel to lower the combined spacecraft's periapsis to 50,000 feet, and later raising its periapsis back to a circular orbit after the LM had made its landing.

[Deltac]

What altitude are you guys using for Lunar Orbit.... ie what proportion of the real thing are we using these days?

I didn't even look up the info for my orbits. In the beginning, I used 100km orbits, but decided to bring that down to 50km. The LEM Ascent stage has plenty of fuel to get to 10km, then rendezvous with the CSM back at 50km.

[hieywiey]

What altitude are you guys using for Lunar Orbit.... ie what proportion of the real thing are we using these days?

I think everything is 66.666666...%, so â…†of in real life.

Edited April 12, 2014 by hieywiey
Find out for yourself, nosy

[wasmic]

I think everything is 66.666666...%, so about â…†of in real life.

Well, parts are supposed to be in 64 % scale (16/25), while planets and moons are about 1/10, with some deviations. The Sun, though, is 1/3 of the real thing, instead of 1/10.

[Jizzax]

Yes, same here. I was wondering if it was a problem with this pack or a conflict with something else.

Managed to fix it by loading the game without the OLDD folder, then adding it back it when in-game and reloading all parts from the debug menu on the KSC main screen. Not sure why it's doing this, but this workaround seemed to fix the problem.

EDIT: You'll need to do the above for every game start. This is bit annoying if the game crashes 1/2 way to the moon, as the reload will cause your mission to be deleted due to missing parts.

@DennyTX, do you have any idea what's causing this bug / can you take a look? Btw, AMAZING mod otherwise!!! I'm a big fan of recreating historic missions and your work here is brilliant.

Edited April 13, 2014 by Jizzax
New Information

[Deltac]

Alright, Denny, it appears that if we want the Parachutes to be RealChute compatible, we'll need to separate the floats from the chutes. One idea is to separate the floats' animation from the chute animation, forcing users to create an action group for deploying the floats while the parachutes work as normal. I'm hoping there's someone here who can tell us how this could be done as I've never seen parachutes with another animated module.

The other method would be just to remove the floats from the chutes, and make the floats a separate animated part to attach to the Apollo CM.

Of course the third option would be to leave everything as is for the rest of eternity, but I'm not sure how popular that decision would be.

I'm posting this assuming you want suggestions. I'm sorry if I crossed a line with suggestions.

[stupid_chris]

Alright, Denny, it appears that if we want the Parachutes to be RealChute compatible, we'll need to separate the floats from the chutes. One idea is to separate the floats' animation from the chute animation, forcing users to create an action group for deploying the floats while the parachutes work as normal. I'm hoping there's someone here who can tell us how this could be done as I've never seen parachutes with another animated module.

The other method would be just to remove the floats from the chutes, and make the floats a separate animated part to attach to the Apollo CM.

Of course the third option would be to leave everything as is for the rest of eternity, but I'm not sure how popular that decision would be.

I'm posting this assuming you want suggestions. I'm sorry if I crossed a line with suggestions.

I don't think you'd need to separate them, it mostly depends on how those animations are made. If it works with ModuleParachute it /should/ theoretically work with RealChute, as the animations are handled the same at the core.

Basically, step by step works this way:

1. When the parachute is initiated, the parachute transform is hidden, and the cap transform is shown.
   
2. When the part is activated, the parachute transform appears, and the cap transform disappears.
   
3. The predeployment animation rolls, and the parachute "floats" in the wind, that animation is generated by RealChuteModule
   
4. When the parachute gets to the trigger, be it altitude or pressure, the deployment animation rolls
   
5. Once the parachute is cut or the vessel stops on the ground, the parachute transform is hidden once more
   
6. Finally, when the parachute is repacked, the cap transform is shown again.

What I'm understanding is that the floaters are being wonky. My proposition is that you make the floaters the same transform as the canopy, and that you associate their expansion to the full deployment animation. The only "problem" with this would be that once the pod stops in the water, they would disappear.

If you want them to stay static, you might indeed want to make them independant of the parachutes. It makes more sense that way.

To be honest, I have a mod working on floaters and such that's in construction, but it's not ready for release yet :/

[DennyTX]

well. some ppl said that LEM is unstable because of many things attached on sides.

okay, life becomes more harder and LEM unstable. LRV (Lunar Roving Vehicle) is coming.

The only problem with LRV is following. It is just an animated brick at moment. Never set up wheels before. Needing a help or lesson.

Edited April 12, 2014 by DennyTX

[Guest]

Looks really good. Perhaps you could also make the chairs actually usable by Kerbals, like the stock command chairs.

[Virtualgenius]

Thats is so cool i can see that rover being used all over the solar system

[Kerbal01]

Bobcat made a LRV.

[Guest]

No, he made a proof-of-concept platform that resembled the LRV. His method could work for this LRV, but details were somewhat lacking.

[Virtualgenius]

He did but with each release its becoming harder and harder to keep his stuff functioning without making a hack or two

[Green Skull]

Two things probably caused by conflicts with other mods. First one I can't do science in any form anywhere with this in game data. Second it conflicts with the KSO shuttle (not your problem Denny but that may help someone) probably with the RPM IVA gauges. Causes amusing cockpit spinning, RCS malfunction and explosions

[Motokid600]

Ditto on the not being able to do science bug.

[NeoMorph]

One thing you need do Denny... Add a v13 Service module. This one has the ability to cause an explosion and then start leaking fuel.

Seriously though, hands up how many of you have done the 13 mission?

[DennyTX]

Ditto on the not being able to do science bug.

can anybody give me savegame with tech tree opened? I'll check this bug. I didnt play career mode myself

[BakerNator]

I had the same science problem, for some reason all science gathering had stopped. Discovered that FASA and this mod had the same definitions, removed the duplicate entries from the FASA science.cfg file cleared up the issue.