curtquarquesso Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 I don't think a SM nerf sounds crazy. It's always been a little strong. It would be sensible for it to be comparable in dV, maybe a bit weaker, than the "KSP Toyota Corolla" design; Mk1 CM with a FL-T200 and an LV-909. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted January 17, 2015 Author Share Posted January 17, 2015 (edited) I don't think a SM nerf sounds crazy. It's always been a little strong. It would be sensible for it to be comparable in dV, maybe a bit weaker, than the "KSP Toyota Corolla" design; Mk1 CM with a FL-T200 and an LV-909.The fuel amount it holds is probably a little too much also: compare to the FL-T200, it is noticably smaller (If you figure there's the engine plumbing in there too).Although, the new model is ever so slightly longer.Might say also: I hate breaking people's craft saves, I really do.I try to avoid changing the size of parts if possible, but I really wanted to fix the fundamentally flawed proportions of the Tantares, for that, I apologise.Everything before the TKS was made without orthographics, all guesswork. Edited January 17, 2015 by Beale Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curtquarquesso Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 No sweat. I go through save files faster than Grant went through the Confederate South. Tweak/refine a bunch of parts at once, and wait to drop them on us all at once. It'll be like a late/early Christmas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted January 17, 2015 Author Share Posted January 17, 2015 No sweat. I go through save files faster than Grant went through the Confederate South. Tweak/refine a bunch of parts at once, and wait to drop them on us all at once. It'll be like a late/early Christmas. Sounds like a plan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrisK Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Beale, I found a weird bug. I'm not sure how to explain it, so please see the following pictures. The new Proton fuel tanks cannot be attached radially. They clip through radial decouplers. This happens with every radial decoupler.The R7 parts attach without a problem to every radial decoupler.Javascript is disabled. View full album Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biohazard15 Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Beale, I found a weird bug. I'm not sure how to explain it, so please see the following pictures. The new Proton fuel tanks cannot be attached radially. They clip through radial decouplers. This happens with every radial decoupler.The R7 parts attach without a problem to every radial decoupler.http://imgur.com/a/l256jThey doesn't have radial attachment enabled in the .cfg, just like stock Oscar-B. Not sure if a bug or intended feature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbobjebkirk Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 I made a replica of the Zarya from Kolyma's Shadow using this and another few mods:Javascript is disabled. View full album Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimovski Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 My Zarya appears to be a wee bit bigger:Javascript is disabled. View full album Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbobjebkirk Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 My Zarya appears to be a wee bit bigger:What rocket was that supposed to launch on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimovski Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Ahh, I didn't make a real R-6A. That's my N-IIIF (can't really lift the 15mt thingy into orbit, but I only wanted a fully ballistic reentry test anyway) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niemand303 Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 (edited) Ahh, I didn't make a real R-6A. That's my N-IIIF (can't really lift the 15mt thingy into orbit, but I only wanted a fully ballistic reentry test anyway)A small nitpick: a "real" R-6A. The only REAL R-6:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_R-6 Edited January 17, 2015 by Niemand303 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbobjebkirk Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Ahh, I didn't make a real R-6A. That's my N-IIIF (can't really lift the 15mt thingy into orbit, but I only wanted a fully ballistic reentry test anyway)Well, You're making what appears to be the real life Zarya AKA big soyuz, whereas I'm making Zarya from Kolyma's Shadow, which is their equivalent os Vostok and Voskhod. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deltervees Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 (edited) Glad Got some SM for ya:http://puu.sh/eClob/3a5dcb0610.jpgWell, that's not very exciting, but I will speak:Decoupler going to mesh stylehttp://puu.sh/eClIX/1643366232.jpgPerhaps SM nerf?This maybe unpopular, I am not sure, but maybe it is good to handicap the Tantares a little?Should it really be able to go Kerbin-Mun-Kerbin?I think not, you should need a Soyuz-Fregat or a LOK Did I hear Fregat? *Hugs Fregat plushie* Edited January 17, 2015 by Deltervees spelled "plushie" wrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrisK Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 They doesn't have radial attachment enabled in the .cfg, just like stock Oscar-B. Not sure if a bug or intended feature.Thank you! I added it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ikaneko Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 That's a slick soyuz you got there!!Are you sure you don't have a breadkin modeler army? What other explanation can there be for your insane development time??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted January 17, 2015 Author Share Posted January 17, 2015 (edited) Beale, I found a weird bug. I'm not sure how to explain it, so please see the following pictures. The new Proton fuel tanks cannot be attached radially. They clip through radial decouplers. This happens with every radial decoupler.The R7 parts attach without a problem to every radial decoupler.http://imgur.com/a/l256jAs already sent, slight config oversight, will be fixed.I made a replica of the Zarya from Kolyma's Shadow using this and another few mods:http://imgur.com/a/s79QdMy Zarya appears to be a wee bit bigger:http://imgur.com/a/LsUScIs this a case of convergent evolution? Very nice I like them. I like the Zarya actually Did I hear Fregat? *Hugs Fregat plushie*You better tell me right now where I can buy a Fregat plushie.That's a slick soyuz you got there!!Are you sure you don't have a breadkin modeler army? What other explanation can there be for your insane development time???Thanks!I work alone Here is engine stuff, not quite done yet though.May flip the grey and white.At least the backup engines are more than textures now.Gonna need a second texture for the Soyuz. Edited January 17, 2015 by Beale Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimovski Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 While it's pretty...I like the hidden, old RCS nozzles more. Might be only me.(PS:Mine should ferry 6 cosmonauts to the Aelita/TKM, and then bring them back to Earth safely at ludicrous reentry speeds from a Mars-Earth trajectory... So I think the similiar features are mainly name- and looks-based, sadly.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted January 17, 2015 Author Share Posted January 17, 2015 While it's pretty...I like the hidden, old RCS nozzles more. Might be only me.(PS:Mine should ferry 6 cosmonauts to the Aelita/TKM, and then bring them back to Earth safely at ludicrous reentry speeds from a Mars-Earth trajectory... So I think the similiar features are mainly name- and looks-based, sadly.)Hmm, they were inspired by the old Noyuz design.While the position and such is vaguely set in stone, the shape is not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curtquarquesso Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Hey Beale!Was at the university library, and got some scans from some books that may or may not help you. (I'll assume you've done more Soviet spacecraft research than all of us combined here...)http://imgur.com/a/6loDbSome of the diagrams show Soyuz configurations that have instrumentation, science experiments and cameras in place of a docking node. Second image shows early concept of what was called the 'rocket train' that involved a Vostok capsule, and a Soyuz-like propulsion system. There's also an image taken from Apollo of the ASTP of the KDTU propulsion module that may or may not help you. Keep up the good work. Cheers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted January 17, 2015 Author Share Posted January 17, 2015 (edited) Hey Beale!Was at the university library, and got some scans from some books that may or may not help you. (I'll assume you've done more Soviet spacecraft research than all of us combined here...)http://imgur.com/a/6loDbSome of the diagrams show Soyuz configurations that have instrumentation, science experiments and cameras in place of a docking node. Second image shows early concept of what was called the 'rocket train' that involved a Vostok capsule, and a Soyuz-like propulsion system. There's also an image taken from Apollo of the ASTP of the KDTU propulsion module that may or may not help you. Keep up the good work. Cheers. Hiya!I do appreciate this!I try and research some, but I have huge gaping chasms of knowledge.Some of these diagrams will be real useful. I think I should do the IGLA eh? It looks cool.Spec. Edited January 17, 2015 by Beale Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuntsmanThe8 Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Somebody Really Needs To Work On a Soyuz Plushie... >:I Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrisK Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 (edited) Beale, I've played around with the Salyut/MIR parts for a while with TAC. How would you feel about adding the TAC carbon extractor and water purifier to the Salyut operation block? They exist in those blocks on the real station. If it would be helpful, I could experiment with adding them to the Tantares_Extra_TAC.cfg file to make sure that they work.Of course, food will still need to be brought up by a TKS or Progress at regular intervals.On that note, I do not think that the Progress carries enough food. Oxygen and water can be taken care of in part by the carbon extractor and water purifier in the Salyut parts, but food is a problem. The Progress is supposed to carry enough food for 6 cosmonauts to survive on for months. The real Progress holds 2350kg of supplies that includes 358kg of food, 420kg of water, and a small supply of oxygen to replace what's lost to the inefficiency of the carbon extractor. In comparison, the Tantares Progress holds 6.5kg of food, and 4.35kg of water. This means that the station requires a Progress run every few days.Edit: to be specific, a Progress is supposed to hold 107 days worth of all resources. Edited January 17, 2015 by CrisK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curtquarquesso Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Glad I could help! I've started reading the one on the Soyuz. I'll let you know if I find anything interesting in there.I think most of us have been relying on the TST CD-01 to replicate the IGLA system. If you do decide to make a more accurately modeled IGLA, it would have to serve some kind of purpose. I'm not crazy about functionless parts, but I don't speak for everyone. I wouldn't mind having some more 'bobbles and gack' to throw on the Tantares as long as they were useful. This one may be tough, but a deployable periscope would be fantastic. Is it possible to link the periscope to function as a window? O.O Code-wise, is it possible to set a completely arbitrary camera view upon double-clicking on a window/periscope? I don't know if I've explained what I'm thinking of adequately... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted January 17, 2015 Author Share Posted January 17, 2015 (edited) Beale, I've played around with the Salyut/MIR parts for a while with TAC. How would you feel about adding the TAC carbon extractor and water purifier to the Salyut operation block? They exist in those blocks on the real station. If it would be helpful, I could experiment with adding them to the Tantares_Extra_TAC.cfg file to make sure that they work.Of course, food will still need to be brought up by a TKS or Progress at regular intervals.On that note, I do not think that the Progress carries enough food. Oxygen and water can be taken care of in part by the carbon extractor and water purifier in the Salyut parts, but food is a problem. The Progress is supposed to carry enough food for 6 cosmonauts to survive on for months. The real Progress holds 2350kg of supplies that includes 358kg of food, 420kg of water, and a small supply of oxygen to replace what's lost to the inefficiency of the carbon extractor. In comparison, the Tantares Progress holds 6.5kg of food, and 4.35kg of water. This means that the station requires a Progress run every few days.Edit: to be specific, a Progress is supposed to hold 107 days worth of all resources.I can't really say how I feel about it, because I'm not 100% familiar with TAC (Maybe I should play with it for a bit).I don't see why it shouldn't have that capability, if you have the config?If people have TAC changes, I'm most always happy to implement them, as long as they are backed up with sound reason why they are better than what is current, sure Glad I could help! I've started reading the one on the Soyuz. I'll let you know if I find anything interesting in there.I think most of us have been relying on the TST CD-01 to replicate the IGLA system. If you do decide to make a more accurately modeled IGLA, it would have to serve some kind of purpose. I'm not crazy about functionless parts, but I don't speak for everyone. I wouldn't mind having some more 'bobbles and gack' to throw on the Tantares as long as they were useful. This one may be tough, but a deployable periscope would be fantastic. Is it possible to link the periscope to function as a window? O.O Code-wise, is it possible to set a completely arbitrary camera view upon double-clicking on a window/periscope? I don't know if I've explained what I'm thinking of adequately...I know what you mean by limiting parts, can't go crazy eh.Periscope: not easy, stock that is. With optional RPM support, it's perfectly usable as a camera, but of course that makes the part downright useless if you don't have RPM. Arbitrary window views are perfectly possible (Try click the middle window "column" in the Mk2 pod). But, of course, the periscope would be a separate part, so it is less possible.Infact, in the pre-rpm days, Bobcat did this kind of thing to add functionality to the Neptune console. Edited January 17, 2015 by Beale Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AppleDavidJeans Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 http://puu.sh/eEtqp/d5aca93aa5.jpgWhat are those things on the side of the HAMAL core? Batteries? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.