Jump to content

[1.12.X] Tantares - Stockalike Soyuz and MIR [16.1][28.05.2024][Mars Expedition WIP]


Beale

Recommended Posts

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.

f71fed0618.jpg

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 by Beale
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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/l256j

They doesn't have radial attachment enabled in the .cfg, just like stock Oscar-B. Not sure if a bug or intended feature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glad :)

Got some SM for ya:

http://puu.sh/eClob/3a5dcb0610.jpg

Well, that's not very exciting, but I will speak:

Decoupler going to mesh style

http://puu.sh/eClIX/1643366232.jpg

Perhaps 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 by Deltervees
spelled "plushie" wrong
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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/l256j

As 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/s79Qd

My Zarya appears to be a wee bit bigger:

http://imgur.com/a/LsUSc

Is 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.

a416defbc3.jpg

f3d2800896.jpg

f507dbe3bd.jpg

Gonna need a second texture for the Soyuz.

892d780aac.jpg

93998cf50f.jpg

Edited by Beale
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

2dd3a09598.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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/6loDb

Some 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. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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/6loDb

Some 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.

a838ba7567.jpg

Spec.

6745bfcfa4.jpg

f4aa46a2c5.jpg

a14c018e7f.jpg

d5aca93aa5.jpg

Edited by Beale
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 by CrisK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 by Beale
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...