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

[Beale]

Beale, I think the only reason it is destructive is that the lander tips over… any error associated with time warp I suppose might make the craft become briefly "suborbital" and then deleted due to the larger physics radius now?

Try putting a Libra parts lander on the Mun, gear out. Then exit the game, and go back with another lander someplace nearby… then exit KSP, and see if the lander is in the tracking station. I can likely try tonight with a slightly more vanilla install for you.

Intuitively, I don't think this is happening, but then intuition rarely is right.

But, basically if it is on-rails, the LK should be marked "landed", and is locked to the co-ordinates of landing site, no trajectory stuff going on.

When in physics range, if the legs revert back to folded, it should act as normal, that is only a very small drop, nothing that should destroy the craft.

I think maybe I can be wrong on that first part, I'll try and reproduce your problem when I have time.

Awesome! Awesome! Awesome!

Thanks!

Glad to see this part getting started! What would make this part more useful, was if it were hollow inside. That way, you could insert different 1.25m modules inside it, or clip in batteries or MP tanks like the stock truss. It just currently looks a little bulky for what should be lightweight structural truss. Have you considered a dull white instead of gray?

YESSSS!!! Can you make sure it folds forward, curved to the profile of the Soyuz OM, and not backwards like the current KURS dish does?

"Michetta" Lunar Lander TweakScale Demo

http://imgur.com/a/GEvpG

TweakScale config progress! Mocked up a quick lander using rescaled FOBOS and Cygnus parts. (Probe, RCS, Kontact Docking Probe) Works like a charm so far. Got ATV, Cygnus, and FOBOS done, just working on Fuji now. Might get most of them done by the end of the night.

Hollow? Yeah that would be quite simple, I will see to that.

IGLA, yeah, it will fold that way.

Anyway, nice tweakscale config! And cute lander.

International Lesbian & Gay Aquatics?

Ohoho, that slaps me on the knee.

So, apparently new rescue contracts spawn capsules instead of Kerbals.

And these capsules can be from mods, too.

http://i.imgur.com/J7NXMoJ.jpg

This is (or better was) Khleb. Looks... creepy. Also, you can see Zond (without solar panels, as I haven't researched them yet).

And look at the pilot's name

Pilots name! How? Manual config edit or Regex's mod?

I had no idea rescue worked like this now, interesting...

Oh I know whats going on when they spawn a pod for contracts they spawn it without resources which then triggers the ablation shader when there is no ablator. personally I edit the ablator out of my tantares mod pods sure its a nice gimmick but it's behavior is inconsistent with other parts I use.

That is a little dumb, I'll be honest. Thanks for the info!

Could split the heatshield into a separate part, could...

Tantares - prime contractor for Il-28 Beagle bomber rear turret mount!

http://i.imgur.com/0RaHpdh.jpg

(Yeah, I know that in reality Beagle bomber had 2x23mm cannons, not "Totally-not-mockup-of-Gatling-Gun-made-of-six-antennas". Gatlings look cooler. Deal with it.)

EDIT:

Cold War Rivals - Ilyushin Il-28 Beagle and Martin B-57 Canberra:

http://i.imgur.com/ew5MSN5.jpg

Sadly, not many people remember those two today.

(Canberra is kinda smaller than it should be, sorry!)

Oh nice!

Use of the plane pod, upside down is really clever, nicer than the regular nose cone.

ANYWAY this is rapidly drifting off-topic.

Beale I'm having trouble finding the Capella + Ariane parts in a science/career game? Are they all in the science tree? I can only find the Capella engine block :\

EDIT: I Should add I unlocked the entire science tree, but no parts :\

There's a topic?

But, thanks for alerting me of this, it seems the ATV parts may insert themselved into deprecated tech tree nodes, which is obviously quite a big problem... I'll get to fixing that.

KSP will cache the old config file in the subassemblies files.

For real? Ack! That's an irritating bit of trivia.

[Chameran]

Oops I double Posted

Edited May 13, 2015 by Chameran
Double Post

[Beale]

Hey I know this may be a noob question, but I have looked everywhere for the answer in this thread, I downloaded each of those craft files and they all give me the error that there is an invalid part for most of the MIR modules, its vega.solar.d. I have seen in the parts that there is no such part anymore, so how do I change it in order for it to work? thank you

Yep, the craft files are a little out of date, the Vega_Solar_D part has been deprecated as it was made redundant by one of the Soyuz parts

[billbobjebkirk]

That is a little dumb, I'll be honest. Thanks for the info!

Could split the heatshield into a separate part, could...

Yeah, they need to give the pods some resources. I wouldn't take the ablators out, it make the post landing Soyuz look a lot more realistic.

[tater]

I did some tests. Anything with those libra legs on it will retract them when the scene changes out of physics range. Sometimes they disappear (killing the crew) sometimes they don't' Works at KSC, too, no need to go to the Mun.

I dumped KJR in case that was causing the problem to test, as well.

Here's a roster from a dead test subject:

KERBAL {

name = Jenvie Kerman

gender = Female

type = Crew

brave = 0.4903094

dumb = 0.1120793

badS = False

tour = False

state = Dead

ToD = 0

idx = -1

CAREER_LOG

{

flight = 2

0 = ExitVessel,Kerbin

0 = Suborbit,Kerbin

0 = Die

1 = Die

}

FLIGHT_LOG

{

flight = 2

}

}

There was the one flight, I shot the craft off the launch area to land a couple hundred meters away in the grass with the libra legs. Wonder why 2 deaths shown?

[VenomousRequiem]

"Ohoho, that slaps me on the knee."

Is that a Team Fortress 2 reference?

[passinglurker]

Yeah, they need to give the pods some resources. I wouldn't take the ablators out, it make the post landing Soyuz look a lot more realistic.

last I checked this was a stockalike mod. stockalike is basically a standard it tells people part packs with this label can coexist and not clash against each other. Tantares pods charing while others under the same label don't is a deviation from that standard thereby creating a visual clash (not to mention ablator is dead mass 90% of the time)

That is a little dumb, I'll be honest. Thanks for the info!

Could split the heatshield into a separate part, could...

nah you already have a separate heat shield for those interplanetary aero brakes no point cluttering things up with separate heat shields for every pod like we do with docking ports.

also imagine doing it for the gemini it would be the decoupler problem all over again.

If this is stockalike then the stock trend is to not load pods with ablator, but I'll admit it's popular with some so I'd rather instead of abolishing it have "ablator in pods" as a separate mm config that one could delete in one go

Edited May 13, 2015 by passinglurker

[pTrevTrevs]

Tomorrow, IGLA!

HOLY CRAP!!!

IT IS TIME!!!

[CrisK]

Hm. It's easy to config the pods so that the heat darkening effect doesn't happen. That could be one solution. I prefer to have the ablator built in. We/Beale could also make the pods more heat-resistant, or disperse heat faster.

[curtquarquesso]

Tantares Space Technologies TweakScale Mod Support configs (Alpha 1.0.1)

Dropbox Download

Changelog:

05/15/15 (1.0.1) Added Mir 2 truss, and new solar panels as well as more size options for the Almach return chute.

To install:

Replace the file /GameData/TweakScale/patches/

OR

Delete the file in /GameData/TweakScale/patches/ and put the file instead in /GameData/Tantares/

Currently, I have TweakScale configs for almost all of the major parts in the game.

Notable exceptions:

• Early tech tree Almach parts, as not to screw up career mode in the early game.
  
• TantaresLV. Haven't even started that file yet.
  
• Alnair docking ports. They scale strangely with the 1.875m Alnair Docking Module.
  
• Alnair Structural Adapters. Oddball sizes, and redundant parts. Still working on this.
  

The goal of TweakScale compatibility is to allow more accurate scaling relationships between parts for us serious accuracy nerds that annoy mod authors so much, and to allow more design flexibility for people who want to use parts for purposes other than intended. Using Waykeepers to land a base on Duna? Why not!

Current bugs and concerns:

• Does this break the tech tree? Does it circumvent natural progression at all?
  
• Which parts should be scaleable? What is too large, and what is too small?
  
• How do we deal with certain ratios, and size adapters? How do we prevent more oddball sizes?
  

TweakScale has a setting in it's config files for disabling crewed pod scaling. When you test this, disable this by navigating to ScaleExponents.cfg in the TweakScale folder, scroll to the bottom, and set noScaledCrewPods = 0 This will allow you to scale all crewed pods in the game, including the ones in Tantares.

General rules I try to adhere to, is that the module hatches have to be large enough for a Kerbal to fit through. For example, I wouldn't allow the ATV to be scaled to 0.625m, otherwise, you couldn't theoretically fit a Kerbal through the hatch.

I haven't even touched how costs and resources are scaled yet. I presume most of them to be wildly off at the moment. I'd like to keep those scaling factors relatively close to stock factors.

Size standards: 0.625, 0.9375, 1.25, 1875, 2.5, 3.75. Most parts should be allowed to scale to any one of these scales.

Surface Attached part scaling convention depends on the purpose of the part. For example, the Soyuz 1x4 solar panels are meant to attach to the 1.25m orbital module, so the default scale is 1.25 for the solar panel. If you scale both parts up to 1.875, their relationship will stay the same. Nothing is set to scale to (100%, 200%, etc.) It makes it easy to cheat, and it's dumb when it comes to scaling.

Because this is my own work, if you have problems or suggestions, contact me, not Beale. He's got enough on his plate, and it's not his responsibility. I don't want people asking him why my configs aren't working. The best way to contact me is through PM, as I don't want to crowd up the thread here too badly, even though it is on-topic.

For those of you that pry into the config, be aware that the SCALETYPES are a bit messy. Currently, it all works, but could be better. The biggest part that needs work is scaling the adapter plates, and not returning weird oddball sizes when they're scaled in game.

License: WTFPL (Is this even necessary actually?)

I've only really begun to skim the surface of how it interacts with the tech tree, and other mods. @Niemand303, do you see this perhaps interfering with Road to Kosmos at all? I wouldn't want to muck that up.

Please enjoy, and let me know what works, and what doesn't.

Edited May 15, 2015 by curtquarquesso

[Chameran]

is there anyway to fix it or can I swap out the missing part in the craft file or anything? I would love to build my own MIR but I suck at building so

[Beale]

I did some tests. Anything with those libra legs on it will retract them when the scene changes out of physics range. Sometimes they disappear (killing the crew) sometimes they don't' Works at KSC, too, no need to go to the Mun.

I dumped KJR in case that was causing the problem to test, as well.

Here's a roster from a dead test subject:

There was the one flight, I shot the craft off the launch area to land a couple hundred meters away in the grass with the libra legs. Wonder why 2 deaths shown?

Mmm, tricky.

I can hopefully reproduce this tonight, anyone else?

Could be a big problem.

"Ohoho, that slaps me on the knee."

Is that a Team Fortress 2 reference?

Yup!

last I checked this was a stockalike mod. stockalike is basically a standard it tells people part packs with this label can coexist and not clash against each other. Tantares pods charing while others under the same label don't is a deviation from that standard thereby creating a visual clash (not to mention ablator is dead mass 90% of the time)

nah you already have a separate heat shield for those interplanetary aero brakes no point cluttering things up with separate heat shields for every pod like we do with docking ports.

also imagine doing it for the gemini it would be the decoupler problem all over again.

If this is stockalike then the stock trend is to not load pods with ablator, but I'll admit it's popular with some so I'd rather instead of abolishing it have "ablator in pods" as a separate mm config that one could delete in one go

Hm. It's easy to config the pods so that the heat darkening effect doesn't happen. That could be one solution. I prefer to have the ablator built in. We/Beale could also make the pods more heat-resistant, or disperse heat faster.

Yah, you are right on the Gemini stuff!

Eh, I think maybe just remove the charring effect...

And reduce the amount of Ablator by a fair amount.

http://i.imgur.com/IxJaCS2.jpg

HOLY CRAP!!!

IT IS TIME!!!

Time is going slowly!

Does anyone have an orthographic view or diagram of the IGLA?

It is proving quite difficult to model actually...

I don't have much so great reference material, hard to see the mechanism.

The best I find:

Tantares Space Technologies TweakScale configs (Alpha 1.0.0)

Dropbox Download

To install:

Replace the file /GameData/TweakScale/patches/

OR

Delete the file in /GameData/TweakScale/patches/ and put the file instead in /GameData/Tantares/

Currently, I have TweakScale configs for almost all of the major parts in the game.

Notable exceptions:

• Early tech tree Almach parts, as not to screw up career mode in the early game.
  
• TantaresLV. Haven't even started that file yet.
  
• Alnair docking ports. They scale strangely with the 1.875m Alnair Docking Module.
  
• Alnair Structural Adapters. Oddball sizes, and redundant parts. Still working on this.
  

The goal of TweakScale compatibility is to allow more accurate scaling relationships between parts for us serious accuracy nerds that annoy mod authors so much, and to allow more design flexibility for people who want to use parts for purposes other than intended. Using Waykeepers to land a base on Duna? Why not!

Current bugs and concerns:

• Does this break the tech tree? Does it circumvent natural progression at all?
  
• Which parts should be scaleable? What is too large, and what is too small?
  
• How do we deal with certain ratios, and size adapters? How do we prevent more oddball sizes?
  

TweakScale has a setting in it's config files for disabling crewed pod scaling. When you test this, disable this by navigating to ScaleExponents.cfg in the TweakScale folder, scroll to the bottom, and set noScaledCrewPods = 0 This will allow you to scale all crewed pods in the game, including the ones in Tantares.

General rules I try to adhere to, is that the module hatches have to be large enough for a Kerbal to fit through. For example, I wouldn't allow the ATV to be scaled to 0.625m, otherwise, you couldn't theoretically fit a Kerbal through the hatch.

I haven't even touched how costs and resources are scaled yet. I presume most of them to be wildly off at the moment. I'd like to keep those scaling factors relatively close to stock factors.

Size standards: 0.625, 0.9375, 1.25, 1875, 2.5, 3.75. Most parts should be allowed to scale to any one of these scales.

Surface Attached part scaling convention depends on the purpose of the part. For example, the Soyuz 1x4 solar panels are meant to attach to the 1.25m orbital module, so the default scale is 1.25 for the solar panel. If you scale both parts up to 1.875, their relationship will stay the same. Nothing is set to scale to (100%, 200%, etc.) It makes it easy to cheat, and it's dumb when it comes to scaling.

Because this is my own work, if you have problems or suggestions, contact me, not Beale. He's got enough on his plate, and it's not his responsibility. I don't want people asking him why my configs aren't working. The best way to contact me is through PM, as I don't want to crowd up the thread here too badly, even though it is on-topic.

For those of you that pry into the config, be aware that the SCALETYPES are a bit messy. Currently, it all works, but could be better. The biggest part that needs work is scaling the adapter plates, and not returning weird oddball sizes when they're scaled in game.

License: WTFPL (Is this even necessary actually?)

I've only really begun to skim the surface of how it interacts with the tech tree, and other mods. @Niemand303, do you see this perhaps interfering with Road to Kosmos at all? I wouldn't want to muck that up.

Please enjoy, and let me know what works, and what doesn't.

Very nice!

Linked on first page (the post number).

I will have a play with this.

Anybody looking to start modding out there?

I drew a thing.

Because I'm a boring, boring man.

Edited May 13, 2015 by Beale

[tater]

Beale, you can actually watch it happen. I retested in stock.

Put legs on something. Land it someplace. Time warp at a high rate watching the sunrises and sets blink… hit , rapidly to drop to 1:1, the ship will close the legs, hopping into the air (on Kerbin) as it does so.

I will try it on the Mun, and see how high it hops.

[spacecookie]

http://www.ninfinger.org/models/vault2008/Salyut%201/saliout%204%20integration.jpg Here's a view of IGLA retracted Dishes are erecting just like your soyuz parabola

Soyuz IGLA system was erected as well but in the other direction, lying along the orbital module to the docking port.

[curtquarquesso]

is there anyway to fix it or can I swap out the missing part in the craft file or anything? I would love to build my own MIR but I suck at building so

Now that I have the TweakScale configs begun, I can work on the .craft files a bit. I'll try to get them into a workable state I suppose.

Mmm, tricky.

I can hopefully reproduce this tonight, anyone else?

Could be a big problem.

Yah, you are right on the Gemini stuff!

Eh, I think maybe just remove the charring effect...

And reduce the amount of Ablator by a fair amount.

Time is going slowly!

Does anyone have an orthographic view or diagram of the IGLA?

It is proving quite difficult to model actually...

I don't have much so great reference material, hard to see the mechanism.

The best I find:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b4/Model_of_a_Soyuz_spacecraft,_1985.JPEG

Very nice!

Linked on first page (the post number).

I will have a play with this.

Anybody looking to start modding out there?

I drew a thing.

Because I'm a boring, boring man.

http://i.imgur.com/Ssnh1Om.png

Yes. I've had this happen to me before. The legs are cursed I think.

I would move slowly on the ablation issue. SQUAD doesn't even fully know what they're doing with that. As long as the base Tantares reentry pod can survive a reasonable realistic descent, and not burn up, that's all I care about it. If you're trying to aerobrake on Jool, you should be using more shielding anyways.

IGLA! Looks like you've got a decent reference photo there. If I come across anything more detailed, I'll send it your way.

Much appreciated! Hope it doesn't break too much. It's going to require a lot of testing to make the cost and resource values reasonable.

Apollo direct? Looks like a piece of cake. Looks like a Fuji atop a 2.5m SM with an engine cluster. It'll be in the .craft files when the next version comes out.

http://www.ninfinger.org/models/vault2008/Salyut%201/saliout%204%20integration.jpg Here's a view of IGLA retracted Dishes are erecting just like your soyuz parabola

Soyuz IGLA system was erected as well but in the other direction, lying along the orbital module to the docking port.

Nice find. There you have it @Beale: Salyut IGLA folds backwards, Soyuz IGLA folds forwards.

Also, to everyone who wanted the Cygnus/Pol in 1.25m, you now have options for .625m, .9375m, and 1.25m.

KSP Toyota Kerbolla for scale...

Edited May 13, 2015 by curtquarquesso

[_Augustus_]

Mmm, tricky.

I can hopefully reproduce this tonight, anyone else?

Could be a big problem.

Yup!

Yah, you are right on the Gemini stuff!

Eh, I think maybe just remove the charring effect...

And reduce the amount of Ablator by a fair amount.

Time is going slowly!

Does anyone have an orthographic view or diagram of the IGLA?

It is proving quite difficult to model actually...

I don't have much so great reference material, hard to see the mechanism.

The best I find:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b4/Model_of_a_Soyuz_spacecraft,_1985.JPEG

Very nice!

Linked on first page (the post number).

I will have a play with this.

Anybody looking to start modding out there?

I drew a thing.

Because I'm a boring, boring man.

http://i.imgur.com/Ssnh1Om.png

I like that direct lander!

I may add that to Bacon Labs at some point.

[tater]

Put a craft on mun with libra legs, stock plus tantares. They retract as always (warp, go to 1:1, legs are retracted now, always). Doesn't hop much. Maybe it glitches into the surface?

Switch to another craft in space, craft on Mun is now gone, poof.

[Beale]

Beale, you can actually watch it happen. I retested in stock.

Put legs on something. Land it someplace. Time warp at a high rate watching the sunrises and sets blink… hit , rapidly to drop to 1:1, the ship will close the legs, hopping into the air (on Kerbin) as it does so.

I will try it on the Mun, and see how high it hops.

Put a craft on mun with libra legs, stock plus tantares. They retract as always (warp, go to 1:1, legs are retracted now, always). Doesn't hop much. Maybe it glitches into the surface?

Switch to another craft in space, craft on Mun is now gone, poof.

Thank you for investigating

I think yes, can pretty much confirm this is a Tantares problem.

Okay - quick fix I will do:

Switch module landing-leg for module animate, it will be a pain, to right click leg and deploy rather than G key, but will prevent this behaviour (hopefully).

Edit: Okay, hot fix seems to work.

For the loss of a little convenience with the 'G' key, the legs now stable under timewarp and don't pop the ship and kill everyone - a fair trade if you ask me.

Hopefully push an update tomorrow (is late here in the UK now!), with the new solar panels, truss section and leg hot-fix (And IGLA, maybe).

http://www.ninfinger.org/models/vault2008/Salyut%201/saliout%204%20integration.jpg Here's a view of IGLA retracted Dishes are erecting just like your soyuz parabola

Soyuz IGLA system was erected as well but in the other direction, lying along the orbital module to the docking port.

Nice image, thanks!

Separate IGLA for Soyuz and Salyut eh?

I can do this, maybe.

Soyuz first, reasonably complex model, but getting there.

Now that I have the TweakScale configs begun, I can work on the .craft files a bit. I'll try to get them into a workable state I suppose.

Yes. I've had this happen to me before. The legs are cursed I think.

I would move slowly on the ablation issue. SQUAD doesn't even fully know what they're doing with that. As long as the base Tantares reentry pod can survive a reasonable realistic descent, and not burn up, that's all I care about it. If you're trying to aerobrake on Jool, you should be using more shielding anyways.

IGLA! Looks like you've got a decent reference photo there. If I come across anything more detailed, I'll send it your way.

Much appreciated! Hope it doesn't break too much. It's going to require a lot of testing to make the cost and resource values reasonable.

Apollo direct? Looks like a piece of cake. Looks like a Fuji atop a 2.5m SM with an engine cluster. It'll be in the .craft files when the next version comes out.

Nice find. There you have it @Beale: Salyut IGLA folds backwards, Soyuz IGLA folds forwards.

Also, to everyone who wanted the Cygnus/Pol in 1.25m, you now have options for .625m, .9375m, and 1.25m.

http://i.imgur.com/u9WGLOwl.png

KSP Toyota Kerbolla for scale...

Thanks for confirming the leg stuff.

On ablation, yep, still waiting a hotfix for the aero, so who knows what may or may not change.

Rescaled Cygnus looks sweet!

Edited May 13, 2015 by Beale

[biohazard15]

Pilots name! How? Manual config edit or Regex's mod?

I had no idea rescue worked like this now, interesting...

Neither. It's actually in game Got lucky with name generator, I guess.

[tater]

Likely pulls a random command pod that has crew != 0.

[Guest]

Switch module landing-leg for module animate, it will be a pain, to right click leg and deploy rather than G key, but will prevent this behaviour (hopefully).

For the loss of a little convenience with the 'G' key, the legs now stable under timewarp and don't pop the ship and kill everyone - a fair trade if you ask me.

You can get the "G" key functionality back by manually binding the toggling of the landing gear to the "Gear" action group. I had to do that with the AIES legs when they went all wibbly several builds ago.

[Chameran]

Thanks man, and also keep up the good work, you and Beale are both amazing at this stuff! One last question though, can you tell me the parts I need to make the mir core, from the pictures of your old craft I can figure out spektr and the kvants pretty easily, but the mir core module is really stumping me. Once again, thank you so much!

[Beale]

Neither. It's actually in game Got lucky with name generator, I guess.

That's surprising! But, I suppose the female names are Russian-themed (I think?).

You can get the "G" key functionality back by manually binding the toggling of the landing gear to the "Gear" action group. I had to do that with the AIES legs when they went all wibbly several builds ago.

This is true, but of course I will never remember this

Thanks man, and also keep up the good work, you and Beale are both amazing at this stuff! One last question though, can you tell me the parts I need to make the mir core, from the pictures of your old craft I can figure out spektr and the kvants pretty easily, but the mir core module is really stumping me. Once again, thank you so much!

Many thanks.

MIR Core: Basically a Salyut station with the 4-way adapter on the place of forward tunnel.

Or is something other detail you are struggling with it?

Tantares 26

Quick fix to get the LK leg fix in the public.

14/05/2015

- Fixed LK legs with ModuleAnimate workaround.

- Added new MIR solar panels.

- Added MIR-2 Truss part.

- Added new 6-way node.

Edited May 14, 2015 by Beale

[spacecookie]

yepee many thanks for the update !

[biohazard15]

That's surprising! But, I suppose the female names are Russian-themed (I think?).

The only Russian name I've seen so far is Svetlana. I've also seen Lola (she appeared in "Kerbals for hire" list). I hope they have some other Russian names...

BTW, it saddens me that they hadn't added some Russian male names. Billy-Bob is a nice nod to all the rednecks out there, but I want Yuri Kerman and German Kerman! (German Kerman. Hehe, that's a great name! Do want!)