T'Flok Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Woah! Just woke up and two pages of loafsome (aka awesome)! Loving the look of the new pod! I like that blue variant myself since blue is my favorite color but green in the case of KSP feels more natural and blends in better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted June 18, 2015 Author Share Posted June 18, 2015 (edited) Rigel, Sirius, Betelgeuse, Aquarius, Arcturus, Deneb, Regulus, Draco, Virgo, or Wolf 359, if you're a Star Trek fan.Heh, I've got too much time on my hands. Nothing to do while driving across Arkansas but think of star names and count the miles to the end of my trip.Aquarius! Yes, I like it, starts with the A also.I actually like all of them. But as it was mention earlier, green one is pretty much neutral and will go nicely with any parts. Still must say that blue one looks nice with your Gemini and passinglurker's Mercury, though.I gotta say the orange is looking a bit more stockalike to me but I'm a fan of the blue.Green is the way to go!Blue and Green brushes are both great, I recommand doing it blue if you still plan to do a recolour of the tantares in blue and white, just to keep the same colour code Woah! Just woke up and two pages of loafsome (aka awesome)! Loving the look of the new pod! I like that blue variant myself since blue is my favorite color but green in the case of KSP feels more natural and blends in better. Wow! Quite some feedback' date=' thanks I dunno with a small craft and the way tantares pods are typically put together extra batteries and reaction wheels seem redundant and we can't take away vostoks batteries and reaction wheels to fix that because then it would hurt the pods usability in non-recreation situations (even now the vostoks reactions wheels need a buff because a probe core level of torque is simply to low to control any rocket that isn't covered in fins and gimbals like the R7)also we shouldn't combine decouplers and fuel tanks if we can help it because it screws with dv calculation mods like engineer and mechjeb and radial lfo tanks are useless without external plugin dependency unless you force the engines flow mode in the config and even then they are only useful with that one engine making it a niche kit part.what about what I've been proposing in the mock up where the size adapter/fuel tank simply has a ring of bulbous protrusions near the top? I'll admit it's not a perfect recreation, but doesn't it at least nod in the right direction? also if we were going for perfection wouldn't we find a way to make the window placement work?(how bad is the clipping if you just used separate meshes for the windows? since they are shielded in the northern hemisphere they can get away with protruding a little right? then again if we get the windows right then we'd have to get the service module right and its proving difficult to strike a balance between stock-a-like and realistic... I made a loop!)This is true, it has currently... 0.1 torque? Not very useful it's true (In fact, Prospero outperforms it!).I think the actual baubles are important to have, I'm not sure what to have really. The current fuel baubles currently hold too much fuel for their size, I could move most of that into the service module.The baubles could also be grouped into groups of two or three as a single part, thereby halving or third-ing the part count.By the design of the mesh, the windows should not be directly exposed to the perils of re-entry (okay this is a lame excuse...).I will see if it is possible to move or alter them.I can also give windows a "Shelf" for something extra.I hope it would take a year or so. Because Beale must stop doing these endless revamps and churn out something new. PPTK+Angara would be nice.PPTK is directly next! But, yes I've heard the feedback now - I will play it cool with the revamps (And in truth, a revamped R-7 I think will involve some significant size changes).Here is the engine!Does it look plain? It should! I'm planning something... interesting. Maybe will come to fruition soon. Traditional compare shot.Sorry, a few textures have gone missing from the old models!I'd like to say that these revamps were beautiful and somewhat needed. Previously, to be honest, Tantares lacked style (except from "Beale gray everywhere"), no offense, Beale. Also all these size refurbishings are undoubtedly useful even if frustrating to update.I agree entirely, it has been chaotic and I apologise. Edited June 18, 2015 by Beale Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VenomousRequiem Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Wow, Vostok looks pretty nice! It looks... off... without the radial tanks though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T'Flok Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Nice engine! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pTrevTrevs Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 How about having animated radiator panels on that engine? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passinglurker Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 the engine looks spiffy I look forward to future fruitionas for the radial tanks since I never said I didn't want them to exist just that I didn't want them required for a working craft how about this. The size adapter is filled with LFO for the engine and the radial tanks are filled with monoprop for the RCS(you said you were reducing how much they carry so its not gonna be as overkill as it sounds) which is admittedly an unnecessary part for an early orbital flight in career. The vostok would simply have to be balanced so that a bare minimum version riding an R7 (1 antenna, no monoprop, or rcs ports) can't like do a flyby of the mun or similar and that the fully loaded recreation version can still reach orbit so thats about a 700-800 dv performance window to work with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Rictus Bingo Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 The compare shot .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted June 18, 2015 Author Share Posted June 18, 2015 Wow, Vostok looks pretty nice! It looks... off... without the radial tanks though.They're on the way, no worries! Nice engine!Many thanks! How about having animated radiator panels on that engine?Are you a mind reader? the engine looks spiffy I look forward to future fruitionas for the radial tanks since I never said I didn't want them to exist just that I didn't want them required for a working craft how about this. The size adapter is filled with LFO for the engine and the radial tanks are filled with monoprop for the RCS(you said you were reducing how much they carry so its not gonna be as overkill as it sounds) which is admittedly an unnecessary part for an early orbital flight in career. The vostok would simply have to be balanced so that a bare minimum version riding an R7 (1 antenna' date=' no monoprop, or rcs ports) can't like do a flyby of the mun or similar and that the fully loaded recreation version can still reach orbit so thats about a 700-800 dv performance window to work with.[/quote']Many thanks! That might be a nice solution!On limitation, isn't the Vostok (atleast a somewhat accurate recreation) limitied by it's lack of solar panels? Well, no for sure it shouldn't be able to skirt by the Mun, nope.The RCS baubles, I'm thinking only 5-6 units each, so not much in terms of Delta-V from the RCS (And - I could alter the RCS parts to be useless as main engines "facing outwards").Making the engine run on LFO - and making the fuel stored in the service module would give an absurd amount of control in how much delta-V this little pup will have, yes, I like this! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passinglurker Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 (edited) On limitation, isn't the Vostok (atleast a somewhat accurate recreation) limitied by it's lack of solar panels? Well, no for sure it shouldn't be able to skirt by the Mun, nope.The RCS baubles, I'm thinking only 5-6 units each, so not much in terms of Delta-V from the RCS (And - I could alter the RCS parts to be useless as main engines "facing outwards").Making the engine run on LFO - and making the fuel stored in the service module would give an absurd amount of control in how much delta-V this little pup will have, yes, I like this! says who vostok didn't have solar panels?supposedly they flew solar panels on Korabl-Sputnik 4 something... look the soviet naming scheme gets confusing alright!? which was a test flight of vostok before going mannedanyway here is a les thought out thought on the RCS ports you could kill the isp and slash the cost and call them cold gas thrusters it would give them a niche compared to stock linear ports and justify early tree placement Edited June 18, 2015 by passinglurker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biohazard15 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Making the engine run on LFO - and making the fuel stored in the service module would give an absurd amount of control in how much delta-V this little pup will have, yes, I like this! No! Nonono! Vostok should use monopropellant, and said monopropellant should be stored in bubble tanks. You can attach as many as you want, thus tweaking the amount of dV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VenomousRequiem Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Woah, I just noticed something... This mod is Soviet spacecraft... and yet... there's no Voskhod? That seems strange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecookie Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 (edited) Just yuri's smile, there's nothing else to say To venomous, well with a bit of greebling my friend.. http://i.imgur.com/kTBcnua.png Don't despair, the mighty loaf hear our pagan prayers Edited June 18, 2015 by spacecookie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biohazard15 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Woah, I just noticed something... This mod is Soviet spacecraft... and yet... there's no Voskhod? That seems strange.Voskhod is hard to make without additional plugins, especially its inflatable airlock. And putting 3 Kerbals inside 1.25m capsule is basically impossible (you probably can, if they're without their suits - exactly what we did back then).When I need Voskhod, I usually use Soyuz CM with Vostok hardware. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pTrevTrevs Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 I always use Zond as a Voskhod replacement. Voskhod was a dead end project to begin with, and had no practical advantages to Vostok other than the ability to fit up to three crewmen or to allow spacewalks. One could very easily list the Voskhod missions as a reason for the failure of the Soviet moon program. But yeah, you can use the Soyuz CM. With the new OM IVA, you can use that instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biohazard15 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 One could very easily list the Voskhod missions as a reason for the failure of the Soviet moon program. Frankly, I can't see any connections here. Voskhod was a rushed Vostok-derived program, the only goal of which was to get several "firsts" records. Moon program was in advanced development when it was cancelled, and several of its bits (Soyuz and Blok-D) became very successful projects on its own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pTrevTrevs Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Frankly, I can't see any connections here. Voskhod was a rushed Vostok-derived program, the only goal of which was to get several "firsts" records. Moon program was in advanced development when it was cancelled, and several of its bits (Soyuz and Blok-D) became very successful projects on its own.Well, while the Soviets rushed to rig up a Vostok with thee/two seats and an airlock, NASA developed a special Dpacecraft that could outperform Voskhod. Voskhod flights and Genini flights both began around the same time, so while America was learning orbital rendezvous and docking, Russia was learning how to cram three people into a capsule by putting them on diets. If they had left Voskhod and began work on a real second generation ship like Soyuz/Zond earlier, they may have had a bigger chance at the moon. Unfortunately, they didn't, and their first manned rendezvous and docking happened a mere five months before Apollo 11., while America was able to do theirs in 1966 thanks to the extra time and money they sunk into Gemini.Oh dear, I derailed the thread again, didn't I? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biohazard15 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 (edited) Oh dear, I derailed the thread again, didn't I?Yes, you did.Now, for something completely different - Beale, how about an Indian space program?I like that "short" service module with mounting pylons for solar panels and "one-and-three nozzle" engine. Edited June 18, 2015 by biohazard15 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
passinglurker Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 on the subject of vostok vs. vokshod I feel I should point out that you technically can't make a true vostok without plugins either as the pilot is supposed to eject and come down in on separate chute but yeah anything unique about voskhod doesn't have much merit in KSP it seemsNo! Nonono! Vostok should use monopropellant, and said monopropellant should be stored in bubble tanks. You can attach as many as you want, thus tweaking the amount of dV.oh for the love of- how is this better? everything odd, janky, and jury rigged about the current vostok implementation is tied to the need for those dang tanks not to mention again the real descent engine was hypergolic in other words bi-propellant. if you want to make a custom munshot vostok just stack in more LFO tanks or do like the soviets and add a whole extra stage, and if you want less dv for some reason just take some out of the tank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biohazard15 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 and if you want less dv for some reason just take some out of the tank.Ever tried to tweak the fuel in LF\OX tank? No? Try it. You'll quickly find out that with current GUI, it's almost impossible to set it exactly as you need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lindemherz Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 The only reason Voskhod existed was because the development of Soyuz (or rather, Sever back then), was running too long and it wouldn't be ready before Gemini. Even with the detour taken in 1964, with all the historical problems in its development it seems unlikely that Soyuz would have had its first flight before early '66 (opposed to November '66 as in real life).PS. I just found out Soyuz 7KT-OK only had 210m/s of deltaV. Gemini had only 98! I cannot even deorbit with that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invader_guy Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Voskhod is hard to make without additional plugins, especially its inflatable airlock.wait... really? there are some other mods that add inflatable parts, I don't see how an airlock would be any harder to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted June 18, 2015 Author Share Posted June 18, 2015 (edited) Folks - let's keep it civil and on-topic eh? On Voshkod, it is often requested, but with the diameter I'm using it is difficult even to place two Kerbonauts inside, forget three! So it's potential to be made is quite low, sorry!I did play around with a potential Zenit design, really to try avoid using much if any new texture space.Now, for something completely different - Beale, how about an Indian space program?http://danielmarin.naukas.com/files/2010/07/Img20100708alas1810.pnghttp://danielmarin.naukas.com/files/2010/07/isroOVeee.jpghttp://danielmarin.naukas.com/files/2010/07/Img20151.pngI like that "short" service module with mounting pylons for solar panels and "one-and-three nozzle" engine.Hehe, I made it close to 2 years ago! One of my first mod parts.It's an interesting capsule and I'd certainly like to re-visit in the future.wait... really? there are some other mods that add inflatable parts, I don't see how an airlock would be any harder to do.You can animate a hatch sure, but you can't tie EVA ability to a status of the airlock inflation Edited June 18, 2015 by Beale Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kibble Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Voskhod was a dead end project to begin with, and had no practical advantages to Vostok other than the ability to fit up to three crewmen or to allow spacewalks.Those are very practical advantages! (the Soviet lunar mission required multiple cosmonauts, and spacewalks) It also made Voskhod more capable than Gemini, which had dozens of studies about continued use and improvements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T'Flok Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Hilarious, another discussion about which came first, oh my sides! So, was it the chicken or the egg? *starts taking a step backwards*In all seriousness, I don't really care what came first. It's enough for me to have all these awesome unique parts in KSP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Invader_guy Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 You can animate a hatch sure, but you can't tie EVA ability to a status of the airlock inflation Doesn't the USI Survivability pack already do something like that? 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.