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

[Niemand303]

16 hours ago, Beale said:

both RO and (Scatterer?).

It's both Scatterer and RVE

[Beale]

2 hours ago, Niemand303 said:

It's both Scatterer and RVE

Thanks!

 

 

A question, how important are the circular solar panels? If people are crazy about them I can give an attempt to produce them, though there are a few issues to work through.

But, I need a demonstration of how the folding of a circular panel works.

There is also the short variant of the Cygnus:

Edited July 28, 2016 by Beale

[hraban]

16 minutes ago, Beale said:

A question, how important are the circular solar panels?

Would be nice to see in KSP with your typical style but I did not want to build the animation 

 

[Beale]

2 minutes ago, hraban said:

Would be nice to see in KSP with your typical style but I did not want to build the animation 

 

Very agreed!  

Rotation-fold is not an option, so I am unsure how it works...

The real example, the panels do not differ in step, all on the same level.

[Foxxonius Augustus]

19 minutes ago, Beale said:

~snip~

But, I need a demonstration of how the folding of a circular panel works.

~snip~

@Nertea has a good circular panel that you might draw inspiration from (or ask him how he did it). @raidernick also has experience making odd solar panels such as the ones for the OPS stations *cough* hint hint *cough* so you might ask him for some advice as well.

[hraban]

This works like a better accordion

A typical, Rectangle solar panel is more efficient. The usable surface is simply larger.

Edited July 28, 2016 by hraban

[Calvin_Maclure]

@Beale, just thought Id say, glad to see you still being able to work on this mod, after all that Brexit stuff. 

Question: Im assuming that the latest (or next eventual build of Tantares) with these sweet updates is gonna be craftbreaking from the Tantares version for KSP 1.1.2, huh?

[trooperMNG]

On 27 luglio 2016 at 7:25 PM, Niemand303 said:

http://imgur.com/a/FtbWZ

Testing out Soyuz-TMA on Soyuz-FG launcher, note that I made RCS thrusters out of stock models in corresponding locations for historical accuracy.

how did you get Soyuz-FG to work? Without cheaty modifications it's top heavy (and therefore unflyable)

[VenomousRequiem]

Just now, trooperMNG said:

how did you get Soyuz-FG to work? Without cheaty modifications it's top heavy (and therefore unflyable)

That doesn't make any sense. If a rocket is top heavy, that leaves he centre of mass in front of the centre of lift(presumably, with how the Soyuz's fins are set up), thus making it stable. Not to be rude but maybe its the way you're flying/building it. 

[tjsnh]

1 hour ago, trooperMNG said:

how did you get Soyuz-FG to work? Without cheaty modifications it's top heavy (and therefore unflyable)

The easiest way is to clip some fins into the bottom of the center tank.

In my Soviet Career mod (linked in my sig) I tweaked the weights of the various parts so that the R-7 series rockets would be more flight/CG-stable and gameplay-balanced, but if you're running "stock" Tantares clipping fins into the bottom really is the easiest way.

Otherwise it's VERY delicate to fly, you have to do your gravity turn VERY slowly.

[trooperMNG]

11 hours ago, VenomousRequiem said:

That doesn't make any sense. If a rocket is top heavy, that leaves he centre of mass in front of the centre of lift(presumably, with how the Soyuz's fins are set up), thus making it stable. Not to be rude but maybe its the way you're flying/building it. 

I should have explained myself better. It's too top heavy. Even the slightest turn makes it tip over. As @tjsnh said, the gravity turn should be slow and controlled. But without clipping fins, it's very difficult in stock conditions. About construction, it's the standard Tantares Soyuz. 4 boosters and central core, second stage and normal Soyuz with no 3rd party parts except for stock separatrons and decoupler. And no, you didn't seem to be rude, but my flight capabilities are OK. I normally fly Shuttle and Buran, rarely using Mechjeb (only when building stations and it's the same launch for like 5-6 times). I only encountered difficulties with Tantares Soyuz-FG and Contares Feniks with a heavy load on top like @hraban Kliper.

[Beale]

14 hours ago, Foxxonius Augustus said:

Nertea has a good circular panel that you might draw inspiration from (or ask him how he did it). Raidernick also has experience making odd solar panels such as the ones for the OPS stations *cough* hint hint *cough* so you might ask him for some advice as well.

14 hours ago, hraban said:

This works like a better accordion

A typical, Rectangle solar panel is more efficient. The usable surface is simply larger.

Thanks for the tips! A good place to start.

14 hours ago, Calvin_Maclure said:

@Beale

Question: Im assuming that the latest (or next eventual build of Tantares) with these sweet updates is gonna be craftbreaking from the Tantares version for KSP 1.1.2, huh?

From 1.1.2 I am not sure everything has changed, but if you are using the latest version of Tantares right now, nothing will break.

The Cygnus parts are exactly the same size as before.  

56 minutes ago, trooperMNG said:

I should have explained myself better. It's too top heavy. Even the slightest turn makes it tip over. As @tjsnh said, the gravity turn should be slow and controlled. But without clipping fins, it's very difficult in stock conditions. About construction, it's the standard Tantares Soyuz. 4 boosters and central core, second stage and normal Soyuz with no 3rd party parts except for stock separatrons and decoupler. And no, you didn't seem to be rude, but my flight capabilities are OK. I normally fly Shuttle and Buran, rarely using Mechjeb (only when building stations and it's the same launch for like 5-6 times). I only encountered difficulties with Tantares Soyuz-FG and Contares Feniks with a heavy load on top like @hraban Kliper.

Hmm! How strange this situation is.

I think the flight tipping problems have been sold for quite a long time now. I can maybe post a video to demonstrate how I fly these things  

The Soyuz rocket especially is very easy to fly.

[trooperMNG]

1 minute ago, Beale said:

Thanks for the tips! A good place to start.

From 1.1.2 I am not sure everything has changed, but if you are using the latest version of Tantares right now, nothing will break.

The Cygnus parts are exactly the same size as before.  

Hmm! How strange this situation is.

I think the flight tipping problems have been sold for quite a long time now. I can maybe post a video to demonstrate how I fly these things  

The Soyuz rocket especially is very easy to fly.

Maybe I should check if my installation is corrupted, because I can't seem to fly Soyuz so easily

[Beale]

Just now, trooperMNG said:

Maybe I should check if my installation is corrupted, because I can't seem to fly Soyuz so easily

It maybe is possible, the old drag cube issue.

(I am also using stock fairings, maybe this can make a small difference).

[Beale]

Cygnus!

1.875m Fairing

 

[CobaltWolf]

15 minutes ago, Beale said:

#Topical

[VenomousRequiem]

Personally, I think it'd be cool if you split Cygnus up into sections. Like the cargo section. That way if we wanted to make normal Cygnus, we could use a fewer amount if segments than Enhanced Cygnus, then there could be a structural adapter to sit on top for the docking port, like the ATV. 

[Beale]

1 hour ago, VenomousRequiem said:

Personally, I think it'd be cool if you split Cygnus up into sections. Like the cargo section. That way if we wanted to make normal Cygnus, we could use a fewer amount if segments than Enhanced Cygnus, then there could be a structural adapter to sit on top for the docking port, like the ATV. 

It's a nice idea, but I'm not sure, having these pieces as separate segments, would lose the unique textured parts (Like the yellow panel, writing, etc).

I guess there is some possible ways to split it up, but what are people's preferences?

(By the way, splitting the parts up would be save breaking, currently the Cygnus revamp is totally save friendly).

And here is the short Cygnus.

[VenomousRequiem]

18 minutes ago, Beale said:

And here is the short Cygnus.

Is that the same diameter of the extended Cygnus?

[Beale]

20 minutes ago, VenomousRequiem said:

Is that the same diameter of the extended Cygnus?

Yup

[VenomousRequiem]

30 minutes ago, Beale said:

Yup

I guess that warrants a new Antares then, eh? Eh? Please don't hurt me

[Beale]

3 minutes ago, VenomousRequiem said:

I guess that warrants a new Antares then, eh? Eh? Please don't hurt me

Unfortunately, you are right, it does!

But, that is a story for another time - the 1.875m large Castor rocket will be enough trouble alone, the entire Antares rocket at a 2.5m scale will be a big undertaking.

[baldamundo]

Personally my vote's for more modularity so it's easier to have exactly the craft you need!

Btw, is there no heatshield for the TKS VA capsule? (I think historically it was supposed to be a heatshield with a hatch in the middle of it??). Just curious - I mostly just use procedural ones anyway, and CLS let's you cheat holes in things these days so it works fine

[Beale]

24 minutes ago, baldamundo said:

Btw, is there no heatshield for the TKS VA capsule? (I think historically it was supposed to be a heatshield with a hatch in the middle of it??). Just curious - I mostly just use procedural ones anyway, and CLS let's you cheat holes in things these days so it works fine

It's part of the capsule, look at the bottom  

 

Edited July 29, 2016 by Beale

[baldamundo]

17 minutes ago, Beale said:

It's part of the capsule, look at the bottom  

 

OOOhhhh. Clever!