Jump to content

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


Beale

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, bokrif said:

It says the new tantares is not compatible with the old one. If it's a new mod, can you use it in parallel with the old one?

Kindof.
Some of the parts in the "new" replace parts in the "old" so if you install both you'd want to manually delete the duplicate parts out of the "old" first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, SpaceToad said:

Why is the new TantaresLV missing all the Soyuz stuff? Seems to have a lot less compared to old LV.

This has been mentioned many, many times and is also in the readme and Spacedock...

It's also called New TantaresLV

It's also version 1.0

tenor.gif

Merry Christmas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Joeybafoey said:

Speaking of launch escape systems, if I made an LES for the N-1, would you add it to the mod? Something like this:

Related image

I'll be moving onto these soon (But, if you want to make a model, I encourage you anyway - you might have fun doing it).

 

 

Soyuz

For the time being, ignoring 1.5m sizes, preferences?

1.875m Top.
1.25m Bottom.

I had the idea maybe to do both, we then have chunky soyuz and slender soyuz.
Dy5nV5k.png

The more I look, 1.875m is pretty accurate...

8cvP495.png

Edit: I forgot this was such a problem...

7Qk8mh0.png
 

The scale is a little bit off, but the end result is not so bad :wink:

LBSauMs.png

xYxIaGd.png

Edited by Beale
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Beale said:

Soyuz

 


For the time being, ignoring 1.5m sizes, preferences?

1.875m Top.
1.25m Bottom.

My ten cents, just bear with me as this rolls into a few other places. This is presuming that 1.5m is out of the question (though I think it would be the best option if the soyuz crew capsule stays 1.25m).

Thoughts on the R7 stack (just calling it the R7 stack to distinguish it from the Soyuz crewed spacecraft, which I will call the Soyuz stack for now) being 1.875m:
If the R7 stack goes up to 1.875 we gain a few things, and lose a few things. The fairing housing the Soyuz stack will "bulge" slightly less and look a lot more like the "real" launcher and spacecraft assembly. However, the engines and tanks will have slightly less utility value for use outside of the assembled R7 rocket. Upping the R7 to 1.875m would put it slightly more out of ratio to the Proton (presuming the proton stays 2.5 if/when it is eventually remade) compared to the current 1.25m R7 stack. It would also break compatibility with the Vostok (and other parts) from the "old" tantares mod.

If the R7 stack stays 1.25m, the fairing stays "bulge-y" with the Soyuz spacecraft stack mounted inside it, but the parts retain their multi-use capability.

What I would strongly caution against is having the top of the R7 stack cap off at 1.875 but the bottom of the core be 1.25m. The difference would be too drastic, and would look exceedingly odd.

This is all presuming the Soyuz stack stays 1.25m. If the Soyuz spacecraft stack were scaled up to, say, 1.5m and the R7 booster stack scaled to 1.875m this would be an almost ideal solution for several reasons. It would make the Soyuz big enough to be modded for a crew of 3 without looking like a Tardis, but would allow the fairing off the R7 to "bulge" only a little bit and look a lot more like the "Real" booster+spacecraft assembly. Having the "top" and side-boosters as 1.5 and having the bottom "core" 1.25 (with a 1.25m soyuz spacecraft) would in my opinion be a great choice for a variety of reasons, BUT it also introduces an oddball size that isn't used for any other parts in the pack at the moment which I know you are very hesitant to do especially considering the lack of structural parts as size adapters, fairing bases, and so on.

At the end of the day, I don't think there is an optimal solution given that the parts are meant to live in a larger world (the larger tantares mod, which contains more than JUST the R7 / Soyuz) and play nicely in that world. The key thing to keep in mind, which I think you do, is that the R7 rocket stack is going to sit below the Soyuz spacecraft stack and as such probably shouldn't look especially over/under sized compared to the Soyuz+fairing. The current sizes, based around a 1.25m spacecraft and 1.25m booster, work pretty well given the limitations of "playing nice" inside the game's parts ecosystem. Only change that formula if you are really sure.

Edited by tjsnh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 24/12/2016 at 3:00 AM, tjsnh said:

Good words.

Nice feedback there :) 
Because pictures say a thousand words my reply won't be so long (hooray for my fingers).

I think yeah it is a bit of a fudge, but the end result is nice and fine. Thankfully, Current scale with the Proton is maintained (But, I will admit it is not perfect, but 'close enough'). Because I am only making the base tanks wider, but not taller.

kmG8lKS.png
N8wbYvt.png

The bottom of the Soyuz now looks a whole lot more distinctive.

BAAXqLP.png
G2fTH1Q.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Beale said:

Nice feedback there :) 
Because pictures say a thousand words my reply won't be so long (hooray for my fingers).

I think yeah it is a bit of a fudge, but the end result is nice and fine. Thankfully, Current scale with the Proton is maintained (But, I will admit it is not perfect, but 'close enough'). Because I am only making the base tanks wider, but not taller.


N8wbYvt.png

The bottom of the Soyuz now looks a whole lot more distinctive.


G2fTH1Q.png

Suggestion - consider having the tank not taper-off on the bottom as it does in these pictures, or perhaps have the bottom flare out in a shroud or something around the engine mounting. The one complaint I've had with the tantares R7 stack is that the bottom of the radial boosters flattens out instead of flaring out. The only real way to prevent that, that I can think of, would be to have the tank extend a bit beyond/around the mounting point for the engine in a shroud, or to have the engines which mount on the boosters be rather short. Or just have the engines include the flare shape, but it would prevent their use in other designs.

Just 10 cents

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting idea related to Soyuz: maybe create a variant of the strapons that is thinner so six can fit around the central Soyuz tank with a central nuclear engine in the center: then you have YaKhR. Though not many resources exist on the whether or not this is true, in concept drawings it looks like the central tank is just a straight, longer variant of  the central tank for the standard Soyuz. More info: http://www.astronautix.com/y/yakhr-2.html

Staging would be set up as the strapons igniting first and, upon burnout, the nuclear one igniting. Image result for YaKhR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Joeybafoey said:

. Image result for YaKhR

I think that a 1.875 core would be more correct (it's says that the diameter of the core is the same as the boosters , 3.33 meters) also if the core would be straight then I think you could fit there 6 normal boosters 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what I was talking about in my last post, but was having a hard time articulating. Take a look at the bottom rocket, and how it "matches up" with the image in the middle compared to the top rocket.

a0aviw.jpg

By shortening, or removing, the straight section at the bottom of the rocket it becomes a much closer match to the "real" one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tjsnh said:

This is what I was talking about in my last post, but was having a hard time articulating. Take a look at the bottom rocket, and how it "matches up" with the image in the middle compared to the top rocket.

a0aviw.jpg

By shortening, or removing, the straight section at the bottom of the rocket it becomes a much closer match to the "real" one.

It looks nice, but where do the engines go? They need to be straight really.

Edited by Beale
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Beale said:

It looks nice, but where do the engines go? They need to be straight really.

Flatter attachment plates like the old N1 frisbee engines?
Attachment point slightly "up" inside the booster like behind a lip/hood or something?

spkfbp.jpg

Where the dotted line indicates a recess up into the tank, and the green square is the engine part. The attachment point would  be at the top of the green square in this pic, and the bottom of the tank forms a kind of fairing/lip around it.
Not sure if I'm explaining what I'm thinking very well.

Edited by tjsnh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, tjsnh said:

Flatter attachment plates like the old N1 frisbee engines?
Attachment point slightly "up" inside the booster like behind a lip/hood or something?

spkfbp.jpg

Where the dotted line indicates a recess up into the tank, and the green square is the engine part.
Not sure if I'm explaining what I'm thinking very well.

Thanks, you are very clear now. :)

I'm not sold on the idea, it all becomes too specific.
Maybe I will evaluate how it all looks once the parts are textured, then we can play around with nodes, etc.

These will be pretty neat 1.875m engines, but you will have to use them in symmetry.

qiuWUoQ.png

Edited by Beale
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Joeybafoey said:

Interesting idea related to Soyuz: maybe create a variant of the strapons that is thinner so six can fit around the central Soyuz tank with a central nuclear engine in the center: then you have YaKhR. Though not many resources exist on the whether or not this is true, in concept drawings it looks like the central tank is just a straight, longer variant of  the central tank for the standard Soyuz. More info: http://www.astronautix.com/y/yakhr-2.html

Staging would be set up as the strapons igniting first and, upon burnout, the nuclear one igniting. Image result for YaKhR

Here's the new engines relocated around a 1.875m central tank.

dYphkEv.png
PWd7d9i.png

Edited by Beale
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, spacecookie said:

SphMUKh.png

 

Shia-LaBeouf-really-wants-you-to-justdoi

(This second stage needs to be larger.. please ;_; )

5 minutes ago, hraban said:

Dont do that! Andegraf is not a good reference.

Andegraf is usually okay, but there are some oddities.
The upper stage should be more 1.5m, but the difference is so small it looks fine with 1.25m diameter. 
The soyuz has wrap-around solar panels now, so can fit in much thinner fairing bases. :) 

lMDIGtM.png
glo2u9q.png
Z8FldY2.png

 

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...