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

[Guest]

-SNIP-

5. 3 man pods (can carry 2 tourists with a pilot!)

I can just hear the in-flight chatter now...

Tourist 1 : "Captain Jeb, I was wondering. Are we going to be going to any more 'kerbal' type places?"

Captain Jeb: "Well, you heard of Duna?

Tourist 1: "Yeah."

Captain Jeb: "We're going to the planet just to the left of it."

Tourist 2: "What's it called?"

Captain Ron: "Bob's."

[passinglurker]

I feel compelled to carry my little ballance tangent to a logical conclusion the goal here is to sort everything through tiers 1-5 (basically what you get from tier 1 R&D) under the belief that that would provide a player with all the tools they need for a solid space program and therefore any tree placement ballance snafu's that happen after won't be too painful.

1. suborbital R5, Vostok (pod)

2. Vostok (upper stage, service module)

3. Orbital R7

4. Soyuz (pod, service module, orbital module A, upper stage, fairing), Gemini (pod, service module, basically all of it), some 1.875m British rockets (could be used as a titan II analog if some sort of consensus is reached on gemini scaling (straight "chinese clone style" service module? 1.5m pod/sm? 1.5m pod/sm w/built in fairings to bridge size gaps?))

5. Soyuz (orbital module B, solar panels), Progress(all of it I guess?), Salyut (basics no mir or tks stuff), Proton (gonna need a fairing the stock one comes too late), Fuji (couldn't hurt a H-II analog could be made with stock at this point if you don't mind oil chrome drums instead of orange foam)

and that is about as far as I've thought it through.

Edited September 17, 2015 by passinglurker

[kopapaka]

Sputnik 1

[gooddog15]

Hey all,

Over the past week, I remodeled and revamped the Cygnus (Pol/Pollux/Phoenix). I talked to Beale about it, and he suggested I post it here and get some reactions to a possible Enhanced Cygnus revamp.

Cygnus Revamp: Enhanced Cygnus Configuration

http://i.imgur.com/DNcKSSil.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/DcFsav2l.png

Shown here in the longer Enhanced configuration slated to launch on Atlas later this year, as well as a configuration with some stock parts just to show that it blends in nicely. Notice that the PCM now supports Flag Decals!

http://i.imgur.com/39pv4rXm.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/wr9BHdCm.jpghttp://imgur.com/Pk4AEUBm.pnghttp://imgur.com/LgsDzWQm.png

With the scales shown, it's perfectly to scale relative to every other Tantares vehicle in the fleet.

Full Mission Demo Album:

http://imgur.com/a/d5lFN

The main questions to be answered:

1. Do you like the new size, and will it make the Cygnus more useful?

2. Do the part node sizes all make sense?

3. Given the larger diameter of the Enhanced Cygnus, would you want to see the Antares rocket scaled up to 2.5m to support it?

Looking forward to your input.

It's..It's so beautiful.

[DGatsby]

Hey all,

Over the past week, I remodeled and revamped the Cygnus (Pol/Pollux/Phoenix). I talked to Beale about it, and he suggested I post it here and get some reactions to a possible Enhanced Cygnus revamp.

Cygnus Revamp: Enhanced Cygnus Configuration

http://i.imgur.com/DNcKSSil.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/DcFsav2l.png

Shown here in the longer Enhanced configuration slated to launch on Atlas later this year, as well as a configuration with some stock parts just to show that it blends in nicely. Notice that the PCM now supports Flag Decals!

http://i.imgur.com/39pv4rXm.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/wr9BHdCm.jpghttp://imgur.com/Pk4AEUBm.pnghttp://imgur.com/LgsDzWQm.png

With the scales shown, it's perfectly to scale relative to every other Tantares vehicle in the fleet.

Full Mission Demo Album:

http://imgur.com/a/d5lFN

The main questions to be answered:

1. Do you like the new size, and will it make the Cygnus more useful?

2. Do the part node sizes all make sense?

3. Given the larger diameter of the Enhanced Cygnus, would you want to see the Antares rocket scaled up to 2.5m to support it?

Looking forward to your input.

I'd love to have the new size! Would it be possible to have it alongside the original?

[davidy12]

Can someone get a diagram of the antares?

[passinglurker]

Hey all,

Over the past week, I remodeled and revamped the Cygnus (Pol/Pollux/Phoenix). I talked to Beale about it, and he suggested I post it here and get some reactions to a possible Enhanced Cygnus revamp.

Cygnus Revamp: Enhanced Cygnus Configuration

http://i.imgur.com/DNcKSSil.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/DcFsav2l.png

Shown here in the longer Enhanced configuration slated to launch on Atlas later this year, as well as a configuration with some stock parts just to show that it blends in nicely. Notice that the PCM now supports Flag Decals!

http://i.imgur.com/39pv4rXm.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/wr9BHdCm.jpghttp://imgur.com/Pk4AEUBm.pnghttp://imgur.com/LgsDzWQm.png

With the scales shown, it's perfectly to scale relative to every other Tantares vehicle in the fleet.

Full Mission Demo Album:

http://imgur.com/a/d5lFN

The main questions to be answered:

1. Do you like the new size, and will it make the Cygnus more useful?

2. Do the part node sizes all make sense?

3. Given the larger diameter of the Enhanced Cygnus, would you want to see the Antares rocket scaled up to 2.5m to support it?

Looking forward to your input.

I'd love to have the new size! Would it be possible to have it alongside the original?

Some one remind me since I've been stuck in a "analyze early game balance, tweak, start over" loop as of late and haven't actually made a station in a while. What are these unmanned cargo craft used for in kerbal again? if its just replica's and role playing I see no reason to keep anything but the relatively accurate sizes

[curtquarquesso]

I'd love to have the new size! Would it be possible to have it alongside the original?

Depends on what everyone else is feeling about it. If people are still attached to the 0.625m Cygnus, I could try to make it so they can exist in the same game, but I really think we should decide on one or the other.

Some one remind me since I've been stuck in a "analyze early game balance, tweak, start over" loop as of late and haven't actually made a station in a while. What are these unmanned cargo craft used for in kerbal again? if its just replica's and role playing I see no reason to keep anything but the relatively accurate sizes

Yup. I made the 1.5m SM as easy to work with as possible. At the moment, the only reason to really build up your stations is for roleplaying purposes. If I release it, there will be CLS, TAC, KIS, StationScience, and DangIt support from day one to make it as useful as possible. I've thought about doing a really basic IVA for it as a development exercise, but the Cygnus really just isn't a habitation module. It's a flying trash can.

This presentation by Orbital from last year, demonstrates a proposal to use Cygnus vehicles to service a theoretical cis-lunar station. Apparently, they could be outfitted with life support systems enough to service a reasonable amount of crew for a two months or so. Really wishing KSP had some stock life support requirements to make station servicing somewhat necessary, but it throws the learning curve way up there.

Can someone get a diagram of the antares?

Sure thing. Orbital's s Flight Demo video also shows the staging as it actually happens as well.

Getting the interstage and the payload fairings to behave like the real deal is a PAIN, but I managed it for my recreation. It'll all me in the craft files some daaaay....

[passinglurker]

Yup. I made the 1.5m SM as easy to work with as possible.

(Blinks) well... Care to elaborate? I must admit I'm slowly warming to the idea of slightly wide parts if they can be proven to not clash as badly as I may fear

[curtquarquesso]

(Blinks) well... Care to elaborate? I must admit I'm slowly warming to the idea of slightly wide parts if they can be proven to not clash as badly as I may fear

Well, there's an existing 1.875m to 1.25m adapter that takes care of any issues that might arise with the end bottom node of the PCM being 1.5m for starters.

During this little demo I whipped up, I found out that they make awesome looking habitation modules...

As previously stated, the bottom of the SM has a 1.5 to 1.25m fairing making it play nice with 1.25m parts.

[passinglurker]

yes a slightly wider overhang is easier to let the slide the real test is what happens when you put a 1.25 part on top. If it looks good like that then it's more a 1.25W than a whole new size and therefore acceptable. Otherwise 1.5m parts are more case by case the soyuz fairing slides because it has a built in universal size adapter, the soyuz SM's slide because they have at worst just an overhang (they're engines no one's putting something smaller on top of the wide bit only below the wide bit)

[curtquarquesso]

yes a slightly wider overhang is easier to let the slide the real test is what happens when you put a 1.25 part on top. If it looks good like that then it's more a 1.25W than a whole new size and therefore acceptable. Otherwise 1.5m parts are more case by case the soyuz fairing slides because it has a built in universal size adapter, the soyuz SM's slide because they have at worst just an overhang (they're engines no one's putting something smaller on top of the wide bit only below the wide bit)

Well, you wouldn't do that with any part really. You wouldn't just slap a 1.25m part on a 2.5m one. It looks silly. You'd use an adapter. I'll try to take some screens later today.

[passinglurker]

Well, you wouldn't do that with any part really. You wouldn't just slap a 1.25m part on a 2.5m one. It looks silly. You'd use an adapter. I'll try to take some screens later today.

And that's the thing if 1.5m parts can't be modeled to sufficiently blend when the next size down is on top then they would need an adapter and if they needed an adapter like 0.9m parts do then you need to classify it as a whole new size which is what would make them unacceptable. In other words the need for separate adapter part is the dividing line between it being a new size or simply just a slightly bulging part of a common size.

[Niemand303]

Ohwow, so many beautiful stuff appeared... That's awesome and I guess time for me again to make updates for RO configs.

Really gorgeous overhauls, Beale!

[curtquarquesso]

And that's the thing if 1.5m parts can't be modeled to sufficiently blend when the next size down is on top then they would need an adapter and if they needed an adapter like 0.9m parts do then you need to classify it as a whole new size which is what would make them unacceptable. In other words the need for separate adapter part is the dividing line between it being a new size or simply just a slightly bulging part of a common size.

Ok. So, I tinkered around with parts to try to disprove your point, and you're correct enough that I'm going to revise the service module design a bit.

1.5m is great for some things: For one, it makes a great Mk.2 Lander Can engine.

It is not great however, for smaller payloads on top, like you said.

It's not awful, but not desirable either, and there are no suitable adapters to rectify this.

HOWEVER, you wouldn't do that anyways really, just like you wouldn't do this,

or even with adapters, this:

It doesn't look good in any design, even with adapters, so it's not so much of a worry IMO.

However, I think I may make a revision to change the top of the SM to be 1.875m like so. ROUGH quick change for demonstration purposes.

This would make the part an EXCELLENT 1.875m service module for lots of things. Might even throw some greeble down in the top opening for kicks and giggles.

PLEASE let me know what you guys think.

[Beale]

So what about Mysterious Goo approach? "It's alive, it's just weird enough for people not to feel sympathetic".

I have a small idea... More soon.

Hmm. I really did prefer the last iteration. You had the engine design nailed I thought. The new one looks kinda squishy and harmless. Not sure why, those are just the words that come to mind.

http://i.imgur.com/gC8x0aXh.png

Look what I dug up!

Nice find!

I will play around with Toroid appearance, see if can look a little more "powerful".

Sputnik 1

http://img18.rajce.idnes.cz/d1803/11/11509/11509823_4a07bec57533c466448cb56354add4bc/images/SPUTNIK1.jpg?ver=0

Nice idea on locking the tanks!

Can someone get a diagram of the antares?

Two stage.

Ohwow, so many beautiful stuff appeared... That's awesome and I guess time for me again to make updates for RO configs.

Really gorgeous overhauls, Beale!

Hello!

Many thanks! That would be wonderful

Currently working on small art-pass to Progress (same size no save breaking).

WIP

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

This would make the part an EXCELLENT 1.875m service module for lots of things. Might even throw some greeble down in the top opening for kicks and giggles.

PLEASE let me know what you guys think.

Now that I love! If you the consider the Cygnus body to be a normal 1.875m part (Cut off the bottom and have a flat connection point) it really does work out quite well.

Reading the discussion has made me realize I am still a little attached to the small Cygnus. Perhaps tiny and large extended Cygnus side-by-side?

For those of you in Europe, the LK is on display in London

[bokrif]

Hi there, first of all I love all these Tantares parts!

But my question is, which part is intended on top of the Tucana / PPTS crew module? For example I tried to put the inline parachute that I guess is intended on the soyuz, but it doesn't fit the "whole" on top of the PPTS.

Any suggestions?

[davidy12]

Hey Beale, just curious, do you plan on making an angara rocket in the near future?

PS: Going to the UK just before Spring Break. We'll be able to catch the tailend of the display.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh and PS: I meant a diagram similar to the one when you presented the Ariane 5.

[passinglurker]

Ok. So, I tinkered around with parts to try to disprove your point, and you're correct enough that I'm going to revise the service module design a bit.

1.5m is great for some things: For one, it makes a great Mk.2 Lander Can engine.

http://i.imgur.com/6dnYU2vl.png

It is not great however, for smaller payloads on top, like you said.

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

It's not awful, but not desirable either, and there are no suitable adapters to rectify this.

HOWEVER, you wouldn't do that anyways really, just like you wouldn't do this,

http://i.imgur.com/bLdRM8Zm.png

or even with adapters, this:

http://i.imgur.com/8ZnAthAm.png

It doesn't look good in any design, even with adapters, so it's not so much of a worry IMO.

However, I think I may make a revision to change the top of the SM to be 1.875m like so. ROUGH quick change for demonstration purposes.

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

This would make the part an EXCELLENT 1.875m service module for lots of things. Might even throw some greeble down in the top opening for kicks and giggles.

PLEASE let me know what you guys think.

mk1 on top may not have been the best choice and you have to admit it wouldn't look as silly if you used a taller size adapter and a little offset magic to hide the decoupler and finally while you are right with a lowprofile adapter it still looks pretty silly I'd remind you that 1.5m is a much smaller difference and may well wind up looking not so silly.

Anyway dissimilar sizes and shapes works well when its a vacuum craft (just look at the excursion fuel module or the mk1 lander can) the point where this falls apart aesthetically is when you go atmospheric (as people would be inclined to do upon seeing the cylindrical service module and think "low part count upper stage") like you would be doing with say a theoretical 1.5m gemini and its associated bottom bits. So what I'd propose trying in order to make 1.5m parts that look good with 1.25m parts on top yet still work with the parts they were intended for is taking that 1.875 lip you made and turning it the other way(45 degree slope inwards to the 1.25 diameter point ought to do it) then set the top node at the 1.5m point (this "size adapting slope" would be modeled to be outside the collider to avoid invoking the kraken and therefore just be for show not actual aerodynamics) a 1.5m part on top like a 1.5m gemini would then be able to fit flush while a 1.25m meter cylinder would blend well enough that it isn't an eyesore just a slight bulge in the middle of the rocket, and a sloped or thin part like a low profile adapter, or a mk1 pod can simply invoke some offset magic to fit in.

[Sideswiper22]

I just made a Munar Space Station and a spacecraft that docks to it. The spacecraft has an odd design featuring no windows!

Javascript is disabled. View full album

[Beale]

But my question is, which part is intended on top of the Tucana / PPTS crew module? For example I tried to put the inline parachute that I guess is intended on the soyuz, but it doesn't fit the "whole" on top of the PPTS.

Any suggestions?

0.9375m Port

Hey Beale, just curious, do you plan on making an angara rocket in the near future?

I meant a diagram similar to the one when you presented the Ariane 5.

Angara is planned... near future? not so much. Very little free time lately and Angara family is quite ambitious.

Like so

I just made a Munar Space Station and a spacecraft that docks to it. The spacecraft has an odd design featuring no windows!

http://imgur.com/a/VUwuT

Very nice, reminds me of the Boeing Capsule

Several Progress configurations.

Edited September 19, 2015 by Beale

[FlyMeToTheMinmus]

Great "Progress" there!

[passinglurker]

On the subject unmanned cargo's role in vanilla tantares what about making them probe driven crew cans? I mean analogs for Chinese and Japanese cargo vessels are already essentially made from salyut and tks crew can pieces, and the macgyvered way stations get put together in the real world results in stations and cargo having a lot of commonality (also all those pics of the cygnus part fitting in being used as station modules instead of just cargo)

[Beale]

Great "Progress" there!

On the subject unmanned cargo's role in vanilla tantares what about making them probe driven crew cans? I mean analogs for Chinese and Japanese cargo vessels are already essentially made from salyut and tks crew can pieces, and the macgyvered way stations get put together in the real world results in stations and cargo having a lot of commonality (also all those pics of the cygnus part fitting in being used as station modules instead of just cargo)

Possibly... The difficulty is crew transfer mechanic to consider - it needs a visible hatch to be tied to.

Progress LFO Tanks

Edited September 19, 2015 by Beale

[Kibble]

I guess time for me again to make updates for RO configs.

<3

Oh and I agree, Beale models so pretty!