hraban Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 @CobaltWolf There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. - There is another theory which states that this has already happened. @Beale The Polaris (Fuji) has only a vac dV of 513 m/s with attached orbital module and all things you need for a save spaceflight. This is not sufficient to enable orbital circularise after the start, manage a rendezvous maneuver with more than 200km radial difference and - after that - to secure a braking maneuver to accomplish planned re-entry with a inclination correction of at least 5°. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted January 8, 2016 Author Share Posted January 8, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, CobaltWolf said: I'm not entirely sure what was wrong with the old Fuji part layout? It seemed to work fine to me. 35 minutes ago, hraban said: The Polaris (Fuji) has only a vac dV of 513 m/s with attached orbital module and all things you need for a save spaceflight. This is not sufficient to enable orbital circularise after the start, manage a rendezvous maneuver with more than 200km radial difference and - after that - to secure a braking maneuver to accomplish planned re-entry with a inclination correction of at least 5°. @CobaltWolf Innovation for the sake of innovation . I'm not sure, I think radially attached might be more versatile, but the old layout can work fine too if I continue to be frustrated with modelling. @hraban I could change the engine to MonoProp, might work a little better. On seating of Fuji, finding the space for three could be tricky... But, I like the idea of using some of the heatshield depth. On 1/4/2016 at 5:36 PM, OTmikhail said: Happy New Year Beale! Keep up the great work and do what you want to do buddy! I made a video for you in the Taerobee forum, but I'll share it here too since I think the members might enjoy it and/or get some inspiration. Looking forward to everything you do in the future! BealeSat! I'm flattered! Nice job using the WAC (scaled?) ! I have always had trouble, looks difficult to control As some may guess, I have not had much time lately, the TKS continues as normal, but slowly. Edited January 8, 2016 by Beale Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GabrielG.A.B.Fonseca Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 Hy, Beale! First, let me congratulate you on this amazing mod of yours. It's quite the thing, great looking parts that maintain a stock aesthetic! Secondly, I'd like to ask, are the Tantares' pack engines compatible with the Engine Ignitor plugin? My apologies if this has been asked before. I see that there is Realism Overhaul compatibility, but I'm not sure if that makes it compatible with the standalone Ignitor plugin per see. :/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hraban Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Hi Beale, please take a look at my Contares Post. Thx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 On 1/8/2016 at 2:27 PM, Beale said: As some may guess, I have not had much time lately, the TKS continues as normal, but slowly. Mini-loaf keeping you up all night? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted January 10, 2016 Author Share Posted January 10, 2016 22 hours ago, CobaltWolf said: Mini-loaf keeping you up all night? Oh where to begin? (not to complain) So still nothing to show, but a question. "Does anybody use the TKS parts for TKS/VA?" I.E., use it as a transport craft akin to the usage of the Soyuz, or is it mainly used for station pieces. Responses here may influence how I texture it and maybe some produced greeble. So, what is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DGatsby Posted January 11, 2016 Share Posted January 11, 2016 I do! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxxonius Augustus Posted January 11, 2016 Share Posted January 11, 2016 5 hours ago, Beale said: "Does anybody use the TKS parts for TKS/VA?" I use them for both honestly. Right now I have a TKSish vehicle for crew and cargo transport to stations and will soon be adding station modules based on TK-OB05A Orbital Block. If you haven't seen it by the way check it out on my renewed 365 day challenge playlist on Youtube! Link! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tjsnh Posted January 11, 2016 Share Posted January 11, 2016 12 hours ago, Beale said: "Does anybody use the TKS parts for TKS/VA?" Yes. Used as a transport craft more than for station parts. That tiny little monoprop lander I posted a week or two ago that fits into the cargo bay has also given TKS/VA a new life (with a nuclear rocket transtage) flying missions to Gilly and various moons of Jool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redhornet919 Posted January 11, 2016 Share Posted January 11, 2016 In all honesty I tend to build it with the intention of Transport but then then i end up bringing the kerbals down a different vehicle and it ends up being part of the station... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerishnakov Posted January 11, 2016 Share Posted January 11, 2016 Is anyone else finding the Soyuz docking ports a little screwy, and I mean all of them, the APAS and gendered ports? For me at least, they don't seem to be able to undock from each other; sometimes the button to undock isn't even available. So far I've been having to use KIS to manually remove docking ports in order for my ships to leave my space station! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curtquarquesso Posted January 11, 2016 Share Posted January 11, 2016 (edited) 4 minutes ago, gerishnakov said: Is anyone else finding the Soyuz docking ports a little screwy, and I mean all of them, the APAS and gendered ports? For me at least, they don't seem to be able to undock from each other; sometimes the button to undock isn't even available. So far I've been having to use KIS to manually remove docking ports in order for my ships to leave my space station! Which docking ports are you referring to? If you can provide the specific part names, and some more details, I could probably assist you. Edited January 11, 2016 by curtquarquesso Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gerishnakov Posted January 11, 2016 Share Posted January 11, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, curtquarquesso said: Which docking ports are you referring to? If you can provide the specific part names, and some more details, I could probably assist you. It's the Soyuz Apas A, B & C ports, and the Soyuz Port A & B. Any assistance at all would be great, thanks! I've had an issue where if I construct a ship with two of the same sized APAS ports connected (i.e. already docked) to each other, for instance when building a Soyuz-style craft, they are then unable to undock from each other in flight; also I'm using Connected Living Space and the two parts connected via the APAS ports aren't counting as one 'space'. This might be because another issue is that I seem to only be able to open or close the port crew hatch on one of the connected ports. With the non APAS ports, gendered ports, the issue just seems to be that they are unable to be undocked from each other. Like I originally posted, the button to undock is there but when I push it, nothing happens and it disappears anyway; the crafts remain docked. I believe there isn't the crew transfer issue with these ports though. I'm fairly certain this isn't an issue with CLS, as I've written my own CLS configs for the Tantares parts I'm using, and CLS now allows you to customise the passability of parts in the editor anyway. Edited January 11, 2016 by gerishnakov Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted January 12, 2016 Author Share Posted January 12, 2016 19 hours ago, gerishnakov said: It's the Soyuz Apas A, B & C ports, and the Soyuz Port A & B. Any assistance at all would be great, thanks! I've had an issue where if I construct a ship with two of the same sized APAS ports connected (i.e. already docked) to each other, for instance when building a Soyuz-style craft, they are then unable to undock from each other in flight; also I'm using Connected Living Space and the two parts connected via the APAS ports aren't counting as one 'space'. This might be because another issue is that I seem to only be able to open or close the port crew hatch on one of the connected ports. With the non APAS ports, gendered ports, the issue just seems to be that they are unable to be undocked from each other. Like I originally posted, the button to undock is there but when I push it, nothing happens and it disappears anyway; the crafts remain docked. I believe there isn't the crew transfer issue with these ports though. I'm fairly certain this isn't an issue with CLS, as I've written my own CLS configs for the Tantares parts I'm using, and CLS now allows you to customise the passability of parts in the editor anyway. Got a list of mods, chap? (A screenshot of GameData folder is a big help!) Certainly I cannot say to have experienced this bug, so is probably interference from another plugin, I can try to make things compatible if that is the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted January 12, 2016 Author Share Posted January 12, 2016 Big question! TKS Docking compartment, should it be: Big End Upwards Current Configuration 'Control From Here' shows the wrong direction in flight (assuming docking port is installed on the small end) Small End Upwards New possible configuration Suggested to me by a friendly space bear 'Control From Here' would provide correct NavBall orientation for docking, flight, etc... Would require extra step in VAB to build TKS (flip the part) (More confusing for newcomers?) Neither of these options would break save files, but the second option would require you to edit crafts (flip the part the correct way). I made a poll! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSgt Baloo Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 I really like the tiny spherical capsule, but I can't EVA, and it shows no image of the pilot/passenger inside. Is that intentional? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 20 minutes ago, SSgt Baloo said: I really like the tiny spherical capsule, but I can't EVA, and it shows no image of the pilot/passenger inside. Is that intentional? You mean there's no portrait? That's because there's no IVA. (Though I thought Beale had made one). In any case, you can right click on the hatch to EVA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billbobjebkirk Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 3 hours ago, Beale said: Big question! TKS Docking compartment, should it be: Big End Upwards Current Configuration 'Control From Here' shows the wrong direction in flight (assuming docking port is installed on the small end) Small End Upwards New possible configuration Suggested to me by a friendly space bear 'Control From Here' would provide correct NavBall orientation for docking, flight, etc... Would require extra step in VAB to build TKS (flip the part) (More confusing for newcomers?) Neither of these options would break save files, but the second option would require you to edit crafts (flip the part the correct way). I made a poll! I say you put it small side up, and add a big sign on it that says "THIS SIDE UP" pointing towards the big end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tjsnh Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 On a mobile device so forgive the poor formatting and possible typos - but relative to the TKS docking module "direction", something to consider; The TKS spacecraft was really the very first (and so far, pretty much the only) spacecraft to be engineered without a specific sense of "front" and "back" , given that it's direction of flight is different depending on what it's doing. It would be more accurate to have the direction of the craft to flip backwards whe "control from here" on the docking crew module part since the orientation of the engines on the TKS is 'backwards' from its 'front' end relative to launch orientation - if that explanation makes sense. It truly was the first spacecraft engineered for three dimensions, way WAY ahead of its time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 21 hours ago, billbobjebkirk said: I say you put it small side up, and add a big sign on it that says "THIS SIDE UP" pointing towards the big end. Or more accurately, "This is a pretty good place for a docking port." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gristle Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 On 1/10/2016 at 5:24 PM, Beale said: Oh where to begin? (not to complain) So still nothing to show, but a question. "Does anybody use the TKS parts for TKS/VA?" I.E., use it as a transport craft akin to the usage of the Soyuz, or is it mainly used for station pieces. Responses here may influence how I texture it and maybe some produced greeble. So, what is it? when I have all the tech to build TKS it becomes my standard orbital vehicle. So yes I use it for TKS/VA. It's a very flexible vehicle that can be modified for cargo, science, transport and keep same basic profile so that same launcher can be used for all missions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thraken Posted January 13, 2016 Share Posted January 13, 2016 (edited) On 1/10/2016 at 5:24 PM, Beale said: "Does anybody use the TKS parts for TKS/VA?" I.E., use it as a transport craft akin to the usage of the Soyuz, or is it mainly used for station pieces. Responses here may influence how I texture it and maybe some produced greeble. I use TKS/VA parts for a TKS/VA. I also use the parts in loads of other craft besides just station parts. I do have a hard time justifying that 3 Kerbals can fit in the VA. I usually justify it as they can all fit in there without a space suit, so if they want to EVA they need to use the airlock in the 1-Kerbal or 2-Kerbal TKS 1.875m body modules. Speaking of the 2-Kerbal TKS body module... It seems you could use that plus a couple adapters to re-create the mid module of Salyut. (if you wanted to eliminate a part... but it would break saves) On 1/12/2016 at 0:25 PM, Beale said: Big question! TKS Docking compartment, should it be: Big End Upwards Current Configuration 'Control From Here' shows the wrong direction in flight (assuming docking port is installed on the small end) Small End Upwards New possible configuration Suggested to me by a friendly space bear 'Control From Here' would provide correct NavBall orientation for docking, flight, etc... Would require extra step in VAB to build TKS (flip the part) (More confusing for newcomers?) Neither of these options would break save files, but the second option would require you to edit crafts (flip the part the correct way). I put my vote in for "Small End Upwards". If this were the case, I would use this part as a lander pod too! Edited January 13, 2016 by Thraken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Djolox Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 On 1/10/2016 at 11:24 PM, Beale said: Oh where to begin? (not to complain) So still nothing to show, but a question. "Does anybody use the TKS parts for TKS/VA?" I.E., use it as a transport craft akin to the usage of the Soyuz, or is it mainly used for station pieces. Responses here may influence how I texture it and maybe some produced greeble. So, what is it? I used it to get to Mun and supply a HKO Station. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 On 1/8/2016 at 0:29 PM, CobaltWolf said: @hraban is not the official spokesperson for Tantares haha. Well this post was over a week ago but I just noticed and feel bad. It was supposed to say ' @hraban is now the official spokesperson for Tantares'. I would have let it go but it almost completely reverses the sentiment of my post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curiosity7907 Posted January 17, 2016 Share Posted January 17, 2016 On 6/8/2014 at 9:53 PM, Beale said: The new version is up! I have totally re-done all the models and textures. Including a few more "stock" texture elements I think they're looking the real deal now. Balancing might still be off, I think they should both still be capable of their intended use. As always, feedback is very helpful, especially for balance (which I'm terrible at)! Thanks for all the support! I think next I'll work on some alternate colour schemes. In the eeloo picture what visual mod did you use? 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.