[1.12.X] Tantares - Stockalike Soyuz and MIR [26.0][18.12.2023][Things are happening]

[billbobjebkirk]

19 hours ago, Beale said:

It's beautiful, the only problem is this part here:

That's only for the nuclear version, the regular one had just a regular width stage surrounded by fuel tanks.

Edited May 18, 2016 by billbobjebkirk

[Beale]

18 hours ago, Korb Biakustra said:

Am I the only one to have weird issues with docking/chutes (supposedly)?

I have a ship with two of these docked together before the launch. The staging is correct, and the ship works correctly when I go from the VAB to the launchpad. However, if I revert the launch to the launchpad, then the chutes deploy automatically (hands off the keyboard) when the game ends loading the ship. If I go back to the VAB and launch, it works again. If I revert again after launch, same issue is back. Also, sometimes, the staging of chutes is messed up after these reverts (but not all the time), although I don't know if this issue comes from the game or the mod.

The issue also appeared once after I loaded a ship orbiting the Mun, still with these two docking ports docked together (same ship, actually, just without lower stages). I had to EVA to disarm them, quicksaved, and the issue was fixed. Later, on this very ship, but after I undocked the two parts, I incurred rapid unplanned disassembly on both sub-ships. Weirdly, this was not instantaneous, I could actually pilot both quite a bit before things went south and all bananas (for both ships, on two distinct game sessions). Another time, one of these subships turned out being just the docking chute after a quickload. Nothing else. It was working correctly when I quicksaved. And one last time, the ship just disappeared after I loaded a Kerbal standing next to a lander, which I assume was the result of another RUD.

I did not actually do a lot of testing because the only ship I have been flying lately a lot of mod parts (I started a new save and don't have other ships yet). However, considering the unexpected deploys, the fact that the docking chute was the only remaining part in some cases, and that I did not incur any of these issues of preliminary versions of my ship with regular docking ports, the docking/chute makes a good suspect!

There have been similar issues in the past, but always related to various mods, do you have:

• A list of mods
• Pictures of the craft

Thanks!

10 hours ago, spacecookie said:

Little komrades are already training with the new LK, thanks as always Beale, this lander is awesome ! ( And I am glad the red star antenna is back )

 

Wow! Really nice greeble LK!

You are using the wrong engine though (If you didn't already know!  )

4 hours ago, hendrack said:

The first post still has a link to the Soyuz-TMA parts with black textures. Is it much work to update them, like only the configs? Kinda like those black parts. IIRC there were some issues with docking ports but that was only switching male and female in the configs.

I can create some black textures for the next release, what is the problem with the TMA textures currently? I have not looked in quite some time.

3 hours ago, billbobjebkirk said:

That's only for the nuclear version, the regular one had just a regular width stage surrounded by fuel tanks.

Interesting! 

 

LK IVA

I think the detail is pretty good for a 512x512 texture (For the time being I have given up on the pre-baked light-map and just created a standard texture).
You can see on the front the depth mask mesh.

[hendrack]

4 minutes ago, Beale said:

I can create some black textures for the next release, what is the problem with the TMA textures currently? I have not looked in quite some time.

That package is not just textures, it has .mu part files and .cfgs and have their own parts ingame. A very nice feature for the future would be an ingame option in the VAB which texture to use with the part, like procedural parts or the SSTU mod does.  Right now the only way is overwriting files in the file manager and be stuck with the texture. 

Edited May 18, 2016 by hendrack

[Beale]

10 minutes ago, hendrack said:

That package is not just textures, it has .mu part files and .cfgs and have their own parts ingame. A very nice feature for the future would be an ingame option in the VAB which texture to use with the part, like procedural parts or the SSTU mod does.  Right now the only way is overwriting files in the file manager and be stuck with the texture. 

Ah ok, I remember, the configs allowed them to be used side-by-side.

The problem with texture switching is dependencies, so I can't do that sadly.

[hraban]

Hello Beale,

after a complete Mun-Testflight i come to the following conclusion:

- L-8KM Orientation block requires a collider in the central region (to attach helpfull things) and a higher thrust (think about 2 kN).
- L-T43 Lander Can need better batteries. With TACLS 100Ah are inadequate ;)
- The landing legs L-DL6 can be operated only through action groups.

[Beale]

16 minutes ago, hraban said:

Hello Beale,

after a complete Mun-Testflight i come to the following conclusion:

- L-8KM Orientation block requires a collider in the central region (to attach helpfull things) and a higher thrust (think about 2 kN).
- L-T43 Lander Can need better batteries. With TACLS 100Ah are inadequate ;)
- The landing legs L-DL6 can be operated only through action groups.

Thanks for the feedback! (But, the stats are identical to the old LK right now)

The collider, good suggestion!

The situation with the landing legs is unfortunate, but I am not sure of any solution.

[hraban]

Just now, Beale said:

Thanks for the feedback! (But, the stats are identical to the old LK right now)

I know have the LK-parts of both versions installed parallel.

[Beale]

44 minutes ago, hraban said:

I know have the LK-parts of both versions installed parallel.

I think all the new LK parts need a universal reduction in mass of around 80%, I hope the lack of thrust on the orientation block will be less of an issue after that.

 

IVA

It works just great! Maybe the seat should be moved back slightly (though it currently leaves a great view for landing).

[Starbuckminsterfullerton]

2 hours ago, Beale said:

It works just great! Maybe the seat should be moved back slightly (though it currently leaves a great view for landing).

It almost looks like you could have left the window where it was on the old model!

Can you read the instruments from the window camera?

[kopapaka]

UR-sus

and 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 19, 2016 by kopapaka

[Beale]

13 hours ago, Starbuckminsterfullerton said:

It almost looks like you could have left the window where it was on the old model!

Can you read the instruments from the window camera?

I think having it in the old position would not give such a good view, currently you can look almost directly down from the standard IVA view, which is great.
For your second question, I will have to place the instruments first and reply to you later  

4 hours ago, kopapaka said:

UR-sus

and 

Amazing Mun lander!

Great to see the Proton finally return safely.

[Beale]

An alteration to the LK interior camera views.

Standard View
A good view of the outside and instrumentation.

Lower Window View
Limited view of the instrumentation, but fantastic views of the descent, the feet of the landing legs are visible!

Upper Window View
Provides a reasonable view forward, but would not really be sufficient for anything useful like docking. Still, it is fine for screenshots.

Bonus, crashing into the VAB feet-first.

[the_pazter]

how do I make the Proton-k

[Joeybafoey]

Does anyone know which parts I can delete so that all I have are the parts necessary to create the Soyuz TMA and N1/LOK? I'm having mild memory issues and don't want to challenge my computer too much.

Edited May 21, 2016 by Joeybafoey
I forgot to type something.

[Beale]

5 hours ago, the_pazter said:

how do I make the Proton-k

I hope to have some kind of a guide soon.

37 minutes ago, Joeybafoey said:

Does anyone know which parts I can delete so that all I have are the parts necessary to create the Soyuz TMA and N1/LOK? I'm having mild memory issues and don't want to challenge my computer too much.

You need only to keep the folders LK and Soyuz in Tantares and the folder LLV in TantaresLV

[Joeybafoey]

1 hour ago, Beale said:

I hope to have some kind of a guide soon.

You need only to keep the folders LK and Soyuz in Tantares and the folder LLV in TantaresLV

Thanks!

[MrMeeb]

Can someone hit me up with the newest/most up-to-date tweakscale configs? I'm trying to find them, but they either give me a 404, only add it to the command pods, or redirect to the front page (Curt's ones, already linked on the front page)

Thanks  

Edit: Nevermind! I clearly don't understand configs when I read them. Derp.

Edited May 23, 2016 by MrMeeb

[Beale]

Oh bother!
It's a complicated shape, the supports need to be reworked to cross.
I am planning to move the Blok-D to TantaresLV.

Edited May 23, 2016 by Beale

[hraban]

Hi Beale,

if you rebuild the Block-D please think about the angel (3°) of the torus tank. Thank you.

[Deltac]

5 hours ago, hraban said:

Hi Beale,

if you rebuild the Block-D please think about the angel (3°) of the torus tank. Thank you.

To save people some clicks and typing, the torus tank that held the kerosene was tilted in order to improve fuel extraction.

[Foxxonius Augustus]

12 hours ago, hraban said:

Hi Beale,

if you rebuild the Block-D please think about the angel (3°) of the torus tank. Thank you.

If at all possible please don't tilt it. I have build dozens of upper-stages, transfer-stages and large probes around the Block-D fuel tank and in all of them most of the effort was put into artfully and tastefully clipping things into it to make it smoother or nicer or more practical. A non-symmetric tilt would render all of these craft not worth remaking. Whats more I know I'm not the only one who dose this with the Block-D. In the end as players, if the 3° is important "for realism sake" why are you not using the Soviet Launchers pack by @raidernick? In the end @Beale, you have to decide which is more important to the pack, 100% realism for realism sake or maintaining the lego nature.

[trooperMNG]

15 hours ago, hraban said:

Hi Beale,

if you rebuild the Block-D please think about the angel (3°) of the torus tank. Thank you.

I'd say no. For reusability/lego style sake. There are other mods for that level of realism

[InsaneDruid]

On 18.5.2016 at 10:10 PM, Beale said:

Just recognizing: Is there a deeper reason why the main cabin of the LK rests on this "blade of sorts" instead of the spherical tank upper side like in RL?

The cabin floor of the LK is not flat, but a dome shape bulge inward, to make room for the tank.

Also, actually the LK could never fiit two man/kerbals, as the rear section of the main cabin is separated from the cockpit area by a huge bulkhead, too.

View from the pilots position towards the hatch, on the left the bulkhead of the rear compartment can be seen bulging way into the cabin, and the floor bulges inwards, too, to fit the top section of the main tank. (which itself is a sphere section with a frustum underneath, sitting in the frustum of the tank/engine compartment.)

Cockpit view. Again note the huge bulkhead of  the aft compartment.

Another view of the cabin floor:

View of the main tank:

View of the tank mated with the engine compartment:

 

LK external view: its clear the main cabin sits on the tank, not a blade.

 

PS: for those making a real two stage LK:

the stage leaving the landing gear behing is NOT a double frustum, but (besides the main cabin of course) consists of a sphererical section, a frustum and a shperical section again. (the main tanks are the spherical section + frustum shown above and an toroid surrounding it. Like many russian designs use toroids. The engine sits in the toroidal part and is covered by a spherical heat shield (and a two-part movable blast shield to protect the nozzles during landing).

With and without the heat shield:

Cut image of the toroidal tank and the frustum of the other tank:

 

 

Edited May 24, 2016 by InsaneDruid

[Beale]

19 hours ago, hraban said:

Hi Beale,

if you rebuild the Block-D please think about the angel (3°) of the torus tank. Thank you.

13 hours ago, Deltac said:

To save people some clicks and typing, the torus tank that held the kerosene was tilted in order to improve fuel extraction.

5 hours ago, Foxxonius Augustus said:

If at all possible please don't tilt it. I have build dozens of upper-stages, transfer-stages and large probes around the Block-D fuel tank and in all of them most of the effort was put into artfully and tastefully clipping things into it to make it smoother or nicer or more practical. A non-symmetric tilt would render all of these craft not worth remaking. Whats more I know I'm not the only one who dose this with the Block-D. In the end as players, if the 3° is important "for realism sake" why are you not using the Soviet Launchers pack by @raidernick? In the end @Beale, you have to decide which is more important to the pack, 100% realism for realism sake or maintaining the lego nature.

3 hours ago, trooperMNG said:

I'd say no. For reusability/lego style sake. There are other mods for that level of realism

I will have to agree on ignoring the 3 degree tilt, for simplicity and symmetry.

3 hours ago, InsaneDruid said:

Just recognizing: Is there a deeper reason why the main cabin of the LK rests on this "blade of sorts" instead of the spherical tank upper side like in RL?

The cabin floor of the LK is not flat, but a dome shape bulge inward, to make room for the tank.

Also, actually the LK could never fiit two man/kerbals, as the rear section of the main cabin is separated from the cockpit area by a huge bulkhead, too.

View from the pilots position towards the hatch, on the left the bulkhead of the rear compartment can be seen bulging way into the cabin, and the floor bulges inwards, too, to fit the top section of the main tank. (which itself is a sphere section with a frustum underneath, sitting in the frustum of the tank/engine compartment.)

Cockpit view. Again note the huge bulkhead of  the aft compartment.

Another view of the cabin floor:

View of the main tank:

View of the tank mated with the engine compartment:

 

LK external view: its clear the main cabin sits on the tank, not a blade.

PS: for those making a real two stage LK:

the stage leaving the landing gear behing is NOT a double frustum, but (besides the main cabin of course) consists of a sphererical section, a frustum and a shperical section again. (the main tanks are the spherical section + frustum shown above and an toroid surrounding it. Like many russian designs use toroids. The engine sits in the toroidal part and is covered by a spherical heat shield (and a two-part movable blast shield to protect the nozzles during landing).

With and without the heat shield:

Cut image of the toroidal tank and the frustum of the other tank:

No deeper reason, just less complicated geometry and less potential for shading artifacts.

Great pictures by the way! Yes, I have already reduced the seating capacity to only one Kerbal. It is much clearer when you compare it to the Mk1 lander can.

Edited May 24, 2016 by Beale

[Beale]

How is this?