Titan Touchups about bluedog-design-bureau

[Rodg88]

The interstage could use the extra long version of titan 2 fairing from the LH2 vac model, maybe instead of the Titan 2 (Bare) variant which has texture stretching.

[CobaltWolf]

Formatting is so messed up will need to fix when I’m at a PC

[Rodg88]

UA-120s may need new mu, just for plume scaling issues. Needs to only have the one thrust transform basically. May be an issue with the LR91s too

Edit - solved with a new mu with a single set of new transforms. Also fixed a bug with the angled offset.

[Rodg88]

The way the LR87s are currently set up for interstage use is just hiding the shrouds, and using the interstage node on the engine itself, on the subtype that includes the structural ring, since there's no engine mount par - the tank butts on the tanks themselves have the mount built in. This makes it pretty easy to attach an interstage too, as there won't be two similar nodes available at once, like when you have engine and interstage nodes together on an engine mount.

There's also a 'compact' mount option without the interstage node and structural ring, for use with engine mounts.

[JacobB094]

Would refreshing the SOLTAN boosters be on the table? They're handy, but lack dedicated separation hardware and look much worse than UA series. I think a new texture and a decoupler would work wonders.

Another thing I'd love to see is an UA-series separation nosecone with nozzles rotated 90 degrees, like such:
https://i.postimg.cc/0jMfVfhJ/screenshot374.png
It's ahistorical, but this configuration is necessary in most LDC configurations, as well as using those boosters on Saturn variants. This still provides sufficient clearance for separation, while avoiding the lower motors clipping into the core, or upper ones blasting it for that matter. In fact, this angle is not unlike what SSRBs use. While it's a simple matter to rotate them, as shown in the pic, the raceways don't line up then, so if it could become a variant, my OCD could rest a little easier.

Also speaking of boosters, could we get Little Joe 2 variant of the Algol made into a radial solid booster, complete with a nosecone and a decoupler (perhaps it'd fit the Castor 1/2 one)? Titan 33BAS used a pair of Algols as boosters, but the current booster Algol is based on Scout one and thus drastically overscaled. Little Joe version is scaled more accurately, but has no nosecone variant nor surface attachment.

Another weird proposal: Titan-Vanguard. Basically, an entire Vanguard rocket riding on top of a Titan I lower stage. In practice, Vanguard engine is larger than 0.9375m, so I imagine this as simply a dedicated decoupler with a cutout for the vectoring nozzles (and probably hot staging vents, Vanguard was unreliable enough without trying to light it at low G), fitting its boattail's odd shape. For what it's worth, my cobbled together variant can get a small probe to orbit the Moon in KSRSS, just like what the real one was intended for.

Finally, a unitary 1.5m to 0.625m adapter would be helpful for Titan 1 ELV. Just a structural bit to mount an Able fairing on top. Maybe even just a variant of SOLTAN nosecone, seeing as it already has an option for a 0.9375m tip.

I've been playing around with Titan a lot lately (as you might have noticed, not only with that), and these are the options for improvement I found. I'm holding off on (suggesting, not building, of course :) ) truly crazy stuff like Arcturus or Titan-Polaris, but these seem like minor extensions of the existing part list.

[CobaltWolf]

@JacobB094 First off, we greatly appreciate the detailed feedback you've been leaving around here!

Now, responding to those points...

• I don't think I can make that nose cone variant due to how the part is unwrapped, but I'll take a loot.
• I don't remember how I did the Algols for Little Joe II. Chances are that part was never meant to be used outside that context, and is lacking details let alone texture space.
• Titan Vanguard, probably not going to do.
• As for adapters, I did kind of intend for the player to use the various other adapters from stuff like Thor for attaching upper stages to Titan 1.

In general the stuff for early Titan variants is pretty thin and I'm not inclined to spend a lot of time on them. Plus I wasn't really intending on making new parts for this update - just reconfiguring the parts we already have.

[JacobB094]

For Algols, the Little Joe ones actually look better, detail wise, than the Scout ones, by a fair margin at that. It's not a complex model anyway, white tube with a nozzle (there's even a canted option, would be great for this). If you can squeeze a nosecone in somewhere, or make a new part (there's conveniently placed node on top for attaching it to Little Joe), then enabling surface attachment would be all it needs.

I can see that Titan-Vanguard would probably work best as part of a wider Vanguard overhaul, however I don't think that's planned anytime soon. If there was a 0.9375m boattail of some sort, a Vega engine could be substituted (unless the shroud had vents that would accommodate the compact variant of the Vanguard version), but there are precious few parts in that size.

The thing with Thor is, there are no 1.5m to 0.625m adapters there, either. :) It's a large jump between unconventional sizes. Able is 0.625m, but the interstage only goes out to 0.9375m. I prefer having only a single structural part for this role because stacks of multiple low mass adapters tend to get wobbly. Admittedly, it's not a top concern for an Able shroud with a Star 20 inside, but you know how KSP joints are.

I get it that you're not really making new parts, however I saw that you were updating the Titan, and figured I could come up with a handful of structural pieces with QOL benefits. I enjoy making weird, unconventional proposals, so I tend to happen on such (in fact, there's a lot more than feedback coming your way soon, I just need to get my spreadsheet in order :) ).

[CobaltWolf]

I'll take a look at the Algols then, I do love me some 3BAS2...

Vanguard is already pretty 'final' and isn't going to receive a revamp, likely ever.

The lack of an adapter is something I can look into fixing.

I've been asked and will look into making nose cones that match the SRMU nose.

[Rodg88]

• Some .mu file updates needed for the tank merge: bluedog_Titan2_S1_Lower_Tank needs a new parent transform (or just move the collider under Titan2_LowerTank_Merged_polySurface75), and bluedog_Titan3_S1_Stretched_Tank also needs a new parent transform. bluedog_Titan4_S1_Lower_Tank needs a unique mesh name too, it's also called Titan2_LowerTank_Merged_polySurface75 so confuses the part switch

[Rodg88]

LR87 titan1/2 mount meshes use an old material that reference Titan2_FirstStageTank_NRM instead of bluedog_Titan2_FirstStageTank_NRM. Both textures are identical. Could remove the non-bluedog texture file if model is updated so the materials reference bluedog_Titan2_FirstStageTank_NRM

[JacobB094]

Could we switch to using transformMultipliers on LR-91 variants, instead of multiple instances of ModuleEngines? It looks messy, with two fuel bars in the staging list. It makes no sense to be able to run the turbopumps' gas generator, but not the pump itself. I know it's a small thing, but it kind of bugs me.

Would be nice if this could be done to Vanguard and Vega GE-405s, as well. They still use that old method. I don't think anything else does.

[Rodg88]

Could we switch to using transformMultipliers on LR-91 variants, instead of multiple instances of ModuleEngines? It looks messy, with two fuel bars in the staging list. It makes no sense to be able to run the turbopumps' gas generator, but not the pump itself. I know it's a small thing, but it kind of bugs me.

I'm looking into this, as it would be better than dual engines I agree. However I'm not even sure the feature works, and all thrust transforms seem to get equal thrust. It kinda works still, but you get way more control authority than you should

edit, got it working

[Rodg88]

Pushed the transformMultipliers update, including hypergol/AJ11A patch updates.

Also @JacobB094 while a 90degree variant of the SRB nosecone isn't possible without new textures, I have added one without any separation motor at all, so you could manually place one.

[JacobB094]

That'll be quite useful, too. I have another thing that could be done: could we get both variants of the mounting ring from LR-91 added to the fuel tank (moving the interstage node downwards if both are enabled)? The idea is to go from a tank-engine-interstage-tank stack and a tank-interstage-tank one, the way many other upper stages in BDB are done. The latter is much more stable. You can already do that, but you lose the mounting ring. I've been getting some problems with wobbling of Titan stacks, particularly SRM-based ones, due to high thrust at burnout. It would also decouple the style of the mounting ring from the engine config, which is I'd also like to see.

[Rodg88]

It'd be a bit weird removing the mounting rings from the 4 vernier LR91s imo, even the single vernier ones have mounting hardware that attaches to the verniers, but maybe. Do you use Kerbal Joint Reinforcement?

both GH405s have been updated too

[JacobB094]

No, I don't use KJR, and I appreciate things being stable under stock physics. Most BDB rockets are stable, I use stock autostruts for those that have problems with it. KJR introduces more problems than it solves, IMO.

I forgot about the 4 vernier LR-91s, and I believe those might very well stay as they are (Titan I is a bit of an edge case, anyway). I was mostly thinking of the thin Titan II and III style rings.

Also, can we have a look at Titan textures? It's obvious with Deferred and more subtle with the stock shader, but specular values are inconsistent across Titan parts. I'm talking about things like this:
https://i.postimg.cc/tTpXZcgy/screenshot384.png
Notice how brown parts on the upper stage are shiny, while the lower stage is not. Likewise, the gray metal under the fairing is shiny, but the intertank isn't. Now that Deferred is a thing, it might be worth checking whether the specular values are what they're supposed to be (although it should be noted that this inconsistency was visible in stock shaders, just not as grating).

[Rodg88]

I can look into adding those basic rings to the tank to allow for neater interstage usage. KJR will completely fix those stability issues though, and I haven't had issues with it at all in the last few years, I always have it installed.

I don't think any textures are going to be reworked just for deferred quite yet.

[JacobB094]

It's not just for Deferred, that just makes it more obvious there's something amiss. The specular value is used by stock KSP shaders as well, and you can see subtle differences between texture "shinyness", especially on parts that are mounted together. Stock lighting sucks, so it's easy to ignore, but it's there. Compare Centaur D to older Centaur G parts, for example. With Deferred, the former is shiny and the latter is not, while in stock, the former looks just sort of newer and less dull, if that makes sense.

I believe it's not something that'd call for a full rework, either. Most of the texture is fine, it's just the specular map that's off. It's not even that it's not shiny, but that it's inconsistent. LDC parts, for example, are all fine, it's just parts of the most basic Titan configurations that are affected. It's almost as if some blue wolf had learned how to use the specular channel halfway through the last Titan rework... :)

[JacobB094]

OK, I know it's out of scope, just leaving it here so it doesn't get lost. One Titan I ELV proposal was to use the second stage of Polaris missile as a kick motor, which would have made a capable LEO launcher (about 2.26T). While searching for data to approximate its performance, I found that it had a really interesting shape:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9c/Polaris_A3_ballistic_missile_upper_stages.jpg

It works out to 0.9375, which means a SOLTAN nosecone could be used as an adapter, or a bespoke top adapter looking more like the top of a Titan I missile could be made (BDB used to have this part back when it also had a Titan I RV). The motor came in two lengths, A1/A2, which was slightly shorter, and A3, as in the picture. It also had thrust termination ports in front. It would have probably been topped by a large shroud, seeing as it'd take quite a big sat (for the period) to hit over 2T that this thing could launch.

While BDB doesn't exactly suffer from a shortage of early tech solid kick motors, I really like the four nozzle design and the toroidal hydraulic tank.