Jump to content

TK-313

Members
  • Content Count

    247
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

430 Excellent

About TK-313

  • Rank
    Spacecraft Engineer

Contact Methods

  • Skype
    tk-313

Recent Profile Visitors

3,049 profile views
  1. @blackheart612, I'm sorry if it isn't in your plans, but could you add blue to the colors and (maybe) a half-D-sized platform? Because, well, being able to build the likes of these crew and lander search and recovery trucks would be super cool. If anyone's curious, these are Soviet (and later Russian) ZIL Bluebird AATVs designed with this very purpose in mind. So far I've managed a couple of almost-lookalikes: But still, blue (and smooth sides) would be really nice
  2. Try autostrutting each part to its grandparent from Block A or B upwards to the capsule, then from the LES downwards to the capsule (probably including the decouplers). Works for me. Also, if you want the launch to look nice without Block A making the rocket OP to interplanetary, try some 2.5-3.2 scaled solar system. Perfect fit
  3. *Looks at the second thing from above* *Reaches for a couple of RTGs*
  4. Looking at this, I wondered: is it possible to make some small disk-shaped rotator-like part that would be mechanically a solar panel with 0 output, always rotating towards the sun together with any attached parts? That would be a great thing to build your own two-axis solar panel arrays out of whatever for stations like this Mir-2. @Beale, your word? Or anyone else?
  5. Ah! I mixed up two things... Yes, the early Vostok is cool. Perhaps I'll try that as well. And no, the flying doghouse was tested with dogs, and the mannequin wasn't there then (not that they would both fit into one catapult at the same time), the mission descriptions will give you that. When the mannequin was on this catapult, the dog cabin was not there and the whole thing looked like an ejection seat (which it was)
  6. Ahem... I do believe "match the warhead nosecone shape"does not equal "based on a warhead", but okay. I'm still trying to understand, though, why you are still trying to present the poor animal container as a standalone spacecraft when all evidence says it was an integral part of the unmanned Vostok... Or do I misunderstand?
  7. Affirmative, there is one - but you have to note it is not based on a warhead, but built around the spherical lander pod (as were all Vostok designs, actually - see page 6; there's even a specific mention that the cone-shaped lander didn't even make it to design drafts) with its cone-shaped service module in front of the lander. On the same page we read that this layout was dropped by 1959. Furthermore, we read on the same page 7 the launch plan for unmanned tests: - 2 1KP ships (no life support, no thermal protection, weight imitator where the pilot would be - this is what cra
  8. Waiting for them most eagerly, they might seriously change what I know about early spaceflight in USSR. However, I have to note that literally the second sentence on the Russian wiki notes that "it was designed for human spaceflight and was the first prototype of the Vostok ship-satellite, on which such flight was performed for the first time" Meanwhile, here are a few photos of Belka and Strelka's ejectable container (Sputnik-5 mission) as exhibited in the Cosmonautics museum in Moscow - and a Vostok ejection seat for comparison.
  9. Please do provide the basis of your statement as I have provided mine. Also, please do explain your distrust to the soviet book the text of which is provided on that page. P.S. If by "paintings" you mean the schematics you quote, please do take your time to check the link I have posted above, it is to the book they are taken from. You will see they are in the section named "Ejectable animal container", which describes said container in fine detail.
  10. Once again, this is not a spaceship. It is what took the place of the ejection seat on Vostok's prototypes - an ejectable animal container. This page goes into more detail about this piece of equipment, Google Translate help you if you don't know Russian.
  11. I'm sorry, but you're very wrong in naming that cylindrical part a pre-Vostok ship. The images you quote show a life support pod for two dogs that was installed in the place of the ejection seat on the Vostok unmanned prototypes (which actually were designated Ship-Satellite/Korabl-Sputnik as well as Sputnik-4, 5-1, 5, 6, 7-1, 9 and 10, to be exact. The "-1" numbers were used for failed missions to reserve the "clear" designation for successful ones. Weird, I know). All in all, this is very much a Vostok thing.
  12. I'm sorry, but you're very wrong in naming that cylindrical part a pre-Vostok ship. The image you quote in the other topic shows a life support pod for two dogs that was installed in the place of the ejection seat on the Vostok unmanned prototypes (which actually were designated Ship-Satellite/Korabl-Sputnik as well as Sputnik-4, 5-1, 5, 6, 7-1, 9 and 10, to be exact. The "-1" numbers were used for failed missions to reserve the "clear" designation for successful ones. Weird, I know). All in all, this is very much a Vostok thing. Now, it might be implemented as an ejectable science bay co
  13. In fact, the N1 is perfectly scaled for a 3.2 system - all staging events happen exactly as intended by the original N1-L3 flight plan. Just remember that block D does both orbit insertion and most of the landing.
×
×
  • Create New...