Jump to content

Jcking

Members
  • Posts

    320
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Jcking

  1. Re: C-8. Below are MSFC critiques on the program as of June 23, 1962. "The schedule is shown is considered optimistic even with the assumptions listed. It is a success schedule in which nothing goes wrong, all technical judgements are correct, and there are no failures. The six (6) vehicle R&D program is extremely undesirable considering the jump in technology from Saturn C-1 to C-8. The decision required on July 1, 1962 to meet the schedule cannot be made without a major change in NASA policy and without a complete disruption of the Apollo program and the thousands of personnel now doing productive work towards the mission objective. A major redirection at this time would cause considerable delays in the schedule to bring C-8 to the same status that C-5 is today. Based on past experience at MSFC in implementing programs of this magnitude, it is estimated that the first C-8 flight could take place in May 1967. This allows for time to stop the presently approved C-5 program and to the define the C-8 program in sufficient detail that decisions can be made, facilities can be started and the contractors can be given sufficient information to start the stage development. Considering the technical uncertainties in the C-8 development, a 10 vehicle R&D program is almost mandatory although secondary missions could be flown starting on flight No. 6. Manned flights should not be considered prior to No. 11 in March 1969."
  2. Not any parts specifically for the SEIs Saturn derived HLLVs, but the parts are there for you to make one.
  3. Nothing is in a playable state at the time of this message, so just sit tight.
  4. There are several dozen shuttle upgrades that fall under STS Block 2 or Shuttle 2. Some of them similar, quite a few contradictory.
  5. The 2.3.12 version made for 1.4.2 still works fine (plus you don’t need all the dependencies that the newer ones require), and tweak all removes the limitations on configs. The version checker complains that it’s out of date, but that means nothing.
  6. On the contrary, a reusable version was studied, but was an entirely new vehicle more or less (note that the LOX and LH2 tanks are now conical with flat bulkheads and are made out of 32 segmented multicellular tanks to provide a lighter but more expensive tank structure). Recovery of strapons would consist of a tail first entry with a 70ft diameter ballute providing stabilization for the SRMs and parachute providing deceleration. recovery system weight is expected to be ~40,000 lbs (unknown if this is per strapon or for all strapons). Recovery of the injection system would consist of a base first entry using main engines for deorbit with a balloon or ballute/ parachute system providing stabilization and deceleration. recovery system weight for that is expected to be ~98,000 lbs.
  7. 1140 tons (AMLLV is a 4 million lbs to orbit max). As for single launch bases to mun or duna, the parts available in mods and in stock aren't large enough to justify that (even the massive 5m centrifuge from SSPXR is only like 20 tons), and for fun you could launch 14 of FFTs antimatter beam engines to orbit at their full extension. Maybe in KSP2 there will be good use cases for such large vehicles, but not in KSP.
  8. So obsessed with big rockets, but when you get them you realize that there isn't much if anything in the game or mods to justify them, so they sit unused.
  9. Wouldn't that make it 4 SMs? Mini Mod Big G IIIM, S-IB conic, Advanced Big G INT-20, and this culled one? EDIT: Logistics Spacecraft Evolving from Gemini Volume I Summary Report states that "A third configuration was considered prior to mid-term but was dropped with the deletion of the Saturn IB launch vehicle as a study requirement", and the launch configurations and the final concepts consider lead me to believe that it was the conic Saturn IB version that was culled instead of a cylindrical design. For reference, here are the two configurations ultimately put forth (not shown is that the propulsion module separates from the cargo module at right about the RCS cluster, but both don't use solids).
  10. Internal contractor ideas that never even made it to the restricted/limited distribution/classified section of NTRS were either lost, destroyed, or still in boxes in company, museum, or college archives; or even someone’s attic.
  11. The JSTOR papers you can make a free account and get to read 100 or so per month. However you are given the pages as images so go to your page info or inspect element to grab them and save them. IEEE, AIAA, SAE stuff you can usually find on NTRS for the modern stuff (1990-) if they were actual NASA papers and not by contractors. Beyond that search up the name of the paper in quotations and you might come across another website that hosts it for you to download for free (though I cannot vouch for the trustworthiness of said site(s)). As for sites with freely accessible papers: NASA Technical Reports server, Internet Archive, Hathitrust, OSTI, UNT government documents department. Listings has around 12,000 pages of NTRS numbers and titles which some plugged into the webarchive using the old CASI link format (like the ones in my previous post) will bring back captures of documents which are either difficult or impossible to find any other way.
  12. Luckily that one was saved, many of that series were either not saved, or were never there. BTW, can you post the title of your first link as it requires a university account to access? Never mind, the title is: The Space Station; A Fundamental Part of the Integrated Space Program. https://web.archive.org/web/20100519121815/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19700075027_1970075027.pdf A little bonus. https://web.archive.org/web/20100519212255/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19700018358_1970018358.pdf
  13. I’ve wondered about that, but documentation quoted 6 F-1s for certain and 12 J-2s from what I remember. As for the VAB problem, even these smaller NOVA vehicles wouldn’t use the VAB and crawler transport, but would instead be integrated on the launchpad (with later proposals including static firing the booster on the pad as well).
  14. Oh, I know what that vehicle Wikipedia is quoting and it’s not the vehicle you think it is. The 520, 396, 260 vehicle is the baseline all liquid nova vehicle that had a 6 f-1 first stage, 12 j-2 second, and 2 j-2 third stage. The vehicle where I got the dimensions, and more closely represents the C-8 vehicle can be found here https://web.archive.org/web/20100515071742/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19740076058_1974076058.pdf
  15. First stage is 9m minus the skirt, second is 6.5 (but you can get away with it being 6.25), third is 5m.
  16. As the Apollo Saturn update was totally incompatible with the old Apollo Saturn parts, they have been deleted. Your best bet is to get an older version that has those files and get the models, textures, and configs associated with those parts. Just be aware that you may have to rename the files, and the directories in the config/model for it to work.
  17. Direct flight has other advantages: One of the things that hurt Orion and Altiar bad is the abort at anytime requirement which needed significant margins for plane changes to meet up with the Orion for the polar sites that were desired. Going direct flight eliminates this concern, but the breakpoints in which this pushes LOR to being close to parity with Direct Flight in terms of mass I do not know.
  18. No, that is an unnecessary complication for liquid propellant vehicles and negates one of the advantages of them. Only on the pad or test stand are they fueled (solids on the other hand are cast in the factory).
  19. SOCK only handles the space shuttle orbiter, and a couple of accessories. ET and SRBs are left for other mods.
  20. N1 is at least conical (more or less). This is just a bunch of different tank sizes and adapters of different diameters (312in, 5m KSP; 408in, 6.5 KSP; 576in, 9m KSP), almost all of which have no applications outside of this concept.
×
×
  • Create New...