MKSheppard

Members
  • Content Count

    55
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About MKSheppard

  • Rank
    Rocketeer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. If Atlas expansions make you hard; there's a guy who worked on Atlas (his first launch was in about '85) who is compiling drawings of the proposed Atlas variants over here at: https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=26915.0;all You have to go all the way down to get to the interesting stuff.
  2. “Fat Core” Titan III Proposals Note: The name comes from an Aerospace Technology article on 29 January 1968, which went: Asked what he foresaw as the launch vehicle beyond an uprated Titan III-C (Titan III-M, seven-segment solid rocket motors and a stretched first stage), Col. Taliaferro said: "That is about the extent of the growth potential of the present Titan III. Beyond that, if and when a firm requirement exists for a booster in the 50,000 to 100,000 lb. payload class, I like the fat-core Titan with optimized 156-in.-dia. solid rocket motors." Col. Taliaferro defined "fat core" as a Titan III vehicle with the diameter extended to 156 in. Four of the current Aerojet liquid-fuel engines are clustered and fed from common tankage. Martin-Marietta Corp. has funded an in-house effort of this nature for some time and such a vehicle has been well defined. TITAN IIIG: "The Titan IIIG has a 15 ft. diameter core with a 4 engine first stage, and can use 7-segment 120-inch or 5-segment 156-inch diameter SRM. Low earth orbit payloads up to 100,000 lbs are claimed. Martin has generated a serious sales effort to sell this vehicle in competition to the Saturn derivative intermediate family (e.g., INT-20)." Selected Comments on Agena and Titan III Family Stages, Case 720; 26 March 1968, Titan III Large Diameter Core (LDC) Family (aka Titan IIIL) Notes: This family was proposed from mid-1971 onwards by Martin Marietta. It would have increased the core stage diameter up from the existing 10 feet (3m) and would have used a varying number of UA-1207 SRMs developed for the Titan IIIM program.
  3. Found some data on the Titans for you. ABOVE: standalone Titan IIIL. BELOW: Titan IIIL as Space Shuttle Booster:
  4. Any chance a properly kerbalized Navaho series of engines could be done? They form the "missing link" between the early V-2 style engines and heavily simplified (Redstone) engines and the Atlas/Thor/Delta engine configurations. The Navaho engines were: Navaho Phase I Notes: Two German-built V-2 engines were reconditioned for this phase, which consisted of taking the engines and operating it with water substituted for propellants at flow rates corresponding to 56,000 lbf of thrust for 64 seconds. Rocketdyne XLR-41-NA-1 (Navaho Phase II) Notes: Simplified V-2 engine made from US-built parts and built to US pipe size and fitting standards. Was water-flow tested, and as it was ready to be hot fired; the program was cancelled in favor of hot testing the early US-designed thrust chambers that would eventually lead to the Redstone NAA-75-110. Rocketdyne XLR-43-NA-1 (Navaho Phase III) Propellants: LOX/Alcohol-Water 75% Thrust (sl): 75,000 lbf Chamber Pressure: 300 psia Rated Lifetime: 60 seconds Notes: Developed for Navaho missile booster which would push the missile to Mach 2.85 at 38,000 feet before burnout. Test fired ahead of schedule in May 1950. This engine formed the basis for the Redstone’s NA 75-110 A-1 to 7 engine. Rocketdyne XLR-43-NA-3 (Navaho Phase IV) Propellants: LOX / 92.5% Alcohol, 7.5% Water, Gas Generator Thrust (sl): 120,000 lbf at 230 ISP Dry Weight: 1,230 lb T/W (sl): 97.5 Notes: First US engine to use “spaghetti” (tubular wall) configuration for the thrust chamber, which reduced weight by 50%. A high speed turbopump was developed for this engine which used a gas generator that was powered by the propellants themselves, eliminating the need for a separate hydrogen peroxide tank to run the turbopump. Rocketdyne XLR-71-NA-1 (G-26 Navaho II / Navaho Phase V) Propellants: LOX / 92.5% Alcohol, 7.5% Water, Gas Generator O/F Ratio: 1.375 Thrust (sl): 240,000 lbf @ 229 ISP Thrust (vac): 278,000 lbf @ 265 ISP Chamber Pressure: 438 psia Dry Weight: 2,501 lbs T/W Ratio (sl): 95.96 T/W Ratio (vac): 111.15 Engine Length: 117 inches Engine Diameter: 77 inches Expansion Area Ratio (ε = Ae/At): 4.6 Rated Lifetime: 65~ seconds Notes: “Doubled up” version of XLR-43-NA-3 with two thrust chambers. This engine proved the feasibility of running two separate thrust chambers fed off a single common gas generator, but retaining separate turbopumps. First test fired September 1953. Rocketdyne XLR-83-NA-1 (G-38 Navaho III / Navaho Phase VI) Thrust (sl): 405,000 lbf @ 245 ISP Propellants: LOX / JP-5 Rated Lifetime: 93 to 100 seconds Notes: “Tripled up” version of XLR-43-NA-3 with three thrust chambers and modified with better cooling to allow the burning of hydrocarbon fuel. Each thrust chamber had it’s own turbopump, but all three chambers were fed off a single common gas generator. First fired January 1956. Navaho Engine Development in Retrospective Despite the program being canceled before any operational missiles could be deployed, the Navaho engines helped rocket technology in the United States take a dramatic leap forward. Instead of a simple welded sheet metal thrust chamber (Redstone and earlier), Navaho pioneered the brazed regeneratively cooled tube wall thrust chamber. Additionally, instead of using HTP to drive the engine turbopump, a bipropellant gas generator which used the same propellants as the engine itself was used; eliminating run time limitations imposed by HTP tank sizes. Finally, the Mark 3 turbopump which was used in various forms on the Thor, Atlas, and Saturn I/IB engines was introduced with Navaho. ************************************** Essentially, you don't need to do all of these engines; just Navaho Phase IV / Navaho Phase V / Navaho Phase VI; which are basically "lets add more combustion chambers for MOAR THRUST".
  5. Martin had many many "fat core" Titan projects proposed. Titan IIIG was the first, and would have been a 180" diameter core and would have had option of two UA-1207 or UA-1565 (156" diam 5 segment SRM) boosters, and would have had four engines. No idea if these were stock LR87s or the 'cut down' single chamber LR87s of only 226 klbf used in Titan IIIL-1207-4 (Spread). Titan IIIL-1207-4 (Spread) had a 192" core and would have been the booster for the Grumman H-33 Shuttle Orbiter. Titan IIIL 2/4/6 (Straight) had a 196" core. Titan IIIM (LDC) (LDC = Large Diameter Core). Will edit to add more information.
  6. I've tried out some of Realistic Progression Zero (RP-0) through CKAN and I'm pretty impressed. From what little I've looked at, it does about 90% of what I was aiming for in my own private mod ideas. I haven't looked through it a lot, but so far I've only got a few quibbles: There's no Jeb/Bob/Etc Kerman at the start. :-( But I do like how you have simple scientific instruments such as a barometer, thermometer, etc available at game start; unlike stock KSP which locks those away. EDIT: Sorry for repeating myself. I'm still kind of getting back into the swing of things here. I'll have some more detailed critique once I've had a chance to play RP-0 a bit more.
  7. I've tried out some of Realistic Progression Zero (RP-0) through CKAN and I'm pretty impressed. From what little I've looked at, it does about 90% of what I was aiming for in my own private mod ideas. I haven't looked through it a lot, but so far I've only got a few quibbles: There's no Jeb/Bob/Etc Kerman at the start. :-( But I do like how you have simple scientific instruments such as a barometer, thermometer, etc available at game start; unlike stock KSP which locks those away.
  8. I am really liking this mod so far. My only quibbles so far is that no Jeb Kerman. :-(
  9. I'm glad to see that early space rocketry is being done. I have some photos and data on some of the early stuff, if you're interested.
  10. It's been a long time, and I've been out of KSP for a long time; but am I correct in assuming that Real Fuels supports thrust scaling according to atmospheric pressure? Stock KSP 1.0 has that now, e.g. sea level and vac thrust are different; done in CFG files as: I think the last entry "9 0.001" is setting the exponental function for the thrust/ISP vs Altitude curve.
  11. http://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Boosters/Titan/Titan_IIIE_Core_Airframe.gif http://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Boosters/Centaur/Titan_IIIE_Centaur_Stations.gif
  12. I'd like to see a more logically laid out tech tree by 1.0; right now, in Beta Than Ever; we have the following annoyances: 1.) You have to research unmanned probe technology; but start with a mercury-equivalent. 2.) You get one of the best engines in the game, the LV-T30 right from the start -- with 320 sea level and 370 vac ISP; which enables SSTO performance from the start. 3.) You have a spaceplane runway and hangar; but no jet engines or wings from the start? 4.) No basic science equipment such as a barometer, temperature probe, etc at the start? There's a whole lot more of annoyances like that regarding starting out in career mode presently.
  13. Is it possible to have a "primitive" MechJeb ascent autopilot put in eventually? I can understand if you don't want to have the player having fully automatic push button, go to orbit and circularize capability from the start of a career/science game; but we should at least have a simple "maintain this heading and angle of attack" autopilot available to us from the start; along with a delta v and TWR calculator.
  14. Anyone have the MBM to PNG file converter? It's no longer up on spaceport. :-(