Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'voyager'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • General
    • Announcements
    • Welcome Aboard
  • Kerbal Space Program 2
    • KSP 2 Discussion
    • KSP 2 Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • KSP 2 Dev Diaries
    • Show and Tell
  • Kerbal Space Program
    • The Daily Kerbal
    • KSP Discussion
    • KSP Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission ideas
    • The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP Fan Works
  • Community
    • Player Spotlight
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
  • Gameplay and Technical Support
    • Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
    • Technical Support (Console)
  • Add-ons
    • Add-on Discussions
    • Add-on Releases
    • Add-on Development
  • Making History Expansion
    • Making History Missions
    • Making History Discussion
    • Making History Support
  • Breaking Ground Expansion
    • Breaking Ground Discussion
    • Breaking Ground Support
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU Forums
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Skype


Twitter


About me


Location


Interests

Found 7 results

  1. (This was first posted on the Space Exploration StackExchange and the AskScienceDiscussion subreddit first, but I want more input, so I'm posting here as well. As forewarning, the most integral details of this question are bolded.) For context, I have been writing an alternate history involving the accelerated development of spaceflight technology for over 5 years now (one with quite different assumptions from other examples of the subgenre), and one of its long-standing elements has been a wildly-ambitious space probe that would be sent on a Solar System Circumnavigation through a Grander Tour. What does this mean? Well, here are the mission objectives: The main spacecraft body (which I will obfuscatorily name “the Spacecraft”) must fly by every planet (1930–2006) in the Solar System save Pluto. At least a subprobe (“Subprobe A”) must fly by Pluto. Double points if it manages to do so while flying by all 8 other planets. A sample, no matter how miniscule (probably micrometeorites or ring particles), must be returned to Earth by a subprobe or sub-subprobe (“Subprobe B”) after flying by all 8 2006– planets. The course correction to do so may involve as much as an orbital-scale (~9000 m/s) multi-stage solid rocket together with aerobreaking and/or a brutal gravity assist. Double points if it is on or launched from Subprobe A. Triple points if it is on or launched from Subprobe A after the Pluto flyby. Each flyby in the Outer Solar System should preferably be at least 1 synodic period before that of the real-life Grand Tour users the Voyagers in order to prepare for the arrival of a vaguely equivalent program. The base of the spacecraft’s conception was that it would be launched around the time of or before the first outer planets and interstellar probes in real life (Pioneer 10/11) to make time for it to engage on a more proper Grand Tour trajectory. This was reinforced by the fact that said time range roughly overlaps with the 450th anniversary of an Earth circumnavigation expedition done by the crew of a certain navigator, who happens to be the namesake of a far less impressive real-life space mission. So, the rock-hard minimum and maximum are the 450th anniversary of the start of that navigator’s voyage (September 20th, 1969) and the launch of the latter Pioneer, Pioneer 11 (April 5th, 1973). However, it would ideally be launched before September 6th, 1972, exactly 450 years after what was left of that expedition returned, yet as close to that date as possible (i.e. within 1972) to allow as much advanced technology to be used in it as possible—the spacecraft would include developments like 8-bit microprocessors, helical-scan tape data storage, robotic arms, synthetic aperture RADAR, and possibly non-solid-state radioisotope generators. And yes, the first asking of this question was deliberately timed to match with the 50th anniversary of that date and the 45th anniversary of the launch of Voyager 1. (I’d have preferred it to be earlier, but ehh…) Also, the spacecraft’s original conception had it launched on a Saturn IB–Agena D (what I thought was the highest-capacity high-velocity non-Saturn V notional “drop-in” vehicle that could have been made at the time… ignoring that either a Saturn IB–Centaur or earlier Titan IIIE would have greater capacity and could probably be made with similar R&D), but as its size and capabilities grew, its proposed launch vehicle was progressively upgraded until it became the “Saturn 1E-SB”, which consists of 4 stages (more details on which could be provided if required), the last one, not considered integral to the launch vehicle’s identity, being the main course correction stage of the spacecraft. The first 3 stages would have the capability to put the 4th stage and ~5.5-ton spacecraft complex—~28.5 tons in total and ~6.75 tons dry mass—on a trans-Cytherean or potentially trans-Martian injection (up to 3650 m/s tested in KSP RSS RO using a penultimate version of the launch vehicle, probably ~3800 m/s), beginning its Grander Tour… A Saturn V could do so, too, and to be honest I now find justifying the existence of the Saturn 1E-SB somewhat difficult, so I may bite the bullet of switching away from a “Saturn one” platform. Now, how much ∆v would the course correction stage be capable of supplying? A measly… ~5500 m/s. And that’s with the subprobes still attached. So there is a very beefy, though not unlimited course-correction capacity. Now, orbital mechanics is a complex business, and I don’t know if it would even be possible to fulfill even the barest mission requirements given the ∆v budget within that launch window, let alone how it would be done. However, the existence of trajectory designs like this, a flyby of all 2006– planets launched in the same vague timeframe with a negligible course-correction budget, indicates its likely possibility. Note that the 5500 m/s and 5.5 tons payload is a maximum and minimum, respectively—the more optimized the trajectory can be made, the smaller the fuel mass of the course correction stage needs to be, allowing a greater scientific payload, so the more optimized the mission is, the better. And so, the question. Ideally, I’d like to have the specifics of this drilled down by April 5th, 2023 for some sense of timeliness. For more context, this is the encounter order as planned when the conception of this mission reached its modern form: Main spacecraft: Earth→Venus→Mercury→Venus→Mars→Jupiter→Saturn→Ouranos→Neptune→Interstellar Subprobe A: 〃→〃→〃→〃→〃→〃→Pluto→Interstellar Subprobe B: 〃→〃→〃→〃→〃→〃→〃→Ouranos→Neptune→Earth
  2. This is just my new account, so I don't need any "welcome to the forums" comments So a few days ago, I was hanging out, thinking about how to solve the problem of larger SRBs. Then an Idea came to me: instead of large 2.5 meter ones, what about 1.875 (in the middle) SRBs? I then thought of a great look and idea to go for: What about the titan 3-E rocket SRBs: The titan 3-E had a central LR-87 engine (We have it as the Bobcat in making history). The two side SRBs are what would be added. It had a LR-91 second stage (cheetah). It also had a third stage (concealed by the fairing) with two RL-10s. The point I'm trying to make here is that It would go along well with current themed parts, along with other purposes. Now what did the titan 3E do that is memorable? Isn't this just a boring rocket that did boring things? No. This rocket launched two amazing firsts: Voyager 1&2 with too many records to count (Including one on the spacecraft!) and Viking 1&2, the first probes to land on mars! This is a pretty historic rocket, so It solves many problems at once. With these side boosters, you could recreate the first landings on mars and Voyager far better, and use it on everything from better looking space shuttles or just as "larger SRBs" -Kerano Kerman
  3. Dust storm Chapter 2-VOYAGE Against the slowly stopping wind... Against the freezing night...Against the weakness, kerbals go.. Bob looked around the rover.. Jeb was resting, looking into the void-dark sky... Bob got closer to observe the rover. To his upset he saw nothing valuable. Bob pushed the rover really hard! And then the wheels began to work! The happiness of accomplishment overwhhelmed Bob and Jeb.. Rover went on, automaticly.. Rover stopped. And then, Jeb suddenly got off the rover, it seems like he got better, Bob didn't want ot question that. Probably because Bob was doing something else. Kerbals went sleeping.. But then, suddenly Jeb woke up at the Dunian midnight. Jeb's personality began to crack under the pressure of the situation, much to Bob's surpise.. Kerbonauts finally found their calm, and began sleeping, dreaming about their homes.. Eearly,early in the morning. Morning starts with a proper routine, even in the extremal situation.. Crossing the remaining 9km was not easy, especially for Bob.. Finally, after a long time reaching the base, kerbals, or kerbal, to be clear, saw the base in the distance.. They have reached the safety for now, but that is just for now.. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Song: The second part is reached! Our little voyagers have reached the base! Awaiting trials of the future! Now, i sincerely ask @Vanamonde, not to merge this one with the previous one. I want to merge it after i will be done with the third part. I will send a message!
  4. Redo the Voyager-Program! Step 1: Build the probe This might just be a challenge itself, because the probe is asymmetric. Aesthetics count! You may use Mods like IR to have hinges to deploy the booms (and antennas). If you don't want to do that (like i do), try to assemble the booms in space. However, it has to be a single launch. Mods that include cameras and more science-eqipment are welcome. Make sure the probe is only propelled by Monopropellant. You may use one or more O-10-Engines. For fun-reasons, you'll get extra points for using a single O-10. if your thrust-Vector is different from the orientation of your main probe-core, make sure you have another probe-core or a docking port aligned with the thrust-vector. - Your probe is asymmetric yet balanced around its main thrust-vector and looks like the Voyager-Spacecraft (I leave the look up to you, not going to judge your artistic work here) +20 points - your probe uses a single O-10 Engine for propulsion +5 points - Your spacecraft carries not more than 1/10th of its mass in Propellant. +50 points - Your probe uses LF-OX -20 points - Your probe uses Ion- or nuclear-engines minus all of your points Step 2: Build the Launch-Vehicle Easy as pie: The launch-Vehicle does nothing more than to send the payload on an transfer-trajectory to a large Planet (Kerbin, Eve, Jool or Jupiter if you'r doing this in RSS (RSS players get an extra leaderboard for awesomeness). - Your transfer-stage detaches from your probe before leaving Kerbins SOI +20 points Step 3: Gravity-assist yourself out of the Solar-System How exactly you do this is up to you, for your personal mission Profile, find a balance between: - Fly by as many celestial bodies as possible. +5 points for distant flybys, +10 points for close flybys (situation "in space near ..."). Max. 10 points per celestial body. - be on your escape-trajectory in a reasonable amount of time. To make this comparable, take the total mission time as soon as you leave the SOI oft the body that gives you the "last Kick" and sends you on an escape-trajectory. +10 points for every year less than 20, -10 points for ever year more than 20. - perform two big gravity-assists in a row (i.e. Eve-Jool) without performing a complete sun-Orbit. It's OK to have flybys in between: +50 points
  5. Allright people, I need your help. I wanted to do an as close to reality Voyager mission as possible in KSP, so I spent most of my christmas break modeling and texturing a Titan IIIE launch vehicle and the Voyager probes. The end-goal is to make a video of the mission and put in on the Youtubes. I've finished the launch vehicle (image furher down), but I've run into a bit of a problem with the Star-37E/Voyager part of my build. From the reference images I see that either the Star-37E or the structure holding the Star-37E/Voyager stack has a hydrazine attitude control system, but what I can't seem to figure out is what type of thruster it is, its thrust, and most importantly, which directions of thrust the ACS system has. Is it only "forward" and "back", is it roll? I can't tell. As there are plenty of smart people on the forum, I figured I'd ask for help here. I'll post links to some of my reference images so you can get an idea of what I'm talking about. Reference image 1 Reference image 2 Reference image 3 Reference image 4 Anyways, here is an image of what I've got so far. There is a Centaur-D-1T inside the fairing, but I've yet to render an image of it.
  6. Made a new video for my Real Spacecraft series so... heres the video. Hope you enjoy
  7. Here is a short clip from the 45 minute film my team and I are making! http://nassault.com/ Sorry for the delay everyone, but as promised the film is coming to Youtube during an August near you. Working away from home for two months. But can't wait to get back and finish this, as well as begin making some more fun films.
×
×
  • Create New...