[1.12.5] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.13.0 "Забытый" 13/Aug/2023)

[Starhelperdude]

weird question, but which type of S-IVB would the INTs have used? The 500 or 200 ones?

[Friznit]

2 minutes ago, Starhelperdude said:

weird question, but which type of S-IVB would the INTs have used? The 500 or 200 ones?

I over simplistically assumed 500 cos later on the wiki, but I guess it would depend on which INT and whether the J2 needed to restart.  The SIVB page on Wikipedia describes the configurations, and you can work out which would be used if the INT series went beyond a paper exercise  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-IVB#%3A~%3Atext%3DThe_200_series_was_used%2Cnot_have_to_be_restarted.?wprov=sfla1

[Adam-Kerman]

12 hours ago, pTrevTrevs said:

Here's a craft file for my LRV in its Apollo 17 configuration, for those who have been asking.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/14fbEdFvNQoLr0nhd4d3Ipb-W3F2tUYKW/view?usp=sharing

In addition to the BDB dev branch, the file uses parts from Kerbalism, Near-Future Construction, ReStock, Shuttle Orbiter Construction Kit, Making History, and Breaking Ground.

is there a step by step on how you deploy your Rover?

[Space_nico]

Good evening all,

Delta III 2.5m Fairing Base & Commercial Titan III 2.5m Dual Payload Adapter SAF  fairings are basically Ariane IV's ones.

↓ - I made a post here for similarities between Delta III, Titan III Dual Payload Adapter &  Ariane IV! 

I guess that 1 segment of fairing is equivalent to a Ariane IV's Type 3 Fairing.

I wonder if it's possible to modify the length of the wall segment according to the reference of fairings types sizes? → http://www.capcomespace.net/dossiers/espace_europeen/ariane/ariane4/config spelda 1988.jpg

I tried some modifications on my side about it :

Quote

 

 MODULE
  {
      name = ModuleSimpleAdjustableFairing

      segmentLength = 3.62 ← ( considering this value as a Type 3 fairing, I changed it to 1,3 [3.62/3 = 1,206 → 1,3] because of 3 mains fairings types to have approximately an average segment length size... I so  bad at maths tho...)
      maxSegments = 4
      numSlices = 2
      scale = 1

 

This results to place the fairing nosecone on place but not changing the wall length (nosecone is down inside the fairing walls).

Maybe it's not possible but I would tried to do something about it  ( Did I really like Ariane IV and Delta III? Naaaaaah ) Those two mods work perfectly together so why not add some fun? ( even if fews here could find it useful, I guess...  )

Thanks in advance for replies. 
(if this message isn't according to the topic, feel free to remove it...)

[Zorg]

11 minutes ago, Space_nico said:

Good evening all,

Delta III 2.5m Fairing Base & Commercial Titan III 2.5m Dual Payload Adapter SAF  fairings are basically Ariane IV's ones.

↓ - I made a post here for similarities between Delta III, Titan III Dual Payload Adapter &  Ariane IV! 

I guess that 1 segment of fairing is equivalent to a Ariane IV's Type 3 Fairing.

I wonder if it's possible to modify the length of the wall segment according to the reference of fairings types sizes? → http://www.capcomespace.net/dossiers/espace_europeen/ariane/ariane4/config spelda 1988.jpg

I tried some modifications on my side about it :

This results to place the fairing nosecone on place but not changing the wall length (nosecone is down inside the fairing walls).

Maybe it's not possible but I would tried to do something about it  ( Did I really like Ariane IV and Delta III? Naaaaaah ) Those two mods work perfectly together so why not add some fun? ( even if fews here could find it useful, I guess...  )

Thanks in advance for replies. 
(if this message isn't according to the topic, feel free to remove it...)

No the length of the wall segment can only be modified in the model itself. The line in the config is there just to tell SAF what the model looks like so it can position additional segments correctly.

Doing multiple length variations of the wall is not something I could consider doing right now.

Edited February 20, 2022 by Zorg

[pTrevTrevs]

36 minutes ago, Adam-Kerman said:

is there a step by step on how you deploy your Rover?

What I usually do is as follows:

1) Unlock the hinge for the white cover plate holding the entire  assembly inside the LM quadrant and lower it to about 30 degrees below horizontal.

2) Unlock and unfold the Canadarm hinge for the rear third of the rover itself, then extend the rear wheels.

3) Have a Kerbal board the rover for control once it's detached, and raise the front half of the rover to as high a position as can be managed without clipping into the LM itself.

4) Trigger the decoupler underneath the rover's chassis to disconnect it from the cover panel. I have staging disabled on it by default to prevent myself from accidentally triggering it, so unless you reenable it you will need to manually right-click the decoupler.

5) While carefully unfolding the front section and extending its wheels, slowly reverse the rover off the cover pallet until it sits firmly on the ground. If the rover's rear wheels aren't getting enough traction, disengage the motor on the cover panel's hinge and allow it to fall freely to the ground.

6) Deploy the antennas and sensors on the vehicle. Besides the large dish antenna borrowed from Strawman, there's a smaller antenna on the driver's console as well as a surface scanner on the back. The rover gets electrical power from two small RTGs clipped into the back section, but they aren't really enough to power every science experiment at once. Not with Kerbalism, anyway. Speaking of Kerbalism, the oxygen tank on the rover should supply enough air for two Kerbals to spend upwards of a twelve hours outside the spacecraft, while the RTGs will keep their suits powered. The LRV can easily exceed ten or fifteen meters per second, but for safety's sake I try to keep it below five. I've neglected to add any kind of control to the rover beyond the Kerbal's seats, so it needs crew to operate its experiments and transmit data, but for the purposes I use it for that's never been a problem.

[Pappystein]

4 hours ago, Zorg said:

Yup anything you come across on Astronautix MUST be verified elsewhere through primary sources or at least a more reliable one to be credible. The site isnt maintained anymore and even when it was it never cited its own sources. 

Actually I found where the Citations on Astronautix are...   At the TOP of every "family" of Rockets for example:
http://www.astronautix.com/8/8587.html 

But as you can see by this Citation... Astronautix is Citing itself via Wikipedia's article being based almost completely off of Astronautix  (literally almost word for word)  

4 hours ago, Zorg said:

We definitely want to work on Nuclear tugs, we can base it off of existing saturn tankage for some of the assets but we'll need to make new adapters, mounts, docking ports etc. Lots of exciting stuff. And for nuclear engines I want to get started to Nerva I  & II soon.

Ok, does this mean the Saturn D series might be in the Offering?

 

EG: 19630045289 SATURN D /NUCLEAR ROCKET UPPER STAGE/ DESIGN STUDIES /U/ FINAL REPORT

Edited February 20, 2022 by Pappystein

[Entr8899]

37 minutes ago, Space_nico said:

Good evening all,

Delta III 2.5m Fairing Base & Commercial Titan III 2.5m Dual Payload Adapter SAF  fairings are basically Ariane IV's ones.

↓ - I made a post here for similarities between Delta III, Titan III Dual Payload Adapter &  Ariane IV! 

I guess that 1 segment of fairing is equivalent to a Ariane IV's Type 3 Fairing.

I wonder if it's possible to modify the length of the wall segment according to the reference of fairings types sizes? → http://www.capcomespace.net/dossiers/espace_europeen/ariane/ariane4/config spelda 1988.jpg

I tried some modifications on my side about it :

This results to place the fairing nosecone on place but not changing the wall length (nosecone is down inside the fairing walls).

Maybe it's not possible but I would tried to do something about it  ( Did I really like Ariane IV and Delta III? Naaaaaah ) Those two mods work perfectly together so why not add some fun? ( even if fews here could find it useful, I guess...  )

Thanks in advance for replies. 
(if this message isn't according to the topic, feel free to remove it...)

I don't think Well is working on Knes anymore.

[CobaltWolf]

Working on more surface experiments!

https://www.twitch.tv/cobaltwolfy

 

[Beccab]

3 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

Working on more surface experiments!

https://www.twitch.tv/cobaltwolfy

 

Is the pallet also possible/planned?

 

[pTrevTrevs]

4 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

Working on more surface experiments!

https://www.twitch.tv/cobaltwolfy

 

Do the Apollo 14 explosives experiment, I dare you.

[septemberWaves]

For the version of the Apollo Telescope Mount that would've been used with wet workshop Skylab, how is that intended to be mounted to the ascent stage of the lunar module? I'm struggling to figure out a logical way of attaching it that doesn't involve clipping parts in weird places.

[x170doom]

edit: nvm, just saw the exact images i was talking about on the stream anyway

8 minutes ago, septemberWaves said:

For the version of the Apollo Telescope Mount that would've been used with wet workshop Skylab, how is that intended to be mounted to the ascent stage of the lunar module? I'm struggling to figure out a logical way of attaching it that doesn't involve clipping parts in weird places.

I belive zorg mentioned that he was going to make a dedicated ATM core for use with the Ascent Stage, since the current one doesn't really have a way of attaching propperly

Edited February 20, 2022 by x170doom

[UniversalCentury]

So I’m trying to download BDB and use it, but I’m struggling a little to get it and all of the prereq mods on the same version? Is there a modpack or guide anywhere to simplify things?

[Cdodders]

I give you, the Saturn-Shuttle! Including a shot of the Shuttle docked to a station of which the core is a pair of Skylab Drylabs and has a pair of Apollo Blk.V already docked!

 

[Zorg]

2 hours ago, septemberWaves said:

For the version of the Apollo Telescope Mount that would've been used with wet workshop Skylab, how is that intended to be mounted to the ascent stage of the lunar module? I'm struggling to figure out a logical way of attaching it that doesn't involve clipping parts in weird places.

 

2 hours ago, x170doom said:

edit: nvm, just saw the exact images i was talking about on the stream anyway

I belive zorg mentioned that he was going to make a dedicated ATM core for use with the Ascent Stage, since the current one doesn't really have a way of attaching propperly

The ATM that got built for skylab seems a lot taller than the original proposals (and I think I mistakenly got the struts diameter slightly off anyways, they should contact the SLA where the legs do on the descent module). We dont have the nodes to allow it to be attached to an LM. The pic below is just through translation gizmo just to demonstrate.

Even if we provided the appropriate nodes the Skylab ATM doesn't really work as you can see.

So we need a dedicated LM ATM module with its own built in instruments with similar horizontal and vertical footprint to the LM Descent Module for it to work. The designs vary a lot in different pictures (and indeed some look taller than the pic below) but I'm leaning towards something like this.

[Zorg]

4 hours ago, Pappystein said:

 

Ok, does this mean the Saturn D series might be in the Offering?

 

EG: 19630045289 SATURN D /NUCLEAR ROCKET UPPER STAGE/ DESIGN STUDIES /U/ FINAL REPORT

Havent gone too into depth into the stages yet to be honest and its not something I've researched before. If anyone has cool refs do send along. I couldn't find that one with a quick search.

I've got some assorted stuff like this though:

Got good dimensional refs for Nerva II incidentally but havent seen a flow diagram yet, prob easy enough to work out but would be great if anyone has seen one.

Edited February 20, 2022 by Zorg

[septemberWaves]

I think the balancing on the Saturn 1 solid first stage needs to be adjusted. Currently, the solid rocket motor is substantially more expensive and has somewhat worse performance than the liquid fueled first stage. The lower performance isn't an issue, but I think that either the cost of the SRM should be reduced or the total cost of the liquid first stage should be increased. Otherwise there's just no real reason to use the solid first stage over the liquid one.

[Pappystein]

2 hours ago, Zorg said:

Havent gone too into depth into the stages yet to be honest and its not something I've researched before. If anyone has cool refs do send along. I couldn't find that one with a quick search.

I've got some assorted stuff like this though:

Got good dimensional refs for Nerva II incidentally but havent seen a flow diagram yet, prob easy enough to work out but would be great if anyone has seen one.

The Proposed Test and early Launch rocket was the Saturn D-2... Yes, a C-2 with a new 3rd stage instead of S-IV.    It is in the big C-2 preliminary design doc I linked in SourceDocs.

After cancellation of the C-2, the C-3 was chosen to be used, it would have been designated D-3 but someone, in speaking to congress was instructed to  not to make it sound like a new rocket... so re-cast as C-3N.

Per ABMA the Nuclear saturns were all D series derivatives of the C-Series.   Per NASA HQ and politics, they were C-2N, C-3N, C-4N and C-5N.

The C-2 doc has a preliminary sketch of both a test stage and a 260" Tug stage... the Tug Stage is more of a block diagram than a good sketch however.

 

[CobaltWolf]

"Active Seismic Experiment" aka a mortar, used on Apollo 14 and 16

[septemberWaves]

Doing a bit of testing. I know BDB doesn't have any plans for a lunar rover but I wanted to kitbash one to see how it works out. Not doing the full mission profile today because I've not yet done the Kerbalism config for the Apollo capsule's life support, but I will do that probably soon.

[TaintedLion]

1 hour ago, CobaltWolf said:

Yes, Jeb!

[Invaderchaos]

Some more texturing progress for Pegasus:

[blu3wolf]

8 hours ago, Pappystein said:

Actually I found where the Citations on Astronautix are...   At the TOP of every "family" of Rockets for example:
http://www.astronautix.com/8/8587.html 

But as you can see by this Citation... Astronautix is Citing itself via Wikipedia's article being based almost completely off of Astronautix  (literally almost word for word) 

Your link doesnt seem to load a reference properly for me, it just links to Wikipedia's C-3 page. Which text is word for word copied?

Do you know whether it is Astronautix copying Wikipedia, or Wikipedia copying Astronautix?

[pTrevTrevs]

5 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

"Active Seismic Experiment" aka a mortar, used on Apollo 14 and 16

Whoa, I was only joking; I didn't expect you to actually make this thing.