Jump to content

[1.12.3] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.10.4 "Луна" 19/July/2022)


CobaltWolf
 Share

Recommended Posts

First, curse le mobile forums. *curses*

second, @JsoI have more of my respect on balance; I now see why the CSM were bulked up. I loaded a stock (+FAR; I don't know if that made much of a difference) system and although it barely made it off the ground, the S-I was able to do a Mun mission with ease. I had been using 6.4x + SMURFF and had a lot of trouble, as the dV was (relatively) quite low on the CSM due to the added mass. 

i know we don't balance around any such modifications, but now I'm not sure about stock. I had been worried that some of my MM patches might be too massive, but now I want to go back and cram more in them. 

I had just forgotten how (not) much delta V was required for a Mun shot :/ 

(this post was mostly me musing, I will try to have some more constructive thoughts later on)

Edited by komodo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, komodo said:

First, curse le mobile forums. *curses*

second, @JsoI have more of my respect on balance; I now see why the CSM were bulked up. I loaded a stock (+FAR; I don't know if that made much of a difference) system and although it barely made it off the ground, the S-I was able to do a Mun mission with ease. I had been using 6.4x + SMURFF and had a lot of trouble, as the dV was (relatively) quite low on the CSM due to the added mass. 

i know we don't balance around any such modifications, but now I'm not sure about stock. I had been worried that some of my MM patches might be too massive, but now I want to go back and cram more in them. 

I had just forgotten how (not) much delta V was required for a Mun shot :/ 

(this post was mostly me musing, I will try to have some more constructive thoughts later on)

I think we will have to revert the mass increases on the Apollo / LEM in order to give them enough dV (mostly the CSM - the LEM is pretty ok). One mission phase at a time - I think once we nail down the payloads we can worry about the rest? Of course @Jso is the guy with the numbers there. Remember we are assuming a 2x-3x rescale being 'real world balanced' for KSP parts.

Additional worries - the F1 can't be 'conservatively balanced' too much or the Saturn 1C (1 F1 instead of 8 H1s) won't have the ~10% increase in payload that justifies it.

EDIT: Remembered my other comment. Remember, IRL the Saturn 1 couldn't lift the final Apollo CSM at all. And the 1B had to launch with the SM only partially fueled. A Blok III  style SM would probably have been fine, but the mission module wouldn't be possible.

Edited by CobaltWolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

Additional worries - the F1 can't be 'conservatively balanced' too much or the Saturn 1C (1 F1 instead of 8 H1s) won't have the ~10% increase in payload that justifies it.

Another consideration for balance is that the ETS Saturn 1C used an uprated F1-A engine for its lower stage. So just a slight bit of extra greeble of your eventual F-1 to make an F1-A while keeping the original slightly more conservative is an option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, komodo said:

First, curse le mobile forums. *curses*

second, @JsoI have more of my respect on balance; I now see why the CSM were bulked up. I loaded a stock (+FAR; I don't know if that made much of a difference) system and although it barely made it off the ground, the S-I was able to do a Mun mission with ease. I had been using 6.4x + SMURFF and had a lot of trouble, as the dV was (relatively) quite low on the CSM due to the added mass. 

i know we don't balance around any such modifications, but now I'm not sure about stock. I had been worried that some of my MM patches might be too massive, but now I want to go back and cram more in them. 

I had just forgotten how (not) much delta V was required for a Mun shot :/ 

(this post was mostly me musing, I will try to have some more constructive thoughts later on)

6.4x is going to be the extreme limit for these models. There will probably need to be some case by case tweaking as not all the rockets are the same scale due to pidgin-holing them into round KSP sizes (1.25, 1.5, 1.875, 2.5 etc). Fuel utilization will be a big gottcha since the stockalike tanks only hold 87% of volume rounded down. You'll want that in the mid to upper 90s for 6.4x. Real fuels may or may not be a must (cryo definitely for Saturn or Centaur). This Saturn will be 5.625/3.75 rather than the more correct 6.5/4.25. That alone will probably kill it in 6.4x without getting cheaty with the fuel and dry masses. I suppose you could rescale it but the pedal adapter will be a problem there.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, pheenix99 said:

All of this Saturn/Apollo talk has me wondering...how many of you live near the Kennedy Space Center? I have a distant, yet decent view of the launches from my building (about 18 or so miles from the launch complex).

Only person I can think of that's near there is @Tristonwilson12. I've been to Wallops a couple times but never during a launch. Just passing through on vacation.

1 minute ago, Daelkyr said:

Another consideration for balance is that the ETS Saturn 1C used an uprated F1-A engine for its lower stage. So just a slight bit of extra greeble of your eventual F-1 to make an F1-A while keeping the original slightly more conservative is an option.

I think our (read: my) plan was to just give the F1 stats closer to the F1-A. There really isn't much of an external difference and they would fill exactly the same role in terms gameplay niche. I'd also like to make it so the F1 can only throttle down to 70% but I've received pushback there. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, pheenix99 said:

All of this Saturn/Apollo talk has me wondering...how many of you live near the Kennedy Space Center? I have a distant, yet decent view of the launches from my building (about 18 or so miles from the launch complex).

I live in the DC area, which means I could theoretically watch wallops.

Edited by Rory Yammomoto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CobaltWolf said:

Only person I can think of that's near there is @Tristonwilson12. I've been to Wallops a couple times but never during a launch. Just passing through on vacation.

Now you can add me to the list :)

 

4 minutes ago, Rory Yammomoto said:

I live in the DC area, which means I could theoretically watch wallops.

I remember when I used to live in Satellite Beach in an apartment overlooking the ocean....one night there was a shuttle launch and due to its SE trajectory, it rattled our storm shutters. Awesome experience, but it doesn't compare to "Merritt Island shaking" when the Saturn V's would launch (according to my father who worked at Cape Canaveral AFS at the time).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, VenomousRequiem said:

How do we feel about colours? I was thinking that the F1 should have the distinct Rockomax oramge, and the J2 should have the same blue highlights as the RL10, but Cobalt was thinking orange all around. What do you guys think?

Orange all around

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Jso said:

6.4x is going to be the extreme limit for these models. There will probably need to be some case by case tweaking as not all the rockets are the same scale due to pidgin-holing them into round KSP sizes (1.25, 1.5, 1.875, 2.5 etc). Fuel utilization will be a big gottcha since the stockalike tanks only hold 87% of volume rounded down. You'll want that in the mid to upper 90s for 6.4x. Real fuels may or may not be a must (cryo definitely for Saturn or Centaur). This Saturn will be 5.625/3.75 rather than the more correct 6.5/4.25. That alone will probably kill it in 6.4x without getting cheaty with the fuel and dry masses. I suppose you could rescale it but the pedal adapter will be a problem there.

 

I ought to have been more explicit: I wasn't trying to get them going with 6.4x and "stock" parts, I had both @Nerteas cryogenic fuels as well as SMURFF doing fuel fraction rebalancing. I agree that at that scale, the numbers just don't work out. That SIVB I posted a page or two was made of tweakscaled Titan and centaur parts, and worked well for the mission of "get a half fueled CSM to low orbit", before the extra mass boost. The "canonical" S1 config doesn't have a prayer at either mass, fortunately. In contrast, Gemini + Titan works well with a slight stage stretch, so I don't doubt a balanced solution can be found here.

I will have to try a 2x w/o extras to compare.

@CobaltWolf, it was the S1 with the SIV that got off the ground with the CSM, albeit it partially fueled, but aside from a sluggish surface TWR and a lousy stage 2 TWR, it was able to make orbit and even to a TMI burn (plus insertion, but we've passed ridiculous at that point)

I am not trying by any means to go full torches and pitchforks "FIX EET NAOOOO", but just to get some current feedback on where we were vs the goals. I have a decent idea now, so I'll have to have a think on it. To reiterate, I have no doubts that a balanced configuration will be found, and a use for each booster as well. :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, VenomousRequiem said:

How do we feel about colours? I was thinking that the F1 should have the distinct Rockomax oramge, and the J2 should have the same blue highlights as the RL10, but Cobalt was thinking orange all around. What do you guys think?

I'd go for blue highlights on the J2 like the RL10, as they are both cryogenic engines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

Only person I can think of that's near there is @Tristonwilson12. I've been to Wallops a couple times but never during a launch. Just passing through on vacation.

I think our (read: my) plan was to just give the F1 stats closer to the F1-A. There really isn't much of an external difference and they would fill exactly the same role in terms gameplay niche. I'd also like to make it so the F1 can only throttle down to 70% but I've received pushback there. :wink:

to Quote Cobalt, Yes I live less then 10 miles from the KSC Visitor complex For.... Reasons :):wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

Only person I can think of that's near there is @Tristonwilson12. I've been to Wallops a couple times but never during a launch. Just passing through on vacation.

I think our (read: my) plan was to just give the F1 stats closer to the F1-A. There really isn't much of an external difference and they would fill exactly the same role in terms gameplay niche. I'd also like to make it so the F1 can only throttle down to 70% but I've received pushback there. :wink:

Maybe habe the F1-A have a big stovepipe like the F1-B, but have the old fashioned F1 nozzle, hinting at it being an intermediate engine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...