Jump to content

[1.12.3] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.11.0 "вне" 22/Oct/2022)


CobaltWolf
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, CobaltWolf said:

-snip-

Absolutely magnificent job there CobaltWolf on that Gemini and Titan booster.

The ablative nozzle skirt on the LR-91 looked strange at first, but I've come to like it.

Edited by Spica
tried to fix mention
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Pappystein said:

@CobaltWolf   I love how the top of the first stage tank has the blow-holes in it actually have depth!   Awesome!   That was a big neg on the old model/texture the First stage blowholes were just black marks in the texture.  

Hmm, they don't *actually* have depth to them, they're not proper cutouts just a normal map. But part of me wants to cut them out of the model.

9 hours ago, Spica said:

Absolutely magnificent job there CobaltWolf on that Gemini and Titan booster.

The ablative nozzle skirt on the LR-91 looked strange at first, but I've come to like it.

Yeah, most of the Titan design is offputting once you actually see what it looks like up close, but I'm definitely warming up to it, both the engines and the tank design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/23/2019 at 9:15 PM, Pappystein said:

The engine has been in the game since Apollo Moon lander was implemented.  The Delta P is powered by the exact same TR-201 that powered the Apollo Decent stage.   Delta P (much like most of NASA's Delta program) reused parts from other rockets.  The RS-27 is a re-belled H-1 Engine (turbopumps etc that were made for H-1s were "upgraded" to RS-27 standard the only physical difference is in the engine nozzle itself... for the most part.)   The Tankage was a stretched Ablestar I believe and the engine for Delta P was TR-201 without any modifications.   The prime feature of TR-201 was the pintle injector which reduced the complexity of restart mechanisms and therefor reduced overall engine cost while increasing reliability.

Interestingly, my understanding is that the RS-27 basically reverted half of the simplifications/improvements of the H-1 in order to return it to the "S-3D" arrangement / mounting so they didn't have to modify the boattail/engine mount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jso said:

Cut them out

Agreed,  It is a visual thing and makes the Rocket more realistic with out being real

 

15 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

Interestingly, my understanding is that the RS-27 basically reverted half of the simplifications/improvements of the H-1 in order to return it to the "S-3D" arrangement / mounting so they didn't have to modify the boattail/engine mount. 

I think that should be "Simplifications/Improvements" in quotes because most of those "simplifications" were to allow the S-3D to be mounted on the Saturn Fixed/single axis gimbal base.   The Improvements had to go because it created an awkward thrust line that would be hard to compute a controlled flight profile against/ the twin LR-101s were not powerful enough to counteract.   Remember in Saturn each engine canceled it's opposite engine out.  In delta there is no cancellation as there is only a single engine.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/23/2019 at 6:15 PM, Pappystein said:

The RS-27 is a re-belled H-1 Engine (turbopumps etc that were made for H-1s were "upgraded" to RS-27 standard the only physical difference is in the engine nozzle itself... for the most part.)

I think it used the same 8:1 nozzle, just with the turbine exhaust aspirator removed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So... I decided to calculate the Scout's payload performance and came up with this graph... I tested it a bit in KSP and it is quite close to the delta-V used by the launch vehicle so the numbers match what you would get in KSP.

According to the maths &), the Scout can hypothetically launch a 1600 kg payload to LKO in stock and 500 kg in 2.5X... it is quite powerful really... In reality it can't launch all of it due to delta v losses in the trajectory, drag, steering ans whatnot.

eQNaVo8.png

In the future I intend to calculate the payload performance for most rockets in this mod.

 

 

 

Edited by Marcelo Silveira
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Marcelo Silveira said:

So... I decided to calculate the Scout's payload performance and came up with this graph... I tested it a bit in KSP and it is quite close to the delta-V used by the launch vehicle.

Makes sense, our Scout is grossly overscaled to fit into standard diameters :)

EDIT: Nvm, misread and interpreted as "the delta V is close to the real one"

Edited by CobaltWolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rock3tman_ said:

The issue with the Scout I find more in gameplay is getting things to fit within that small fairing, because I absolutely despise unrealistic fairing size. It's definitely a super fun launcher to fly though when I have a payload that can fit on it.

1) I agree about stupid fairings.  

2) it is a good thing that the Agol 2nd stage is in the DB now.   So your first and Second stages can be the larger 0.9375m diameter size.   I am routinely launching Agena payloads on the Agols in stock....   I am BARELY orbiting Agena payloads on Atlas in 2.5x-GPP (1 in 3 failures to orbit typically.)  But of course that is because I need 3200dv default scale to LGO, and that equates to  just under 5100 D/V for LGO in 2.5 rescale.  More likely 5500 due to my poor orbital efficiency :P

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Kerbal01 said:

I do believe this is the first time I have posted screenshots in this thread. Atlas IIAS with a lunar orbiter. https://imgur.com/gallery/jm6IA4p

Nice set of Photos.   I tend to not eject the Boosters until the LF meter is between the Q and the U in the word Liquid.   Not a real efficient way of doing it but it GENERALLY in STOCK game gets me into a nice orbit that way.   Did you compare your rocket/Payload vs the very nice Separation graphs that @Marcelo Silveira did for Atlas?

I have used his graphs 5 times now and each time I had the easiest orbit with Atlas from BDB.   My L-Q Guess method is quick and dirty but it isn't real accurate.   Marcelo's graph method takes a few more minutes to do but it is pretty damn accurate.    The only monkey wrench is it is for KSP stock scale in a Stock system.   Nearly useless for a 2.5x rescale (yes I know multiply DV by ~1.6 to get 2.5 scale DV) in the Galileo Planet Pack.  

 

And that brings up a Subject change.   If you REALLY want a challenge, Try flying BDB in a 2.5 Rescale with the GPP....    To get a single DOS station module from SSTU into orbit I am using a Saturn V with 2x AJ-260S SRMs   My target orbit for the stack is 800km with an initial orbit at 500km before navigating to the existing station core.

A Titan II is too small to place a Gemini Capsule into orbit of Granus (the starting planet)   Now that MIGHT have to do with the fact that I have the Titan II set to use IRW Aerozine-50/NTO for fuel but I am not 100% on that.   Stock GPP for LGO orbit is ~3200 d/v...  Or about 5600d/v for 2.5x rescale.  So for my Gemini type missions I am launching a Titan IIIc(-) with UA-1202s or 4x Agols and Air ignited LR87.

Oh and for those not in the know, if you are using some sort of Rescale you have to multiply the Stock scale Delta-V by the Squareroot of the Rescale factor (In my case square root of 2.5 is 1.58113 so I round it to 1.6 for easier math :) )

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Pappystein said:

Did you compare your rocket/Payload vs the very nice Separation graphs that @Marcelo Silveira did for Atlas?

I didn't calculated the delta-v for the Atlas IIAS, the solid rocket boosters would complicate everything too much.

17 minutes ago, Pappystein said:

The only monkey wrench is it is for KSP stock scale in a Stock system.   Nearly useless for a 2.5x rescale

Does GPP (or whatever rescale mod you use) change the amount of propellant in the rocket? If it doesn't change the rocket, only the delta-v requirements, than it makes no difference, just use a different contour line and you would be mostly fine :) 

17 hours ago, Pappystein said:

2) it is a good thing that the Agol 2nd stage is in the DB now.   So your first and Second stages can be the larger 0.9375m diameter size.   I am routinely launching Agena payloads on the Agols in stock..

Spoiler

Let's call it... Scout-B... and why not put an Agena-A on top of it??
9GSYOt6.png

 

Also, @Kerbal01, very nice looking Atlas IIAS :D 

Edited by Marcelo Silveira
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Marcelo Silveira said:
  Reveal hidden contents

Let's call it... Scout-B... and why not put an Agena-A on top of it??
9GSYOt6.png

 

Thanks for the clarification Marcelo.   Also I use almost exactly the same stack you just drew up (Scout B... I like) I use it to carry the Probes PLUS! version of the basic Scansat hardware into LGO.   It BARELY makes it to a 250km circular orbit but it does make it... I do have to use a pair of Castor-1s for a safety factor however.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Pappystein said:

 I tend to not eject the Boosters until the LF meter is between the Q and the U in the word Liquid.   Not a real efficient way of doing it but it GENERALLY in STOCK game gets me into a nice orbit that way.  

I'm too thick to understand maths and graphs, so go with the approach suggested in the BDB wiki:

Quote

General rule for staging Atlas 1.5 stage rockets: Jettison the booster stage at 2 1/2 to 3 Gs. This should occur with around 30 seconds of fuel remaining.

In 1.6.1, you can pop open the staging bar to see burn time remaining.  I use Smart Parts to automate it because pressing the space bar is really hard (not really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've decommissioned my large MOL station (after 300 days in orbit), did the Apollo style Mun and Minmus landings, and now it's time for Skylab stuff.

I guess some parts and mission planning is in the works.

The Hokulani-RAP Radial Attachment Point, what is it used for, and how do I fix it so it has two nodes so it is usable?

 

P.S. those Titan parts are nice looking.

 

What is used for the LDC Titan engines?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DriftNasty said:

The Hokulani-RAP Radial Attachment Point, what is it used for, and how do I fix it so it has two nodes so it is usable?

 

What is used for the LDC Titan engines?

it's like the stock radial attachment point, it's for adding additional nodes to the docking adapter :)

The LDC stuff is unfinished, it's going to depend on the Titan engines once they're remade. We tried to hold off on releasing them but I think they accidentally snuck back into one of the hotfixing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CobaltWolf said:

it's like the stock radial attachment point, it's for adding additional nodes to the docking adapter :)

The LDC stuff is unfinished, it's going to depend on the Titan engines once they're remade. We tried to hold off on releasing them but I think they accidentally snuck back into one of the hotfixing.

Does the tube side go into the part like on the stock radial attachment? Maybe that is where I was miffing it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DriftNasty said:

Does the tube side go into the part like on the stock radial attachment? Maybe that is where I was miffing it up.

Yup. The use I was intending it for was turning the MDA from a 4 way node to a 6 way node, but I'm sure people can think of other uses :)

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...