Jump to content

[1.12.5] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.12.0 "Песок" 13/Jan/2023)


CobaltWolf
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Starhelperdude said:

I remember saying ''I'm the first to consider gold apollo!'' a while ago and I'm now 100% sure that I'm wrong and that somebody once concieved it

It's the 60s, there was probably even a proposal for a fluorine powered Apollo CM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Adam-Kerman said:

so Skylab CSM's didn't have the S-Band HGA?

so there was nothing in it's place?

Apollo missions to LEO didn’t need the S-band because they were still low enough to use the scimitar antennas on the sides of the service module. The only ones I’m not sure about are ASTP and Apollo 9, since those missions involved communicating across multiple spacecraft and might have required the HGA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Beccab said:

It's the 60s, there was probably even a proposal for a fluorine powered Apollo CM

And here was the engine to power it (Bell Model 8031, built for the GE Apollo Entry though it seems that they eventually went to Hydrolox).

Capture.PNG

E0eQldR.png

Edited by Jcking
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jcking said:

And here was the engine to power it (Bell Model 8031, built for the GE Apollo Entry though it seems that they eventually went to Hydrolox).

Capture.PNG

There was an actual study for a fluorine powered Shuttle too in the 80s I think, for the USAF Sortie proposals (airplane launched mini shuttles, ala FAM Pathfinder but that actually make sense). Those studies also included a spaceplane launched from inside a C5 Galaxy, then deployed from the back like air troops and activated a SSME to go to orbit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Adam-Kerman said:

so Skylab CSM's didn't have the S-Band HGA?

Skylab CSMs didn't have the HGA, ASTP did for communicating through the ATS-6 satellite in GEO.

ASTP

1 hour ago, pTrevTrevs said:

The only ones I’m not sure about are ASTP and Apollo 9, since those missions involved communicating across multiple spacecraft and might have required the HGA.

Apollo 9 did carry a HGA.
The Apollo 9 Command/Service Module 'Gumdrop' as seen from the Lunar...  News Photo - Getty Images

Edited by TaintedLion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, derega16 said:

I almost forgot, it the past there was a mention of a special mount for M-1. I know it's low priority stuff, is that planned to be a part of Saturn revamp of later?

Yep I started work on the upper stage mount recently but prioritizing the CADS and probably some work on the AARDV control core next. But will be coming soon-ish I hope.

Image

Thats a 3.75m lower plate and will probably have options for smaller engines to mount there as well that dont overlap with the 5x and 7x options on the SII mount. You can mount some cool NFLV mounts here as well as various 3.75m upper stages from Nertea's mods or Restock. Plus other mods I guess but thats what i was thinking of at the time anyway.

Image

The second component used to attach M1 here will also get optional mounts to have RL10 "verniers" sort of like that S4B lander thing the name of which I always forget. Not based on anything, just looks cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Zorg said:

Yep I started work on the upper stage mount recently but prioritizing the CADS and probably some work on the AARDV control core next. But will be coming soon-ish I hope.

Image

Thats a 3.75m lower plate and will probably have options for smaller engines to mount there as well that dont overlap with the 5x and 7x options on the SII mount. You can mount some cool NFLV mounts here as well as various 3.75m upper stages from Nertea's mods or Restock. Plus other mods I guess but thats what i was thinking of at the time anyway.

Image

The second component used to attach M1 here will also get optional mounts to have RL10 "verniers" sort of like that S4B lander thing the name of which I always forget. Not based on anything, just looks cool.

For smaller engines, I can think of 1x or 2x mount for S-IIB and Nuclear stuff. Interstage that fit M-1 should also fit nuclear

Edited by derega16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Beccab said:

It's the 60s, there was probably even a proposal for a fluorine powered Apollo CM

Barely related, but I feel the need to remind people of the fluorine-lithium-hydrogen rocket that some of these crazy people built. Amazing efficiency for a chemical rocket, like 550 seconds and 450 if you remove the hydrogen... but it used gaseous hydrogen (I do not envy trying to keep high-temperature liquid lithium and low-temperature liquid hydrogen stable together, so that's probably why). Love to grab horribly corrosive stuff, combine it with stuff that explodes if it touches water, and then add hydrogen to the mix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GoldForest said:

Saturn A-1

Hz1SNWy.jpg

Saturn A-2 (She's very heavy, recommend under fueling the first stage a little.)

wfOB6jE.jpg

Saturn B-1

dvc93Nf.jpg

Saturn C-1

YaAj0sv.jpg

Saturn C-2

b02kdFs.jpg

Saturn C-3 (Note: This thing can't really fly. It has a .60 to .7 twr fully configured and fully fueled.)

NrzQ07w.jpg

I’m sorry but why is there a bare apollo csm attached to a centaur.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you channel your inner Wehrner a little bit too hard...

The REAL Juno V:

XCpuPcE.png

(That's Juno I\II Sergeant cluster, which is placed on top of Juno IV-B, which is placed on top of Juno V first stage. It doesn't make any sense to use Titan I when you have Juno IV.)

39 minutes ago, SpaceFace545 said:

I’m sorry but why is there a bare apollo csm attached to a centaur.

Early Starliner prototype.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SpaceFace545 said:

I’m sorry but why is there a bare apollo csm attached to a centaur.

I don't make the pictures, I just follow them. I actually messed up, B-1 should have overhang Apollo and not Gemini as well.

http://www.astronautix.com/graphics/s/satc12c5.gif

And it's just CM, not CSM. It's missing the S. :P

Edited by GoldForest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Tangle said:

Barely related, but I feel the need to remind people of the fluorine-lithium-hydrogen rocket that some of these crazy people built. Amazing efficiency for a chemical rocket, like 550 seconds and 450 if you remove the hydrogen... but it used gaseous hydrogen (I do not envy trying to keep high-temperature liquid lithium and low-temperature liquid hydrogen stable together, so that's probably why). Love to grab horribly corrosive stuff, combine it with stuff that explodes if it touches water, and then add hydrogen to the mix.

Despite the tripropellant's very high specific impulse, it has a rather poor mass fraction, so a pentapropellant configuration was investigated using hydrogen, fluorine, oxygen, lithium, and beryllium (with hydrogen, fluorine, and oxygen stored as liquids, and lithium and beryllium stored as solids not dissimilar to SRMs). despite performing all around weaker than tripropellant configuration it did have a small advantage in the long duration mission consisting of a 8000 fps burn after a 205 day coast. However, both were inferior to gelled hydrogen-lithium/fluorine, and bi-propellant hydrogen-fluorine in both direct injection and long duration missions.

Edited by Jcking
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...