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

13 minutes ago, TaintedLion said:

Are we gonna be getting the 5-man Apollo soon?

Unless Cobalt wants to spice it up somehow, it should just be a new config file. The five man IVA already exists, and the model and textures are the same as the normal one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/26/2021 at 5:00 PM, TaintedLion said:

Also I asked earlier but it got buried, I want to switch out the IVAs for Mercury and Apollo with the ones from FASA, how would I go about doing that?

I was able to do this with Mercury and Gemini a few months ago, but recently it stopped working for me and I reverted to the standard IVAs. It reminds me though, it would be nice to have a version of BDB that has the FASA IVAs as standard. Don’t get me wrong, I’m grateful we even have IVAs, but for parts like Gemini and the LEM the ones BDB offers just can’t hold a candle to what’s already been made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jcking said:

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.

I love how a lot of the bad spy dramas (and comedies) of the era were all about the 'secret rocket fuel formula' whereas these days it's just Liquid methane/hydrogen and liquid oxygen. I'm over simplifying,  but a lot of the high end crazy chemistry seems to have  left the industry on the grounds of 'yeah it works, but there's too high a chance of the pad rats getting their faces eaten off'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/28/2021 at 4:18 PM, 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

E0eQldR.png

Hum,  Looks like a derivative/predecessor to the XLR81 from the Agena.   Is that report available on the net anywhere?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Pappystein said:

Hum,  Looks like a derivative/predecessor to the XLR81 from the Agena.   Is that report available on the net anywhere?

 

It is available on the internet as part of the GE Apollo submission (volume IV, book 3) https://web.archive.org/web/20100524230228/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730064289_1973064289.pdf The rest of what's available on the internet from that report is below.

https://web.archive.org/web/20100520070427/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19780072063_1978072063.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100516120917/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730065795_1973065795.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100523193832/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19740073704_1974073704.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100525062904/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730065788_1973065788.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100514224911/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730064288_1973064288.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100525025513/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730064275_1973064275.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100525035554/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730064274_1973064274.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100525033405/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730064286_1973064286.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100524032720/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19740073596_1974073596.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100527081941/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730064728_1973064728.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100514011213/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730065791_1973065791.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100519143022/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19740073801_1974073801.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100524163533/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730064290_1973064290.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Jcking said:

It is available on the internet as part of the GE Apollo submission (volume IV, book 3) https://web.archive.org/web/20100524230228/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730064289_1973064289.pdf The rest of what's available on the internet from that report is below.

https://web.archive.org/web/20100520070427/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19780072063_1978072063.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100516120917/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730065795_1973065795.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100523193832/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19740073704_1974073704.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100525062904/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730065788_1973065788.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100514224911/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730064288_1973064288.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100525025513/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730064275_1973064275.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100525035554/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730064274_1973064274.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100525033405/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730064286_1973064286.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100524032720/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19740073596_1974073596.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100527081941/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730064728_1973064728.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100514011213/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730065791_1973065791.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100519143022/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19740073801_1974073801.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20100524163533/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19730064290_1973064290.pdf

Thank you kindly!

Getting sick of reports that have nothing to do with weapons being classified as weapons. 

Then again, I used to mod/support a Video Game that was classified as "Munitions" as well so SHRUG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apollo 4: All-Up

kRcULxV.png

Really been anticipating the chance to fly the new Saturn as part of my current KSRSS campaign, and I'm happy to say I didn't experience any problems except with the Mobile Launcher, which isn't related to the mod. Not much to say other than that, because this mission was just a typical Apollo 4 flight profile.

Quote

dB5oGMV.png

I love the F-1's spool-up noises, but they aren't exactly new, are they? Only thing that could make this screenshot better would be for KSP to have a realistic shader/shadow system.

SVtizcu.png

Regardless, it gets much better once I'm high enough for the sunlight to be be refracted into a dim orange.

SseAehW.png

rIi4kXD.png

I bet with the KAL controller from BG (or just KOS) I could set up a proper inboard-out system without needing to do the cutoff manually, but at least this way I have something to do during ascent. Since my trouble flying Thor/Delta I've let MechJeb handle almost all my ascents.

VnphNcw.png

lyWEitU.png

Next time I'll try to get a screenshot to mimic the iconic skirt separation film from Apollo 6.

63mqCkW.png

FySQP25.png

Also the new command module texture variants are pretty great; Can't wait for the new SM textures to hit the GitHub so I can do a proper all-white Apollo 6.

R1mP54z.png

lZmCkyM.png

p6BLzTK.png

Yqcixnw.png

Apollo 4's S-IVB launches it out approximately half the distance to the Moon's orbit, where the spacecraft performs a series of SPS firings and other maneuvers.

hNiq6vy.png

The mission lasts about two days, as opposed to the eight hours it took in real life. This is because I wanted to test the spacecraft's fuel cells to ensure they could support a crewed flight of a week or more.

FnnH9ke.png

iAv1kbj.png

One of Apollo 4's primary goals was also to test the Apollo heatshield at a near-lunar reentry speed, something the Saturn 1B flights the previous year were unable to do. That's one of the reasons the Saturn V put the spacecraft on an elliptical orbit instead of a typical LEO.

qWi1t6g.png

For some reason the parachute cover didn't break off like it was supposed to, but that didn't hinder the chutes in any way. My best guess as to why this happened would be that I used the Block I nosecone, or maybe I had part clipping turned on when I assembled the vehicle and accidentally attached it to the wrong node. Either way, will investigate and fix on Apollo 6.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pappystein said:

Thank you kindly!

Getting sick of reports that have nothing to do with weapons being classified as weapons. 

Then again, I used to mod/support a Video Game that was classified as "Munitions" as well so SHRUG

Headtilt

Hmm what else was being developed in the 50's - 60's? Was it perhaps Inter Continental Ballistic Missiles? which used a LOT of the same technology as the space program.  (see also my comment on secret rocket fuel mixes). Any rocket technology was classified because improvements in thust or isp meant bigger payloads or longer ranges. Guidance is guidance, whether it's landers on the moon or warheads on Washington.  Manned tech? Propaganda material. Everything was important, so everything was classified. There was a war on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

For All Mankind vibes.

the soyuz I used here has a small interceptor probe (basically a space missile at the front) but I found it more effective (and more risky) to just ram stuff like solar panels with soyuz itself

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Sudragon said:

Headtilt

Hmm what else was being developed in the 50's - 60's? Was it perhaps Inter Continental Ballistic Missiles? which used a LOT of the same technology as the space program.  (see also my comment on secret rocket fuel mixes). Any rocket technology was classified because improvements in thust or isp meant bigger payloads or longer ranges. Guidance is guidance, whether it's landers on the moon or warheads on Washington.  Manned tech? Propaganda material. Everything was important, so everything was classified. There was a war on.

except none of it is classified.    It WAS classified.  Then it wasn't.  20+ years after declassification, it was considered a Munition.    By definition a Munition is a weapon of war.    So the History of the Saturn Space program is automatically a weapon of War.

If Kerbal Space Program had been made in the US (by a US company) *IT* would have likely fallen under the "It's a Munition" category.    Seem right to you?   That is how pervasive this is.   "This game deals with rockets... Rockets are Ballistic missiles... this game is a weapon of war"

I don't want to get into this further here as it isn't the right venue.   Instead I will just say, it is very hard to find data on the Saturn C-2, C-3 as well as the earlier Saturn A and B series because of this.   While I get the A and B series (they were after all Titan and Atlas missiles on top of good old ABMA Cluster...   The C series was not, and was, by design, NOT part of the Ballistic missile system (except for using the tooling to make the tanks for Cluster.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good timing getting the CADS in game, Zorg. We have more stuff to use with it!

 

Stuff from the stream today:

Length switches for the S-IVB!

CaBH5BG.png

 

 

SOFI switch for the S-IVB:

mqXAtbp.pngnzWzQNe.pngJ11GJwH.png

 

 

Apollo Block V from Eyes Turned Skywards - solar panels, HGA, and a mesh switch for the SM engine mount:

cGnjONM.png
XqAGOd9.png
tEg6VOM.png
7IWmvKl.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

Apollo Block V from Eyes Turned Skywards - solar panels, HGA, and a mesh switch for the SM engine mount:


XqAGOd9.png

 

Showing off Apollo Block V but attaching a Block IV module to the top of it.  :P That is the definition of KSP imo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

Showing off Apollo Block V but attaching a Block IV module to the top of it.  :P That is the definition of KSP imo. 

The Block V did fly with a mission module for Freedom expeditions, unless I'm missing something and it had a noticeably different MM?

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...