Jump to content

[1.12.X] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.9.0 "пробе" 13/Dec/2021)


CobaltWolf
 Share

Recommended Posts

In other news, a look at some pre-production for the next release after the main Saturn/Apollo update...

This is actually a full Twitter thread, so check it out to see some of the sources and info I used to get this far!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

In other news, a look at some pre-production for the next release after the main Saturn/Apollo update...

This is actually a full Twitter thread, so check it out to see some of the sources and info I used to get this far!

 

YOOOOOOOOO I'm so excited for this! I hope that means we get some Apollo Applications Program stuff hehe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, JustDark said:

YOOOOOOOOO I'm so excited for this! I hope that means we get some Apollo Applications Program stuff hehe

Oh, for sure. That's what this whole project was always supposed to lead to, wasn't it? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What decouplers are we supposed to mount the Atlas V SRBs onto? Using a small stock radial decoupler has the pin outside of the hole.

HeBQ6LN.png

Side note, it'd be cool if the bottom Atlas V tank had part switches for each SRB configuration where you can attach a decoupler and the SRB onto nodes like with the Titan and Castor SRBs and their decouplers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm having difficulties with some of the pre-built craft. In particular, the Saturn I (not the Ib) says that there is a missing "Bluedog.Centaur.RL10". Probably because there isn't such a part in the parts folder. Instead, there is the "Bluedog_CentaurD_RL10". Is this the part I should replace in the craft file?

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bigyihsuan said:

What decouplers are we supposed to mount the Atlas V SRBs onto? Using a small stock radial decoupler has the pin outside of the hole.

HeBQ6LN.png

Side note, it'd be cool if the bottom Atlas V tank had part switches for each SRB configuration where you can attach a decoupler and the SRB onto nodes like with the Titan and Castor SRBs and their decouplers.

Part clipping

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Aardvark said:

I'm having difficulties with some of the pre-built craft. In particular, the Saturn I (not the Ib) says that there is a missing "Bluedog.Centaur.RL10". Probably because there isn't such a part in the parts folder. Instead, there is the "Bluedog_CentaurD_RL10". Is this the part I should replace in the craft file?

Thanks.

I think the craft file may be outdated, but I imagine you could replace "Bluedog.Centaur.RL10" with "Bluedog_CentaurD_RL10" without issue because they're the same part.

3 hours ago, bigyihsuan said:

Side note, it'd be cool if the bottom Atlas V tank had part switches for each SRB configuration where you can attach a decoupler and the SRB onto nodes like with the Titan and Castor SRBs and their decouplers.

I second this. :prograde:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, bigyihsuan said:

What decouplers are we supposed to mount the Atlas V SRBs onto? Using a small stock radial decoupler has the pin outside of the hole.

HeBQ6LN.png

There's a tiny decoupler (BD-WBR Mini Radial Decoupler) that's supposed to go with this and most of the other radially attached SRBs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Beccab said:

Well, that's justified. MOCOM is awful

MOCOM was deemed superior to the other two concepts, as MOLEM didn't meed the stipulated free volume of 175 cubic feet, having only 150 cubic feet (MOCOM had 219 cubic feet of free volume), and was criticized for cramped living conditions, stand up driving, and a minimally sized airlock with questionable emergency operation capability, and MOCAN exceeded the the mass limit of 3860 by 452 kg (compared to MOCOM with was 3743 kg). However, all three concepts were deemed to have no measurable advantages over a specifically designed system, so MOLAB is what they moved forward with (plus MOLEM and MOCOM didn't provide the weight margin that MOLAB had with MOLEM and MOCOM coming in at 3527 and 3743 kg compared to the 3221 kg of the MOLAB, which also provided more free volume at 271 cubic feet).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jcking said:

There's a tiny decoupler (BD-WBR Mini Radial Decoupler) that's supposed to go with this and most of the other radially attached SRBs.

I see, I'll try it out when I get into the game again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/5/2022 at 12:34 PM, Starhelperdude said:

IIRC there is a node inside the DM that you attach on the petal adapter node, the outer things of the landing legs should log into the petal adapter

On 1/5/2022 at 12:35 PM, Jcking said:

Put the descent stage on the SLA base, attach the descent engine to the descent stage, add legs to all sides, put the decoupler on top of the descent stage, then add the ascent engine, ascent stage, and the drogue docking port on top.

I managed to do it, but it was pretty jank.

  1. Place the descent engine onto the inside node in the adapter.
  2. Place the descent assembly on top of the descent engine.
  3. Using the bottom, outside node of the adapter, place the ascent engine upside down.
  4. Place the ascent module upside down on the ascent engine. This is to ensure the ascent module will be offset correctly when you attach the ascent module to the descent module
  5. Place the docking port on the ascent module.
  6. Take the ascent module, flip, and attach to the top node of the descent stage.
  7. Done.

SDQTz1A.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, bigyihsuan said:

I managed to do it, but it was pretty jank.

  1. Place the descent engine onto the inside node in the adapter.
  2. Place the descent assembly on top of the descent engine.
  3. Using the bottom, outside node of the adapter, place the ascent engine upside down.
  4. Place the ascent module upside down on the ascent engine. This is to ensure the ascent module will be offset correctly when you attach the ascent module to the descent module
  5. Place the docking port on the ascent module.
  6. Take the ascent module, flip, and attach to the top node of the descent stage.
  7. Done.

SDQTz1A.png

Ermm, those are the old Saturn and LM parts...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Entr8899 said:

Ermm, those are the old Saturn and LM parts...

Its probably worth remembering the majority of BDB users (even if they dont all post in the forum thread) are using the release and not the development branches off of github.

54 minutes ago, bigyihsuan said:

I managed to do it, but it was pretty jank.

  1. Place the descent engine onto the inside node in the adapter.
  2. Place the descent assembly on top of the descent engine.
  3. Using the bottom, outside node of the adapter, place the ascent engine upside down.
  4. Place the ascent module upside down on the ascent engine. This is to ensure the ascent module will be offset correctly when you attach the ascent module to the descent module
  5. Place the docking port on the ascent module.
  6. Take the ascent module, flip, and attach to the top node of the descent stage.
  7. Done.

 

with the Apollo parts in the current release I used to build the CSM first, then attach the SLA, then either build the LM from the descent engine up or bring it in as a sub assembly (again needing to reroot it to the engine so it can be attached). 

With the upcoming update we have a better solution were the descent stage itself become the attachment point for starting to build the the LM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shuttles Will Never Go Out of Style - The X-38 Crew Return Vehicle + Delta IV Medium ++

OkWvik1.jpg

I'm confident that the X-38 could have flown on the existing Delta IV M+ 5-4, but with a service module to assist in rendezvous, a second RL-10-B2 and the associated mounting, then I believe a third or fourth pair of GEM 60s would be necessary.  For KSP, since the X-38 is a clipped mess of parts, it weighs a ton! The Delta IV core is under fueled and needed a third pair of GEM 60s to get off the ground. The GEM 60's thrust is lowered to increase burn time so that the core could burn more propellent and have a higher TWR at booster separation. Never would have thought the RS-68 would be under powered :P.

09ymnoM.jpg9ScjXEm.jpgnj8bQSp.jpgtL2fRWc.jpgb0mLuVu.jpg

I got this idea from doing research on the X-38 where it was mentioned the possibility of being flown on Delta or Ariane 5 here. I really like how it turned out! If you want more images to look at from the flight, I've got an Imgur Album if you'd like :).

Edited by Kuiper_Belt
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...