[1.12.5] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.13.0 "Забытый" 13/Aug/2023)

[CobaltWolf]

22 minutes ago, boylesmason113 said:

I do I have it, I was just looking for one with a shroud. Thanks for helping!

I assume from the response you found the shroud option? (If not, place the engine like you would normally and use the right click menu in the VAB to switch to the 2.5m with Pipe shroud variant)

[NicolaSix]

On 4/23/2019 at 8:31 PM, Pappystein said:

I look forward to looking at your research later this/next week... First week back to work after injury... Paperwork like crazy    But I am back to work!  YAY!

Re the bad wobble:   several suggestions if you haven't already tried them:

• Hot stage the Castor... Many of the solids don't do well staging from a coast at low altitude (control issues.)  
• Given you are playing with the CFGs verify that Gimbal is turned down/or set to 0.    You have RCS on that Castor to continue your aerodynamic turn.
• Remember that if you are giving a Turn command WHILE staging the huge and sudden loss of dead-mass will cause the upper stages to over-control   <-- Mostly likely issue in my opinion.  

 

 

I eventually found the answer in TM-749-48 (pg 9) which is that there was a coast period (to 130,000ft altitude) between first stage ignition and second stage ignition where the first stage remained attached, I was too used to the liquid engine/Kerbal concept of constant thrust during ascent, so I'm rewriting my kOS launch/ascent program to follow the launch protocol defined in the handbook. So technically it was reason 3, sudden dead-mass loss, but also partially that stage 2,3,4 were never even vaguely designed with an aerodynamic profile.
Now if I can just work out the best way to make kOS initiate a high RPM roll then disengage control..  -- feel like carefully placed retros would be helpful here, given we don't have a part that is a 40lb spin table.

[Jso]

1 hour ago, NicolaSix said:

Now if I can just work out the best way to make kOS initiate a high RPM roll then disengage control..  -- feel like carefully placed retros would be helpful here, given we don't have a part that is a 40lb spin table.

That can make a spin table, but I think scout just uses rcs to spin the third stage before releasing the 4th stage.

 

Edited April 25, 2019 by Jso

[Zorg]

UA1206 flying well in game and looking even better 

(yes Titan III with Centaur II  )

Upgraded Titan IIIE here with 1206 instead of 1205.

Edited April 25, 2019 by Zorg

[Pappystein]

6 hours ago, Zorg said:

UA1206 flying well in game and looking even better 

 

NICE action shot!

[Pappystein]

9 hours ago, Jso said:

That can make a spin table, but I think scout just uses rcs to spin the third stage before releasing the 4th stage.

 

Everything I have read does NOT mention a spin table so this is likely the correct method of Spin stabilized deployment.     However many experiments launched on scout would also NOT be spin stabilized.

[NicolaSix]

On 4/25/2019 at 12:29 PM, Jso said:

<snip>
That can make a spin table, but I think scout just uses rcs to spin the third stage before releasing the 4th stage.

I'd probably end up MM'ing those into thinner parts if I did, docking parts are THICC

15 hours ago, Pappystein said:

Everything I have read does NOT mention a spin table so this is likely the correct method of Spin stabilized deployment.     However many experiments launched on scout would also NOT be spin stabilized.

Yeah, actually rereading through the documents I have, while there's mention of a "spin table assembly", it /seems/ like there was a set of two to four retros mounted into the Upper D assembly that would initiate a roll in the upper stages just prior to the separation event. I tracked down enough additional information[1] about them to get their thrust/burn-time/weight/dimensions etc, so I guess I'll MM myself some 25-50% scale Zoot kick motors from the Mercury and pretend they're the 1KS40, 0.6KS40 or 1KS75 kick motors.

While researching I came across the Athena RTV, another american all-solid rocket, though a sounding one, comprised of 4 x Recruit + 1 x Castor 4 + 1 x Antares 2 + 1 x 23-KS-11000/Alcor IA, it's probably something you could MM patch into existence, plus the bottom stage looks kinda cool, it's a castor with the 4 recruits as integral boosters.

 

Quote

However many experiments launched on scout would also NOT be spin stabilized.

As far as I've read, every scout launch would initiate a spin of the upper stage (Altair+Payload) prior to separation; the Wallops launch facility had a dedicated spin test building and all the testing for upper stage motors was fired during spin, I imagine while all payloads would be spun to have attitude control during orbital insertion, some may have included de-spin mechanisms to cancel out the roll. The Yo-Yo Despin mechanism/technique was invented in '62 so possibly used on some payloads for the Scout among other LVs. In KSP I'd just use the almost-always ridiculously overpowered probe roll control.

Which reminds me I want to take the torque wheel off the explorer I, when attached to an Altair it's got enough torque to start an attitude change, but not enough to stop in time, so the (not-great, tbf) KSP attitude system just starts yawing back and forth with the maximum angle range slowly increasing until you fire the rocket at 30° offset.. -.-

[1]:
- CR-259 - Evaluation of the 1KS75/MARC-36A1 spin motor
- Fig 51 - Pg 152 - CR-165-950
- Extract from 'Micropropulsion For Small Spacecraft'

Edited April 26, 2019 by NicolaSix

[CobaltWolf]

[Pappystein]

15 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

err wait!  Are those lines in the decoupler's inside supposed to represent the Det-cord that actually separates the stages?!    WOW!   NICE!

 

Insert any and all memes that beg, ask, demand for it all RIGHT NOW!

 

[CobaltWolf]

 

Edited April 29, 2019 by CobaltWolf

[TimothyC]

@Jso When @CobaltWolf gets around to it, this document has some data on the UA1208 solid rocket motor (used in the S4-120 configuration) on page 34 of the PDF.

Edited April 29, 2019 by TimothyC

[Guest]

Nice Transtage, but I'm really not fond of the grid. Also, will the engine be available in standalone form?

[Jso]

7 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

snip

Big improvement on the Transtage. The checker pattern is 90 degrees off. It should be on the sides the tanks are up against.

The diagonal stripes on the fairing base clash. It looks stock. They gotta go. It should blend, not say hey look at me!

I'm worried about what those bumps around the decoupler are going to look like in a stack. And maybe lose two thirds of the red triangles. I get the point but those are always unsightly. The det cord's a nice touch though.

7 hours ago, TimothyC said:

@Jso When @CobaltWolf gets around to it, this document has some data on the UA1208 solid rocket motor (used in the S4-120 configuration) on page 34 of the PDF.

Thanks. I'll see if I can figure it out.

[CobaltWolf]

2 hours ago, Dragon01 said:

Nice Transtage, but I'm really not fond of the grid.

There will be a texture switch. The outer skin is on a separate 256 texture sheet.

2 hours ago, Dragon01 said:

Also, will the engine be available in standalone form?

No, the Transtage is too complex to make a separate version.

 

1 hour ago, Jso said:

Big improvement on the Transtage. The checker pattern is 90 degrees off. It should be on the sides the tanks are up against.

Thanks, I know the RCS (which is separate, everyone, don't worry) and everything are correct relative to each other but when I did that part I was only looking at exterior photos.

1 hour ago, Jso said:

The diagonal stripes on the fairing base clash. It looks stock. They gotta go. It should blend, not say hey look at me!

Not getting rid of the stripes on the fairing base. It's some of the only consistent design language in the game

1 hour ago, Jso said:

I'm worried about what those bumps around the decoupler are going to look like in a stack. And maybe lose two thirds of the red triangles. I get the point but those are always unsightly. The det cord's a nice touch though.

The bumps will be fine I think. I am probably going to get rid of the triangles they're fugly.

 

8 hours ago, TimothyC said:

@Jso When @CobaltWolf gets around to it, this document has some data on the UA1208 solid rocket motor (used in the S4-120 configuration) on page 34 of the PDF.

[Pappystein]

21 hours ago, TimothyC said:

@Jso When @CobaltWolf gets around to it, this document has some data on the UA1208 solid rocket motor (used in the S4-120 configuration) on page 34 of the PDF.

Probably the best SINGLE PDF NASA has sever released on large bore SRMs.   I think there are atleast 15 different types/configurations of SRMs in that document.   A treasure trove to those of us who like to make or own cfgs for parts.

22 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

err... um..... Did someone find my darn Jaw in Australia?    It just fell through the planet!

What an interesting Preview...  Even including Jso's comment about the texture being 90 degrees off.... That is probably the BEST 1st generation Transtage I have seen in any game or Simulation.     

 

The only nitpicks  I have is the engine combustion chamber and the upper bell area.  Upper bell is supposed to be a dark Cobalt blue due to the Molybdenum alloy as well as the Molybdenum-Silica coating.   And since this is a "Heavy" AJ10, the combustion chamber above the bell should be a bit darker as it is the same material as the upper bell a Moly-Nickel alloy of steel... Not rocket Aluminum like the rest of the structure down there.

Engineering history tidbit:

Spoiler

For what it is worth the "heavy" AJ10 is only like 6kg heavier than the "Light" Delta/Able AJ10...   Ablestar flew with both heavy and light AJ10s (err Ablestar flew with heavy and fat Delta using the same basic tank, flew with light AJ10s).  The big difference isn't in the weight as much as the cost.  Molybdenum is one of the hardest to find elements naturally occurring in the world (at least it was in the 1960s!)   Today, strong/heavy (vs light) mountain bikes are made with a Cr-Mo (commonly pronounced like crow-moe) Steel frames are cheaply and readily available.   Being a person who bends, warps and breaks Aluminum Mountain bikes on the trails easily and and with great repeatability I only use Cr-Mo Steel for my bikes

So when Transtage was developed the materials to make the AJ10 were expensive so Aerojet solved it by coming up with a lighter duty Aluminum combustion chamber.  It saved about 10kg of the particular Moly alloy used per engine.   This reduced costs....  But conversely an Aluminum engine could not be used as often/long.  

IIRC the Space Shuttle OMS and probably the Apollo SPS both use heavy Moly-alloy chambers on their AJ10s as well.

 

13 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

The bumps will be fine I think. I am probably going to get rid of the triangles they're fugly.

Personally-  Make the triangles just a red outline instead of solid.   If you get close you can still clearly see what side is up but from the typical zoomed out view they won't be very visible (unless THAT is what you are looking for.)

 

[Jall]

Alright, I’m kinda curious. What was the point of a checkerboard scheme on the 1st gen transtage? I can’t think of any purpose it would serve.

[Marcelo Silveira]

11 hours ago, Jall said:

Alright, I’m kinda curious. What was the point of a checkerboard scheme on the 1st gen transtage? I can’t think of any purpose it would serve.

The checkered pattern was used for ground based optical tracking. If the rocket was all white it would be very difficult to track its rotation using a camera on the ground. That's why many of the early rockets (1960s) have stripes while the more modern rockets do not. The guidance systems inside the modern rockets are supposedly  accurate enough so you can rely on telemetry instead of optical tracking.

[Friznit]

And I thought it was just NASA experimenting with transparent textures.

[StarStreak2109]

1 hour ago, Marcelo Silveira said:

The checkered pattern was used for ground based optical tracking. If the rocket was all white it would be very difficult to track its rotation using a camera on the ground. That's why many of the early rockets (1960s) have stripes while the more modern rockets do not. The guidance systems inside the modern rockets are supposedly  accurate enough so you can rely on telemetry instead of optical tracking.

Thanks, I just have learned something again!

[Jall]

4 hours ago, Marcelo Silveira said:

The checkered pattern was used for ground based optical tracking. If the rocket was all white it would be very difficult to track its rotation using a camera on the ground. That's why many of the early rockets (1960s) have stripes while the more modern rockets do not. The guidance systems inside the modern rockets are supposedly  accurate enough so you can rely on telemetry instead of optical tracking.

Cool! I had a feeling it was something like that, but the only tracking pattern I knew of was the stripes.

[Pappystein]

4 hours ago, Marcelo Silveira said:

The checkered pattern was used for ground based optical tracking.

To add and amplify on this.  beyond the basic tracking reasons, the Checkerboard pattern actually calls out where the fuel tanks are prior to 2nd stage / Tran-stage separation, when it becomes easy-ish to see.  

 

 

[komodo]

21 hours ago, Pappystein said:

Cr-Mo (commonly pronounced like crow-moe)

Huh. I've always heard it as Chromolly in the states. TIL. 

[Beale]

On 4/29/2019 at 4:04 AM, CobaltWolf said:

 

I have come back to look at this 6 times or so, so nice.

[Pointblank66]

I noticed an issue with BDB when I have Tweakscale installed and the RF configs for BDB.
For some reason there are a handful of parts this weird slider is unusable and a slider which does not function well.

The installed modlist is in the spoiler tag

https://imgur.com/u9bXgbB

So to explain the problem a bit more, the first scale slider where the does not scale like it should with Tweakscale. Instead it only switches between 2 and 4, and without any sort of suffix so I can't see what the actual size is. Also if it is set to 4, when ever I press in the bad it automatically scales back to 2. again without any suffix so no way of knowing what the scale is.
The second scale slider is basically unusable. The arrows buttons do not work and the clicking in the slider does also do nothing at all.

Spoiler

B9 Part switch
Bluedog Design Bureau
BDB Real Fuel configs
Community Resource Pack
DM Module Science Animate Generic
Module Manager
Near Future IVA Props
Real Fuels
Real Fuels Stockalike RF Config
Smoke Screen
Solver Engine Plugin
TweakScale

Not sure if a Output log or a KSPlog is needed. So please say so if you need those too.

[Jso]

23 minutes ago, Pointblank66 said:

I noticed an issue with BDB when I have Tweakscale installed and the RF configs for BDB.

That's weird. I haven't used RF in so long I'm not sure how it normally behaves with TweakScale. Can we see a GameData/ModuleManager.ConfigCache. I'm curious why there's two scales on the menu. Might as well upload a ksp.log too.