Jump to content

[1.8.1-1.11.2] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.7.2 "Огромный" 22/Mar/2021)


Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, AstroPawian said:

Pls update to 1.11

They are working on it, along with content updates, please be patient. BDB is naturally a bit slow to update just because of how big it is

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, OrdinaryKerman said:

They are working on it, along with content updates, please be patient. BDB is naturally a bit slow to update just because of how big it is

yeah,  also, cobaltwolf is making the apollo/saturn revamp, so it probably take a bit longer and it wouldn't be (I think) just a update to make it work on the newest version (though I haven't encountered any problems in 1.11.1)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Starhelperdude said:

though I haven't encountered any problems in 1.11.1)

Me neither, not a single one yet and i use BDB for let´s say 80% of my Crafts. not a single bug in about 200 launches in multiple 1.11.1 instances until now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Starhelperdude said:

yeah,  also, cobaltwolf is making the apollo/saturn revamp, so it probably take a bit longer and it wouldn't be (I think) just a update to make it work on the newest version (though I haven't encountered any problems in 1.11.1)

There are some known issues with minimum part mass in KSP 1.11. In any case there will be a smaller update well before Saturn though, Soon (tm) :P 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, mxi_steel said:

hi i was flying and it seems waterfall support was added for the rl10 =am i correct?

there is no waterfall compatibility in the current release. Its being worked on for the next release though.

Its in a special github experimental branch and there will be no support provided for that at the moment as the configs are still early drafts.

Edited by Zorg
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Zorg said:

I love the smell of Aerozine 50 in the morning 

 

Looks excellent.  IMO it should have a more orange-red hue

Maybe @Clamp-o-Troncan use it for SH?

Edited by Spaceman.Spiff
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not specifically, if I see it I’ll configure the engine to be hypergolic. Probably manually as it is now, there is too much that could go wrong auto-configuring engines and it’s not too bad to do myself.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Spaceman.Spiff said:

Looks excellent.  IMO it should have a more orange-red hue

Maybe @Clamp-o-Troncan use it for SH?

Its kinda hard to pin down the exact colour of hypergolic plumes tbh. It often changes a lot based on the lighting as well. I am stylzing things a bit, and am going a bit redder/orange for the UDMH/NTO plume (not for BDB but for tantares and general waterfall use). from what I understand the red tint mostly comes from unburnt NTO actually. but yeah I change my mind every day on what I think looks right and eventually need to stop tweaking :P

41Yi-3VcMUL._AC_.jpg

gem_13.jpg

gem_2.jpg

titan-ii-glv.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Zorg said:

I am stylzing things a bit, and am going a bit redder/orange for the UDMH/NTO plume (not for BDB but for tantares and general waterfall use). from what I understand the red tint mostly comes from unburnt NTO actually

For visual (and stockalike) flair I would go for brighter, more colorful hues :happy:

If someone wants RO waterfall plumes, they can have their bland colors :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Zorg said:

there is no waterfall compatibility in the current release. Its being worked on for the next release though.

Its in a special github experimental branch and there will be no support provided for that at the moment as the configs are still early drafts.

i just hadnt flown the rl10 in the atmosphere 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Spaceman.Spiff said:

For visual (and stockalike) flair I would go for brighter, more colorful hues :happy:

If someone wants RO waterfall plumes, they can have their bland colors :P

we're definitely not going for 100% realism. But I like my Titan plumes very transparent.

 

Theres a fair amount of colour in other plumes as previewed in the link though and nothing is final yet. I am tweaking the colours a bit still but deciding the right balance is a little tricky. My personal tastes skew more towards realism in sea level plumes certainly. (realistic plumes in vacuum often means no plume except for kero :P )

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/10/2021 at 10:54 AM, CobaltWolf said:

Probably want to use a Thor or Jupiter first stage then.

Probably not, the current update is the aether and hasn't told me whether all its bugs are fixed or not :P

 

Speaking of not knowing what's going on with the current release, I realized I haven't posted the current state of the Apollo CSM:

KmFlvIu.png

 

This weekend I think I'd like to start on the LM? Since I want to get everything basically modeled so that I can verify everything fits together, before I actually start texturing. Last night, Apollo the Gecko was helping me do some research on it. As I pondered, my assistant gave me some inspiration: Henceforth, the LM shall be known in BDB as the Munar Landing and Excursion Module, or MLEM.

sD9vrsB.jpgXjn9XOT.jpg

LZTYCrP.jpgq7OR0wa.jpg

 

 

Question: With the B9PartSwitch now being a heavily-used tool in this mod, will there be a variant of the Service Module without the SIM bay and its handholds?

Also, I’ve been retroactively watching the recorded dev streams and I would be remiss if I didn’t mention how the link someone shared to their concept for an Orbiter-derived Space Station Enterprise made me both sickened and intrigued. Props to whoever’s the first to make that abomination using SOCK and ReDirect parts...

Link to post
Share on other sites

For anyone who didnt see the stream and is wondering what this  is about, its from very cool alternate history timeline being written by TimothyC and Eofpi (the latter being a co-author of Eyes Turned Skyward based on which BDB has several parts like Saturn Multibody). Its really interesting,  definitely wild, and worth checking out :)

https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/boldly-going-a-history-of-an-american-space-station.502152/

Edited by Zorg
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Zorg said:

Its kinda hard to pin down the exact colour of hypergolic plumes tbh. It often changes a lot based on the lighting as well. I am stylzing things a bit, and am going a bit redder/orange for the UDMH/NTO plume (not for BDB but for tantares and general waterfall use). from what I understand the red tint mostly comes from unburnt NTO actually. but yeah I change my mind every day on what I think looks right and eventually need to stop tweaking :P

 

titan-ii-glv.jpg

 

Zorg, you are exactly right.   The red you see in many pictures is NTO that is burning outside of the Hypergolic reaction with UDMH, Hydrazine or 50/50 (aka AZ-50 or Aerozine 50.)   IE the NTO is acting as an oxidizer to other "contaminants" and not exclusively reacting with the fuel (UDMH/50-50 etc.)     *and yes Jso, I did just finish my hard copy of IGNITION!*

Most books I have describe the proper burn as a clear with blueish white hues before turbulence interferes, then some red hues emerge.   You can see that pretty clearly in the one photo I left in the original quote from Zorg.  Note that the spray from the pad angled up and toward the rocket is water... and it is significantly DARKER than the actual exhaust from the LR87s!   Water is clear :D

RE the orange fireball.  That picture was developed incorrectly and or had film decay.  The entire rocket is orange from the side Opposite of the big "fireball"   The bare metal parts have a ornage-red glow and the white paint is almost pink in color.   Those colors can be safely ignored :D

And if you want to get into a bunch of science on how to set up cameras and why it is important to do so:

https://www.mysterybox.us/blog/2017/9/7/display-calibration-color-management

https://imagingscience.com/

I deal with reproduction of colors on a daily basis in my career.   I want to be clear the above photo is the best in the original quote for the almost clear looking exhaust of the 50-50/NTO burn as described in various sources including IGNITION listed above, but it is over exposed because when the camera was adjusted the RED of the service tower was a primary color (notice how the top of the Rocket is noticeably brighter than the bottom, yet the entire rocket is bathed in direct sunlight! )   

13 hours ago, JoeSheridan said:

Me neither, not a single one yet and i use BDB for let´s say 80% of my Crafts. not a single bug in about 200 launches in multiple 1.11.1 instances until now.

1.11.1 still has the mass bug, but it is REDUCED from what it was...   I wrote a post on it like 3 or 4 pages back.    Any really light part can break a craft because it's mass could be significantly higher than it was prior to 1.11.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Pappystein said:

1.11.1 still has the mass bug, but it is REDUCED from what it was...   I wrote a post on it like 3 or 4 pages back.    Any really light part can break a craft because it's mass could be significantly higher than it was prior to 1.11.

Should be fixed on the github master as of yesterday.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Zorg said:

Should be fixed on the github master as of yesterday.

does the patch break .craft files?

i can never tell whats applied to them and what isn't

Edited by zakkpaz
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, zakkpaz said:

does the patch break .craft files?

i can never tell whats applied to them and what

I dont know, not tested tbh.I think they would be ok.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/11/2021 at 5:30 PM, Rock3tman_ said:

enterpriselaunch.png

screenshot21.png

You called?

You monster, that orbiter would have made a science museum very, very happy one day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So yet further followup on the Titan CT3 and Titan IV propuslive question.   Is there an LR87-AJ-11A and LR91-AJ-11A and do they differ in performance from the AJ-11s?

Now I hate to cite documents because I always invariably and continuously screw the cites up.    I have several documents used as well as some Web Pages:

Spoiler

Webpages:   en.wikipedia.com (the first place I saw reference to the AJ-11A engines!),  and Ed Kyle's SLV Library on SpacelaunchReport.com

PDF documents from USAF:   Titan IIIM 1st stage Propulsion Development, Titan 23D and Titan 34D users Guide

PDF Documents AIAA:  AIAA-86-1631

PDF Documents NASA: Titan IIIE and Centaur Summary

PDF Documents Lockheed Martin:  THIS IS COMMERCIAL TITAN INC (Martin Marietta 1991)

PDF Documents from Aerojet:  <None>  Every document I have just duplicated the data from the two USAF documents.

Ok now that the CRAP is out of the way....    I want to first say that I do not have every source I could.  There is a, I believe NASA document that covers the engine changes to the Titan IV (specifically the IV.)   Unfortunatly I didn't copy it from my old computer (and the hard drives were wiped.)  

LR87

Titan IIIM PDF credits 520000 lbf, or ~2313kn.   Wikipedia (for production AJ-11s) quotes 2413kn and that is congruent with the Titan 23D and 34D User guide data (2353kn for ground ignited version and 2413 for Air ignited version.)   

Now wait.  I said 2353 for ground ignited version......   Simply put the AJ-11 was designed first and formost to get MOL into space.   It needed to be more efficent in a Vacuum.  Well after the AJ-11 was ordered into production,   Aerojet, realizing they couldn't maintain two distinct LR87 production lines for long and ecconomically, proposed a short skirt version of the AJ-11 that returned the total expansion ratio of the engine back to the 8:1 ratio as seen on every LR87 since the AJ-3.   That is why we have two thrust ratings.   2353kn is vacuum performance for 8:1 bell, and 2413kn is Vacuum Performance for 15:1 bell.  

So AIAA-86-1631 and the UK CT3 document above cite the LR87-AJ-11A as having a thrust of 2429kn (both the Titan IV and CT3 are Air Lit so...)   Also there was a 40kg mass reduction by removing old "man rating" test equipment and replacing it with more modern test equipment that largely replicated the previous system.   As stated previously a de Laval nozzle was added to the turbopumps (I believe this is where the thrust increase comes from, as initially the engine was quoted as same thrust with the slight weight loss vs the LR87-AJ-11.

LR91

   From the LR91-AJ-5, -7 and -9 are all argumentatively the same...  The -9 uses the brown vs "clear" bell but is otherwise identical to the -5 or -7 in performance.    of the 3 the -7 is the heaviest at 76lbs heavier due to NASA required Test Equipment.   The LR91-AJ-11 is where the first "big" changes occur since the AJ-5.   The ISP is increased significantly by way of a Dr Rao optimized bell design.   The "Chonky" -5/-7 and -9s were replaced by a slightly slimmer bell, that like the AJ-9 before it is brown/red in color vs "clear" translucent of the -5 and 7.   To the un-aided eye, the changes are not preceptable unless the two engines are side by side.    The ISP of the LR91-AJ-5/7/9 was 309.2 while the new LR91-AJ-11 was 318!  

The new LR91-AJ-11A for both the CT3 and the Titan IV is quoted as 5% thrust increase and 16kg mass loss (removed/replaced man rating test equipment!)

 

Summation:

As of currently I show a 1 second ISP gain (that could be rounding error!) a 0.6% gain in thrust and a 40kg mass reduction for the LR87-AJ-11A.

The LR91-AJ-11A is cited as having a 12kg mass loss, and a 5% boost in thrust.

I will be making my own patch for these two engines to see what changes would happen in a Titan IV stack dV wise. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10.02.2021 at 21:54, CobaltWolf said:

Наверное, тогда захочется использовать первую ступень Тор или Юпитер.

Наверное, нет, текущее обновление - это эфир, и мне не сказали, исправлены ли все его ошибки или нет :P

 

Говоря о том, что я не знаю, что происходит с текущим выпуском, я понял, что не опубликовал текущее состояние Apollo CSM:

KmFlvIu.png

 

В эти выходные я думаю, что хотел бы начать с LM? Поскольку я хочу, чтобы все было в основном смоделировано, чтобы я мог убедиться, что все совпадает, прежде чем я действительно начну текстурировать. Прошлой ночью Геккон Аполлон помогал мне исследовать его. Пока я размышлял, мой помощник вдохновил меня: отныне LM будет называться в BDB как Munar Landing and Excursion Module или MLEM .

sD9vrsB.jpgXjn9XOT.jpg

LZTYCrP.jpgq7OR0wa.jpg

 

 

What will be the picture? How is a real Apollo with a reflective coating?

Link to post
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.

×
×
  • Create New...