[Request] Accurate Apollo 13 Recreation

[shoe7ess]

I apologize if this is the wrong place for this, if it is I will close this topic out as soon as I find out (couldn't find a rules thread). I saw the alternate Apollo 13 mission here but I'd really like an incredibly realistic version of the Apollo 13 mission. I'm talking having to eyeball re-entry without any help besides (possibly) an orbital line akin to Mission Tracking station Lvl 1, spinning out of control, and having to steady the craft via RCS, no SAS (obviously, but possibly after docking with the LEM), losing the center F-1 engine during first stage asscent, having to conserve a specific amount of RCS,, having to make a manual burn using the LEM engine, etc. I could see an issue with trying to transfer 3 kerbals to the LEM (haven't looked at one they added but I"d asume it's a 2 crew craft?) After I get some time I may do this myself based off the event list of Apollo 13's failures and post it here, but if anyone with more knowledge tackles this earlier I would (and I assume many others would as well) be very interested in playing it.

[Bluer22]

Hi, I also find this idea for a mision very interesting.

So, Im currently working on an «Acapello 13» using the mision builder on my free time. I also plan to make a "Space race" pack, from both, American and Rusian/Soviet Space programs since Squad didn't include it for some reason.

 

[shoe7ess]

On 3/25/2018 at 1:14 PM, Bluer22 said:

Hi, I also find this idea for a mision very interesting.

So, Im currently working on an «Acapello 13» using the mision builder on my free time. I also plan to make a "Space race" pack, from both, American and Rusian/Soviet Space programs since Squad didn't include it for some reason.

 

That is awesome! Please keep us updated and I appreciate you taking the time to work on this! The space race idea is pretty awesome too. I actually thought that's what I was going to be getting with the game. I kind of wish they had included contracts in the game akin to the historical progression contract pack mod for contract configurator. It'd be great if they updated the mission builder to a stock contract builder or allow those missions to occur as contracts in game but it's hard to keep realism unless you can force certain actions to occur (i.e. numerous rockets losing telemetry and their payloads either not making it to orbit or making it into highly eccentric ones which happened pretty often early on).

 

Thanks again,

shoe7ess

[Bottle Rocketeer 500]

@shoe7ess I am working on an Apollo 13 mission right now, and it now includes launching on day 13, will add the center F1 engine shutting off on ascent, now I also have the return-to-Kerbin time after all the failures set to 1 day, probably for extra challenge, but it is possible that it isn't actually that challenging.

[shoe7ess]

On 3/27/2018 at 4:08 PM, Bottle Rocketeer 500 said:

@shoe7ess I am working on an Apollo 13 mission right now, and it now includes launching on day 13, will add the center F1 engine shutting off on ascent, now I also have the return-to-Kerbin time after all the failures set to 1 day, probably for extra challenge, but it is possible that it isn't actually that challenging.

Awesome. I've been working on a .craft file for the mission but I move some mods out (BDB and Contares want to take over everything apollo at the moment lol), I will post a link to it on the craft dump site and see if it is at all helpful for you when I am able but it sounds like you likely already have it situated, and it sounds great so far!

 

*Edit*

In fact, someone much better than myself has already made a youtube video recreating Apollo's Saturn V with all the new parts. I'll attempt to recreate as best as I can but in the meantime I'm working on getting Matt's .craft file if that would be any help (may have to change the parachute locations though due to the "stowed" bug he gets.

Matt Lowe's Youtube Channel (video): 

 

Edited March 29, 2018 by shoe7ess

[Bottle Rocketeer 500]

@shoe7ess I have found what is, in my opinion, a better craft on KerbalX:

https://kerbalx.com/KSpaceAcademy/KSA-Saturn-V

[klesh]

5 hours ago, Bottle Rocketeer 500 said:

I have found what is, in my opinion, a better craft on KerbalX:

 

Strange.  In some of those photos there is a shroud around the heatshield, and in others the heatshield is exposed.

[Bottle Rocketeer 500]

3 hours ago, klesh said:

 

Strange.  In some of those photos there is a shroud around the heatshield, and in others the heatshield is exposed.

Probably, some of those images were from another version of the craft (not the final one).

[shoe7ess]

19 hours ago, Bottle Rocketeer 500 said:

@shoe7ess I have found what is, in my opinion, a better craft on KerbalX:

https://kerbalx.com/KSpaceAcademy/KSA-Saturn-V

Actually that thing is beautiful. I created my own version, just need to throw together the LEM and put it in the petal adapter and change up the Apollo SM a bit. I've kept the TWR  as accurate to the real thing as possible:

• Stage 1: 1.15 TWR
• Stage 2: 0.8 TWR
• Stage 3: 0.66 TWR
• CSM: 0.63 TWR
• LEM:  ~0.3 TWR (Descent Stage) & 2.12 TWR (Ascent Stage) in Munar Gravity 

The easiest way I found to tweak these is simply lowering the fuel in each stage to match said TWR while still allowing for the mission to complete as if it went as a routine Apollo mission (enough dV to land on the Mun and reunite with the CSM, etc.)

Didn't plan on doing math after work tonight, back to gaming... lol

Edited March 30, 2018 by shoe7ess

[shoe7ess]

Here is the KSA Saturn V you posted with every stage tweaked (mostly via engine thrust limiting) to have every stage match with the TWR stats I posted above. I'm hoping (and assuming) that FAR did not change the TWR readouts via Mechjeb.

Here you are here: REMOVED DUE TO MODDED INSTALL AFFECTING CRAFT, SEE UPDATED CRAFT FILE BELOW

Edited April 3, 2018 by shoe7ess

[Bottle Rocketeer 500]

3 hours ago, shoe7ess said:

-snip-

@shoe7ess It still shows FAR as a required mod on the KerbalX page. 

[shoe7ess]

I'll be updating this shortly with a list of all "major" events that need to take place. However, some of these events require fixes, and to do these fixes stepping out of the "accuracy" may be needed". For example after stirring the O2 tanks the SM should be very difficult to control. Firstly, SAS Level should be turned to 0 at this point IMO. My ideas the "losing control" event one could to either set the thrusters of each of the four RCS modules down via an event node, further followed up by them being constantly in use, draining the MP and making the craft lose control until repaired.  The other idea I had was by keeping the craft in a holding position for X amount of time in order to regain control of the craft (with each RCS port putting out MP at different thrust values I can see this being difficult, but I think that's somewhat the point) and cause the thrusters to stop venting the MP you will surely need to complete this mission. You may have already succeeded in re-creating this in a better fashion than myself but if not I thought I'd throw my hat into the ring.

Also: I will be posting a list of each major event to help make things easier for you (as a reference) in a post below.

 

Edit: I'm re-editing the TWR values of the original .craft file you posted in a vanilla install because while going through the .craft files not only were FAR modules added to most parts, but Tweakscale and USI modules and resources were added as well, and instead of going through and removing every single one of these modules through notepad++ I figured it'd be easier to just edit what I need to without mods installed lol. The updated/accurate .craft file will be added in the post below this.

Edited April 3, 2018 by shoe7ess

[shoe7ess]

Mission Failures (taken straight from https://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/Apollo_13h_Timeline.htm for a timeline, see post above):

Since there are so many possible nodes in order to maintain accuracy, I condensed the above to a googel spreadsheet of "major" incidents/burns that you can follow if you wish: 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XJ9wIFNWPS5Be4y_O0csgaOxxgyzKEkTU4UKEdKyWnk/edit?usp=sharing

 

Edited April 4, 2018 by shoe7ess

[shoe7ess]

Here is the updated (fully vanilla) KSA Saturn Craft with correct TWR values (also edited the fairing between the LEM and the CSM to end at the correct point of the CSM). There is an issue with staging I believe because as it seems now it stages the LEM before staging the CSM, but the LEM should be "hooked" onto the 3rd stage and the LEM should be docked with during the TLI if I'm not mistaken after the 3rd stages TLI burn (which the comments on the speadsheet note; they had to use the third stage to course correct as well as a LEM DS Engine course correction for a proper free-return trajectory).

Updated Craft File: https://kerbalx.com/shoe7ess/KSA-Saturn-V-Making-History-Expansion-Realistic-TWR-Values

Edited April 5, 2018 by shoe7ess

[shoe7ess]

Oh yeah, and as an easter egg you can always through in a reference to the Beatles breaking up on the initial launch

[shoe7ess]

Wanted to add, I didn't make the change to the updated craft, however on the four outboard engines of the first stage had gimbaling capability. This is something I may edit and re-upload since the point is for realism (not that disabling gimbaling on one F-1 engine will change a damn thing lmfao)

 

Newest Revision (Added a mock-up launch tower bridge and made sure that the center engines on the first two stages had gimbal lock (they did surprisingly, but went ahead and set the gimbal limit to 0 anyway as a redundancy).

Craft (Probably same link as above): https://kerbalx.com/shoe7ess/KSA-Saturn-V-Making-History-Expansion-Realistic-TWR-Values

The last few thins I have to tackle is the staging as editing/adding the new tower and clamps put them in random spots on in staging (even they they were all alt+clicked). Plus I need to edit the third stage a bit to make the CSM undock/separate and dock with the LEM before ditching stage 3. But that will have to wait until I get off work tomorrow, as well as create action groups and add them to the KerbalX page where needed.

Hope everything's going well with you and project. Let me know if there is anything I can help with.

Edited April 7, 2018 by shoe7ess
Craft Update

[shoe7ess]

As an update, I've decided to take on this project for now. I'm currently familiarizing myself with the mission editor and looking for ideas on how to simulate certain events. Also updated craft to be 1.4.2 compatible, fixed staging, and added action groups (easy and in order starting from shedding the fairing on Stage 3 for docking CSM to LEM all the way to landing back on kerbin, using all 10 action groups in order of necessity).

Edited April 22, 2018 by shoe7ess

[Mrcarrot]

I would say that yes, you'll have a bit of a hard time getting 3 Kerbals in the MEM, but perhaps the IVA could be edited for the specific mission...

[shoe7ess]

On 4/26/2018 at 1:42 PM, Mrcarrot said:

I would say that yes, you'll have a bit of a hard time getting 3 Kerbals in the MEM, but perhaps the IVA could be edited for the specific mission...

I'll have to see if that's even possible, I'm not very intimate with the Mission Builder yet. If I could make this dependent on BDB or at least MM things would be so much easier, but then that cuts the community in to the bits that don't bother with mods  

[KnedlikMCPE]

On 3/24/2018 at 11:51 PM, shoe7ess said:

I apologize if this is the wrong place for this, if it is I will close this topic out as soon as I find out (couldn't find a rules thread). I saw the alternate Apollo 13 mission here but I'd really like an incredibly realistic version of the Apollo 13 mission. I'm talking having to eyeball re-entry without any help besides (possibly) an orbital line akin to Mission Tracking station Lvl 1, spinning out of control, and having to steady the craft via RCS, no SAS (obviously, but possibly after docking with the LEM), losing the center F-1 engine during first stage asscent, having to conserve a specific amount of RCS,, having to make a manual burn using the LEM engine, etc. I could see an issue with trying to transfer 3 kerbals to the LEM (haven't looked at one they added but I"d asume it's a 2 crew craft?) After I get some time I may do this myself based off the event list of Apollo 13's failures and post it here, but if anyone with more knowledge tackles this earlier I would (and I assume many others would as well) be very interested in playing it.

Want it stock? With FASA it will be more realistic.

[shoe7ess]

On 5/7/2018 at 9:50 AM, KnedlikMCPE said:

Want it stock? With FASA it will be more realistic.

See post above. I'd love to be able to go FASA/BDB as that would make things a lot easier. Could even edit the .dds for the SM to show damage under its covers and include it as optional, but I think the main goal is to stick with stock so people unfamiliar with modding or those just stepping into the game don't get separated from those like us that push the 64x build to its' limit

Hell, since I have any updates from Mr Rocketeer, I may just go ahead and finish what I've started on the stock version then make an alternate "hardcore" version that would either require BDB or FASA, TAC-LS or USI-LS, Module Manager, and a handful of MM configs to allow for things like 3 seats in the LEM, changes to the capsule (to allow for accurate simulations of different events). It would also give me the ability to kill the scrubber and allow it to be repaired or turned back on in some sort of realistic way though I still don't know how to do it in an engaging way (maybe make them repairable only after a specific event has triggered if that's possible). LIke I said, I'm new to the mission builder but I've spent more time modding KSP than playing it (like  4:1 ratio at this point), for some reason I find it more fun to take a mod and make it "my own", so maybe it won't be as hard as I'm making it out to be in my head.

[KnedlikMCPE]

On 5/10/2018 at 12:08 AM, shoe7ess said:

See post above. I'd love to be able to go FASA/BDB as that would make things a lot easier. Could even edit the .dds for the SM to show damage under its covers and include it as optional, but I think the main goal is to stick with stock so people unfamiliar with modding or those just stepping into the game don't get separated from those like us that push the 64x build to its' limit

Hell, since I have any updates from Mr Rocketeer, I may just go ahead and finish what I've started on the stock version then make an alternate "hardcore" version that would either require BDB or FASA, TAC-LS or USI-LS, Module Manager, and a handful of MM configs to allow for things like 3 seats in the LEM, changes to the capsule (to allow for accurate simulations of different events). It would also give me the ability to kill the scrubber and allow it to be repaired or turned back on in some sort of realistic way though I still don't know how to do it in an engaging way (maybe make them repairable only after a specific event has triggered if that's possible). LIke I said, I'm new to the mission builder but I've spent more time modding KSP than playing it (like  4:1 ratio at this point), for some reason I find it more fun to take a mod and make it "my own", so maybe it won't be as hard as I'm making it out to be in my head.

Im going to work at it this week.

[shoe7ess]

On 5/17/2018 at 1:26 PM, KnedlikMCPE said:

Im going to work at it this week.

Great, I'm swamped and really have barely enough time to myself let alone to this project at the moment. I'm looking forward to it!