Jump to content

[1.1.2]Aerojet Kerbodyne 3.0 (4/29/16 Better FX, still good for 1.1.2)


Recommended Posts

With the 3.75m MM rescale coming, perhaps you could include some 2.5m and 3.75m dual and quad nozzle engines. In a 3.75m configuration (with a nice flatter adapter than we have currently), this would make the perfect Block II upper stage.

Well, I think the KR-2L works good as a J2-X but it's stupid mounting plate will make dual use for block II quite hard without clipping. So that is a good idea

Edited by DasBananenbrot
Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I think the KR-2L works good as a J2-X but it's stupid mounting plate won't make dual use for block II quite hard without clipping. So that is a good idea

Not to mention that I think the engine bell is a bit too big for that and it would be massively overpowered if using two of them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmmm, is posting a pic possible? I'll do my best to make it look like it but stockalike

I'll do as quick as possible. We are still speaking of a pic of the J2-X right?

Edit: I have some pics for you . Both are artist concepts though as everything is still in development :wink: As seen in the second image the upper stage with the 2 J2-X will probably be as wide as the main stage. There are some sources still stating that the Earth Departure Stage will have 3 J2-X engines but newest informations from NASA only depict the upper stage with the 2 J2-X engines. So if noone else has newer informations ,we best stick with the 2 J2-X version. So best would be to make it 3.75 for those stock size users and then I can rescale it so it fits my larger main stage rescale :D

290537main_j2x_gridlines_665.jpg

sls-block-2.jpg

Edit Edit : There are some real-life pics of J2-X during testing though without the lower part of the nozzle as seen in the concept image

[spoiler=] 755998main_j2x_test_june14_2_full.jpg?itok=1YkyR4_n

735648main_j2x_overlay_lg_full.jpg?itok=mDczNVN-

Edited by DasBananenbrot
Link to post
Share on other sites
Alright, I think I'm really into making my own service Module specifically for the Taurus HCV and I'll be grabbing DaBananenBrot for resizing it to 2.5m lol

Haha :D well good to see. Do you make it Orion like? Because I can ditch my SDHI service module resize then

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice :D if I'm not able to fix the problems with the rocket I will put out my rescale of your parts anyway. One has to find a way for himself to get it in orbit then though. I also wanted to ship it with a ARM resize to about six meters but the SRB produces weird FAR drag valúes even with nose cap. Don't know if this is a problem of the rescale or a general problem of the SRB with FAR

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I have not many ideas about far :P

Ooh! I really like that aerocap! The LES seems a but unneeded because of the capsule's, though - what about a smaller one to just clear the cap away, or even a radially decoupled cap?

Well, I can make an aerocap that's a nose cone with built in boosters for it. I heard you have upcoming optional no LES parts also, this Huge LAS is... Huge. It's Orion-like and that's my main goal, I always get off track because I get distracted so yep, I might be making the aerocap with built in boosters.

Edited by blackheart612
Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I have not many ideas about far :P

Well, I can make an aerocap that's a nose cone with built in boosters for it. I heard you have upcoming optional no LES parts also, this Huge LAS is... Huge. It's Orion-like and that's my main goal, I always get off track because I get distracted so yep, I might be making the aerocap with built in boosters.

Well I definitely want that LES :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
Or have an LES and modify the capsule's engines to be more for deorbiting or minor orbital corrections (or even landing in low gravity). Kind of like the Dragon capsule.

lol I think that would go round and round though, the pod's CoM is offset, it will get you messed up. That was actually not the case on the earlier LAS though, the LAS had the offset and Mk1-2 has dead center so no problems would occur if ever you want to land straight up with solid engines are something.

Link to post
Share on other sites
lol I think that would go round and round though, the pod's CoM is offset, it will get you messed up. That was actually not the case on the earlier LAS though, the LAS had the offset and Mk1-2 has dead center so no problems would occur if ever you want to land straight up with solid engines are something.

The CoM is offset to make the integrated LES work. If anything, you'd need to talk to the pod author and get that taken out so you could properly build a service module and tower for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The CoM is offset to make the integrated LES work. If anything, you'd need to talk to the pod author and get that taken out so you could properly build a service module and tower for it.

Yeah, Maybe I could talk to them so I can give out a config that turns off the config if you want the CoM offset to be gone and be on the LAS instead.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

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...