Pappystein

Thursday at 11:14 PM

3 hours ago, nasaholic said:

Might be too late into the modeling/design phase; just wanted to add my 2 cents and point out that if the side "maintenance tunnels" (used for routing pipes, cables, etc.) were to be made into separate part, then, with the exception of cockpit, the cross section is pretty much a perfect circle all the way to the engine area. See attached blueprint. Potential for Lego-ability would be much increased.

(Scott Crossfield gives an interesting insight in his book, Always Another Dawn: "North American engineers planned to use tunnels similar to the Bell design, however, during the evolution to the final shape of the X-15 airframe, wind tunnel testing found that “maintenance tunnels” along the top and bottom of the fuselage would destabilize the plane in yaw. North American engineers ran the tunnels along each side of the fuselage instead, and found in wind tunnel tests that the side tunnels not only cured the yaw instability but also increased lift & improved propulsion efficiency. [7, p.229] It was found that at high Mach numbers the side tunnels would provide almost half the aerodynamic lift.")

Sadly, the parts are in the game already. However, I would point out that the Mk2 Expansion mod did a similar thing and it has never been hugely reliable at staying together even with mods like KJR or Strut Everything. Parts like that do not work well with KSP stock aeronautics, and from my now very old experience same with FAR.

Also a fun followup... You are correct about the Interaction between the "Tunnels" and improved high AOE and High speed aerodynamics. This accident is what lead to the wing glove shape of the F-14 and F-15 as well as the initial Concept of the LERX on the F-5E, the F-16 and F-17/AF-18

Thursday at 10:58 PM

9 hours ago, bacontornado said:

I recently started a new KSRSS save and I'm having some trouble with the Atlas LV-3B. I used the design from the manual and it can barely get itself to an 85X100 orbit with no payload mass. I know the stage and a half design can be tricky, and I've read Marcelo Silveira's documentation on the wiki, but I still can't seem to reach enough payload mass to get the full Mercury capsule to the orbits it should be able to. Best I have found is setting the booster engines to jettison at about 3.5 Gs. Anyone have any tips?

I will follow up here, The Atlas is launching in an "under-thrust" for the bulk of the flight that is high efficiency. Thus you have to AIM HIGH. You do not want to seek that 100km AP, you want to go for 250-300km. You will end up in something akin to a 120-90km orbit. At least that was my experience. How did I set myself up to win? Well, for some reason, my Mechjeb install is NOT WORKING anywhere but the VAB as intended (it is on my list of things to fix after my next interview tomorrow.) So this is what I did. In the VAB... Build the all-up rocket with the booster skirt and everything except ground service equipment that you will attach to hold the rocket upright before launch.

Now Remove the Skirt (but don't destroy it!)

Now using either MechEngineer or MechJeb's Delta V displays (they both show TWR better than VAB's own stuff) DE-FUEL the rocket until you get about a 0.8-0.9 TWR showing with just the LR105 and twin LR101s on the rocket.

Now Re-attach skirt, Notate the TWR with the booster skirt added and the nearly empty fuel tanks that got you that 0.8 TWR!

Set the G Activation force to, as closely as possible, match the TWR showing in your MechEngineer or MechJeb TWR display...

Don't forget to REFILL All the tanks!

Now attach your ground service equipment. And you are GO FOR LAUNCH.

If you are flying manual like I am... I seek to be at a 45 degree inclination after launch when passing through 20Km. Remember to be gentle with your inputs below 15-17km! At 60km, I set the rocket parallel to the ground. My skirt generally ejects between 60 and 80km. I do not adjust the rocket further... meaning at apoapsis, I am probably nose high by 30-35 degrees. Once I achieve orbit, I quickly bring the nose back down. If you are like me and try to keep your space clean, hopefully your rocket has several separation type motors to reverse the thrust of the Atlas rocket hull itself and send it back to a sub-orbital trajectory

Hope that helps. I achieved 2 good orbits after practicing (Failure to orbit) twice with the engines on the NA-3 upgrades. Not easy but not insurmountable with the above steps

Just checking things... Looks like the Imgur interface has changed on my web-browswer... I posted these the other day if any pop up embeded I will be happy!

Interesting, The DirectLink button didn't save DirectLinks last night but rather used the "Link" code.... Or I am an idiot ... (could be both even!)

Follow-up

@Zorg I have to say I was really impressed with the 5 node Atlas XSM-65 skirt. Once I figured out why my GEMs were striking it it flew very well and lead to that Gemini stack with a transtage being in a useful orbit to perform some rescue missions! I didn't have all the Titan parts I needed unlocked when I did that launch.

Thursday at 02:44 AM

Time for some more "Cursed" Screen Tax:

Spoiler

First my Atlas F-Vega-Agena launch from yesterday... Final images:

https://imgur.com/a/AJdjPSQ

Spoiler

Second. First attemt at Gemini-Transtage-Atlas XSM-65... Utilizing GEM40sx8 for lift off.

https://imgur.com/a/w4FJYv3

https://i.imgur.com/nSttaGn.png

And now I can not embed images again

Wednesday at 08:11 PM

10 hours ago, Rodger said:

A few questions - How old was your download of BDB? Do you have FAR and or RealChute? And do you have KSPCF installed? Game freezes in general were only an issue on the very first uploads of the x15 parts a few weeks ago, and only if you didn’t have KSPCF. I’ll have a look into JNSQ with tweakchutes too, but there shouldn’t really be a case where it can break now with the latest dev version of BDB.

And re screenshots, I *wish* I could use windows snipping tool in KSP, for some reason its broken on my system, only in KSP, where it instantly closes after I open it via keyboard shortcut! I have to have some other app focused for it to work, and take the screenshot of KSP while it’s in the background. Anyone else had this and maybe has a fix? lol

That is about windows priority. When you press the Window Key your computer thinks you want to switch to a different program... I have found having too many programs running causes this (it is not a Memory issue, it is a a Windows gets confused and is dumb, issue.) I ended up re-scheduling PRT-SCRN button to do this (it is in Windows settings) And now, when I have a bunch of programs running the Print screen button activates it. It still isn't foolproof but it is better than the 3 key combo

Wednesday at 03:47 PM

3 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

What @AdrianDogmeat said. It's also where mods like KVV and NeptuneCamera store their photos. If you have a custom install folder, than they will be in the screenshot folder that sits in the main directory.

Also, don't go crazy with the supersize btw. And it only goes in whole number intervals. So for argument sake, let's take a 1080 monitor.

1 = 1920 x 1080

2 = 3840 x 2160

3 = 5760 x 3240

Also, using supersize, your game will hitch for a frame or two. The screenshot ups the resolution to the supersize, takes the screenshot, then puts the game back to your set resolution.

That would mean 2 for me would be:

7680x3200 Like I said UX-Wide is a big ole drug (I own 3x 21x9 monitors!)

Wednesday at 02:59 PM

10 hours ago, RocketBoy1641 said:

With as many mods as I used before my hiatus (started Nov last year), I always did back up once I had something confirmed as stable in a build. Granted, that drive has died.... but... ideas

My issue is I thought I DID have a Backup... One I apparently deleted months ago

I have rebuilt my Mechjeb patch, But I have not gotten the Aerojet patch up to snuff yet. I am pretty certain I sent a PR for that to the Dev Github, but I haven't found it yet (it was over a year ago and there are a LOT of updates between then and now.)

10 hours ago, GoldForest said:

Steam compresses their screenshots, yes, but KSP's screenshot system does not. F1, KSP's screenshot button, takes a full resolution, uncompressed screenshot. In fact, you can tell KSP to take Superscaled Screenshots if you want even higher resolution.

where do these images save and where are the settings? I ask because I always had really low quality photos with F1, Which is why I was using F12 (Steam) And everyone kept complaining of that so Windows Snipping tool. (Also I run UX-Wide and it freaks some people out)

Wednesday at 03:21 AM

More Cursed Images for you all...

Yes that is the new Atlas III tanks... with an LR-105... Sue me I don't have RD180 yet! This Atlas III-Vega-Agena is going to the moon baby!

Spoiler

I may not have the Atmosphere set up right yet... but Space... Space looks GREAT! Agena Gambit to the Moon!

When you want to launch a rescue mission and forget that the computer auto populates the 2nd Seat in Gemini... Pop them out on a space walk. This is far enough away Right? RIGHT?

Tuesday at 09:26 PM

Cursed Minuteman-Flea-Mercury

Tuesday at 09:12 PM

So, decided to try to use CKAN again (as well as KJR) Did a complete wipe of my gamedata folder... And promptly forgot to backup my personal mods (Geebus!) So bye Bye LR87-AJ-11A engine! (amongst many other tweaks I have done)

Ok over that (that is a lie I am not!). Installed everything needed for ISS + BDB and ORANGES/Photon Corp. Here is my 4th launch... Proper use of early X-15 parts:

Contract to test Star 31 Antares III scout 3rd stage engine using a Juno Guidance computer, some science bobs, some aerodynamic bobs and of course Real Chute 1.25m conic chute

And I need to install atmosphere/texture mods still... But oh well system runs good!

Tuesday at 08:07 PM

Ok More details now that I am back from my interview (2nd and final interview with the company. I think I did ok. Only time will tell.)

While I did cover this a bit in my Agena article. The Ascent Agena (the last 16 production Agenas ever built) really can't be called a stand-alone stage/satellite anymore. It is a set of fuel tanks, RCS and an Engine. No Guidance computer, No Electronics, no nothing else were on it. In this guise they were dumb boosters. The last generation KH-8 Gambit would be the computer to run these. These Agenas do not receive any sort of letter designation but are sometimes credited by 2nd tier historians as "Agena E." We have documented proof that Agena E is either Shuttle Agena or KH-9 Propulsive section (in its final form,) so Ascent Agena is letter-less in it's official nomenclature. The Documentation on this was released in the last 5-10 years. Agena E as a name for Ascent Agena has been branded around a lot longer than that time frame.

I covered the reasons behind the Agena C cancellation a few months ago. Short version was Lockheed and Bell were "messing up" by the numbers with the Agena A and Agena B. Reliability was really low. Most of this was due to analog clocks being the guts of the Guidance system. And I am serious Electrically powered "Wind up" style clocks were used to TIME everything on these launches! The precision (ability to be set to the same time every-time across all clocks) was low, the people manually configuring these clocks were not super accurate. All this is because of the "Rush" of the Space race. Needless to say the contractual promises were kinda ahead of the technology at the time. In this Environment, Lockheed submitted an unsolicited proposal for Agena C with a 10ft diameter...... USAF was NOT HAPPY!

What became Shuttle Agena, is the last "True Agena" stage. While sources on the USAF programs are scant at this point, I THINK this is Agena F, not Agena E. Whatever one it is... the other Agena(x) became the KH-9 Propulsive section... And it too is no longer related to Agena (other than being an evolution of it.) Shuttle Agena was a series of Proposals in the early-late 1970s for a NASA only version of Agena that would fit in the Shuttle bay. We have one version of it already in BDB with the inclusion of the SOT tanks and Deflection cone/"tutu" for the Agena D tankage. Some of the guidance and communication bits were also included in the fairly recent Agena Update. The alternative single tank Shuttle Agena, was again 10ft diameter (1.875m in KSP) Powered by a single Bell engine and per the few drawings we have of it, NOT compatible with the SPS pods utilized on GATV Agena, although that might be an omission from the paper because of how the SPS engines were enlarged for the KH-9 Hexagon. Shuttle Agena took two forms. The in BDB SOT tank option, and the 10ft monohull option. Both granted the Agena about a 4x fuel load on the same (improved) LR81-BA engine.

Why I think Shuttle Agena is the Agena F is simple. The Ascent Agena contract and the Agena E contract were laid out at the same time for Lockheed and Bell. Agena E contract, at the start, was to be the Propulsive section for the slightly larger than the KH-8 Gambit replacement... the KH-9 GAMBIT! Yes, I said that correctly. At the time of contract start, the KH-9 was to be an evolved KH-8 Gambit with extra battery, and Solar power and a 3rd Return bucket. Mission creep would see the now renamed KH-9 Hexagon get a 4th film bucket for the mapping camera, and the Agena E would utilize an ENLARGED version of the SPS pods that were really first used on the GATV for NASA. The Enlargement of the SPS pods is why I think none of the Shuttle Agena drawings really show them. But that is 100% supposition on my part. Eventually as the UA120x family would evolve, the Titan III family getting it's longer first stage tanks and better LR87 and LR91 engines, it was realized that the big Bell engine would not be needed and a single smaller engine, with quite a bit of fuel, would be more efficient. This is when Agena "E" ceases to be and what is left is the Hexagon Propulsion system. If you ever look at the front of the HPS, you can see clearly the 5ft central dome that is a hold over from the Agena's fuel tank! This tank is surrounded by several smaller tanks inside the HPS structure. The single engine powering this into orbit? Yes, the enlarged single SPS engine. *To be clear, it is my supposition as to the structure being the last vestages of Agena... we do not know, no sources have been released to tell us much about it yet.*

Finally we have EELV Storable Upper Stage, which has a "heritage" Agena Engine parts... The press, and the engine designer had dubbed this Agena 2000. However it appears that General Dynamics Convair was not actually naming it that. Atlantic Research (A division of Marathon (oil) company latter British Petroleum, now defunct in the US) proposed re-using a bunch of out of production rocket motor parts, including several from the Bell LR81, to power the General Dynamics (Lockheed) Atlas Storable Upper Stage. The Idea was it would be cheaper to build because the parts were already "certified" as space worthy. However the all up rocket motor would still need to be certified and many at USAF and NASA did not trust this concept. Almost all the 3rd party parts used to make this engine were already out of production and the manufactures have long since moved on to other projects. There is a AIAA paper exists and is purchasable from the AIAA archives (I have a copy of it) covering the performance... significantly smaller than the LR81 Agena engine, mostly in length due to the much smaller combustion chamber... the "Agena 2000" engine (Atlantic Researches name for it) looks like what would happen if you took a Rocketdyne RS25 SSME and shrunk it down with a smooth surfaced bell akin to the latter AJ10s

If anyone has sources on the Storable Upper Stage for either the Atlas V or the Delta IV, I would appreciate the share. We do know that the Delta IV Storable upper stage would be Delta II heritage AJ10-118K powered and a small diameter.. maybe even the same 8ft as the Delta II upper stage.

Tuesday at 01:24 PM

Ok, I have 15 minutes to bash this out before I have to leave for my interview....

Fat Agenas:

Agena C: scant details 10ft diameter, 2-4x the fuel of AgenaB/D. One or 2 engines (also debatable!) <===--- Force canceled by the USAF for breach of contract (Agena A/B contracts)

Agena F (E?) / Shuttle Agena (appear to be the same unit) 10ft diameter SINGLE Engine GCU looks similar to same timeframe Centaur (it isn't the same however!)

Agena E 10ft diameter, 1 Agena 2 Enlarged SPS engines. Canceled in favor of less complicated Satelite Propuplsive section on KH-9 Hexagon.

Agena 2000. Probably 10ft diameter But nothing is certain on this except. The proposed engine by Atlantic reaserch which is dubious in the ability to make given parts were out of production.... It is an Agena in name only (Kinda like how Atlas V and Delta IV are Those rockets in NAME ONLY too)

Tuesday at 12:56 PM

16 hours ago, GoldForest said:

@CobaltWolf or @Zorg Can we have these? Please?

They are Atlas related... kind of.

Or just Use VEGA parts with an Agena engine and the old hypergolic fuel patch for the tanks (you want about 4x the fuel as Agena B/D tank to match what it would be IRL (Based on Shuttle Agena documents)

I think the LONG centaur Interstage is tall enough to fit all of that together!

Monday at 08:12 PM

37 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

Agena 2000 would be 1.875 IIRC. Shuttle Agena was also wide. Idk if it would be 1.875.

The "uni-body" Shuttle Agena or Big Agena would have been 1.875m KSP scale... +/- Most of the drawings I have of it show it at 10ft. BUT most of the drawings of it are.... um light on the details. Most of the documents that lead to the SOT tanks for Agena as well as the rear deflection "skirt" are the ones with the Uni-body shuttle Agena.

Agena 2000... it is debatable. Some people talk about it as a 0.9375m dia tank inside an extended fairing. However, I do agree with you Agena 2K would likely have been 1.875m and IMHO would have used Centaur GCU for simplicity. But then again we will never know. Honestly though, that is so far into the future... oh Snap. I just thought of this as I was typing. Lo-MSC may have proposed Agena C for it. Agena C, which never got more than 3 steps down the "can we do this" decision tree, was to be 1.875m ksp scale (10ft IRL) Powered by 2 engines...

Monday at 06:01 PM

I have seen that Atlas Tri-coupler model in two un-related places. Both of them had outlandish things to say...

In one instance, it was a way to launch a Convair developed Space Station for NASA.
In the other, it was meant for the Superheavy Thermonuclear warheads... Just like the OG Atlas F (the Atlas III length one with 2x H-1 engines from Saturn as Booster engines!)

In Neither case is the source material anything but some rando person's thoughts. No paperwork to back up either.

Zorg's link to NASASpaceflight has the only "actual" documentation I have seen. Now what is a 1.875m KSP scale storable stage....

I have a Drawing of a Centaur derived (it looks nothing like centaur) Storable stage in my archive. It is tiny compared to the model so I doubt it is it.

May 23

31 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

Hmmm. Well, from what i understand, BALLOS was designed for the "numerous" space stations that America was going to have. Of course that didn't happen, but Freedom came about in the late 80s, so would it be safe to say that the spacecraft, if repurposed for Freedom, would have gotten a similar name to go along with Project Freedom? Such as Liberty?

And for arguments sake, let's say it would have flown together with Shuttle.

I think Liberty is likely NOT a name that would have been chosen. Esp given Freedom was supposed to have the HL-20.

Mostly because I do not see Ronny RAY-GUN naming things Liberty

May 23

8 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

Ah, gotcha.

I bet it wouldn't have been called Big G. I feel it would have been the Mercury Mk 2 thing all over. "Let's call it mark 2." "But it has nothing to do with the original, so it needs a new name."

Honestly even the "Patched together Big Gemini" would have gotten a new name. NASA names the capsules after the funding program that they were funded/designed under. NASA never actually funded the detailed design of what we all know as Big Gemini. So until NASA did fund a design program, a placeholder name is all we got!

May 23

43 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

So, Big Apollo is just Bigger G?... still going to call it Big A.

Actually "Big Apollo" is ALL NEW Big-G. It has the same overall size of the Big-G we know... it just does not have the narrow nose of Gemini/Big-G. The only parts really in common with our Big-G in mod is the cockpit interface area and the Inconel skin. Hence pointing out the Gemini windows in the "Lockheed" BALLO art

21 minutes ago, Zorg said:

The 3.125m parts will get at least a partial revamp. I think the skirt and aft tank are really good and would like to keep them as is, but the tanks themselves need to be updated to the new style.

NICE NICE! 5 Engine atlas can't hurt you... it isn't real Yet you are making it Real NICE!

Parts look GREAT Zorg!

May 23

3 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

Gonna have to summon @Pappystein on this one, but I'm pretty sure that's actually the "advanced" Big G, the one that would share little to no hardware with the Gemini or the "min mod" Big G. But I'm sure he can expand on that.

In other news, I'm out fishin. See you all in June.

You you you rat "stand-up guy"... Summon me and then peace out on a Fishin trip! How DARE YOU!

Ok! Joking aside, questions answered, and oh, enjoy your holiday and vacation fishin!

May 23

Congressional hearing on the cancellation

On 5/23/2024 at 5:45 AM, septemberWaves said:

Big Apollo isn't a real proposal, right?

CobaltWolf is precisely correct... what everyone calls "Big Apollo" Is McDonald Douglas's ultimate Gemini (still called Big Gemini.) Lockheed usurped the concept for a brief period and called it BALLOS... In the artwork, you can Division, which was primarily responsible for the KH family of spy sites,see the Gemini-style windows still!!! Lockheed Space and Missile Division, which was primarily responsible for the KH family of spy sats contributed the Service Module to the Ultimate Gemini in the BALLOS proposal. The Capsule artwork is 100% the same as the McD artwork! The addition of the SM is the only difference.

The SM looks like what I envision Agena E looking like, right before it lost it's Bell engine, shrank a little, and became the KH-8 Propulsive section.

Followup for clarity's sake: Did North American Aviation embark on a "Bigger" Apollo program? The Answer is BOTH. North American, was asked during the congressional hearings on Big Gemini if they could make an enlarged Apollo capsule. Their answer was YES of course. HOWEVER, no funding, and no contract was ever let for such an entity, and North American focused on how they could convert EXISTING Apollo capsule to carry more people. That is the extent to which Big Apollo is REAL. The Blk3/Blk4 Apollo is all you get for Big Apollo.

NOW, fast forward to the mid 1990s and the start of the Inter-webs. You get people who see the "advanced" phase Big Gemini artwork, which is a standard single-angle conic capsule, lacking all of the regular Gemini nose-docking-port/parachute shroud and cylindrical RCS features. They only have the picture, and with no Context to it they start calling it "Big Apollo." In short, any document talking about Big Apollo, outside of the Congressional hearing on the Cancellation of funding for Big Gemini, is an internet falsehood and not real. IT CAN'T HURT YOU!

Having read the actual transcript it is easy to see why Advanced Big Gemini is often called Big Apollo. The picture is cited RIGHT at the start of the congressional questioning of the North American representative.

Want to read my full document on the Big Gemini? https://github.com/Pappystein/Space_History/wiki/Capsule-Command

On 5/23/2024 at 10:51 AM, Beccab said:

Some posters I made - a few old...

...and a few not-so old....

Love all the GE Apollo D3 love!

May 20

12 hours ago, GoldForest said:

Hmmm. So, it was just a test article with no service module or launch vehicle drawn up?

Hmmm. @Pappystein You're a plethora of knowledge. Anything in your vault about Big VA?

Sadly, no

8 hours ago, MashAndBangers said:

On today's episode of Rockets and Space Exploration with Pappystein, Pappystein invades the Soviet archives to uncover any information on Big VA. But will Pappystein escape the KGB Zombies? Stay tuned!

I have enough trouble with the Alphabet Soup folks!

Actually, that isn't true, but it fits the narrative

May 18

1 hour ago, MashAndBangers said:

Go Fast, Go high, Gooooo TEAM!... yeah something like that

Kinda Sad that an X-15 pilot is who crashed into XB-70A-02 RIP Joe Walker, RIP Lt Carl Cross!

Coincidentally Joe Walker was supposed to have his first flight in XB-70A-02 the very next day

May 18

6 hours ago, GoldForest said:

Yeah, deleting the water producing module did nothing. Hmmm...

Looking at the log it says "!TacLifeSupport."

I don't have Tac, does that have something to do with it?

! in front of a Variable (in this Case TacLifeSupport means **NOT** TacLifeSupport AKA you only pass this variable check if you do not have TACLS.

Most commonly seen as != or "Not equal to"

May 16

On 5/14/2024 at 7:15 PM, MashAndBangers said:

Made a XB-70 kinda sorta to launch the X-15 Delta. Currently the X-15 normals/materials/whatever that cool texture thing is called seem messed up. From a normal distance away, there's like black squares, but zooming in really close makes the X-15 parts look normal. Work in Production of course

No, I can't get the wing tips to fold all the way down. Using Robotic Hinges is... not good. These wing tips are Proc canards stretched into the shape, but since control surfaces can only "deploy" to a max of 30 degrees, that's all you get :3

The Snoot Droops

WOW it is my SEMI TRUCK! 10 wheels, 50,000lb+ Payload... Yep it checks all the boxes A semi Truck

Interesting using a Concord nose for what should just be a VG windscreen

12 hours ago, GoldForest said:

Why no Kerficer, I am not drunk. What makes you think that?

You realize, you now have the technology to make the UA-1205 based SRM first stage for Saturn Right? BTW how did you do it Simple radial decoupler or something else? IIRC that is Saturn INT-05? the INT-11 is the UA-120x 1st stage Saturn, 4, 5 or 6 UA-1204,5,6(full segements not in BDB) or 7

May 12

On 5/11/2024 at 1:21 PM, GoldForest said:

Something like this? Or were you thinking more along the lines of a separate launch for the S-IVC?

Honestly, not a fan of this...

Probably a shorter propellant tank for the S-IVC stage... but yes

May 12

On 5/11/2024 at 12:34 PM, GoldForest said:

I believe it is this one that Paddystein is talking about.

Yep, that is it. I have that report and two others.

The J-2 Engine was chosen for greater clearances over the more viable twin bell LH2 LR87 FOR this concept. So base J-2 if you are doing early tech or, as this Douglas document calls out, the J-2S for later time (this diagram is from some of the MLV studies post 1967, which means J-2S dominates now) ***TBC this was hardly the only factor and I covered it in detail in my LR87 history document***

BDB HAS all the parts you need for this to work.... except the AZ50 Space Ring Tug.

Many of the reports I cite about S-IVC were behind the 'classified' wall when I believe e of pi and team began developing their ETS alternate timeline (hence the reuse of the S-IVC designation. I know I kicked one of the documents loose as part of a FOIA request myself. (Preliminary Design report on the C-2 Saturn)

Profiles

Forums

Developer Articles

KSP2 Release Notes

Bug Reports

Posts posted by Pappystein