Pappystein

Funny thing, the first 3 "Taurus" or Minotaur C launches were with LGM-118 first stages Thiokol SR-118 TU-903. Given USAF Peacekeepers were powered by TU-901s I ASSUME that it was the same rocket motor with a slightly different grain cut (the solid fuel "star" profile was different. In all my research I have not found any DEFINITIVE differences listed between TU-901, 902, 903 SO! if you want to fly Early Taurus fights you fly them with the SR-118 engine not CASTOR-120.

Once the PR is actioned on yes. Don't know when it will be actioned on... and more to the point I don't know if I even did the Pull-Request correctly

@GoldForest @Zorg I have PR-ed (I think) the request with a fix. The J-2T-400K is now part of the J-2T-200 family (I have tested it on my local build.) I have also deleted my M55 simulator which was based on Algol Given we are almost 100% of the way there to making our Saturn II INT-19 with bespoke parts!

all depends on what you mean by "full Saturn and Apollo experience" If you mean Just getting to the moon/mun then you are probably mostly correct. If you mean Advanced Saturn Projects then you actually kinda need the Gemini and MORL stuff. Having not ever pruned BDB I am not 100% certain... You will want the solid motor folder for certain however. And of course you need the Pafftek Folder in the extras... For AZ50/NTO on your Apollo Capsule and Moon Lander *gratuitous self promotion* Probably a more correct for all Saturn flown flights (IRL) would be: Aero, APAS, Apollo, Centaur, Engines, Generic, LDC, SAF_Fairings, Saturn, Science, Shard, Skylab, Solids, Timberwind (for the nuke engines) LaunchClamps (unless you are utilizing another mod for good Launchclamps)

Yep I did say the other day that the J-2T-400K needed some work yes? I will put it on my to-do list for this weekend But when I am done with it, it will be an upgrade selection on the standard J-2T (I think I remember how to do that!)

Fun things I learned in completely the wrong place (BDB specific here) www.designation-systems.net : Looking up information on US Military Jet and Rocket engines for missiles and an article I was writing for a Naval magazine, and came across the entry for the LR-119. An Enlarged RL10 for the Saturn V stage (or Saturn Centaur Stage) For point of Refrence the RL10A-3 and A-3S are both classified as LR-115 engines to the DOD. Much later we learn that it was the RL10B3 (now in BDB via an extras add on) www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/ Again looking for data on a US Navy Missile program that has been swept under the rug.... Find refrences to the 400klbf torroidal J-2. Also in BDB extras (although it is in need of a major revamp.) Also on Alternatewars.com/bbow/ Find a photo of an E-1 battleship bell. Cobalt appeased mine (and others) pushing... In BDB. (as above was reaserching a mostly ignored by history missile) www.spacelaunchreport.com/library (now defunct) Find out about H-2 Engine. 6 ish years later we find actual data points on the test turbines for the H-2 engine... Was researching how the Atlas Balloon tank worked / how Atlas was constructed. Fun-fact, Alternatewars.com is also down... but it is being rebuilt as generalstaff.org

H-2s were my baby prior to getting good info on the engine. When it turned out the H-2 was just an H-1 with a much higher pressure turbopump... Much easier to process the update. Prior to that little nugget all we had on the H-2 was from a USAF drawing of a Theoretical Atlas F that used paired H-2s as a booster and had a Centaur and a Centaur JR... Below is a cleaned up aproximation of the ICBM version by Ed Kyle. The Real Atlas F was a couple meters longer than the Atlas E, not 10 meters. One of the things about research is sometimes you find the data you need. 8 States away, buried under 5 Battleships worth of scrap metal.

Before reading further, Understand I am one who is all about lego-ing to win... C-2 was to fly with 8x H-1s or 8x H-2, or 4x H-2 and 4x H1 (center four being H-2)or 4x-H-1 and 1x F-1 or 4x E-1s (order of most Likely to Least likely) Also C-2's S-I stage is shorter than C-1/Saturn I/Saturn IB first stage so drop 10% fuel and LOX from it. But beyond trying to Steal the C-3s S-I power-plant of 2x F-1s Great mission Love the use of the Gemini extension "Butt-kicker" capsule addon Brings me joy seeing it used https://github.com/Pappystein/Space_History/blob/main/PDFs/Saturn CII and CIII archive version.pdf I posted a bit on the subject last year Easter Sunday (I think)

already been stated as no it isn't coming... But So was Pegasus I am still hoping for a TU-122 nosecone... For INT-19 reasons... But at the size it is I could probably be "Okayish" with a stock one

Keep in mind, The 10ft Pressure vessel is oh I don't know.. MOL sized so Titan Diameter @Ultim32 AKA 1.875m in KSP

That would be Minotaur II! You know I still have not found any 1st tier sources on Minotaur I... which is vexing. (that is aside from the historically useless payload planer guides) But I have learned a darn lot about Minuteman... stuff I never intended to learn Like one thing I learned. The reason that Northrop Grumman can offer the Minotaur VI with the stacked SR-118s? Because under START only a certain percentage of ALL UP rockets can be utilized to launch payloads into space on governmental contracts. However individual stages can be used in conjunction with other all up units (thus stacking SR-118s is OK). The warhead bus, nor the Ballistic missile Guidance Unit can be used for Satellite launches. But CAN be used for weapon tests (be they warhead related or Intercept related.) And it is START that apparently prohibits the use of made for Military ICBMs as civilian launchers. (I have not verified this by trying to read the START treaty, Just repeating info from several sources including NASASpaceFlight etc)

So what is the Difference between Minotaur I's M55A1 Engine and the original first stage used on the Minuteman IA (the M55)? Well performance wise (thrust and ISP) They are essentially the same. It is in the reliability of the Gimbal hardware that they differed, the M55 typically melted the 4 gimbal nozzles which caused the motor to fail around the 55 second mark in flight (variable). The M55A1 was strengthened to survive the full 70 second burn time (actually a little less than that) This results in almost a 2000km range improvement (when used in conjunction with either the M56A1 or the SR-19 2nd stage.) FWIW the USAF did not like the M56A1 (it was still not 100% reliable) and Aerojet made the all new SR-19 to replace the M56A1 on the Minuteman II. The Minotaur II utilizes the M55A1, the SR-19, and the current version of the M57. All Minotaur II launches are in conjunction with military weapon tests or warhead tests for future ICBMs.

Actually only the Test and Evaluation Minutemen had a Flared Skirt All Operational Minuteman Missiles were straight skirted. The Flared skirt was apparently for On pad protection of the Quad Engine bells (from the elements) The Transporter Erector carried the Minuteman missile inside a Coccoon, And since it was used for both Test and Evaluation launches as well as Service(Operational) rounds, the Cocoon was designed to accommodate the flared skirting. Sources: A Technical History of America's Nuclear Weapons (I and II) Minuteman: A Technical history.... In Short: Flared skirt means the Minuteman was meant to ONLY launch from a PAD and not a Silo. Straight Skirt is for Either. @GoldForest@CobaltWolf

I may not use RO personally but I really do appreciate the effort! Been forgetting to ask... is this going to be 0.9375 & 0.625 diameters?

I don't see a nosecone for my Saturn II INT-19! Kidding of course. Looks amazing... can't wait!

Ok So on a barebones system with BDB and a few other station parts mods only... I can confirm. The Hypergolic patch is working fine... HOWEVER, There is a visual discontinuity that can lead to "problems" As you can see this is the 8250-B engine mount with the twin 8250 engines per pod (No RCS) There is an AZ50/NTO fuel tank This is the 8250 Inital variant tank/engine combo which is 1 RCS engine and 1 8250 Engine. Notice the tank has no AZ50/NTO? Well that is because as far as a Hypergolic engine is concerned it gets fuel from a separate tank. From the expanded text document on this engine we can clearly see it's Propellants are AZ50/NTO and Mono... The tank just holds Mono Only. So unless another mod is suppressing cross-feed in your game (or you have disabled it) you should have a fully functional engine with the base 8250 engine. Obviously assuming your Tanks are actually setup for AZ50/NTO. Hope this helps!

I will get to it within the next 24 hours barring any power issues (major storm inbound) *EDITED* I am mystified by this error report, the patch SHOULD be providing AZ50/NTO to the SPS engine (bluedog_GATV_SPS) Booting up KSP instead of intended program now to test myself (it worked the last time I built up KSP modlist but checking on a new mod-build)

This looks really awesome In reading the several books I now own on the Minuteman, it had an interesting design history. The M55 and M56 stages both had serious construction issues when the Minuteman I was in development. All three stages original had Quad exhaust and only the 3rd stage was low enough thrust/pressure on the quad gimbals to NOT EJECT the gimbals themselves as rocket Exhaust. Truly the M55 and M56 stages were DESIGNED to RUD totally on accident. Thus when the slightly strengthened M55 and M56 were approved for service, it was with a lower thrust level than initially designed. The So called Minuteman IA resulted. Range was short by almost 1000km from designed with the same payload. The Minuteman IB was further strengthened and with the Minuteman IA payload was closer to design spec (but still not there. The Aerojet M56 was troublesome to re-design... By this time the payload mass had increased so the range remained about the same. Minuteman II has the M55 and M57 of Minuteman I with a new second stage the Aerojet SR19-AJ-1 which was made from titanium to save mass and had a new LIQUID INJECTION TVC system with a single exhaust nozzle. The SR19 allowed either even more payload or the planned range of the original Minuteman I missile. It is not fair to blame just Aerojet for the lack of range as the Thiokol and Hercules sections (the M55 and M57) Both had their own problems. Minuteman III has an updated M57 for the 3rd stage a new Solid state Guidance and Control Unit and between these two features further increased the payload capability (including MIRV) or the range. Minotaur I is a Minuteman II's first and 2nd stage combined with the Orion 50XL, the Orion 38 and a HAPS terminal stage (all from Pegasus XL) Minotaur IL is a Minotar I, with out the Orion 38 or HAPS and it is commonly used for Strategic defense target launches Minotaur II is a full up Minuteman II without the Minuteman II's GCU or payload bus... the end is replaced with a strategic defense target Minotaur C, also know as Taurus is a kinda hodgepodge between the CASTOR-120 and the Minotaur I's/Pegasus XL rocket stack of Orion50XL, Orion 38 and HAPS... Minotaur III is a LGM-118 Peacekeeper MX without the final stage Again Strategic defense and Hypersonic suborbitals only Minotaur IV is already in game and we know it is a Minotaur III with some Star rockets on top

So it is funny, I have all the sources I thought I needed for Minotaur 1... instead I can now write intelligibly about Minuteman I II and III. So while we wait for KSP 2 to release in 25 minutes... I will leave you with this thought. Where has all the modern published history gone?

So I thought I would share an update on my Article writing. I have found a historical conundrum that I can not solve via Web... too many contradictory sources with no real citations that are trustworthy enough to go by. So I have ordered 3 books on the subject that are considered Top Tier. All three books deal with the ICBM side of things and one is specifically on Minuteman and many comments state it includes Space launch data.... So until I get the books (this weekend and early next week) My writing is going to be curtailed on the first article... and since the first article (Minotaur I) really drives the latter narrative on the Taurus/Minotaur C and Minotaur III+ I do really need this info... Hopeful that these sources will have all the data I need to do right by my last KSP-I Article series

Funny because all I see are SRMs for the Saturn II INT-19 are in the offing! I guess I better get my Butt in gear and finish this Minotaur I article I am working on

I see no Power Tower... FAIL Nice Mockup! CAn't wait to see your mission launch pix!

So I have an Itch to write another article... Problem is.. I have NO IDEA what I want to write it on. Looking for suggestions for my next historical article. A couple of things I won't write about: I won't write about Nuclear weapons, nor the Ballistic missile side of the space race other than in the pure space sense. (don't ask me to write an article on how the Peacekeeper guided it's warheads for example, but I could write one on how it evolved into the Minotaur IV/V/VI)

A) I am using KSRSS 2.5, B) Yes RSS/RP1 HAS in the past utilized BDB, but that is up to them to support. With all the major changes to saturn I do not know if they are up to date with current BDB release yet however... again up to the RSS/RP1 community to maintain, not something the BDB team does.

An interesting rocket idea... one that could have been easily built IRL (assuming tooling for large ~4m tanks was available )