Pappystein

good news it appears to only affect the heat-shield at-least

There were 4(?) designs for the C-2 that I am semi-aware of. Most are known only by TEXT descriptions (no drawing exists.) The OG C-2 was the S-I JunoV stage plus the S-III stage, S-IV(4 engine 20 inch smaller diameter) Payload on top. Then there was the C-2 payload carrier which had a slightly bigger S-III stage and the full up 4(6 in actuality) engine S-IV (the as built diameter and size). This is the one we all "know about" with S-III. Then there was the Substitution of the S-II for the 4 engine S-II, which only makes sense if the JunoV stage (S-I) is E-1 powered as the E-1s had growth potential and the H-1s really didn't. Really it is the cancellation of the E-1 that doomed Saturn C-2, more than anything else. Lastly, there is the fanciful C-2 with the long S-II stage powered by H-1s. It could carry a tiny payload into a HIGH orbit. So if you needed say a 1000lb payload at 8000km orbit, this one would do that (fictitious numbers to give you an idea of what it could do)

****WHICH**** Saturn C are you looking for. C-1 and C-2are buildable and Mostly buildable (for the PRE 1960 C-2) The Pre 1960 C-2 just needs a double J-2 Engine mount (I typically Use the ETS S-IVB mount for this with the old parts) If you are looking for Post 1960 but pre Silverstein C-2 it is harder.... Same is true of the C-3. C-4 is mostly buildable right now as well. (well atleast the S-IC-4 stage is buildable!)

OPINION: The only way Saturn C-8 makes sense is if there is an actual Nova Parts pack as several Nova Rockets used similar diameters (or larger) than the Saturn C-8. Who, not already on the BDB team, wants to volunteer to build that? FACT: There is not enough HARD design work on the C-8 or the Nova rockets for most artists to be willing to take much of a stab at them. If you were to somehow get 10 artists of the caliber of Cobalt, Zorg, InvaderChaos, Estreet, Beale, Nertea etc to all do the exact same Nova Rocket, none would look like any of the others except in general outline. If you took the same crew and said "Make Saturn V" They would all be broadly identical with only nuance and minor amounts of difference between them. Why? Because much of the detail that we love in mods like BDB comes from actual design drawings, not the artists imagination. These amazing and wonderful artists spend all their efforts in getting the models right. Utilizing a drawing, a picture or even a toy to get the information correct is a completely different process than magically guessing what it should look like and having it be right. Mind you convincing that many artists to all make the same thing for KSP would be rather wasteful. ALSO: THANKS to everyone jumping on the Saturn C-8 is Not a Nova

HA! I didn't even notice. I had issues the previous itteration of the update with ZERO effects. Now I have no waterfall effects and the Old school partical stuff... will look at fixing that ASAP! naw don't fret over it. You have the exact edition my source mentions. Yet again a source cite that has nothing to do with the source or the cited materials

Hmm. Love with sources cite X Y or Z and then when you get X Y or Z nothing is there.... any info on Titan? The Rocketdyne S-4 was the 2nd stage engine for Titan I as an alternative to the LR91 (E-1 first stage S-4 2nd stage)

Basic Saturn I and Saturn V with SOME INT/MLV and a little of the ETS stuff + Saturn ID I think that is everything currently

yes Please. AS the S-4 evolved into the LR105

Bob the Builder? Frank Lloyd Wright? the suspense is killing me OHH Maybe just MAYBE it is an old Janes AWA

Just submitted a Pull request to remove most of my Pafftek files in the Extras folder. They were all obsolete (Titan, Saturn etc) Some parts (The J-2T-400K and H-2) will remain. But things like HG-3 will be gone once the PR is activated and accepted by the Dev team. Just wanted to give everyone fair warning before the next update

Sorry I didn't catch this earlier. Both Thor and Atlas used the same Vernier... in both cases they are LR101s. The LR105 is the S-4 sustainer on the Atlas

My very Rare lately screenshot tax. Got all my required tasking done early today (yay!) Rocket: Saturn II INT-18-5xSMRU3-Skylab yes that is a mouthful Stages: 0- 5x SMRU-3Segment 1- MS-IIA with 5x J-2T-400K (in the BDB extras folder) 2- MS-IVB with 1x J-2T-400K Payload: Skylab+ Unfortunately, as the eagle eyed players will notice. I will need to launch this rocket.... AGAIN. I made a mistake and did not have HABTECH2 installed and thus have the wrong dockingport onboard

Some notes for the Future FAQ update @Friznit 1) Saturn VFB solar array. PUT ON AN ACTION GROUP. As you unfold one pannel, it covers the next and you have to zoom in real close and be lucky with your clicks to get a hidden panel open if you do it manually! 2) Saturn S-ID Brake Fins. Have TWO SEPARATE Air Brakes. Make certain you include both of them if you are using Action groups (other than the BRAKE GROUP) to activate. I used the S-ID in a Saturn MLV-VFB booster with the 6 F-1 first stage... it began spnning as soon as it hit atmosphere as only half of the air brakes were deployed

Damn, Going to have to re-write my Fuel patch for Apollo. AZ50/NTO is breaking the SIM bay On another note. Any chance of the Apollo CM decoupler getting an arm extension option down the line? I tend to use the AARDV Probe core between the HeatShield and the CM so I can fly all Civilians/Scientist/Engineers who for some reason don't have even a rudimentary pilot training of NOT hitting the buttons so I can get to space. Obviously this is the old AARDV core since the new one isn't ready yet. Low priority but I thought I would mention it

The plan was to take the various components of the S-IVB IU and break them apart and put them on a bigger ring. There is one planned for the Mod I believe but if you have tweakscale, you can make a simple patch if it isn't already covered by one to scale it up.

So when do we get the Atlas Space Shuttle? Oh I am sorry. MANNED GLIDERS ???? Could you either explain or point to a link explaining the Wolfe's Decree? I know nothing about it. But thanks for the link have just Downloaded

Followup to last nights post. Not all of the Nova Program final reports were easy to find on the NTRS server. I did not go looking further than to type the word NOVA in. and on the right side click the Space Vehicles button. Given these reports are some of the foundation of NASA I would guess we could find all of them on the NTRS servers if we had a better way to search. If you find the missing ones, please link the numbers back here!

Interesting Idea. *YOINK* It is now mine seriously... why did I never think of this when the new engines came along!?

Which Generation of NOVA do you want Starhelperdude??? First generation never got far... they were a "competitor" to the Von Braun "Juno V" system which became Saturn. Silverstein pushed Nova into an "after Saturn" program and a technology breeder FOR Saturn and the future of space flight... Accepted into production was Juno V as Saturn I and Titan C as Titan IIIA/B/C. It should be noted THIS, the Civilian NASA decision to go ahead with Titan C is a big part of the reason the UA-1205s are not SR47s (a USAF designation for the original UA-1205) Second Generation is where the Crazy Shenanigans begin. Third Generation was paper studies for alternative rocket designs... mostly to keep companies not making Shuttle in the game.... only lasted a couple of years in the mid 1970s As much as I don't trust it as a reliable source. Astronautix has a fair bit on NOVA... I will post links to this message in a few minutes once I find them. http://www.astronautix.com/n/nova.html Again not the most trustworthy. But it gives you a quick and dirty, without reading through NASA reports *START* to your Nova experience The Actual Silverstein report may give you some better info: https://archive.org/details/DTIC_AD0341745/page/n5/mode/2up More about the changes to the NOVA program than the individual rockets but it sets the stage. NTRS reports https://ntrs.nasa.gov 19640012565 19660012934 19630022928 19630013328 19630000838

I won't put words in other peoples work load... So I am just going to paraphrase something CobaltWolf has said multiple times. "we will get the already in game assets replaced FIRST" Remember the Saturn Engines and S-ID were the first steps of this art revamp that we are now going through. The Engines do not need to be replaced and S-ID just needed to be finished (well started over but like the other existing parts it all the planning work was already done.) You could say S-ID falls into that "replace the asset" category even if we have never been able to play with it! =============================================== I ***THINK*** the first step is getting the basic textures and assets done. Then updating them with new textures can come "Easily" *I can't do it but hey it might be easy for an artist like them* In short, Please have a little patience. I know I know... it is HARD to do so with something so exiting and Awesome as new Saturn stuff. ***UGH Web browser WHY did you fail me.*** Sorry for the necro post... Browser literally showed the post I responeded to as the most recent. SHRUG

and the second J-2X program is what gives us the fun Aerospikes... Like the J-2T-200K, -2T-250K, -2T-400K (only one of those not built) and the J-2L-200K *COUGH* LTBE L-1 and LTBE L-2 and via the X-33 program the XRS-2200. Unlike the First J-2X program the Second one resulted in hardware creation for every option except the J-2T-400K. None of the Hardware was flight capable but they did make all of the other engines I mention above.... yet is is only the THIRD J-2X program that people seem to want to talk about... and it has nothing to do with the J-2 or J-2S engine. AIR BRAKES! THANK YOU THANK YOU!

Nice Alternate of the Saturn II INT-19. I assume those are GEM engines. Real INT-19 would have been using TU-122 (Civilian use version of the first stage from Minuteman ICBM) The Algol is a close fit (size wise) but the performance is way out there.

OPINON: The payload is ON THE GROUND in those angles.... But also realize, these were more for "hey we can land here how do we get rid of it" test flights....

Potentially they are competing projects... I really should check the link you provide before I reply The Lunar Leaper itself is not in my report but every other piece of art work/drawings is. So yeah Same thing! Fun part about the report I cited... has the Fortran simulation program in the end... so if anyone has a Fortran IV system and has the punch cards to make the program... you could run the simulations that said this was a good idea yourself

covers the Retro rockets So on the Subject of the S-IVC(NASA) I did another dive down the NTRS rabbit hole. Found document 19680020292 Which comes up every time I search for S-IVC or S-4C... Has the lunar HOPPER... The one man Hopper is propelled by it's LEGS like a Kangaroo! Looking over the info... it is not a vehicle I would want to ride... also heavier the the Rover.... the four outer legs are basically springs to keep you upright while adding to the "jump" force.... The fact that some engineer thought this was a good idea... sheesh