Pappystein

It is like you were reading my mind! The right part is almost exactly what I was going to do to Kitbash the RM-1 and RM-2 nodes for the Russian Segment of the ISS (full build as proposed) (not the quad with the awesome covers but more the body with the "science experiemnts/tanks" The new parts are looking AMAZING...

So a couple "Screen Tax" shots for you all. First off, if you haven't checked it out yet EStreetRockets has a new mod called https://spacedock.info/mod/2729/Rocket Motor Menagerie Current Status of my Station: I am going for the "Full proposed" ISS + some extras... like Skylab... and a BigGemini rescue boat (hidden on the back side of this pic) I am making a few changes to fit the parts I have (like the extra "AFT" Russian docking node... to make room for a TKS derived SPP I am thinking about) And yes the Unit Node is backwards (and I am not changing it) (PS the Titan LDC in these pictures is 100% recoverable via Staged Recovery! The Transtage CAN be recovered (I can recover 3 or 4 per shuttle launch to the station depending on configuration of the Transtage))

So I have been slowly (mostly due to my issues with the various mods that introduce Canadarms) building a "full Proposed+" ISS. I am using HABtech2, Tantares, BDB and a couple other station part mods, and mostly Kerbolrise for an alternative shuttle alongside SOCKS. Aside from the fact that no one has made either the RM1/RM2 research modules (should be easyish to kitbash) or the SPPP (much harder to kitbash) the station is now going along swimmingly once I ditched both SOCKS and Kerbolrise shuttles. (No offense Benjee10, just can't use the dang robot arms to save my life!) I thought I would share my current progress on this forum since most of the parts are from Habtech2 A few things that someone might want to point out. 1) Transtages? yep I am almost exclusively using a CH4 fueled Titan LDC stage from BDB and using the Transtage as the final "tug" given storable fuel. 2) Unity Node is backwards. this was intentional... (you all believe me right!?) 3)Skylab! Yeah alt history bigtime... Skylab has an C100 docking port with 2 drogue docking ports. making Skylab the US gateway for older LV/ships 4) Big Gemini! See 3 above! What you don't see is I lost 4 whole Stations in this play-through due to Candarm causing bad collisions. This is almost certainly a PEBKAC error... but since I can't figure the robotics out in KSP it can go hang. I actually planned on a total of 26 Shuttle launches (16 SOCKS and 10 Keroblrise) I like both shuttles. Use em both to deploy satellites and retrieve Sats (And sometimes my Transtage tugs!) But I can't use the Robot arm, which means they are nearly useless at the station. So instead I have been using the STME powered (CH4) BDB LDC Titan. The STME is from EStreetRockets and their Rocket Motor Menagerie. I am possibly going to also begin using their Angara Launcher for future Russian launches.

Anyone know where I could find the parts to build the originally proposed SPPP for ISS? I am no so worried about the 4x solar wings as those would take a ton of parts and not work as tracking panels... I am more worried about the 3 step body of the Module. Any thoughts? I am currently contemplating using a TKS with the upper cone replaced with a long structure full of Solar Arrays. But that is short and fat (with open Girders) and just slapping 8x Zvezda Solar arrays on it. The Current Status of my "Full proposed+" ISS. (I didn't unlock the Solar panels for the ROS/DOS modules until much latter than the actual hulls YES that is a Skylab attached (and it will remain so) HABTech2, Tantares, BDB, and a couple other Station mods (who's names currently escape me since I haven't launched any of their parts) will make up this station. Due to issues with me controling the various robot arms between SOCKs and Kerbolrise, Most of these modules were launched on Titan or Titan LDC/Delta IV. I created an "AFT" docking Node in the Russian section (to the right, with a Transtage tug docked currently) This is because of my contemplated TKS derived SPPP. Playing in JNSQ 1.11.2 KSP. And before it is pointed out, yes the Unity Node is backwards and it is hard to make out but the current Station Escape craft is a Big Gemni on the bottom side of Skylab

No I am trying to build the Whole thing, including the 6x Solar wings. Thanks for the tip on the pressure vessel though!

So I have mentioned I am slowly building an "Alternative" ISS. I plan on doing much of the Original unbuilt ISS proposal with a few alternatives of my own thrown in. I just haven't figured out what to make the Russian Power module's Hull out of. 1) I have a fleet of 12 space shuttles from SOCKs. I chose to "Update" Enterprise after the loss of Challenger AND order Endeavor and new production. The Moonraker line as they are affectionately know will perform an average of 8 flights a year (both the LC39 Launchpads AND ALL of the VAB would be used for this venture. 2) smaller parts to the station are actually launched on Transtage equipped Titan derivatives or for things like the PMAs, Delta IIH-HOSS. If you are wondering, yes the Skylab Final Position will NOT be where the Shuttles have to dock. Currently it is there because of solar panels... After I get the first 360x360 tracking solar array up it will move to it's permanent position below and facing RIGHT as you look at the International "front end" where the Shuttle docks in real life. Solar panels will be "retracted/removed" at that juncture. Skylab module will provide Legacy docking for any future Apollo or Gemini Life Boat LAunches.

Ignoring all of the other AWESOME stuff coming with the Saturn revamp. THIS THIS ALONE makes the wait worth it... IDK if Cobalt Even knew about the Gemini hatch being the Airlock until after he had already mostly built the OG Skylab. (going from stream memory 100 years ago so!)

well aware. I wasn't commenting on the fact that the engineers at Douglas, Boeing, McDonnald, and Lockheed + NASA weren't genius... just that it LOOKS more fragile. I am related (shirt tail) to one of the Lunar Rover engineers (he later went on to be one of the lead engineers on the Viper super car.) I am related to an Engineer who worked on The Service Module (even more distantly than the first) and my Uni Electronics Prof did several (3) switches on the LM for Grumman (at 6 years of work!) It amazes me that none of them used a calculator... all they had was either a Slide rule or if you believe one of them, a large abacus.

So you look at the skeletal legs of the ATM mount... and you think. This was mounted ontop of a rocket that could pull 4 or 5x the force of Gravity to get to space.... And you realize that the ATM itself is pretty massive.... And you wonder.... HOW THE HECK DIDN'T THIS break! The solar panel broke! This thing is at least 10x more likely to break! @Zorg You have knocked it out of the park. it may not be done but you already have your trip around the bases to score! *GAH I hate baseball why am I using baseball superlatives?!*

eh, not quite, In the original naming standards Centaur C was Saturn Centaur, Centaur A and B were to be single launch test centaurs on Atlas... making Centaur still designed for Atlas first. After the explosive failures of the A & B the funds for Centaur C were diverted to make what became the functional flights leading to Centaur D and latter D.1, D.2, D.3 etc Of course in the old naming nomenclature (Pre ULA taking over from NASA) the current centaurs would be called Centaur D.III and Centaur D.IV and D.V NASA standards the C (and latter after the initial failures the E family) of CEntaurs are Saturn Centaurs: the D family is for Atlas and Titan.... Then Challenger happened. And nothing stayed the same Point to remember... Consolidated Vultee (Convair) division of General Dynamics designed Atlas.... and Centaur... they meant for it to be launched on Atlas first. Probe locks! NICE! The Probe docking port looks really good. Has there been a solution derived for the latter (and larger) NASA spec APAS? Or is that going to be an all new upper hull component?

NICE... I see you have begun to mockup the 4.25 main hull as well. (Hurry Up Cobalt! KIDDING!) The Docking adapter... any thoughts to leaving it a Tri- docking adapter like the current one (with a docking port under the ATM for those of us who many not launch a Skylab with ATM? I don't know about other players but I tend to launch Skylab for AB-Historical stations. I am currently building an ISS+ Skylab in my current playthrough for example. It has taken me some serious re-orginization of the ISS. I have Zvezda, Harmony and Skylab all up in space currently (I think it is Harmony IDR which node I launched!) Skylab and Zvezda are providing the power.... the Zara module is my next launch (on a Moonraker SOCKs shuttle... launched on a Stretched Energia! Alternatively I am going to launch it on a Saturn II INT-18 using SMRU-3s The Russian DOS style modules are hard to get into position with the shuttle

I think he meant of the two options you proposed

Interesting builds. I haven't tried to use SRMs on the LDC Titan. Couple comments as some of these builds are actually proposed builds: 1) Mercury Titan I would likely have had 2 or 4 Algol SRMs, it wouldn't be a Zero stage like on the latter Titans, but would have increased the TWR enough to have stage separation near vacuum. The USAF's MISS program proposed that as a potential launcher. well more mentioned it than proposed it. Your Titan V Orion. Are you using LFO or Hydrolox for the Core stages? I run 5x J-2S on the first stage and 2x LR87 LH2 VAC engines on the LDC core and find it plenty powerful with plenty of d/v

First, I posted a month ago on the co-operative ReDirect forum that I have not launched either many ReDirect or SOCKs shuttles. That has changed recently. So I wanted to share some observations. 1) I love the configurability of SOCKs 2)I also love the alt colors in SOCKs recolor (most of my Shuttles fly as MoonRakers from 007. Orange is where it is at!) 3) I still haven't figured out how to get the manupilator arm to work effectively..... I have tried both IR and the stock expansion (but then again Robotic arms was never my thing. The fact that a realisitc one is included is a bonus... 4) Surprisingly this shuttle seems to fly best with either Alcentar's or Beal's Energia as the booster (rather than IRL SRM+DropTank.) I have both in my game mostly because I also have Alcentar's Kerbolrise shuttle. I am using a Hydrolox Patch on Alcentar's parts. I just stretch the Core stage to give enough Hydrolox for both the four RD0120s as well as the 3 SSMEs (or my last two launches were powered by BDB PW XLR129s.) 4a) I equate my conclusion in 4 due to the fact I am carrying over massed loads. With the Energia booster I am launching the DOS/TKS based Russian ISS Modules (Zvezda... etc) In the end, I am running three all up Shuttles on my playthrough. And each has uses and unique capabilities. The Kerbolrise is my "training" space shuttle. It has a more "aerodynamic" setup for engines and control but is least realistic of the three shuttles. I am running the old school sooper detailed (too detailed IMHO) Buran, as well as SOCKs. Of the three the SOCKs shuttle most accurately flys in the glide to base as well as at launch. The Kerbolrise shuttle is best in orbital maneuvers, and the old Buran shuttle... is ugly from the start and it is missing something (a good RD-58 engine for example.) So to end this little post. Thanks Benjee10, this mod is an amazing addition to your mod catalog!

NO But still not something that CobaltWolf is a fan of doing... (sorry this gets covered a lot and I posted on this literally 3 pages back) Saturn C-8 has NEXT to nothing to do with NOVA... it was ONE of the Saturn Concepts for Direct Ascent and quickly voted the LEAST likely! HOWEVER Someone in Congress (not NASA) thought it should be included in NOVA...... AFTER both NOVA and actual Saturn C-8 dev WERE OVER. Saturn C-8 as well as any of the potential NOVA rockets were separately replaced by Saturn MLV. Now to your MLV choices for Direct Ascent are 5x or 6x F-1A Stretched MS-IC tankage first stage (max stretch), MS-IIA 2nd stage tankage (the longest stretch) with S-IVC or the MS-IVB stretch on top. Likely the first stage would have had 2x twin F-1A boosters OR 4x 156" SRMs (likely the Thiokol ones that with further evolution became the Space Shuttle SRM.) It is possible that 4x UA-1207 or UA-1208s could have been used as well. YES There was an Actual S-IVC proposed in Saturn... This is not the ETS S-IVC. It was a single ADVANCED Hydrolox powered stretched S-IVB. Go for RL20 Vac! Do you have Tweakscale RECAL installed? WIthout it B9PS parts can break with Tweakscale in my experience Warning, KSP REcall not compatable with Smart Parts (sad panda noises!)

Bluuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuueeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Columbium (sorry Niobium for you all in Europe) Engine bells so pretty with their blueish black color!

And Some of us have converted say Titan Engines to AZ50/NTO (as well as the SPS for Apollo ) sadly I am lazy and not willing to play with IRFNA-III, IRFNA-IV (HDA), UDMH, any of the MONs or MMH

Pershing could be a neat MICRO satelite launcher. Because the problem is it's diameter IRL just less than 1 meter. that would be a 0.625 scale Sold rocket Sat launcher in KSP Actually that would be pretty neat if you think about it.

Zorg, WHY WHY must you do this so well and so.... er .... um EARLY?!?!?! There are no Saturn Vs fit to launch this yet! Looks amazing. Can't wait to see what you do finishing this up as well as the rest of Skylab. Skylab is one of those programs that continued to shrink from it's orgional goal... never did it really grow. It would be intersting to see some AB-History parts for Skylab (tracking solar arrays for the ATM comes to mind for example.) A node on the Dish side to all a special skeletal decoupler for Saturn II launches as a stand alone (skylab not included) I say Saturn II only because we all know the Saturn IB is thrust and Delta V limited... A C-2(1959) would be a much better payload launch platform with it's S-III stage.... Geeze I hope the S-III stage will still be build-able... even if it isn't BDB approved

Several LDC type Titans were planed with *PLACEHOLDER* engines. IIRC the RL20 would be the best engine for a Hydrolox LDC.. but if you go all Hydrolox (1st, 2nd and any kick stages) then you can go J-2S Sea Level on the first stage and either LR87-LH2-VAC or J-2S on the 2nd stage (I prefer the LR87s myself) No Solids needed. IRL the Hydolox Titans would have all launched with UA1204 or UA1205s.

Downloading for LRB for SOCKS Shuttle. Can't wait to see more! `

Yeah that is the LATE (post 1960) version of the Saturn C2. The PRE 1960 version had the S-III stage between the S-I and the S-IV. The S-III stage was a twin J-2 with a small tank (use the ETS Saturn IVC extension tank for a good simulation, with it's twin engine mount) IIRC and Friznit would have to answer for certain but I think he used Tweakscale to shrink down the S-II tankage and engine mount.

I can't answer your first question but I am guessing so (completely a guess) TO your second question, care to provide a link?

Alberro+ It is OK But yes it is a oft requested request... First off, FTR Nova is NOT a saturn Rocket (don't show me your Saturn C-8 rocket proposals and call em Nova... the C-8 is lumped into the Nova Program because a lower level NASA Flunkie caved to congressional pressure to include it in NOVA. AFTER THE NOVA PROGRAM WAS DONE! Sea Dragon has more in common with Nova than anything from the Saturn program... excepting the engines Heliotrope, that is exactly my take on what Saturn MLV is. Lets take the pie in the sky program known as NOVA and make it a buildable sustainable program.... AKA Saturn MLV

A line like.... "While some parts of the Nova Program may be in BDB a full up Nova Rocket in any form, including the Saturn C-8, is not planned nor will requests for this be implemented/actioned on." FWIW, M-1, J-2L, J-2T and J-2X Airmat are all parts of NOVA. But, so is F-1 Saturn MLV just co-opted the J-2 variants and M-1 well... Just like Project Nova co-opted the F-1 (it is literally the only part of Saturn or anything to do with Von Braun in the ACTUAL NOVA contracts)