Pappystein

If those Government Contract codes follow the method I understand, the YLR-91 was ordered on a contract in the year 1976. It shows the latest style of Thermal Blanket on it so maybe it is a prototype for the newer Ablative coatings. Decidedly not sure on this one. I tried looking up the Contract in my usual methods to no avail.

Which YLR-87? Were there not 5 different YLRs? I thought there were YLRs for the first Titan 1 as well as the First Titan 2.... And I THINK the Hydrolox development was funded as a YLR as well. For those not in the know... A Letter X proceeding an Aircraft or Engine designation means Prototype, not ready for service but will allow basic testing to proceed. A Y in front of the Aircraft or Engine Designation means SERVICE Prototype. IE it is designed for actual service use.... Notable Exceptions are the YF-22 and YF-23 and later where the "Service" Prototypes were anything but conceptual work (IE not the real aircraft.) Both of the YF-22 and YF-23 should have been given X-Plane (EG X-32) numbers as they are only Visually similar to the real aircraft that they were to represent. If you want more details I highly suggest spending some time on : Best US Designation rules and listing website

@MaverickSawyer do you know if they are AJ-11s or AJ-11As?

Actually some of the shape issues you are seeing is the Ablative blanket was applied differently (in differeing thicknesses) throughout the Life of the LR-87/LR-91 family. If you look closely, both at CobaltWolf's models as well as the pictures there is a sharp lip at the end of the Nozzle. That is the ACTUAL max diameter of the Bell. All that extra Chonky (did I spell that right?) look is straight from the use of thick ablative engine Blankets AKA Batting. The Aerojet LR-87/91 engines ended up with some of the nicest Blankets of all the 1st/2nd/3rd generation tube walled Rocket engines. But still it is something that burns off QUICKLY in flight. Bottom left corner shows the ACTUAL bell shape (dashed lines) and the Batting applied for thermal protection of the engine bell. Please note that that dashed line is for the EXTERIOR of the Bell not the Interior. Latter LR-91-AJ-11 or AJ-11A (unsure) look like this with the batting installed.: Please note the LR-87-AJ-11A in the background. (Visually the LR-87-AJ-11A seems to have those white conic exit nozzles for the Turbopump exhaust... I THINK and would love confirmation on that) The Round "spots" on the Engine bell are burn through patch to cause a Star like burn-through pattern to increase the radiated cooling effect of the batting. So to follow up on what Cobaltwolf was saying about incorrectly labeled space objects in museums. Here is another AIR and SPACE blunder https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/upper-stage-launch-vehicle-agena-b The Caption calls it an Aerobee Nosecone... so about 15 inches in Diameter. The article attached and the photograph are both of an Agena-B Upper stage with an empty payload fairing. Agena B is ~65" in Diameter.... Or about 4.3* bigger.

So I like to test parts on Space-planes before putting them on rockets. For decouplers one of my tests is an Unloaded GEM-60 mounted on the SPINE of a Space Plane. Does the Decoupler at mach 3+ cleanly separate it. This Medium Decoupler is Amazing. 10 tests at 1km and 2330m/s no tail strikes. The force settings are about prefect for a GEM46/GEM60 payload. For KSP level explodieness I consider a part *GOOD* if 6 out of 10 separations are strike free! Lets not talk about what happens to the drone cores on my test bird a few seconds AFTER I do the tests.... They tend to go into Plasma blackout and tumble or worse overheat and explode.

Thanks for posting that. Love how the bottom of the station has a J-2T drawn on it but with no obvious fuel source. Is that a Wet to dry lab similar to the Saturn Venus Flyby?

Saturn IVB and Saturn IVC of course? Maybe an unloaded AJ-260? After all the Guppy was ordered for carting Saturn S-IVBs from Douglas California to NASA Florida, (admittedly the original Guppy was a private venture but NASA saw the need for it in Saturn.) @FahmiRBLXian If you are referring to DMP as Dark Multiplayer... an Update to 1.6 is on Spacedock.

Siet, first welcome to the forums. 2nd, we would need a LOT more data before we could answer what is happening. As no-one else seems to have this issue we couldn't begin to guess by just the symptom. Follow the linked information to provide the kind of information that the mod developer would need to help you please.

n a word. NO. Simply put everything you propose could HELP but would obliterate the entire purpose of the exercise... To reduce Cost vs tank+2x SRB. But let me break it down for you S-1C changes proposed and result: F-1 engines with 20 degrees of Gimbal. This one will literally double or WORSE the mass of a S-1C rocket stage. HUGE cost increase. and the stage is now no longer capable of lifting itself plus a Shuttle/Hydrolox tank to the edge of space. Grid Fins. While the Soviet Union used them on several Rockets and Missiles prior to the RVV-AE prototypes to the R-77 "AA-12 Adder/Amramski". Until the R-77 started testing, the western world pretty much dismissed them as a hoax or as an air-brake that gave some semblance of control. Elevons on shuttle? They were already there. Adding additional control surfaces would only serve 2 purposes. Increase the amount of lead ballast in the nose and further reduce the load capability of the space shuttle. now if you want to talk about a way that the Saturn could be used to replace the Space shuttle.... Well then you kind of have to look at what McDonald Douglas was proposing for their Big-Gemini. But most of what was said about that program... outside of the actual Big-G capsule itself or the various Service Modules is pure hype and no actual engineering of any form was thrown at it.

I wanted to touch base on this. Please PLEASE read http://www.space-travel.com/reports/Cult_spacecraft_Part_One_The_Little_Spaceplane_That_Could_Not_999.html Before you go further. There is no way on this green and blue Earth that Saturn Shuttle would have flown as pictured in that photo. The sucker would almost immediately Topple over into a tumble on launch. The wings need to be in the back/bottom of a rocket. Putting a shuttle on TOP of a rocket spells disaster. This is SIMPLE Aerodynamics. The Whole point of that proposal was to "save money" You need a pair of wings in each direction = to at least 1.5x the surface area generated by the Shuttle (Side, Top/Bottom) Probably closer to 4-5x the size. You end up with wings bigger than my Avatar's (XB-70 Valkyrie) There is no way something that large would A) Fit in the VAB, and more importantly B) somehow save money. Cool Idea by some bean-counter who didn't know anything about aerodynamics. Even the Pictures of the X-20 on top of Titan have control surfaces that are too small. Now if they wanted to use 2x AJ-260s from Saturn to launch the Shuttle into space (probably Munar altitude....) That might have been neat......... Hmm... Turns on KSP In the end. Yes it LOOKS AMAZING.... Too bad it can not in any way, shape, or form, work as depicted... and MORE IMPORTANTLY too bad CobaltWolf does not like space shuttles/want to do a Space Shuttle mod.

On top of what Saltshaker has already said... And CobaltWolf above in the post above yours hieywiey, The Diameter of Saturn in the game currently causes some limitations. A 6 engine mount just dose not work with a same scale F-1 engine on the current diameter. To fit all the engines would have to hang OUTSIDE the engine mount.. I am sure someone could rig something up but it wouldn't look right / the Engine bells would be able to hit each other.... Further MOST of the MLV studies did NOT increase the number of F-1 engines... only a couple of them did and were quickly eliminated from contention (too much costs... MLV was all about using Existing Saturn Hardware and keeping costs down as much as possible while doing something new. F-1A Engine was already developed prior to the point of MLV thus F-1A would be used for MOST of the proposals. Lastly, why not just strap some AJ-260s onto your MLV.... That is what they are there for (and Solid Saturn I but that is another conversation). CobaltWolf did an AMAZING job making those beasts.. I have yet to need more than 2 of them for my biggest MLV launches... And Best of all... 3 of them were ACTUALLY MADE and FIRED... so LIKE the F-1A they are a real world part available.

Abpilot, I have flown Alcentar's Energia at-least 40 times (from his old LCA mod) with the CA-Buran-analog... Heck with some extra tankage I have even used Energia to launch a US STS Space Shuttle with it's 3 RS-25/SSME engines running.... I have not used KJR since 1.0.5 (I think.) why not just learn to use STOCK strengthening of your rockets? The functionality is already in the game and it actually works. While Ferram4 does amazing work.. using less mods = less problems. Alcentar, thanks for re-launching this set of parts. I am downloading it now! As others have asked I too would love a Alcentar created Energia-Vulkan. The Vulkan is in my opinion one of the best ideas that came out of the whole Energia program

No issues Tater.... It could very well be that it is based upon cfgs I wrote for SSTU from oh... 1.5 years ago.. It SHOULDN'T be different (other than the change of 2 resource names.) but IDK.

Are the Dockingports individual or are they all one part? That is a pretty neat looking start.... You have some great details on the tug that bring color to the drab (silver/grey) world of Apollo.... I like that. I could see THAT being used for ASTP instead of that black cylinder with the boxy attachments like IRL. Put an Soyuz docking port on one side and either a Probe/Drogue or APAS on the Apollo side.

True but I mention it because someone might want to power it by TWR-201s or something else not to design. For my purposes I was looking for a 2x with a docking port in the middle.... I haven't fired up KSP since Battletech Flashpoint came out so I can't be certain, but I think your 2 engine mount has the engines close coupled with no space for a docking port. And I am glad to help wherever I can, if you wish you can include the Tweakscale or B9 Fuel conversions right into your mod if you wish. I also have a SSTU tank conversion but my tester hasn't gotten back to me on it's functionality!

I have used those RD-0120s with other mods before so I am pretty certain they will work fine. So I re-downloaded LCA and realized I totally forgot Alcentar did not support anything but pure stock... SO.. Copy the below and save it as RD0120SSTU.cfg anywhere Will create a new "false" mod called zzzzSSTU to modify the RD0120 to work with SSTU and proper Hydrolox fuels.

I would add to Shadowmage's comments, almost any mod with Energia would have the RD-0120... I think there are 5 or 6 of them out there. my Favorite is no longer produced but still available on Spacedock. The Energia is very hard to put together but a brute in flight. The engines are well made artistically... I THINK they would be 100% compatible with SSTU by just dropping the mod in.

Or download the masters file on the Github, as it has the latest B9PartSwitch. I know I didn't upgrade B9PS on it's own and it is working fine for me in 1.5.1 But THANKS for posting that for the people who haven't downloaded the most up to date version of BDB! Just verified the Master file has B9PS updated on or about November 19th. PS it looks like I have to download the masters again with that new awesome boat-tail for the Atlas-V.....

So question. JSO how did you skip in? shallow or deep? The reason I ask is I have tried to do a Sanger Skip orbital flight for years with KSP and have utterly failed... Just trying to figure out if it is the guy behind the Keyboard or of that is a KSP limitation.

Actually I believe there is a LOT more work to it then that. The steps to localization as I see it: An English Localization file would have to be made. then Every part in the mod would have to be remade Test English Localization THEN a different (Russian in Gapone's case) file would have to be made. rinse and repeat the testing. Test Russian Localization to base mod settings the a Real Names English Localziation would have to be made Test English Real Names Loc Then a Russian Real names would have to be made Test Russian Real Names Loc Assuming Gapone is going to use Real names, it will also have to be translated into Russian.... that is a 4th Localization file that would have to be made. Now for some good better news. @Gapone you have a passion and desire to see this project moved forward. The best thing you can do is find out how to make the Dictionary.cfg yourself and start writing out the Russian Localization for the stock mod as well as the RealNames in Russian. The Title, The Description and the Tags would all need the localization if not more... I think that mod-manager can be used to insert localization into a mod by altering the data fields for description and the like. This would allow you to both build and test the localization, isolated from the main mod development.... If that is something you want to put the effort into. I the end both JSO and CobaltWolf have been willing to add other peoples content to the mod in the past... if it makes sense and does not blow the mod up. Why else is there a BDB extras folder?

@AlphaMensae I will go on the record stating that I am apposed to splitting BDB up in any way at all. While I do feel the parts could use a good re-organization and isolation... @CobaltWolf is already doing that. One part at a time. Having said that however your point of a "Core" and "Expanded" BDB actually makes the most sense of any proposed "splits" of BDB I have read or chatted about (Discord/Twitch etc.) Well thought out and there is a point. The Expansion RELIES on the Core so textures and models could be re-used. The drawback is I see there would have to be a full time "Moderator" to maintain what is core and what is not.... To verify add on functionality (EG B9PS, TAC-LS, whatever other "compatibly" change,) and the Hold the line for everything. Adding more permanent hands might seem to make Cobaltwolf's job easier but it makes more "Make Work" It is for these reasons in part that I am apposed to splitting BDB up. Butyour suggestions are the most well thought out and cleanest split suggestions I have seen. BDB isn't BDB without the history of US space flight in it. Just support a Gemini pack might be good for one or 5 people but that does NOT in my opinion represent that special thing that BDB is all about. Truthfully what is needed is a way to clone the Cobaltwolf Texturing/Modeling ability 5 or 6 times over so that each clone's work looks JUST as good as Cobalt's.... We need to clone 3 or 4 JSO's so the number crunching / testing can be spread around and we need to find a way to FUND all of these people to only work on this mod 30+ hours a week... no extra job needed to live a great life! Sadly I am not a multi-millionaire (or I would be working on buying my first big truck as pictured in my avatar) and sadly no one has found a legal way to clone people yet..... Ok so I took a serious statement and gave you both a serious reply and a funny(ish) reply.

So no Vixens for you? In all seriousness I will confirm this @Jso If you are not using RealNames the engine shows up as Vixen.

@CobaltWolf Thanks for re-posting that here. It gives us your followers a good "minds's eye" view into what you are going through and your plans.

1) Nice set of pictures! I really like how you tried to take them all at the same altitude and same attitude of flight! 2) I to am running a lot of E-1 powered Saturns. and they are AWESOME. The weight savings vs the minimal thrust gain adds a bit of Delta-V for sure. And, I am not certain without re-reading the CFG files, but I don't even thing those are the Ultimate E-1 but rather the proposed TITAN version (the E-1 received a boost to thrust for the Saturn Proposal.) The huge jump in performance is likely due to the "fun" of KSP 0.64 scale. 3) I could see a E-1 powered Saturn Multibody actually making cheaper flights to the moon with the E-1 engines. Might need to use the S-IVC stretch tank with a single J-2 engine (or 2 J-2s) but I could see it being an actuality.... If there was a good way with early 1970s tech to Man rate strap on boosters (short of implosive destruction....) Dang Marcelo great work! Awesome! As a followup I have bookmarked the page of charts because they are BEYOND Awesome! Thanks for calculating out charts so we don't have to do all the hard math by hand!

I will simplify it a bit. DOS parts TKS, PWR, CORE/HAB/LAB and Entertainment are in my station with solar panels... Still hasn't tripped. I have not unlocked much of the COS parts yet (the science from THAT first station launch was going to power the COS unlock.... Basically none of the TKS derived parts seem to populate as having Solar panels but I have not launched ALL the TKS derived parts yet..