[WIP] [RELEASED] ShadowWorks - Stockalike Space Launch System (SLS) & More

[_Augustus_]

Here are some development renders of the SLS core stage and ICPS. The core stage is 5m just like the External Tank for obvious reasons. The ICPS main diameter is 3.125m. Using the image I am to model from, 3.125 happened to fit quite nicely. This also solidified the decision to make the Orion 3.125m as opposed to 3.75m.

Renders:

Core Stage, Interstage, ICPS

http://i.imgur.com/UkOD8tD.png

Close-up of the ICPS and Interstage

http://i.imgur.com/re5c68u.png

Im planning to make the three-part fairing covering the Service Module like engine fairings, if only to simplify the building process for everyone and avoid any hassle with the procedural fairings.

Do orange paint!

[TheShadow1138]

Do orange paint!

At the moment I plan only to do the white and black scheme as it has been depicted in all official images and animations. You are welcome to make an orange texture once I release the parts if you wish, but I have no plans to make one.

[TheShadow1138]

Here's an update render of the now fully textured Core Stage of the SLS, and the 5-Segment SRB.

The SRB uses the same texture as the Shuttle's 4-Segment SRB, so that's at least some savings.

[_Augustus_]

Here's an update render of the now fully textured Core Stage of the SLS, and the 5-Segment SRB.

http://i.imgur.com/z4st3mP.png

The SRB uses the same texture as the Shuttle's 4-Segment SRB, so that's at least some savings.

The paint needs to be darkened

[Kibble]

Do orange paint!

The orange isn't paint, it's spray-on polyurethane foam insulation. Space Launch System was recently depicted in offical NASA paperwork leading up to the CDR in its correct unpainted orange form.

[TheShadow1138]

The paint needs to be darkened

Which paint? Where? The Core Stage's grayish-white pretty closely matches the grayish-white of the booster.

Space Launch System was recently depicted in offical NASA paperwork leading up to the CDR in its correct unpainted orange form.

Could you point me towards that documentation. All the articles and images I've seen thus far from NASA show a white and black tank.

[Kibble]

Could you point me towards that documentation. All the articles and images I've seen thus far from NASA show a white and black tank.

One image from the document, as well as a link to the full thing is provided in the following article, however access to the document is limited to users with a payed account to the host site: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/05/sls-team-working-thousands-pages-cdr-documentation/

[TheShadow1138]

One image from the document, as well as a link to the full thing is provided in the following article, however access to the document is limited to users with a payed account to the host site: http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/05/sls-team-working-thousands-pages-cdr-documentation/

Thanks for the link, but since I can't view the original document I can't independently confirm anything about the nature of the image. The design of the vehicle in that image also appears to be different from earlier depictions. Keeping in mind that I don't know exactly what all goes into these CDRs I consider that it may be possible that this could represent an alternative (perhaps quicker) path to get SLS flying within the time constraints should it be determined that the current path is not progressing as it should to meat cost thresholds and deadlines. The image is presented out of context, and as I said, since I cannot view the document I cannot see it in the proper context. I'm not saying that the author of the article is being misleading, just that I can't see it as he does and so can only rely on his assessment, which may or may not be correct. I also don't agree with the author's phrasing of "Notably, SLS is now shown in official documentation in her correct appearance, with an unpainted core." To me it indicates a bias on the part of the author. Is it "correct" based on the author's opinion, or is it correct based on statements from NASA, I don't know.

Thus far, the images and other media that NASA has officially released to the public show a white and black core stage for the Block I and Block II configurations with no hint that it may fly as an unpainted orange tank. I realize that this may be because they wish to invoke the memory of the Saturn V, but personally I don't understand the purpose behind depicting the vehicle in a complete white and black paint scheme if you never intend to fly it in that scheme.

I will say that I personally prefer the look of the white and black core stage, and it is for that reason and because all officially released NASA imagery depicts a white and black core, the initial release will have only a white and black core stage. If and when NASA officially releases for public consumption imagery of the SLS with an unpainted orange Core Stage I will make an orange alternative texture for the Core Stage.

[_Augustus_]

Thanks for the link, but since I can't view the original document I can't independently confirm anything about the nature of the image. The design of the vehicle in that image also appears to be different from earlier depictions. Keeping in mind that I don't know exactly what all goes into these CDRs I consider that it may be possible that this could represent an alternative (perhaps quicker) path to get SLS flying within the time constraints should it be determined that the current path is not progressing as it should to meat cost thresholds and deadlines. The image is presented out of context, and as I said, since I cannot view the document I cannot see it in the proper context. I'm not saying that the author of the article is being misleading, just that I can't see it as he does and so can only rely on his assessment, which may or may not be correct. I also don't agree with the author's phrasing of "Notably, SLS is now shown in official documentation in her correct appearance, with an unpainted core." To me it indicates a bias on the part of the author. Is it "correct" based on the author's opinion, or is it correct based on statements from NASA, I don't know.

Thus far, the images and other media that NASA has officially released to the public show a white and black core stage for the Block I and Block II configurations with no hint that it may fly as an unpainted orange tank. I realize that this may be because they wish to invoke the memory of the Saturn V, but personally I don't understand the purpose behind depicting the vehicle in a complete white and black paint scheme if you never intend to fly it in that scheme.

I will say that I personally prefer the look of the white and black core stage, and it is for that reason and because all officially released NASA imagery depicts a white and black core, the initial release will have only a white and black core stage. If and when NASA officially releases for public consumption imagery of the SLS with an unpainted orange Core Stage I will make an orange alternative texture for the Core Stage.

I have the same policy with BL.

[Doggydog]

Just a small thing with the orange vs white and black. STS 1 and 2 Both flew with painted tanks, as will the first STS launch(probably). Past that, You get More cargo by not painting and it probably will not be painted. Just my 2 cents

[Kibble]

The design of the vehicle in that image also appears to be different from earlier depictions.

I'm pretty sure that is a depiction of the Block IB "workhorse" configuration with the new Exploration Upper Stage.

[TheShadow1138]

Just a small thing with the orange vs white and black. STS 1 and 2 Both flew with painted tanks, as will the first STS launch(probably). Past that, You get More cargo by not painting and it probably will not be painted. Just my 2 cents

This is true, but with the Space Shuttle it was believed that the white paint would benefit the insulating properties of the foam. After STS-2 it was determined that the paint was not providing enough of an improvement to be worth the time, money, and weight that it added to the vehicle and so was left off for the remainder of the Shuttle's service life.

It wasn't an instance where they decided beforehand to fly a white tank for a couple of missions and then not paint the tank afterwards, which is why it doesn't make sense (to me at least) when I read in places of people saying that NASA will be doing the same thing with the SLS (flying the first few with a white tank, and then all others in the unpainted orange). Why would you add weight unnecessarily when you know it will do you no good in neither the short-term, nor the long-term? It would represent a waste of time, money, and labor, which I would have to imagine would have been brought up a time or two during the proposal phase and probably the Core Stage Critical Design Review (CDR), but I don't know.

All I do know for certain is that all of the imagery that NASA has officially released for public consumption concerning the SLS shows a white and black Core Stage for the Block I (70 t), Block IB and Block II (130 t) configurations. So the question I would ask is why only depict the vehicle in a white and black paint scheme if you never intend to fly it in that paint scheme, or fly it only once or twice? Some may then ask me to consider that all imagery for the Space Shuttle leading up to the first launch depicted a white External Tank (ET), but it only flew twice in that paint scheme. To which I would point out what I said above; it was intended that all Shuttle flights would use the white tank until it was discovered that the paint provided no additional benefit. It was a decision made after flights began based on information obtained from those flights, not before any flight hardware was built, which is what some have suggested is happening for the SLS. I supposed this could somehow be the case, but again I don't know.

All we can really do is wait and see, as we won't no for certain until the first SLS is completed and stacked, or until NASA releases imagery to the public depicting the tank in unpainted orange. Something else, I would note is that with an unpainted orange Core Stage, the SLS becomes even more like an Ares V (minus one SSME).

I'm pretty sure that is a depiction of the Block IB "workhorse" configuration with the new Exploration Upper Stage.

Ah, you're right. For some reason I thought the spacecraft launch adapter looked taller than in the NASA image that was released showing the white tank.

Edited June 16, 2015 by TheShadow1138

[TheShadow1138]

A quick progress update. I've go a fair bit of the Block I SLS modeled, here's a rundown of progress on individual components:

* Core Stage - modeled and textured

* 5-Segment SRB - modeled and textured

* Interstage - modeled, UV unwrapped

* ICPS tank and engine - modeled and unwrapped

* Block I Spacecraft Launch Adapter - modeled

* Service Module & CM decoupler - modeled

* 3-petal SM fairing - modeled

* RCS pods - modeled

* Solar Panels - pending

* Orion capsule - pending

* LAS - modeled

Here's a render where you can get a better idea of how the ICPS will look:

[_Augustus_]

A quick progress update. I've go a fair bit of the Block I SLS modeled, here's a rundown of progress on individual components:

* Core Stage - modeled and textured

* 5-Segment SRB - modeled and textured

* Interstage - modeled, UV unwrapped

* ICPS tank and engine - modeled and unwrapped

* Block I Spacecraft Launch Adapter - modeled

* Service Module & CM decoupler - modeled

* 3-petal SM fairing - modeled

* RCS pods - modeled

* Solar Panels - pending

* Orion capsule - pending

* LAS - modeled

Here's a render where you can get a better idea of how the ICPS will look:

http://i.imgur.com/n1GKe6M.png

ICPS looks too small in comparison to Orion. Will the engine bell be toggleable?

[Kibble]

ICPS looks too small in comparison to Orion.

It looks right to me!

^Awesome paper model from legendary AXM

[TheShadow1138]

ICPS looks too small in comparison to Orion. Will the engine bell be toggleable?

I'm going by the image you can see behind the model, and you have to remember in that render the 3-petal faring is in place, and that the LAS Boost Protective Cover is larger than the Orion CM.

I'm not sure what you mean about the bell being toggleable. If you mean like the version I've heard of where the engine bell is two pieces that can be moved into place to change the throat-to-nozzle ratio, then no it isn't.

[_Augustus_]

I'm going by the image you can see behind the model, and you have to remember in that render the 3-petal faring is in place, and that the LAS Boost Protective Cover is larger than the Orion CM.

I'm not sure what you mean about the bell being toggleable. If you mean like the version I've heard of where the engine bell is two pieces that can be moved into place to change the throat-to-nozzle ratio, then no it isn't.

The engine bell is retracted during launch and it extends when the engine is fired.

[TheShadow1138]

The engine bell is retracted during launch and it extends when the engine is fired.

No, mine doesn't retract or extend. I don't really think it's necessary. Most of the time you see it it will be firing, and I know that it would not be an immediate thing for the extension to move into place, I just don't think it would really add anything.

[TheShadow1138]

A quick progress render:

The Orion:

This represents what I consider to be the most difficult part of the Orion CM, the inset window section (not the windows themselves). Right now I plan to model the RCS ports rather than fake them with textures unless Maya starts complaining about all the boolean operations.

I'm thinking for now that the docking device will be 0.9375m rather than 1.25m because the smaller diameter seems to fit better with the capsule. Since this is the case, I may make a Pressurized Mating Adapter that would be 1.25m on the larger end and 0.9375m on the smaller end.

[Beale]

A quick progress render:

The Orion:

http://i.imgur.com/nwqNW8o.png

This represents what I consider to be the most difficult part of the Orion CM, the inset window section (not the windows themselves). Right now I plan to model the RCS ports rather than fake them with textures unless Maya starts complaining about all the boolean operations.

I'm thinking for now that the docking device will be 0.9375m rather than 1.25m because the smaller diameter seems to fit better with the capsule. Since this is the case, I may make a Pressurized Mating Adapter that would be 1.25m on the larger end and 0.9375m on the smaller end.

Looks nice!

How did you achieve those insets? Boolean operations or various pushing / pulling / extruding (Yeah, my terminology isn't great!).

And, the more people that can take up 0.9375m the better

[TheShadow1138]

Looks nice!

How did you achieve those insets? Boolean operations or various pushing / pulling / extruding (Yeah, my terminology isn't great!).

And, the more people that can take up 0.9375m the better

Thanks. That main inset was the part I was most concerned about going into this model.

I used Boolean operations. The main inset (not including the "pillar" between the windows) was the first operation, then the two main forward facing windows were the second, with the two side windows the third. I'm hoping to do the RCS ports in a final fourth boolean operation unless Maya complains.

[wasmic]

How did I not find this earlier? This looks great!

[TheShadow1138]

How did I not find this earlier? This looks great!

Many thanks wasmic.

Here's another quick update render:

RCS ports now modeled on the main pod.

I'll start working on the upper part of the capsule including the pitch down RCS pods and the parachute. The heat shield will be pretty simple, and will be integrated with the main pod. Right now I plan for the Orion CM to consist of three parts within KSP: Orion Command Pod (actual crew space and heat shield), Parachute, and docking collar.

Update: I've pretty much completed the model for the Orion capsule. The next hurdle will be the texture.

Render:

Edited June 22, 2015 by TheShadow1138

[_Augustus_]

Many thanks wasmic.

Here's another quick update render:

RCS ports now modeled on the main pod.

http://i.imgur.com/AWdZYCP.png

I'll start working on the upper part of the capsule including the pitch down RCS pods and the parachute. The heat shield will be pretty simple, and will be integrated with the main pod. Right now I plan for the Orion CM to consist of three parts within KSP: Orion Command Pod (actual crew space and heat shield), Parachute, and docking collar.

Update: I've pretty much completed the model for the Orion capsule. The next hurdle will be the texture.

Render:

http://i.imgur.com/F82t6A2.png

Animate the docking port!

[TheShadow1138]

Animate the docking port!

As there really is no game-enforced reason for this, that is it would be completely aesthetic in nature, I have no plans to animate the docking port.

I would suggest that in the future you phrase such desires in the form of requests rather than apparent demands.