[1.12.5] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.14.0 "металл" 30/Sep/2024)

[lemon cup]

31 minutes ago, Starhelperdude said:

this would be Saturn INT-20

Got it, thank you.

39 minutes ago, Starhelperdude said:

In short, the INT-20 is not a real workable design since most spacecraft have a hard limit of 4.0x the force of gravity.

I see this configuration has some interesting limitations in regards to G-Forces. In a lot of ways the INT-20 reminds me of a super-sized Atlas-V, which does not have the same problem with peak acceleration. Of course this is due to the awesome throttle-range of the Atlas' RD-180, whereas the F-1 could not be throttled at all.

But the F-1 could be shut down early in flight correct? So starting off with say 4 engines, then shutting down a pair of outboard engines early would preclude a huge G-load towards the tail-end of the first stage?

Of course then I suppose you are accepting that you've basically paid full price for a pair of F-1 engines to be useful for half of the mission, and dead weight for the second half.

[OrbitalManeuvers]

I look for excuses to fly the Delta IV Heavy. This is one of them:

Spoiler

 

 

[CobaltWolf]

21 hours ago, lemon cup said:

Got it, thank you.

I see this configuration has some interesting limitations in regards to G-Forces. In a lot of ways the INT-20 reminds me of a super-sized Atlas-V, which does not have the same problem with peak acceleration. Of course this is due to the awesome throttle-range of the Atlas' RD-180, whereas the F-1 could not be throttled at all.

But the F-1 could be shut down early in flight correct? So starting off with say 4 engines, then shutting down a pair of outboard engines early would preclude a huge G-load towards the tail-end of the first stage?

Of course then I suppose you are accepting that you've basically paid full price for a pair of F-1 engines to be useful for half of the mission, and dead weight for the second half.

Couldn't an F-1A be throttled to 70%? Anything after the initial order of Saturns would've used those engines instead.

[Adam-Kerman]

[DaveyJ576]

On 12/21/2021 at 2:03 PM, lemon cup said:

Got it, thank you.

I see this configuration has some interesting limitations in regards to G-Forces. In a lot of ways the INT-20 reminds me of a super-sized Atlas-V, which does not have the same problem with peak acceleration. Of course this is due to the awesome throttle-range of the Atlas' RD-180, whereas the F-1 could not be throttled at all.

But the F-1 could be shut down early in flight correct? So starting off with say 4 engines, then shutting down a pair of outboard engines early would preclude a huge G-load towards the tail-end of the first stage?

Of course then I suppose you are accepting that you've basically paid full price for a pair of F-1 engines to be useful for half of the mission, and dead weight for the second half.

I am a fan of the three engine version of the INT-20. It cuts back on some of those dodgy acceleration issues while still maintaining a LEO payload considerably superior to the Saturn IB. 

[Jcking]

10 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

Couldn't an F-1A be throttled to 70%? Anything after the initial order of Saturns would've used those engines instead.

Existing documentation states that the 5 engine configuration of INT-20 would have had the center engine shut down mid flight, with no mention of throttling.

Edited December 23, 2021 by Jcking

[GroupJW]

On 3/12/2021 at 2:12 PM, biohazard15 said:

Request: Boeing\Hughes HS 376 satellite bus

Last couple of days, I've been trying to make a good-looking replica of TACSAT 1 - prototype military commsat launched in 1969. It used Hughes HS 308 satellite bus - a cylinder 2.8m in diameter, covered with solar panels. Think BIG Pioneer 6 (without motor, although it was added in later HS series buses). While "cylinder" part is not a problem, "covered with solar panels" is. Curved solar panels are extremely rare feature in KSP mods - I know only of NFElectrical, and these are too big for KSP-scaled HS-308 (should be either 1.25m or 1.5m).

Thus, I humbly request several parts which can be used to make a HS-series cylindrical satellite buses. Mainly HS 376 (since it has some notable and fun features).

Suggested parts:

- Probe core: 1.25m diameter, cylinder about 0.5m height, gray color. SAS, reaction wheels, about 40 Ec.  Has built-in RCS with tiny monoprop supply.

- Equipment bay: Same dimensions as probe core, covered with solar panels, empty shell with toggleable endcaps. You can place anything you want in it, including other probe cores (to make pre-376 buses). Make a sandwich with probe core to make HS 376 main body. Toggleable node for telescopical solar panel (see below).

- Telescopical solar panel: No, I'm not kidding.  Diameter slightly larger than 1.25m (to accomodate satellite main body). Height of about 1.5m, attaches to aforementioned toggleable node.

 

EDIT: Sorry, pasted wrong link (that particular page can be accessed only via Wayback Machine). Fixed.

 

[Pappystein]

20 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

Couldn't an F-1A be throttled to 70%? Anything after the initial order of Saturns would've used those engines instead.

Yes the F-1A could be throttled to 70%.   However it was not intended for the F-1A to replace the F-1 in ALL configurations (the core MLV study showcases this by having several MLV rockets listed with 5 or 6 F-1s and grossly similar rockets with 5 F-1As. )     Most of the INT-20 documentation I used to write the article specifically cited F-1 engine and F-1 Engine thrust.   This is one of the reasons I said the INT-20 was Boeing trying to spite everyone else just to keep "their" stage in production.   They cut all "new" or "growth" costs out of the proposal and stuck with a bone stock S-IC for their proposal.     I had only found anecdotal references to the F-1A in the INT-20.

 

All that being said, I have recently had a discussion with other data miners / History Collectors like myself.    Everyone other that me stated that the INT-20 was where NASA should have focused.    To keep the S-IC stage.    This is to the exclusion of the S-II stage... which to me begs the question...   Whats the point?    Keeping S-IC alone does nothing for your goal of keeping a major rocket in production.     What it does do is keep the F-1 engine viable...   There are other ways to do this that do not waste production capabilities in my book.

 

Conversely, I look at three of the INT-x proposals as the go to because with these three, you cover payloads slightly larger than Atlas-Centaur all the way up to full on Saturn V.      I call it Dial a Saturn

Saturn II- INT-18.5/INT-18.7 (including 2x 4x and 5x SRMs)

Saturn II-INT-19 (with Select-able M55 SRMs from 4 to 16)  If this went into production I would assume some non-Minuteman SRMs would replace the M55s for Strategic Arms treaty enforcement.

Saturn INT-21

 

INT-18.7 with 5SRMs can lift ~96% of what INT-20 could lift at 3.6G

The problem with using the Saturn II rockets is the SRMs.   IN the 1960s stacking SRMs is not an expensive process...    By the 1980s it is hugely expensive.

The Saturn II-INT-19 is the most cost effective launcher of the three.  But it is also the lowest performing.   But it's performance is actually better than any of the INT-18s with 2x SRMs.

 

Ground logistics wise you end up with 3 new launch pads, and keeping LC-39 for the INT-21/ standard-ish Saturn V.   The INT-18 (x2) plus INT-19 would ride on one pad,  the INT-18(x4) would need a second and because of the 5 SRMs in a pentagonal arrangement you would need a 3rd pad for the INT-18 (x5.)   I know the mass of a UA-1207 is pretty hefty but I always imagined that the bare rocket would be moved to the pad on a small crawler and then the empty stages (and payload) winched into place on the stand.... then from horizontal "roadable" buildings  the UA-120x would be elevated to the correct point for joining the MS-II stage on the launch stand.    much like you see the old coffin launched Atlas ballistic missile (and IM-99 Bomarc) elevate from low profile buildings to fire.

 

 

 

 

[Pappystein]

18 hours ago, Adam-Kerman said:

mmm,  Columbium/Niobium Blue... Pretty!

Thanks again for making that happen Cobaltwolf!

[Starhelperdude]

^ this one is really cool, didn't expect to make such a thing while playing unconcious with a kerbal, then attempting to ''dock'' to it with the CSM, interstellar style, while playing ''no time for caution

Edited December 23, 2021 by Starhelperdude

[Egaruk]

On 12/13/2021 at 7:58 PM, Invaderchaos said:

UPDATE

Bluedog Design Bureau v1.9.0 "пробе"

v1.9.0 "пробе"

New Content and Features
- Pioneer 10 and 11
- Extra Pioneer 10/11 derived parts including Pioneer SUAE (Saturn Uranus Atmospheric Entry) and Pioneer Outer Planets Orbiter
- Clementine and ISAS
- Radio Astronomy Explorer A/B (and Star-17/Star-17A)
- Transit 3 and 4
- Transit 5A, 5C, 5O/Oscar, 5BN, 5E, and SOOS (Stacked Oscar on Scout)
- Beacon Explorer
- SOLRAD 8
- LOFTI
- INJUN 1
- POPPY (block 1 and 2)
- ANNA 1B
- New small probe (0.625m) sized grapple "Klaw"
- New Titan 23G/Titan IIIB Structural Adapter Part
- Revamped Geiger counter
- IVA's for MOL made by Beale
- New IVA props by Well and Beale
- Revamped Peacekeeper/Athena/Minotaur textures
- Revamped Geiger Counter and Solar Battery mesh and texture
- New Titan Gemini Decoupler IIIA Variant
- Able variant for Thor Boattail
- Thermal Control Pinwheel Texture Variant for Pioneer P3
- New Transtage Alternate White Variant for tankage and shroud
- New LDC Black Texture Variant and Alternate Blue LDC Texture Variant
- Delta IV densified propellant switch in BDB Extras (By Estreetrockets)
- Optional patch to replace BDB boiloff with CryoTanks boiloff in BDB extras (by Grimmas)
- Add engine ignitor configs for M1, XLR129, RL20 and RS30
- New kerbalized flag for Pioneer 10/11 Plaque

Updates and Enhancements
- Update bundled B9 Part Switch to 2.19.0
- Update bundled Module Manager to 4.2.1
- Update bundled Waterfall to 0.7.0
- Old Centaur parts deleted from OldParts folder
- SOLRAD/GRAB 3 variant for SOLRAD/GRAB 1
- Massive LDC Texture Cleanup
- HAPS/Super HAPS Texture Cleanup
- Massive Titan Texture Cleanup (spanning titan 2,3, and 4 tankage, engines, transtage, most structural parts, and UA120 Solid Motors)
- Titan 23G Second Stage Texture Redone (with ACS slightly upscaled to be more accurate)
- Scout Texture Cleanup
- New multispectral scan science definition
- New cosmic ray telescope science definition
- New trapped radiation science definition 
- Added cosmic ray experiment to OGO PEP Instrument
- Added trapped radiation experiment to Pioneer 4
- Added solar wind experiment to Mariner 10 Plasma Instrument
- Added UV Spec and Solar X-Ray experiment to WRESAT
- Massive science balancing tweaks
- Minor antenna balancing
- Cargo support for many probes and experiments
- Less powerful (realism focused) Scout balancing variants available (optimal for launching Transit missions)
- Craft files for the new probes
- Titan 23G/IIIB Craft file updated (to reflect new 23G/IIIB structural adapter part)
- A few more Titan and Delta craft files
- Massive SCANSAT balancing tweaks to accommodate multispectral scanners
- Added SCANSAT support to a few more parts
- Add (minor) support for KSRSS/RSS in a few science definitions
- Add support for SMURFF with RSS (thanks to genehwung)
- Add support for Engine Ignitor for BDB 1.8 cryo engines

Bug fixes
- Minor typos and such
- Update Procedural Fairings compatibility patch
- Fixes for Atlas surface attach patch in Extras (Thanks to Pappystein)
- Fix science transfer issues on MOL labs and Gemini (thanks to birdog357 )
- Minor bugfixes in contracts (thanks to Morphisor)
- Add missing entry cost to some parts
- LDC Short Interstage Mesh Normals Fix
- Titan 2 Upper Stage Raceway Fix
- P-11 Subsatellite Node Fix
- Real description fixes
- Misc tag fixes
- Fix Nimbus Early Command Antenna node height

DOWNLOAD [GitHub]

DOWNLOAD [SpaceDock]
Full Release Album

(special thanks to those who contributed screenshots)

https://imgur.com/a/tRGg3gK

Disclaimer: The rocket in the release cover image is of LDC with the revamped textures, not Saturn. Saturn will come in a later update.

What textures/visual pack was used in the photo with the pioneer over jool?

[CessnaSkyhawk]

Hi guys! I'm proud to announce the Skyhawk Science System has finally been released! It's been a lot of work, but it's finally done, and I at least think it does a good job at really showing off all that BDB has to offer. Thank you so much @CobaltWolf,@Invaderchaos,@Jso,and@Zorg for making such an amazing parts pack! It's truly one of KSP's best mods.

 

Edited December 26, 2021 by CessnaSkyhawk

[Zarbon44]

I am so sorry.

[Jacktical]

5 hours ago, Zarbon44 said:

I am so sorry.

You should be, absolutely disgusting lol 

[Starhelperdude]

Launch of Titan-3AG, a prototype rocket, based on Titan-3A but using the Gamma rocket stage instead of the Transtage, carrying a demonstrator payload.

Spoiler

 

[TaintedLion]

17 hours ago, CessnaSkyhawk said:

Hi guys! I'm proud to announce the Skyhawk Science System has finally been released! It's been a lot of work, but it's finally done, and I at least think it does a good job at really showing off all that BDB has to offer. Thank you so much @CobaltWolf,@Invaderchaos,@Jso,and@Zorg for making such an amazing parts pack! It's truly one of KSP's best mods.

 

Congrats on the release! Gonna try it now!

[Starhelperdude]

was OAO-B similar to OAO-2 or OAO-3 or would it have used distinct experiments (I.E. would it use a different mirror and stuff compared to OAO-2 or OAO-3)?

[Cheesecake]

1 hour ago, Starhelperdude said:

was OAO-B similar to OAO-2 or OAO-3 or would it have used distinct experiments (I.E. would it use a different mirror and stuff compared to OAO-2 or OAO-3)?

https://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sdat/oao-b.htm

It was similar to OAO-3

[Starhelperdude]

Spoiler

 

[Zorg]

18 hours ago, Cheesecake said:

https://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sdat/oao-b.htm

It was similar to OAO-3

 

21 hours ago, Starhelperdude said:

was OAO-B similar to OAO-2 or OAO-3 or would it have used distinct experiments (I.E. would it use a different mirror and stuff compared to OAO-2 or OAO-3)?

OAO-B was physically similar to OAO-3 in that it had experiments only on one end with a larger aperture. Still it was unique.

It carried a single experiment from Goddard https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/displayExperiment.action?spacecraftId=OAO-B

OAO3 had the large optics for the Princeton experiment as well as the surrounding smaller optics for the UCL x-ray experiment https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/displayExperiment.action?spacecraftId=1972-065A

 

[Starhelperdude]

Launchpad/stand for Athena 1/2 (inspired by the real one)

Spoiler

Launchpad for Athena 1C/2C/2CS2/4/6 (fictional)

Spoiler

Launchpad for Athena 3 (fictional)

Spoiler

 

[Entr8899]

10 hours ago, Zorg said:

 

OAO-B was physically similar to OAO-3 in that it had experiments only on one end with a larger aperture. Still it was unique.

It carried a single experiment from Goddard https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/displayExperiment.action?spacecraftId=OAO-B

OAO3 had the large optics for the Princeton experiment as well as the surrounding smaller optics for the UCL x-ray experiment https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/spacecraft/displayExperiment.action?spacecraftId=1972-065A

 

Would there be any chance of making a dedicated OAO-B telescope?

[Zorg]

4 hours ago, Entr8899 said:

Would there be any chance of making a dedicated OAO-B telescope?

Maybe for KSP2 . There's too much else on my to do list that's pending that's far more important.

[pTrevTrevs]

A little preview of the Falcon on the plain at Hadley:

Unfortunately I'm having some issues getting the LRV to unfold. Right now I think it has to do with the rover being slightly larger than the empty bay for it in the J-series descent stage, and I don't know if there's an easy way to fix that in-flight, short of tampering with my persistent file to have the hinge be unfolded already. Hell, I feel like that would cause more problems that it's worth. Worst case scenario, I hyperedit a new rover up there and continue from there, but I don't think I'll be getting this done anytime soon. 

 

In the meantime I have some satellite launches to show off, I guess.

KH-1 Hexagon on Titan-IIID:

Quote

 

Explorer 43 on Delta M6, anachronistically launched to heliocentric orbit, because the spacecraft's historical MEO/HEO regime was tapped out in terms of solar wind and charged particle science:

Quote

 

DSP 1 on Titan 23C. This spacecraft was the first in a series of satellites designed to detect ICBM launches and nuclear detonations, both to safeguard NATO against a nuclear strike and ensure compliance with nuclear test ban treaties:

Quote

Of course, I don't get anything out of launching a satellite like this, but it's fun to pretend. Maybe someone should set up a contract pack for military orbital launches, with orders for navigation constellations, missile detection satellites, SIGINT and ELINT payloads, and good old-fashioned optical reconnaissance spacecraft.

[lemon cup]

8 hours ago, pTrevTrevs said:

Unfortunately I'm having some issues getting the LRV to unfold.

I've had this issue before with robotics. Of course it might not be related to yours, but could be worth a shot:

Try setting Autostrut: Disabled to all parts of the Rover after you've landed and are ready to unfold, including the hinge mechanism.