[1.12.5] Bluedog Design Bureau - Stockalike Saturn, Apollo, and more! (v1.13.0 "Забытый" 13/Aug/2023)

[Richmountain112]

1 hour ago, Lil_Bread402 said:

Helios Sweep!!!

What I meant was after the Helios probe is done.

[Blufor878]

I asked ChatGPT to design a rocket for me. Of course being only text, I had a lot of room to work with. There was also mention of variants with boosters, and I thought "hey, UA120 series looks pretty good..."

I present Celestial 1206-2, the first boosted variant of the Celestial rocket family.


 

[OrbitalManeuvers]

1 hour ago, RocketBoy1641 said:

What is your power tower launch vehicle 34D?  Also, what did you do for control to be able to autonomously dock?

Closer to a IIIE but with smaller SRBs. I build for the performance required per mission, so sometimes little things get changed from the wiki builds. The power tower thinger has a probe core. So I used the transtage for rendezvous, decoupled and positioned the core by hand (MJ cannot be trusted with this step), and then used MJ once it was perfectly lined up, just for the rotational accuracy. I'm realizing as I type this that I'm probably not using the guide fins/pins on the CBM correctly ... something to look into someday.

[Richmountain112]

Does the Manned Landing contract always require the subsatellite? Because I unlocked the contract but don't have Advanced Exploration unlocked.

[CobaltWolf]

 

Streaming again today! Viking Orbiter dev stream starting ~2 hrs from this post (1:30ish Eastern).

Going to be a chill stream, just blocking in/modeling. This probe is still in a pretty early state so you'll also probably see me refering to reference a good bit.

[CobaltWolf]

Stream is live!

[Pappystein]

On 6/10/2023 at 6:07 AM, RocketBoy1641 said:

Anyone have any info about attempts to make stages recoverable/reusable in the 1960s/1970s?

The only info I currently have at my fingertips is the ideas for the Strurn S1C and the STS.  What I am more interested in info on Atlas/Thor/Delta/Titan/SRBs ideas.....preferably more than pipe dreams.

TY in advance

Saturn S-IB, Stage with S-IV upper stage as a satellite launcher would have had a Parawing (folding leading edge, not an inflatable Rogallo wing like Gemini but more like a modern hang glider at the old 60degree delta shape of Rogallo).  The four fins would have electrical actuated control circuits to "fly" the first stage back.    The payload was the reason it was not done.

 

Saturn S-IC (Saturn V) was designed to have airbrake fins (they are in BDB) and parachutes mounted in the engine bay.      The Fuel tanks would be sacrificed as "impact protection," but the engine bay would, in theory, survive impact slowed to a "reasonable" 40-60kts at impact with the ocean.   Again they were trying to save the engines, not the whole stage.   This made sense for LEO launches with the Saturn V, but the payload was never BIG enough for LEO to warrant such a rocket.

Titan UA-1205 was to be parachute recovered (but that one is more "arcane voodoo" than actual we have a documented fact.)

There was talk about putting parachutes on Atlas Booster skirts to save the LR89s.   But that came to naught because the bulk of the LR89s is directly above the LR105 central engine, so you are still remaking engines.  The balloon structure also precludes recovery.

Thor/Delta was too cheap to worry about (recovery cost 1.5-5x that of the actual rocket)

Beyond The UA120x SRMs, the 156" SRM (Thiokol or Lockheed likely for Saturn V MLV program) was contemplated in recoverable and non-recoverable configurations.   The choice was non-recoverable... UNTIL the 156" SRM became the 146" SRB for the Space Shuttle.  
 

 

 

[Richmountain112]

Also, does the landing contract require the Kerbals to be in the LM at Launch!? 

That's absurd because if there's an abort, there would be no way to get them out.

[Raptor22]

3 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

 

Streaming again today! Viking Orbiter dev stream starting ~2 hrs from this post (1:30ish Eastern).

Going to be a chill stream, just blocking in/modeling. This probe is still in a pretty early state so you'll also probably see me refering to reference a good bit.

Are there any plans for the Mars 1984 Viking Rover Mission? From what I can tell, it would have had two orbiters, two landers, and six penetrators.

Diagram Legend:

Spoiler

A = antenna for signal relay through orbiter #2 (it seems that the mission would send two orbiters, one carrying several penetrators, the other carrying the lander and rover - read the link below);
B = antenna for direct transmission to and from Deep Space Network antennas on Earth;
C = optics port cluster and strobe light (1 of 2);
D = imaging/laser rangefinder mast (1 of 2);
E = selenide radioisotope thermal generator (cover removed to display cooling vanes);
F = rover chassis;
G = manipulator arm with sampling drill (folded in travel position);
H = sample-analysis inlet port;
I = hazard detectors;
J = loopwheel mobility system (1 of 4).

 

Diagram Legend:

Spoiler

A = folded landing leg (1 of 3);
B = Viking-type landing footpad (1 of 3);
C = lander body;
D = Viking-type terminal descent engine (1 of 3);
E = Viking-type parachute canister with deployment mortar;
F = terminal site selection system sensors;
G = folded rover ramp (1 of 2);
H = folded loop-wheel mobility system (2 of 4);
I = stowed imaging/laser rangefinder mast (1 of 2);
J = folded antenna for direct communication with Earth;
K = rover chassis;
L = radioisotope thermal generator
M = outer surface of aeroshell (tanks and thrusters not shown);
N = outer surface of bioshield (heat shield not shown);
O = attachment point linking bioshield to Mars 1984 orbiter.

Additional view of Aeroshell and Lander without the rover:

According to the article:

1= top bioshield for protecting the sterilized lander and rover from contamination;
2 =  top aeroshell for protecting the lander from reentry heating;
3 = folded lander (rover not displayed);
4 = bottom aeroshell with attitude control/deorbit thrusters and propellant tanks;
5 = bottom bioshield/heat shield.

Landing would occur as follows: the top bioshield would be left behind on the Mars 1984 orbiter as the rest of the lander moved away; motors on the bottom aeroshell would ignite to deorbit the lander; following reentry, the top aeroshell would deploy a single large parachute; the bottom aeroshell/heat shield would fall away; and, finally, the lander would fall free of the top aeroshell and ignite its landing motors for terminal descent.

Diagram Legend:

Spoiler

The Bendix Mars penetrator was designed to enter the martian atmosphere directly from an interplanetary trajectory and embed itself in solid rock.

A = radio antenna;
B = meteorology package and magnetometer;
C = isotope heater;
D = aft body electronics;
E = Aft body/fore body separation plane;
F = cable linking aft body and fore body;
G = accelerometer and neutron detector;
H = fore body electronics;
I = drill assembly;
J = sampling drill bit;
K = geochemical analysis package;
L = seismometer;
M = batteries;
N = radioisotope thermal generator.

Exactly how the penetrator would stay intact from impacting at interplanetary speeds, as there's no drag chute and Mars has a minimal atmospheric deceleration, I have no clue. It must be made of some seriously tough stuff to survive that - but, then again, we have penetrator bombs that are designed to go through several meters of dirt and concrete to destroy bunkers. Though, those are going probably 5% as fast on impact.

I'm willing to bet that several parts, like the lander body, aeroshell, descent engines, heat shield, landing legs, etc. could be reused from the baseline Viking. Not to mention that the entire orbiter would be pretty much the same.

Since the penetrators would be difficult to implement in-game without additional plugins, they could just act as atmospheric or rough landing probes, or you could omit them entirely. But, I think that the Viking Rover is something that you should give some consideration to, as you wouldn't have to completely design it from scratch - after all, the whole point of the plan was to re-use as much of the existing Viking design as possible.

More info here: https://spaceflighthistory.blogspot.com/2017/08/prelude-to-mars-sample-return-mars-1984.html

34 minutes ago, Richmountain112 said:

Also, does the landing contract require the Kerbals to be in the LM at Launch!? 

That's absurd because if there's an abort, there would be no way to get them out.

You could have then in the LM just until the moment of lift-off, then transfer them over to the CM. Unless you have Connected Living Space installed - then you're out of luck.

But, that's only a band-aid fix. Hopefully it can be patched in a future update.

[Richmountain112]

Oh wait. It was fixed. Also how close do I have to be to the targeted landing spot for it to count? Would bringing a Kerbal there also make it count?

[Raptor22]

Alternatively, there were plans for a Viking III mission, which were more scaled back than the rover I showed above. Essentially, they took the existing Viking system, and replaced the three landing legs with three tracked wheels, referred to as the ELMS - Elastic Loop Mobility System

I found some fairly specific stats for it that were apparently published in a Martin Marietta document, as well as some pictures of engineering mock-ups and prototypes. Attached in the spoiler below (to not make this post take up the entire page):

Spoiler

 

Not sure who that person is. If anyone is able to ID him, that would be great!

Apparently it also made its way onto a Paraguayan postal stamp? And it either has it shown on a very discolored moon, or Earth is impossibly close to Mars - with the high-gain dish pointed the wrong way. Oh well - I just found it entertaining to see it there.

Further documents for the workings of the Elastic Loop Mobility System can be found here:

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19760021186

 

 

There was also a proposal for a Viking '79 mission that would have carried a small rover with conventional wheels on a Viking lander. It has some very detailed drawings of various sub-systems like the integrated science package on the rover:

Spoiler

Additional view of how an alternative, more wedge-shaped rover would be stowed:

The above image came from this document here: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19740009428 - Though, unfortunately, most of the document details technical information and system design trees, etc.; Beyond page 25, you won't find any more diagrams or drawings of the design of the system.

You can read through the full 113-page "Summary" report document (Volume 1) on NTRS here: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19740011775

There is also a more detailed 404-page-long technical document (Volume 2)) for it here: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19740011776

 

Just for fun (I wouldn't recommend attempting to model these, lol), there were some even wackier designs that were considered in a 1987 Mars Rover Technology Workshop, which you can read about here: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19910005287 - but, beware! The document is 840 pages long; download it before reading, or else your page will seriously lag trying to load it. Though, frankly, I don't think that any besides the Viking-derived system would have worked all that well; I mean, for crying out loud, they had a mechanized spider as one of the designs, and one of the weirdest asymmetrical entry capsules I've ever seen.

Spoiler

One of my favorite descriptions in a NASA document: "The Uranus Mobile Robot - A bouncing baby, full of promise."

 

Edited June 11, 2023 by Raptor22

[kspbutitscursed]

10 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

 

Streaming again today! Viking Orbiter dev stream starting ~2 hrs from this post (1:30ish Eastern).

Going to be a chill stream, just blocking in/modeling. This probe is still in a pretty early state so you'll also probably see me refering to reference a good bit.

Oh my God they're doing it they are doing 

Viking 

Let's goooo

[RocketBoy1641]

11 hours ago, kspbutitscursed said:

Oh my God they're doing it they are doing 

Viking 

Let's goooo

And a Viking follow up with rovers!

[CobaltWolf]

1 minute ago, RocketBoy1641 said:

And a Viking follow up with rovers!

Never said I was making rovers... It's just Viking.

[Richmountain112]

Also the Sina LM can't take off from Duna. Never actually tried but the TWR ratio in the VAB is less than 1 when set to Duna.

[Royalswissarmyknife]

14 minutes ago, Richmountain112 said:

Also the Sina LM can't take off from Duna. Never actually tried but the TWR ratio in the VAB is less than 1 when set to Duna.

Its meant for the Mun. 

That's expected. The Solution is to make a different craft for Duna.

Edited June 12, 2023 by Royalswissarmyknife

[Richmountain112]

I solved it by using a different engine (Aerospike for descent and Terrier for Ascent), even though I didn't test that either.

[RocketBoy1641]

3 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

Never said I was making rovers... It's just Viking.

Ah, thought you were the one that did the post of Viking III.

Granted, I think I like what raptor22 posted better as a concept.

1 hour ago, Richmountain112 said:

I solved it by using a different engine (Aerospike for descent and Terrier for Ascent), even though I didn't test that either.

Ya, I would check delta v requirement too.  Just because twr is high enough doesn't mean you will have fuel to get off of duna

Edited June 12, 2023 by RocketBoy1641

[kspbutitscursed]

me seeing vking 

LETS GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[Raptor22]

10 hours ago, RocketBoy1641 said:

And a Viking follow up with rovers!

I just suggested a Viking follow-up with rovers, lol. Whether or not it makes it in to the mod depends on the decision of @CobaltWolf and the rest of their team. I'm hoping it will, but it's their mod, so they make the rules.

[Richmountain112]

I'd also like some Direct Ascent Gemini parts.

[Falcon Aerospace]

Is there a 3rd stage like this for the Minuteman I/II:

There is an upper stage like this but this upper stage is probably .625

[RocketBoy1641]

Looking at the Viking III/Viking ELMS it looks like it would be relatively easy adaptation in modeling.  So, @CobaltWolf, for us lay graphics people rough guess- how much work would go into the apparently one or two parts for legs with the rollers.  I get that it is times three legs, but it looks like parts would just be a couple new ones that may be able to borrow from your experience with the LRV wheels.  I am just looking for an idea that we can al understand.

Edited June 13, 2023 by RocketBoy1641

[CobaltWolf]

5 hours ago, Richmountain112 said:

I'd also like some Direct Ascent Gemini parts.

 

2 hours ago, Falcon Aerospace said:

Is there a 3rd stage like this for the Minuteman I/II:

There is an upper stage like this but this upper stage is probably .625

There is no proper version of that motor, no.

 

1 hour ago, RocketBoy1641 said:

Looking at the Viking III/Viking ELMS it looks like it would be relatively easy adaptation in modeling.  So, @CobaltWolf, for us lay graphics people rough guess- how much work would go into the apparently one or two parts for legs with the rollers.  I get that it is times three legs, but it looks like parts would just be a couple new ones that may be able to borrow from your experience with the LRV wheels.  I am just looking for an idea that we can al understand.

It's a lot more work than it looks, you never wind up being able to reuse as much as you'd like from the existing model.

Not only that, but the stock wheel system doesn't support tracks like that. In any case, there's still a ton of work to do for the flown Viking parts, so let's not get ahead of ourselves. That will take up my entire summer, if not more - even small requests are time consuming and require me to sustain interest for several weeks or months. By the time I get to that point I'll likely be ready to work on something different.

Edited June 13, 2023 by CobaltWolf

[RocketBoy1641]

4 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

 

It's a lot more work than it looks, you never wind up being able to reuse as much as you'd like from the existing model.

Not only that, but the stock wheel system doesn't support tracks like that. In any case, there's still a ton of work to do for the flown Viking parts, so let's not get ahead of ourselves. That will take up my entire summer, if not more - even small requests are time consuming and require me to sustain interest for several weeks or months. By the time I get to that point I'll likely be ready to work on something different.

That's a good enough explanation.