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

[Starhelperdude]

28 minutes ago, rockettime03 said:

 

you mean like this?

you can use the mir shuttle adapter part thingy from tantares

[Minmus Taster]

3 hours ago, Starhelperdude said:

you can use the mir shuttle adapter part thingy from tantares

That's what it's meant for I think

[Adam-Kerman]

NASA Graphics Standard Manual Inspired Saturn 1C Brochure Cover
 

Edited November 18, 2021 by Adam-Kerman
Fixed something Again...

[OrbitalManeuvers]

@Zorg pardon the ping - do you have any ignition count and ullage requirements in mind for the RXD-30?

[Tangle]

3 hours ago, Adam-Kerman said:

NASA Graphics Standard Manual Inspired Saturn 1C Brochure Cover
 

 

oh no it's tipping over

[Pappystein]

1 hour ago, Tangle said:

oh no it's tipping over

I hate when my rockets/stages tip over..  ESP after I have sucessfully landed them!  They tend to go all sploodie

 

[biohazard15]

9 hours ago, Minmus Taster said:

That's what it's meant for I think

It's meant for Shuttle-Mir docking module and similar ISS mini-modules. It's too big for ASTP adapter. For more authentic look, you need 0.9375m cylinder (Agena tank, for example).

[GoldForest]

11 hours ago, Adam-Kerman said:

NASA Graphics Standard Manual Inspired Saturn 1C Brochure Cover
 

No LR-101s... Your Saturn 1C can't rotate. 

Edited November 19, 2021 by GoldForest

[Zorg]

9 hours ago, OrbitalManeuvers said:

@Zorg pardon the ping - do you have any ignition count and ullage requirements in mind for the RXD-30?

You mean the RS30 I guess? It seems the RS30 had a so called tank head pumped idle mode where it could just open the taps, spin up the turbines based on propellant pressure at the tank head, and then run at very low power to both settle the propellants and also provide autogenous pressurisation for the tank. And with a spark ignitor, it seems the engine would be limited by thermal and structural loads. Based on the documents this would be 60 thermal cycles (a startup to any power level) between services and 300 cycles between full overhauls. 

You've reminded me that I never did the engine ignitor configs for the hydrolox engines so I'll go ahead and configure them.

M1 will be quite simple and limited to a single internal ignition so it can be air started.

RS30 will be 60 starts and no ullage requirement.

For the XLR129 I found this: durability 10 hours time between overhauls, 100 reuses,300 starts, 300 thermal cycles, 10, 000 valve cycles. However, on a single flight the XLR 129 would be limited by helium pressurant from the main stage tanks.  Plus the figures are for durability between overhauls and doesnt mention servicing between them. Additionally, I found "Multiple restart at sea level or altitude" but no further detail. Given the purpose of the engine, and being sort of an SSME contemporary, I am giving it a what I think is still very generous 10 starts which is a lot for an engine of this type from the 70s on a single flight.

No figures for the RL20, but the stated durability goal of 10 hours TBO is similar to the XLR129 (no further details known). I am giving it half the XLR129 being an older iteration. So 5 starts. If anyone finds more detailed information, or have some stronger basis on which to re-evaluate the restart capability of the Pratt engines I'm happy to reconsider.

Edited November 19, 2021 by Zorg

[OrbitalManeuvers]

1 hour ago, Zorg said:

You mean the RS30 I guess?

idk, is that what I mean? I have a BDB engine called the RXD-30 "Zhar-Ptitsa". I guess that must be it! This is great info, thanks!

[Zorg]

2 hours ago, OrbitalManeuvers said:

idk, is that what I mean? I have a BDB engine called the RXD-30 "Zhar-Ptitsa". I guess that must be it! This is great info, thanks!

Ah right sorry, I forget the in game names though I gave it myself  Yes IRL its the RS-30 Advanced Space Engine.

[Entr8899]

36 minutes ago, Zorg said:

Ah right sorry, I forget the in game names though I gave it myself  Yes IRL its the RS-30 Advanced Space Engine.

Why did you decide to add specifically those three obscure cryo engines, RS-30, XLR-129 and that other one I can't remember the name of? How did you even find information on the RS-30? The page about it on astronautix is only a couple of sentences long.

[GoldForest]

Quote

December 20th, 1981, 9;59AM, one minute until liftoff. All systems are go, the final checks are complete, a hushed crowd waits with baited breath, listening to the call outs by the announcer. Everyone was worried as a last minute repair had to be done to the rocket a few hours ago, some of them taking it as a random occurrence, some an omen. Finally, "Twenty seconds... fifteen." Everyone rose to their feet as the final countdown began. "Ten... nine..." Space fans started shouting and cheering. "Ignition sequence start." Water cannons ramped up to full blast to deafen the sound of the rocket's engines when they roared to life. "Seven, we have main engine start." The five F-1s roared to life in a fiery display of power. "Three, two, one." The four UA 1207s  ignited right before the clamps holding the rocket in place retracted into their protected shelters. The big rocket began to inch its way off the pad as the fuel and electrical lines disconnected and swung away from the mighty Saturn. After only a second or two, the Saturn began to pick up speed as it went from inching to full on acceleration. It soon cleared the tower before beginning it's roll program to align the rocket with it's intended inclination. 

Everyone cheered and applauded as they watched the massive rocket lift off into the sky with the Starlab Central Module on top of it. Never before has such a large payload been attempted, but the Saturn V appeared to be handling it with ease, the rocket soon becoming too small for anyone to make out. 

15 minutes later, Starlab's Central Module was sitting comfortably in its orbit. Due to having no solar arrays, the module was put into safe mode to await the second Starlab module which would bring with it solar arrays. Until then, the RCS and reaction control wheels went silent after stopping any tumbling or rotation of the station. Starlab now awaited Enterprise, who would join Starlab twenty eight hours later, and offload supplies and a docking adapter for the crew who would eventually call the ISS their home. 

Full Album: Imgur: The magic of the Internet

[Zorg]

17 minutes ago, Entr8899 said:

Why did you decide to add specifically those three obscure cryo engines, RS-30, XLR-129 and that other one I can't remember the name of? How did you even find information on the RS-30? The page about it on astronautix is only a couple of sentences long.

RS-30 because its cool and I wanted to make it. Its a micro SSME literally. It uses subscale SSME components and was designed as a test bed for that purpose primarily. As a secondary purpose it was considered for the Apollo Applications Space Tug instead of the RL10. Its an RL10 sized engine with similar thrust (bit less than the latest models actually) and crazy high Isp due to the 1:400 expansion ratio and over 2000psi chamber pressure from being staged combustion.

RL20 was sort of on a wishlist from Cobalt for a while, we didnt know too much about it at the time though. What really happened with the RL20 and XLR129 is that I thought I would finally make the HG-3 engine, allegedly the rocketdyne predecessor to the SSME and a mashup between the J2 and the SSME or so it seemed. When we actually dug into it in order to find decent sources (instead of making something up), particularly with the help of @TimothyC we discovered that not only was the HG-3 not a real engine design it was only an evaluative study of future engine technology requirements the conclusion being : staged combustion is the future. And it was conducted by Pratt and Whitney for Marshall and had nothing to do with Rocketdyne. 

The Pratt & Whitney RL20 and the XLR129 then seemed like far more *real* staged combustion designs that predated the SSME and both are again interesting and cool. The XLR129 has no connections to any rocket in BDB although the RL20 was mentioned in some MLV documents.

For a more detailed rant about the whole HG-3 thing you can take a look at this post here:
 

 

As for sources Astronautix is terribly unreliable. Not everything on it is wrong but enough of it is (quite a lot in fact) that you cant rely on it. And it doesnt cite its sources.

I got most of the information for these engines from here. Which is hosting some scans of original documents. The documents on the RS30 and the XLR129 are particularly detailed. 

https://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Space_Engines/Pratt_Engines.htm

https://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Space_Engines/Rocketdyne_Engines.htm

M-1 of course is in there simply cos it big. And also even if not part of a canonical saturn MLV build it can be used for speculative advanced saturns.

Edited November 19, 2021 by Zorg

[Entr8899]

8 minutes ago, Zorg said:

RS-30 because its cool and I wanted to make it. Its a micro SSME literally. It uses subscale SSME components and was designed as a test bed for that purpose primarily. As a secondary purpose it was considered for the Apollo Applications Space Tug instead of the RL10. Its an RL10 sized engine with similar thrust (bit less than the latest models actually) and crazy high Isp due to the 1:400 expansion ratio and over 2000psi chamber pressure from being staged combustion.

RL20 was sort of on a wishlist from Cobalt for a while, we didnt know too much about it at the time though. What really happened with the RL20 and XLR129 is that I thought I would finally make the HG-3 engine, allegedly the rocketdyne predecessor to the SSME and a mashup between the J2 and the SSME or so it seemed. When we actually dug into it in order to find decent sources (instead of making something up), particularly with the help of @TimothyC we discovered that not only was the HG-3 not a real engine design it was only an evaluative study of future engine technology requirements the conclusion being : staged combustion is the future. And it was conducted by Pratt and Whitney for Marshall and had nothing to do with Rocketdyne. 

The Pratt & Whitney RL20 and the XLR129 then seemed like far more *real* staged combustion designs that predated the SSME and both are again interesting and cool. The XLR129 has no connections to any rocket in BDB although the RL20 was mentioned in some MLV documents.

For a more detailed rant about the whole HG-3 thing you can take a look at this post here:
 

 

As for sources Astronautix is terribly unreliable. Not everything on it is wrong but enough of it is (quite a lot in fact) that you cant rely on it. And it doesnt cite its sources.

I got most of the information for these engines from here. Which is hosting some scans of original documents. The documents on the RS30 and the XLR129 are particularly detailed. 

https://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Space_Engines/Pratt_Engines.htm

https://www.alternatewars.com/BBOW/Space_Engines/Rocketdyne_Engines.htm

M-1 of course is in there simply cos it big. And also even if not part of a canonical saturn MLV build it can be used for speculative advanced saturns.

Interesting stuff. Is there any chance you'll be adding more weird obscure engines, like this monstrosity?http://www.astronautix.com/e/expansion-deflection10k.html

Have you given any thought to adding engines that use alternate propellants?

[Zorg]

2 minutes ago, Entr8899 said:

Interesting stuff. Is there any chance you'll be adding more weird obscure engines, like this monstrosity?http://www.astronautix.com/e/expansion-deflection10k.html

Have you given any thought to adding engines that use alternate propellants?

I think its unlikely we will see a lot of new engines for BDB for KSP 1 at any rate. Exotic propellants are a bit messy in terms of needing new fuel switchers and working out an appropriate stockalike balance for them and so on.

While things are always subject to change, the only engines on my personal to do list are revamping the old Atlas engines, RS-X which would be derivative of work done on Atlas

And er this:

This being Nerva II which would be even longer than the M1. Our own Nerva I will prob also happen but thats the roadmap for me anyway. This will be part of the 2nd Saturn Apollo update.

[Entr8899]

38 minutes ago, Zorg said:

I think its unlikely we will see a lot of new engines for BDB for KSP 1 at any rate. Exotic propellants are a bit messy in terms of needing new fuel switchers and working out an appropriate stockalike balance for them and so on.

While things are always subject to change, the only engines on my personal to do list are revamping the old Atlas engines, RS-X which would be derivative of work done on Atlas

And er this:

This being Nerva II which would be even longer than the M1. Our own Nerva I will prob also happen but thats the roadmap for me anyway. This will be part of the 2nd Saturn Apollo update.

How would you feel about being commissioned to make things, once you've finished all your major work?

[Zorg]

1 hour ago, Entr8899 said:

How would you feel about being commissioned to make things, once you've finished all your major work?

I do this for fun really and commissions would turn it into work  

[Jcking]

1 hour ago, Zorg said:

 

This being Nerva II which would be even longer than the M1. Our own Nerva I will prob also happen but thats the roadmap for me anyway. This will be part of the 2nd Saturn Apollo update.

Nerva I is the one with the roll control nozzles, right?

[CobaltWolf]

1 hour ago, Entr8899 said:

How would you feel about being commissioned to make things, once you've finished all your major work?

"finished", that's cute

[Adam-Kerman]

Saturn 1C
AARDVark / Other Cargo

[Entr8899]

52 minutes ago, Zorg said:

I do this for fun really and commissions would turn it into work  

True, but that's why I'd be offering to pay you.

[Pappystein]

4 hours ago, Entr8899 said:

Why did you decide to add specifically those three obscure cryo engines, RS-30, XLR-129 and that other one I can't remember the name of? How did you even find information on the RS-30? The page about it on astronautix is only a couple of sentences long.

You have now found THE major problem with Astronautix.   It is  basically a one man wiki and it only accurately covers a small percentage of the data out there.

Astronautix is a great place to get names of things that DID fly or COULD have flown.  But then you have to go to real sources to get better information as it rife with incorrect information, be it from typos or outright fabrications.

sources like 

https://discover.dtic.mil/

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/

for the US stuff.

Edited November 19, 2021 by Pappystein

[CobaltWolf]

Forgot to post yesterday, but there is now a mesh switch for the SLA to have payload adapters for the AARDV Block 1, Block III+ and Block IV mission modules.

[Jcking]

4 hours ago, Entr8899 said:

Why did you decide to add specifically those three obscure cryo engines, RS-30, XLR-129 and that other one I can't remember the name of? How did you even find information on the RS-30? The page about it on astronautix is only a couple of sentences long.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19740008376/downloads/19740008376.pdf