gooddog15 Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 (edited) 2 hours ago, CobaltWolf said: I can't believe I actually made this extremely blessed part... FTFY Edited February 3, 2022 by gooddog15 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeaKaka Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 Taking the much underrated Atlas IIAS out for a spin with EOS-AM 1 (Terra): Quote Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustDark Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 Test video of the beginning of my Skylab cinematic video. The cinematic will be about Skylab and the missions that went to save it and use it. This is about 1/4 or 1/5 of what the cinematic will be. I'll also be adding text and info on screen about whats happening Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorg Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 6 hours ago, JustDark said: Test video of the beginning of my Skylab cinematic video. The cinematic will be about Skylab and the missions that went to save it and use it. This is about 1/4 or 1/5 of what the cinematic will be. I'll also be adding text and info on screen about whats happening Incredible! Looking forward to the full video. Did you patch in a deploy limit for the partially deployed solar? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cheesecake Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 @JustDarkGreat video. But: wasn`t the interstage jettisoned several seconds after ignition of the second stage? Or was this different to the Apollo-missions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Entr8899 Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 Would it be possible to change the 0.625m endcap of the Gemini Ferry structural docking adapter to the one used on Apollo, the sort of white inverted hemisphere? At the moment the probe of the Apollo docking port clips through the little window of the endcap of the structural adapter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorg Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 (edited) 3 hours ago, Cheesecake said: @JustDarkGreat video. But: wasn`t the interstage jettisoned several seconds after ignition of the second stage? Or was this different to the Apollo-missions? The interstage was damaged by debris from the MM shield being torn off and was retained all the way to orbit. This failure is often forgotten about as the attention is on the MM shield and the solar panels (I admit I usually forget myself on Skylab recreation screenshots but this nearly led to complete mission failure too). Quote The interstage was 10.05m (338) in diameter, the same as the S-IC and the S-ll stage that it connected, and 5.56m (18.257) tall with a weight of 3,900kg (8,600lb). At that time a pyrotechnic device should have severed 199 ties holding the interstage to the S-ll but debris from the mangled meteoroid shield damaged the explosive charges that should have simultaneously broken the ties and cut the steel forming the circular lip of the interstage section. The ties were severed but the electrical line that should have triggered the detonation of the physical connection was broken by the now loosely suspended adapter. Ironically, previous Saturn V rockets had a single linear detonation string but on this one they had two separately connected command channels. As a result of the hang-up, the interstage was carried all the way up into orbit until the S-Il shut down, the centre engine at 314.05sec and the four outer engines at 589.2sec, a powered flight phase lasting 6min 39.3sec for the second stage. It had been a near thing. The base heating caused by the interstage adapter remaining in Place brought the S-ll stage close to complete failure, with rupturing of critical lines caused by the high temperatures encountered on the base area only seconds away. Thermal energy trapped within the area shrouded by the interstage ring caused the heating rate to increase at a higher level than ever seen before and temperature sensors on the thrust cone... From: Haynes Skylab Owners Workshop Manual Edited February 3, 2022 by Zorg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biohazard15 Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 22 hours ago, CobaltWolf said: Does the "Fore by Throttle" feature for RCS not work for that? It works for thrust, yes. But ModuleEngines would allow engine-specific things like gimbal (if it's even possible to add it to the model at this stage). Also, no problems with dV display and other things that require engine to be defined as engine (mods that target ModuleEngines, for example) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappystein Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 (edited) 15 hours ago, septemberWaves said: Hey, at least it doesn't have a crew hatch in the middle like a certain other spacecraft proposal. In seriousness though I think it's excellent. I'm already thinking of how to use this as an Apollo-derived Duna lander... Don't knock TKS like that! I mean Gemini B was smart. It wasn't centered! 12 hours ago, JustDark said: Test video of the beginning of my Skylab cinematic video. The cinematic will be about Skylab and the missions that went to save it and use it. This is about 1/4 or 1/5 of what the cinematic will be. I'll also be adding text and info on screen about whats happening Impressive start. Curious why the S-IC to S-II interstage was not dropped as it normally was. The extra Seperation motors on it might have mostly ofset that loss (should have only had 2 or 4 by the time of Skylab, looks like you had 8 Edited February 3, 2022 by Pappystein Snipped comment about keeping the S-IC-SII interstage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pTrevTrevs Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 34 minutes ago, Pappystein said: Don't knock TKS like that! I mean Gemini B was smart. It wasn't centered! Impressive start. Curious why the S-IC to S-II interstage was not dropped as it normally was. The extra Seperation motors on it might have mostly ofset that loss (should have only had 2 or 4 by the time of Skylab, looks like you had 8 I thought ullage motors on the S-II were completely done away with from Apollo 15 onwards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileo chiu Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 12 minutes ago, pTrevTrevs said: I thought ullage motors on the S-II were completely done away with from Apollo 15 onwards. why would they be done away with? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jcking Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 10 minutes ago, Galileo chiu said: why would they be done away with? S-II had enough inertia that the ullage motors weren't required. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galileo chiu Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 2 minutes ago, Jcking said: S-II had enough inertia that the ullage motors weren't required. they already designed the damned stage, might as well keep it as is if it works Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Friznit Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 1 hour ago, Galileo chiu said: they already designed the damned stage, might as well keep it as is if it works I imagine they preferred to remove things that were proven to be redundant wherever possible to reduce cost, weight and complexity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustDark Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 8 hours ago, Zorg said: Incredible! Looking forward to the full video. Did you patch in a deploy limit for the partially deployed solar? I put the solar on a robotic hinge, would be very useful if it had a deploy limit though! Another suggestion I have, a button in the action menu to destroy the panel would be useful Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorg Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 36 minutes ago, JustDark said: I put the solar on a robotic hinge, would be very useful if it had a deploy limit though! Another suggestion I have, a button in the action menu to destroy the panel would be useful idk if JSO is keen to code a destruction module, and in any case they seem to have been busy of late. Re Deploy limit I can take a look and see if it works with the current animation and if so I can chuck a patch into extras. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starhelperdude Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 Would it be possible that we could get an attachment node under the bigger SRMUs, so we can have a launchpad for LCLS-2/3? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
x170doom Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 (edited) 2 hours ago, Starhelperdude said: Would it be possible that we could get an attachment node under the bigger SRMUs, so we can have a launchpad for LCLS-2/3? i believe you would have to ask @AlphaMensae for that since normally he adds them in on his end with a MM patch, alternatively you could make it yourself, making a MM patch for a single node isn't difficult since if i remember there's an example of exactly that in the MM documentation. if you do choose to try it yourself i would recomend a mod called NodeHelper since it allows you to find the correct XYZ coordinates in the VAB/SPH and copy the values into the patch. Edited February 3, 2022 by x170doom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaintedLion Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 5 hours ago, Galileo chiu said: they already designed the damned stage, might as well keep it as is if it works They actually needed to make a lot of modifications to all of the hardware in the lunar program for Apollos 15, 16, and 17 because they were carring more supplies for longer stays and heavier equipment, like the rover and the SIM bay instruments, and the ullage motors were deemed dead weight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappystein Posted February 4, 2022 Share Posted February 4, 2022 8 hours ago, Galileo chiu said: they already designed the damned stage, might as well keep it as is if it works Also should one of those explode it would result in the instant loss of one or more J-2 engines on the S-II stage... if you don't need it... and it adds mass or Risk (or both) Get rid of it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adventures Posted February 4, 2022 Share Posted February 4, 2022 On 2/2/2022 at 6:09 PM, CobaltWolf said: I can't believe I actually made this extremely blursed part... When do you think you will put this part in the Dev Version? and will it in the headshield parts, or landing gear parts, or is this a few parts: (decent engine, shield, legs?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpaceFace545 Posted February 4, 2022 Share Posted February 4, 2022 33 minutes ago, Adventures said: When do you think you will put this part in the Dev Version? and will it in the headshield parts, or landing gear parts, or is this a few parts: (decent engine, shield, legs?) 1. It’s already in it 2. And it’s all one piece Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staticalliam7 Posted February 4, 2022 Share Posted February 4, 2022 On 2/2/2022 at 6:09 PM, CobaltWolf said: I can't believe I actually made this extremely blursed part... I love it! even though it's cursed as hell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorg Posted February 4, 2022 Share Posted February 4, 2022 On 2/1/2022 at 11:34 PM, x170doom said: if i remember correctly the error is in the MM config itself, it propably isnt throwing any errors specifically because if i remember it's incorrect indenting on the file that means MM is just ignoring all the scansat defs for the apollo parts. i'll see if i can find the line where it starts but if i remember it was fairly obvious once i saw it edit: seems to be line 695 to 716, all of the params under MODULE arent indented. there might be some other indents missing in the sim bay components as well but i'm unsure, all i remember is that i like for like compared the way the patches for the apollo parts were written to some of the other components patches and noticed some issues that to my knowlage would cause MM to ignore everything past those lines Scansat should be fixed now. It was a missing bracket not indents (Indents really are stylistic and shouldn't cause errors, I went looking for them anyway as I didnt see any other issue but as usual its the old enemy, a single curly bracket gone rogue). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustDark Posted February 4, 2022 Share Posted February 4, 2022 LONG LONG MAAAAAAAAAAAAN Spoiler I would ask for Skylab length switches to fit alongside the S-IVB length switches, but I think the devs might actually shoot me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.