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

[GoldForest]

41 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

Yeah they're separate transforms so I just need to add variants that combine the extra AES taxi/truck bits with the J-class mesh.

I honestly wasnt sure how useful it would be with the addition of the rover ramps.

Could we get probe functionality added to the Lunar Descent stage as well? So we can use the LM Truck without having a probe core or kerbals?

19 minutes ago, JebTheDestroyer said:

Wait are the new LEM variants out on the GitHub? I don't see them and it looks like the Development link on the the front page is broken.

Click the github link, the dev link is broken. Go to "Code" then switch to 1.11 dev. 

[JebTheDestroyer]

23 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

Could we get probe functionality added to the Lunar Descent stage as well? So we can use the LM Truck without having a probe core or kerbals?

Click the github link, the dev link is broken. Go to "Code" then switch to 1.11 dev. 

I don't know if I'm being stupid, but for the life of me I cannot figure out how to download the Dev version of the Gamedata folder.  Any help you can offer?

 

Edit: Nvm, I think I figured it out lmao

Edited May 12, 2022 by JebTheDestroyer

[GoldForest]

8 minutes ago, JebTheDestroyer said:

I don't know if I'm being stupid, but for the life of me I cannot figure out how to download the Dev version of the Gamedata folder.  Any help you can offer?

 

Edit: Nvm, I think I figured it out lmao

Click the Green button called code and click download ZIP

[Grimmas]

1 hour ago, JebTheDestroyer said:

Wait are the new LEM variants out on the GitHub? I don't see them and it looks like the Development link on the the front page is broken.

It's in the dev branch.

[JustDark]

Are the habitats from ALSS and LESA planned to be added?

[TheShadow1138]

8 hours ago, GoldForest said:

Well, all of them are needed. We could have possibly seen this irl if the AES program was funded.

Though I wonder if NASA would have built a 3rd launch pad or just built another crawler and tower and just had it close to the pad so they could easily turn it around and launch the 3rd mission quickly.

From this image from 1963, Launch Complex 39 was proposed to have five pads LC39A - 39E.  In the image the built 39A was 39C in this image:

Edited May 12, 2022 by TheShadow1138

[Pappystein]

1 hour ago, TheShadow1138 said:

From this image from 1963, Launch Complex 39 was proposed to have five pads LC39A - 39E.  In the image the built 39A was 39C in this image:

That actually explains quite a lot!  Thanks!

11 hours ago, GoldForest said:

IIRC, Pappy said some engines had hypergolic function added, but not all and they would get around to adding others when they had more time.

@Zorg  Thanks for answering the questions about my patch while I was away.  

All BDB Hypergolic engines *SHOULD* have a proper patch.  I would appreciate anyone finding one that is missing letting me know so I can update.

And as I stated previously, rather than 20 different fuel combos with 20 different burn ratios, this is a simplified Hypergolic Patch that only use AZ50/NTO since they work in the 0.9/1.1 ratios similar to LFO.  

And as you are building your Titans, YES they are not supposed to be full!

[AlphaMensae]

3 hours ago, TheShadow1138 said:

From this image from 1963, Launch Complex 39 was proposed to have five pads LC39A - 39E.  In the image the built 39A was 39C in this image:

I believe the need for 5 pads was when EOR was still being considered for the lunar missions, which would have needed a large number of launches. Once LOR was finalized (and other realizations, I think), there wasn't any need for 5 pads, so only two were built.

If you look at aerial photos of the crawlerway near LC-39B, you can see where they started the work on extending the crawlerway to what would have been LC-39C before it got cancelled.

[TheLoneOne]

would you consider adding this for the leo. my justification is that it would be cool and potentially fun https://web.archive.org/web/20020228081046/http://www.astronautix.com/craft/winemini.htm 

(Emphasis on the cool and fun bit)

[Jcking]

1 hour ago, TheLoneOne said:

would you consider adding this for the leo. my justification is that it would be cool and potentially fun https://web.archive.org/web/20020228081046/http://www.astronautix.com/craft/winemini.htm 

(Emphasis on the cool and fun bit)

Winged Gemini did not make a piloted landing on a runway and instead was instead just a test vehicle for gliding reentry and would make a normal parachute landing after separating the lifting surface and retro module at about 50,000ft, contrary to that article and the speculation that Wade's page on Winged Gemini is to me a gross over emphasis on relatively unimportant facts.
 

The lack of knowledge on these concepts isn’t your fault when primary source information is largely inaccessible, nor do I mean for you feel attacked. But hearsay and lore should be countered when possible and when one is capable of doing such, https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/436953817842712576/717125863409451038/Winged_Gemini_Report.pdf

Edited May 13, 2022 by Jcking

[Beccab]

8 hours ago, TheShadow1138 said:

From this image from 1963, Launch Complex 39 was proposed to have five pads LC39A - 39E.  In the image the built 39A was 39C in this image:

Also important were plans for the Nuclear Assembly Building right next to the VAB, from the studies related to our beloved pre-LOR NOVA

[GoldForest]

I hate PRE... I just wanted it to be stable for just a few moments to get a nice pic, but NO, the kraken had to appear and destroy both the shelter and truck and now they're both in pieces that are scattering themselves to the stars! No, literally, the debris is on an interstellar escape trajectory!

And I can't revert to launch because I cheated the CSM and lander into muner orbit... lovely. 

Edited May 13, 2022 by GoldForest

[GoldForest]

Full album: Imgur: The magic of the Internet

Whoo, this was a long mission. But it was good. Had a minor bump in the road with PRE that forced me to cheat the Shelter and Truck back on to the Mun, but otherwise no problems. Apollo 20 crew delivered the Shelter fine, stayed in orbit to ensure LM Truck delivery when good before departing back for Kerbin. Apollo 21 launched the same time Apollo 20 was coming back. 21 did some crater exploration, did some science, then returned safely to Kerbin. 

[CobaltWolf]

22 hours ago, GoldForest said:

Could we get probe functionality added to the Lunar Descent stage as well? So we can use the LM Truck without having a probe core or kerbals?

Oof, yeah, I meant to include that but I forgot since all my tests had the ascent stage, which also has probe functionality.

 

12 hours ago, Jcking said:

The lack of knowledge on these concepts isn’t your fault when primary source information is largely inaccessible, nor do I mean for you feel attacked. But hearsay and lore should be countered when possible and when one is capable of doing such, https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/436953817842712576/717125863409451038/Winged_Gemini_Report.pdf

This, tbh.

 

18 hours ago, JustDark said:

Are the habitats from ALSS and LESA planned to be added?

If I can find more information on them, yes

[Kass__XAP]

@Invaderchaos's Pioneer parts came in very useful in this journey to Gateway.

[x170doom]

1 hour ago, Pioneer_Steve said:

@Invaderchaos's Pioneer parts came in very useful in this journey to Gateway.

Spoiler

the iris...

it is with us now...

laughing at us...

BEHOLD

Spoiler

well now i'm creeped out since i only discovered Gemini home entertainment this morning

 

Edited May 13, 2022 by x170doom

[OrbitalManeuvers]

Where can I read about plans for the LEM Shelter? Specifically, how it gets to the moon and how it brakes for LOI?

Since it lands unmanned, I'm guessing that it could go in a closed SIVB fairing? The issue that stands out to me is the 3 ignition limit on the LMDE. Performing a braking burn at the moon would leave 1 ignition for deorbit, and 1 for the full precision landing.  Right now since I don't know what the proposal was, I'm testing a boilerplate CM with the small SM and a probe core clipped inside to perform the role of dock/extract/brake. Seems very wasteful though  . 

[Jcking]

48 minutes ago, OrbitalManeuvers said:

Where can I read about plans for the LEM Shelter? Specifically, how it gets to the moon and how it brakes for LOI?

Since it lands unmanned, I'm guessing that it could go in a closed SIVB fairing? The issue that stands out to me is the 3 ignition limit on the LMDE. Performing a braking burn at the moon would leave 1 ignition for deorbit, and 1 for the full precision landing.  Right now since I don't know what the proposal was, I'm testing a boilerplate CM with the small SM and a probe core clipped inside to perform the role of dock/extract/brake. Seems very wasteful though  . 

The LM Shelter is carried to the Moon by a manned CSM on board a Saturn V that then autonomously lands on the Moon after a checkout by the crew aboard the CSM (Think of it like Apollo 10). Same is true for the LM truck, which is why all of them (or the payloads on the LM Truck) were to have a drogue docking port on the top. I posted links to what exists of the report on another site (https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/apollo-lm-derived-projects.7570/post-494306)

Edited May 13, 2022 by Jcking

[GoldForest]

56 minutes ago, OrbitalManeuvers said:

Where can I read about plans for the LEM Shelter? Specifically, how it gets to the moon and how it brakes for LOI?

Since it lands unmanned, I'm guessing that it could go in a closed SIVB fairing? The issue that stands out to me is the 3 ignition limit on the LMDE. Performing a braking burn at the moon would leave 1 ignition for deorbit, and 1 for the full precision landing.  Right now since I don't know what the proposal was, I'm testing a boilerplate CM with the small SM and a probe core clipped inside to perform the role of dock/extract/brake. Seems very wasteful though  . 

Why add a probe core? Boilerplate apollo is a probe core. Or do you mean a probe core in LM shelter? Which too is a probe core.

[CobaltWolf]

59 minutes ago, OrbitalManeuvers said:

Where can I read about plans for the LEM Shelter? Specifically, how it gets to the moon and how it brakes for LOI?

Since it lands unmanned, I'm guessing that it could go in a closed SIVB fairing? The issue that stands out to me is the 3 ignition limit on the LMDE. Performing a braking burn at the moon would leave 1 ignition for deorbit, and 1 for the full precision landing.  Right now since I don't know what the proposal was, I'm testing a boilerplate CM with the small SM and a probe core clipped inside to perform the role of dock/extract/brake. Seems very wasteful though  .

14 minutes ago, Jcking said:

The LM Shelter is carried to the Moon by a manned CSM on board a Saturn V that then autonomously lands on the Moon after a checkout by the crew aboard the CSM (Think of it like Apollo 10). Same is true for the LM truck, which is why all of them (or the payloads on the LM Truck) were to have a drogue docking port on the top. I posted links to what exists of the report on another site (https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/apollo-lm-derived-projects.7570/post-494306)

1 minute ago, GoldForest said:

Why add a probe core? Boilerplate apollo is a probe core. Or do you mean a probe core in LM shelter? Which too is a probe core.

My suggested solution for people that don't want to "waste" crewed CSMs, is just to try and do something like this. Which we may or may not need to add a part or two to enable. Basically some form of Apollo tug.

 

I do agree @OrbitalManeuvers it all seems quite wasteful for the actual capability you get, the more I read about this stuff. But hey, this is KSP - we get to do all the cool stuff that the suits wouldn't fund IRL!

[qwery123]

On 5/7/2022 at 5:27 PM, CDSlice said:

You probably have an old version of SAF installed. You need to use the one bundled with the latest release of BDB. 

I use the one that was included with BDB when I downloaded it ca. 2 weeks ago.

[OrbitalManeuvers]

27 minutes ago, Jcking said:

The LM Shelter is carried to the Moon by a manned CSM

10 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

My suggested solution for people that don't want to "waste" crewed CSMs, is just to try and do something like this.

What was the 2nd crew of 3 meant to be doing during their stay in lunar orbit?

Edited May 13, 2022 by OrbitalManeuvers

[DaveyJ576]

6 minutes ago, OrbitalManeuvers said:

What was the 2nd crew of 3 meant to be doing during their stay in lunar orbit?

There was a proposal for a SLA based lunar orbit lab. The "leftover" crew would spend 14-30 days orbiting the moon doing science while the rest were down on the surface. In BDB terms, it would be similar to the upper portion of the VFB lab. I saw a document with pictures on this SLA lab some time ago, but I can't find it now.

[Jcking]

21 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said:

Which we may or may not need to add a part or two to enable. Basically some form of Apollo tug.

If you don't mind the engine not being upside down, you can make a tug out of the AARDV parts and the 2.5 meter fairing (I went with the Block IV SM and single LMDE because I thought the Block II SM and SPS was overkill without carrying a CM, and stuck an RTG that isn't visible in this picture on the engine plate).

[OrbitalManeuvers]

18 minutes ago, DaveyJ576 said:

There was a proposal for a SLA based lunar orbit lab. The "leftover" crew would spend 14-30 days orbiting the moon doing science while the rest were down on the surface. In BDB terms, it would be similar to the upper portion of the VFB lab. I saw a document with pictures on this SLA lab some time ago, but I can't find it now.

Something's not adding up for me, because the 2nd crew's SLA contained the Shelter. Plus the lab was intended for polar orbit, no?