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

[DaveyJ576]

@Friznit,

I would like to build out several of the satellites that you have pictured on your Wiki page. I have Coatl, ScanSat, NFE, NFS, and Space Dust. I would like to build the round sats (Galaxy 1 and TacSat 1) but I can not find the round solar panel set that you used for these. I did find the curved ones from NFS, but they are way too big and can not be Tweakscaled. Which mod did those round ones come from? Thank you!

BTW, I was able to recreate the KH-11 Kennen, but had a question. Historically, these were initially launched on Titan IIID vehicles, but if I build it like you pictured it the solar panels and the antennas would be outside of the fairing and would be damaged going uphill. Using the flared 2.6m SAF Titan IIIE fairing hides all of that nicely, but according to Ed Kyle of Nasaspaceflight.com, it doesn't appear that the Titan IIID ever launched with a flared fairing. If you build the KH-11 with Hexagon style panels on the base of the vehicle and move the antennas forward it will work, but that is not how the Kennen is generally pictured. I know that there is a great deal of speculation about how the Kennen was configured, but I was wondering if you knew.

@Pappystein, any thoughts on this? Thank you. 

[Pappystein]

8 hours ago, DaveyJ576 said:

BTW, I was able to recreate the KH-11 Kennen, but had a question. Historically, these were initially launched on Titan IIID vehicles, but if I build it like you pictured it the solar panels and the antennas would be outside of the fairing and would be damaged going uphill. Using the flared 2.6m SAF Titan IIIE fairing hides all of that nicely, but according to Ed Kyle of Nasaspaceflight.com, it doesn't appear that the Titan IIID ever launched with a flared fairing. If you build the KH-11 with Hexagon style panels on the base of the vehicle and move the antennas forward it will work, but that is not how the Kennen is generally pictured. I know that there is a great deal of speculation about how the Kennen was configured, but I was wondering if you knew.

@Pappystein, any thoughts on this? Thank you. 

From experience, I don't comment on modern spy satellites    

I will say what we know, as in it is in Public domain.    There is no flared fairing on KH-11 "theoretical" launches. 

The fairing is thus either

A) a part of the forward portion of the KH-11, or

B) the KH-11 is smaller than people think it is and the fairing encapsulates the entire bus.

 

LIKELY what is happening is the solar panels either have a small fairing that protects them before deployment (and a recess that they fold into) OR they fold under the KH-11 and have a 180 degree swing during deployment (like the KH-9 ones do in BDB already.)

What is ACTUALLY happening?   I haven't a clue.   nor do I want to speculate further... call it Space magic?

 

[Blufor878]

On 6/20/2019 at 7:06 PM, RaiderMan said:

disclaimer:

bluedog design bureau, its makers, and suppliers(of goods, both legal and illicit -wink-) are not responsible for any of the following should career saves be used with dev builds:
rapid unscheduled disassembly
explosions
REALLY good suntans(read sunburn)
rocket pogo
rocket seesaw
hard overs
lawn darting
head-desking
kerbals spontaneously tapdancing swan lake in steel toed boots whilst wearing pink tutus
depletion of coffee supplies
overcharging by one's therapist.
the therapist charging you for their therapist
loss of sleep
loss of girlfriend
girlfriend taking over computer and proving to be a better rocket scientist than you
---
bluedog design bureau, its makers and suppliers disclaim any and all warranties, expressed or implied when using a dev build. the user assumes all liability and responsibility therein for any side effects that may thusly occur.
 

I’m from the far future. I can confirm these are true. Because of BDB and other parts mods KSP now has the most hours played of any game I have on Steam. And every hour is worth it (except the loading times, but I just use that time to get some cardio in).

Also you may be wondering why I’m responding to a post from 2019. First off, I can do what I want. But also I feel like I’ve missed a lot in terms of custom rocket designs and other developments here.

[GoldForest]

9 hours ago, DaveyJ576 said:

@Friznit,

I would like to build out several of the satellites that you have pictured on your Wiki page. I have Coatl, ScanSat, NFE, NFS, and Space Dust. I would like to build the round sats (Galaxy 1 and TacSat 1) but I can not find the round solar panel set that you used for these. I did find the curved ones from NFS, but they are way too big and can not be Tweakscaled. Which mod did those round ones come from? Thank you!

BTW, I was able to recreate the KH-11 Kennen, but had a question. Historically, these were initially launched on Titan IIID vehicles, but if I build it like you pictured it the solar panels and the antennas would be outside of the fairing and would be damaged going uphill. Using the flared 2.6m SAF Titan IIIE fairing hides all of that nicely, but according to Ed Kyle of Nasaspaceflight.com, it doesn't appear that the Titan IIID ever launched with a flared fairing. If you build the KH-11 with Hexagon style panels on the base of the vehicle and move the antennas forward it will work, but that is not how the Kennen is generally pictured. I know that there is a great deal of speculation about how the Kennen was configured, but I was wondering if you knew.

@Pappystein, any thoughts on this? Thank you. 

 

1 hour ago, Pappystein said:

From experience, I don't comment on modern spy satellites    

I will say what we know, as in it is in Public domain.    There is no flared fairing on KH-11 "theoretical" launches. 

The fairing is thus either

A) a part of the forward portion of the KH-11, or

B) the KH-11 is smaller than people think it is and the fairing encapsulates the entire bus.

 

LIKELY what is happening is the solar panels either have a small fairing that protects them before deployment (and a recess that they fold into) OR they fold under the KH-11 and have a 180 degree swing during deployment (like the KH-9 ones do in BDB already.)

What is ACTUALLY happening?   I haven't a clue.   nor do I want to speculate further... call it Space magic?

 

Isn't Hubble an early block Kennan? And doesn't Hubble's original solar panels attach to the thin part of the fuselage? I think the panels on Hubble rested against the thin fuselage before launch then unfolded into the wider fuselage. 

[Entr8899]

17 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

 

Isn't Hubble an early block Kennan? And doesn't Hubble's original solar panels attach to the thin part of the fuselage? I think the panels on Hubble rested against the thin fuselage before launch then unfolded into the wider fuselage. 

I don't think Hubble and Kennen have any relation, besides a passing resemblance and similar size.

[Pappystein]

43 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

 

Isn't Hubble an early block Kennan? And doesn't Hubble's original solar panels attach to the thin part of the fuselage? I think the panels on Hubble rested against the thin fuselage before launch then unfolded into the wider fuselage. 

 

24 minutes ago, Entr8899 said:

I don't think Hubble and Kennen have any relation, besides a passing resemblance and similar size.

 

It is ***SUPPOSITION*** to make the connection between Hubble and KH-11.    A lot of people have said it is the same hull but they are comparing the general shape of the "smudgy" KH-11 images from amateur astronomers... vs big high res pictures.  

BUT it COULD be the case... It it also could be we are all off our rockers.

 

[pTrevTrevs]

1 hour ago, Pappystein said:

 

 

It is ***SUPPOSITION*** to make the connection between Hubble and KH-11.    A lot of people have said it is the same hull but they are comparing the general shape of the "smudgy" KH-11 images from amateur astronomers... vs big high res pictures.  

BUT it COULD be the case... It it also could be we are all off our rockers.

 

I heard that KH-11 and Hubble are suspected to be similar because they were transported in similar containers, but I can't remember where.

[BSS_Snag]

On 10/18/2022 at 10:28 PM, GoldForest said:

Full album: Imgur: The magic of the Internet

Delta Heavy lifting the DHSS (Delta Hypergolic Second Stage) and a 10 ton payload into a ~499.7 x ~514.5 km @ 18.047 degree orbit. 

Yes, the TWR is agonizingly low. Yes, it took a LONG time for the burns with the DHSS. But hey, I wanted to put a Hypergolic Delta into orbit. 

Also, does anyone know a patch that fixes the buildings with Kerbal Konstructs and relating mods to put them in the right position on a rescaled kerbin?  I use Sigma Dimensions and Rescale: 2.5x Config.

None that i know of.  I just go into K+K and edit the terrain so it works again.

[GoldForest]

@DaveyJ576 

Kennan fits well enough if you use the MOL Solar Array, the one that rolls up. Mind you, it's not the right shape, but it's better than nothing I guess. 

[Zorg]

4 hours ago, GoldForest said:

 

Isn't Hubble an early block Kennan? And doesn't Hubble's original solar panels attach to the thin part of the fuselage? I think the panels on Hubble rested against the thin fuselage before launch then unfolded into the wider fuselage. 

 

3 hours ago, Pappystein said:

 

 

It is ***SUPPOSITION*** to make the connection between Hubble and KH-11.    A lot of people have said it is the same hull but they are comparing the general shape of the "smudgy" KH-11 images from amateur astronomers... vs big high res pictures.  

BUT it COULD be the case... It it also could be we are all off our rockers.

 

 

2 hours ago, pTrevTrevs said:

I heard that KH-11 and Hubble are suspected to be similar because they were transported in similar containers, but I can't remember where.

I think the strongest probable connection between Hubble and KH11 is that the NRO donated two surplus 2.4m mirror assemblies to NASA; exact same size as Hubble although of course the NRO wont say which program its from. One of them is of course being adapted on the Nancy Grace Roman telescope. However this does not imply the optical tube assembly and the bus are the exact same shape as Hubble though. Personally I think the most likely explanation is that for the Titan III launches it was similar to the Kh9 like Pappystein suggested.

Supposed KH-11 launch from https://space.skyrocket.de/doc_lau_det/titan-3d.htm

Edited October 20, 2022 by Zorg

[GoldForest]

Full album: Imgur: The magic of the Internet

Delta V (Delta IV 7M CCB) with 4m DCSS launching a 7-ton payload into a ~250 km x ~250 km 90-degree orbit. 

Btw, @Zorg Do you have that Delta PDF file on hand? The one that shows the Delta IV expansion concepts like the 7m core and the 8m core?

Edited October 20, 2022 by GoldForest

[Beccab]

48 minutes ago, Zorg said:

 

 

I think the strongest probable connection between Hubble and KH11 is that the NRO donated two surplus 2.4m mirror assemblies to NASA; exact same size as Hubble although of course the NRO wont say which program its from. One of them is of course being adapted on the Nancy Grace Roman telescope. However this does not imply the optical tube assembly and the bus are the exact same shape as Hubble though. Personally I think the most likely explanation is that for the Titan III launches it was similar to the Kh9 like Pappystein suggested.

Supposed KH-11 launch from https://space.skyrocket.de/doc_lau_det/titan-3d.htm

Damn, if that's the bus then KH-11 was definitely much longer than Hubble given the fairing

[Zorg]

7 minutes ago, Beccab said:

Damn, if that's the bus then KH-11 was definitely much longer than Hubble given the fairing

I think that biconic fairing had a standard length. looks similar to the one used for many classified missions including the 33B/34B missions. It always looks the same length to me unlike the Titan III standard fairing which was height adjustable. Not that I've done pixel measurements or anything.

27 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

Btw, @Zorg Do you have that Delta PDF file on hand? The one that shows the Delta IV expansion concepts like the 7m core and the 8m core?

https://www.ulalaunch.com/docs/default-source/rockets/delta-iv-user's-guide.pdf

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0094576505001050

 

Edited October 20, 2022 by Zorg

[GoldForest]

2 minutes ago, Zorg said:

I think that biconic fairing had a standard length. looks similar to the one used for many classified missions including the 33B/34B missions. It always looks the same length to me unlike the Titan III standard fairing which was height adjustable. Not that I've done pixel measurements or anything.

https://www.ulalaunch.com/docs/default-source/rockets/delta-iv-user's-guide.pdf

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0094576505001050

 

Thanks!

[Beccab]

Off topic but, does anyone have an idea of what the "Rocketdyne L-9H TORO (NASA II)" is in this scheme? A study on something like a 70' diameter hydrolox engine would be news to me, if we exclude Sea Dragon's handwavey first stage. Google yelds nothing useful unfortunately

[GoldForest]

8 minutes ago, Beccab said:

Off topic but, does anyone have an idea of what the "Rocketdyne L-9H TORO (NASA II)" is in this scheme? A study on something like a 70' diameter hydrolox engine would be news to me, if we exclude Sea Dragon's handwavey first stage. Google yelds nothing useful unfortunately

Apparently, this is a Nova proposal from Boeing. So, good luck finding anything on it. Honestly, it looks like Boeing took MM 14A design and just made the second stage have 1 engine instead of 4.

[Beccab]

2 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

Apparently, this is a Nova proposal from Boeing. So, good luck finding anything on it. Honestly, it looks like Boeing took MM 14A design and just made the second stage have 1 engine instead of 4.

I was able to find the report on the wayback machine
https://web.archive.org/web/20100520060542/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19890068698_1989068698.pdf
(no idea why it's 1989 in the link, it's from 1963)
It talks about a... toroidal engine apparently? Idk, it almost sounds like an aerospike from the description but the drawing definitely isn't of one, and it says it has an expansion ratio of 150 which doesn't seem particularly high for an aerospike (especially one that doesn't start from sea level) but at the same time would be very high for a conventional nozzle. Idk, it's some weird stuff

[GoldForest]

19 minutes ago, Beccab said:

I was able to find the report on the wayback machine
https://web.archive.org/web/20100520060542/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19890068698_1989068698.pdf
(no idea why it's 1989 in the link, it's from 1963)
It talks about a... toroidal engine apparently? Idk, it almost sounds like an aerospike from the description but the drawing definitely isn't of one, and it says it has an expansion ratio of 150 which doesn't seem particularly high for an aerospike (especially one that doesn't start from sea level) but at the same time would be very high for a conventional nozzle. Idk, it's some weird stuff

The engine might be an aerospike without the spike in the center, though the drawings all depict a bell, which is weird. Maybe the injectors are in a ring around the combustion chamber? Just spit balling. Then again, there doesn't seem to be a combustion chamber. It looks like the LOX tank is literally sitting above the throat. So maybe the throat has a ring of injectors? No combustion chamber, just sparking the throat as the fuel comes through? Again, just spit balling. 

I didn't see a diagram of the engine in the PDF, just SRB cross sections. 

Btw, @Zorg How's the RL/MB-60 coming along? It's been about a month, any updates?

Edited October 20, 2022 by GoldForest

[Zorg]

14 minutes ago, GoldForest said:

The engine might be an aerospike without the spike in the center, though the drawings all depict a bell, which is weird. Maybe the injectors are in a ring around the combustion chamber? Just spit balling. Then again, there doesn't seem to be a combustion chamber. It looks like the LOX tank is literally sitting above the throat. So maybe the throat has a ring of injectors? No combustion chamber, just sparking the throat as the fuel comes through? Again, just spit balling. 

I didn't see a diagram of the engine in the PDF, just SRB cross sections. 

Btw, @Zorg How's the RL/MB-60 coming along? It's been about a month, any updates?

The update is that its all been Voyager Mars

[Jcking]

4 hours ago, Beccab said:

I was able to find the report on the wayback machine
https://web.archive.org/web/20100520060542/http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19890068698_1989068698.pdf
(no idea why it's 1989 in the link, it's from 1963)
It talks about a... toroidal engine apparently? Idk, it almost sounds like an aerospike from the description but the drawing definitely isn't of one, and it says it has an expansion ratio of 150 which doesn't seem particularly high for an aerospike (especially one that doesn't start from sea level) but at the same time would be very high for a conventional nozzle. Idk, it's some weird stuff

Expansion Deflection, not bell. It's a type of altitude compensating nozzle. Rocketdyne worked on a couple, and Aerojet built and test fired one.

Edited October 20, 2022 by Jcking

[Friznit]

17 hours ago, DaveyJ576 said:

@Friznit,

I would like to build out several of the satellites that you have pictured on your Wiki page. I have Coatl, ScanSat, NFE, NFS, and Space Dust. I would like to build the round sats (Galaxy 1 and TacSat 1) but I can not find the round solar panel set that you used for these. I did find the curved ones from NFS, but they are way too big and can not be Tweakscaled. Which mod did those round ones come from? Thank you!

BTW, I was able to recreate the KH-11 Kennen, but had a question. Historically, these were initially launched on Titan IIID vehicles, but if I build it like you pictured it the solar panels and the antennas would be outside of the fairing and would be damaged going uphill. Using the flared 2.6m SAF Titan IIIE fairing hides all of that nicely, but according to Ed Kyle of Nasaspaceflight.com, it doesn't appear that the Titan IIID ever launched with a flared fairing. If you build the KH-11 with Hexagon style panels on the base of the vehicle and move the antennas forward it will work, but that is not how the Kennen is generally pictured. I know that there is a great deal of speculation about how the Kennen was configured, but I was wondering if you knew.

@Pappystein, any thoughts on this? Thank you. 

The satellite bus used for Galaxy 1 and TacSat in those kitbashes is parts from BDB Pioneer 6 smooshed together.   General kitbashing woes I discovered on the way: we have lots of round satellite busses / control modules in various mods and yet many real life satellites are blocky.  there aren't so many square-ish ones and those that exist have some lovely textures and greebling, which unfortunately gets in the way.  You have to get creative!

 

Ref. KH-11.  Remember birds aren't real, folks.

[DaveyJ576]

@Friznit, @Pappystein, @GoldForest, and others:

Thank you for the information concerning the KH-11. All of this is a very interesting discussion, but it will have to remain speculative for the foreseeable future. Perhaps in 10 years or so the NRO will declassify the KH-11 in a fashion similar to what they did with the KH-9 Hexagon, and all of these questions will be answered. 

After realizing that mounting the solar panels on the Satellite Support Bus was just not going to work, I played around with the design and came to the conclusion that since the Kennen would spend a considerable amount of time pointing down at the Earth it would make sense to mount the solar panels on the bottom of the SSB, similar to how they are mounted on the Hexagon. I used the Apollo Block IV solar panels and they worked quite well. More research last night showed that well regarded artists C.P. Vick and Giuseppe De Chiara both believe that the panels would be mounted on the sides of the narrow part of the fuselage, similar to what GoldForest showed above. De Chiara works closely with Dwayne Day (who writes extensively on these matters), so I think his representation is as accurate as we can get for now. 

Spoiler

Friznit, please don't interpret any of this as a criticism of your work on the Wiki page. All of your illustrations are fantastic and they prompted several enjoyable hours yesterday of kitbashing in the VAB. Thanks!

[Friznit]

25 minutes ago, DaveyJ576 said:

Friznit, please don't interpret any of this as a criticism of your work on the Wiki page. All of your illustrations are fantastic and they prompted several enjoyable hours yesterday of kitbashing in the VAB. Thanks!

Not at all, I'm delighted that someone is taking inspiration from my inspiration!  Kit bashing in KSP is fun.

[bigyihsuan]

What are people's thoughts on each launch vehicle in your saves?

List going by order on Friznit's wiki:

• Scout: Never used, the tech trees I play with don't have everything in Scout unlocked early enough.
• Vanguard: Only useful for the first few probes.
• Redstone: Meh, only ever used it for launching the first Kerballed rockets.
• Jupiter: It just melds into Thor/Delta when I get to this point.
• MX/Minotaur/Athena: Never used. SRBs are not flexible enough.
• Thor/Long Thor/Delta: A real workhorse in the early-game before unlocking Titan parts. Though, the Delta upper stages (Able, Able-Star, Delta-P/K/DCSS) have not enough TWR for my liking. I only use Agenas for upper stages, they're that good.
• Atlas/Large Atlas: Good, but the half stage is too fiddly for MechJeb's ascent guidance. Only usable if you're flying manually or if you can't get Titan parts yet.
• Titan: The real workhorse. Have a larger payload? Slap larger/more SRBs and call it a day! And a large variety of upper stages to choose from as well. Staging is simpler than Atlas as well, so MJ doesn't complain as much. Titan 1 is very quickly superseded by 2-4, though, since I usually get the UA12xx SRBs with the rest of the Titan.
• Atlas V: When you get the Atlas V you also have the ETS Saturn parts, so not really used.
• Delta IV/Heavy: The regular version I never really used; as said above the Delta upper stages have way too low TWR for my liking. For the Heavy, the fact that the center stage starts at 60% and then goes to 100% after booster sep makes it hard to work with using MJ.
• Titan LDC: Good if you need to send Saturn-sized payloads but you don't have Saturns yet. I used this frequently with Big Gemini and that Titan-Centaur-Agena-Gemini Iota mission I did: 
• Saturn I/B: Good for the first Apollo missions, but the dV budget is too slim for my liking.
• Saturn IC: An amazing workhorse of a rocket, easily extendable. Slap SRBs, slap LRBs, extend the core, add a third upper stage, so much you can do with this thing. Also very low part count as well.
• Saturn V/MLV:  A good base for payloads that need super-heavy-lift capabilities. Also very extendable, see my Apollo-Saturn-based trip to 2.5x Snarkiverse Dres, where I took a maxed-out Saturn V, added a methalox-powered S-II stage and 4 AJ-260X SRBs:
• Saturn II: Not used.

Edited October 20, 2022 by bigyihsuan

[Zorg]

36 minutes ago, bigyihsuan said:

Atlas/Large Atlas: Good, but the half stage is too fiddly for MechJeb's ascent guidance. Only usable if you're flying manually or if you can't get Titan parts yet.

Atlas works quite well with PVG guidance in my experience. In fact I believe the original implementation of PVG in mechjeb was based on Atlas Centaur algorithms.