northern Posted September 16, 2020 Share Posted September 16, 2020 (edited) Page 700 everybody Are the mach diamonds on the delta IV intentional? or is it a bug? if they are its amazing, if not, i found a bug Edited September 16, 2020 by northern Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeaKaka Posted September 16, 2020 Share Posted September 16, 2020 28 minutes ago, northern said: Are the mach diamonds on the delta IV intentional? or is it a bug? if they are its amazing, if not, i found a bug they are intentional, as you can see here: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidy12 Posted September 16, 2020 Share Posted September 16, 2020 3 hours ago, Zorg said: BDB RO compatibility patches are within RO itself. If you install RO and BDB together the parts will get configured for real scale. Due to the huge size of BDB and fast development a lot of parts might not be covered. However mcDouble has made extensive efforts to update even the current bdb development branch to RO. Like i said not everything will be covered but the situation is a lot better than it used to be. I dont think there is a solution for RSS without RO but we do also have custom SMURFF configs. I dont know much about it though. I will say the Sarnus IB needs a lot of augmenting to launch the CSM EVEN when I put it in Earth Orbital Config. But EHHH... It'll be revised within the next year or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcdouble Posted September 16, 2020 Share Posted September 16, 2020 1 hour ago, davidy12 said: I will say the Sarnus IB needs a lot of augmenting to launch the CSM EVEN when I put it in Earth Orbital Config. But EHHH... It'll be revised within the next year or so. I haven't done any Saturn configs for RO since that's probably one of the next things to be revamped. If there are any other parts that are glaring omissions let me know and I'll endeavour to get them done, actually I'm not sure how up to date the ones included with RO are since I just kinda do configs for things as they are released for my own use. 3 hours ago, Pappystein said: and I might be wrong but @mcdouble can verify. Did I not see another new "Alternate Apollo" update (just no notes in the forum to that effect)? Something about a GE Apollo D-2 Capsule LEM (I haven't unlocked it yet... stupid slow crawling career!) I did add a LEM based on the old "bug" design but I don't know if I ever set it up for career mode or anything Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clamp-o-Tron Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 (edited) Bossart-Belle ignites its engines to launch the Belle Target Vehicle. "What's happening to the Bossart?" KSC screams as the sustainer's gimbal fails 20 seconds before MECO. The Belle performs valiantly, but it doesn't have enough TWR to reach orbit. That's OK, we have a backup. It isn't really tested well, and it has less capabilities, but it can prevent the launch of Leo 9A being delayed several months. Here it launches on a Bossart booster from TSC. It's light enough that the Bossart's sustainer can put it into LKO. Telemetry indicates orbit achieved, separation from the Bossart, and RCS powered on. Everything is perfect! (Right. Definitely. Nothing is wrong.) With the BTV in orbit, it's time to send up Leo 9A with Jeb and Haldo the scientist to rendezvous and dock with it. The Prometheus II booster performs admirably, and less than ten minutes after T-0, Leo 9A is 350 kilometers above Kerbin, moving at about 3.5 km/s. Halbo spots the BTV out one of the visual sights near the docking mechanism, and Jeb fires up the RCS to move closer. As the details of the craft become clearer, Jeb can make out that the fairing covering the docking port never really detached from the vessel. "KSC," he says, "We've got a problem with a cross Krokkodile here in orbit". Edited September 17, 2020 by Clamp-o-Tron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidy12 Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 4 hours ago, mcdouble said: I haven't done any Saturn configs for RO since that's probably one of the next things to be revamped. If there are any other parts that are glaring omissions let me know and I'll endeavour to get them done, actually I'm not sure how up to date the ones included with RO are since I just kinda do configs for things as they are released for my own use. No, I mean just in JNSQ. I had to up-rate the ISP by about 15-20 on the 1st stage to get this even close to LKO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorg Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 6 hours ago, davidy12 said: No, I mean just in JNSQ. I had to up-rate the ISP by about 15-20 on the 1st stage to get this even close to LKO. Admittedly the Saturn I is an old part and underscaled, I know JSO balances the new stuff by 20% of IRL propellant mass, not sure if Saturn I and SIVB are volume or mass balanced or somewhere in between. However it IS in fact possible to achieve low orbit with this LV with some careful flying in JNSQ. Example 1, here we use Mechjeb PVG guidance and a target orbit of 128x142km. this is the historical orbit for Apollo 7 scaled proportionally to JNSQ except we go for 0 degrees inclination instead of 30ish. As you can see it nearly makes it but falls short by 100 m/s or so which needs to be delivered by the Apollo SPS. This is using the Saturn IB with the original J2 and the base config for the H1 engines. And Apollo set to orbital config, no further tweaks. (ignore the principia navball, has no bearing on achieving low orbit). In this second example we launch in the exact same way but we upgrade the 1st stage engines to the 1973 configuration which represents H1 performance by the time of Skylab. The extra thrust reduces gravity losses in the early ascent a little and you get 12 seconds Isp gain too. This is enough to make up the shortfall and we make our target orbit with 26 m/s to spare in the S-IVB Now for our 3rd and final example we're feeling confident and we fly manually using the original H1 engine configs. This time we're not looking for any semblance of historical parameters, just trying to make orbit. The trajectory is a bit shallower and more aggressive than MJ. The only things in mind were 1) starting a gentle gravity turn at 100m/s pitching over by 5-7 degrees and mostly holding prograde 2) holding attitude at 45 degrees when you've reached that pitch and aiming for an Ap about 1 minute away by MECO 3) Ditch the abort tower as soon as S-IB is ignited (that thing is heavy). This isnt very accurate from what I can gather, but its necessary with the current setup. 4) Trying to keep the Ap about 45s away throughout the S-IVB burn. I probably could have made some efficiency gains by passing the Ap during circulirisation but I lost concentration. Anyway with the un-upgraded all original engines an orbit of 96x114km is achieved with 26 m/s to spare. Now I'm hardly the best player and Im sure the MJ performance could be improved with some tweaks and so too could the manual flying. But the point is it is possible to reach LKO in JNSQ with some careful flying and fudging some details like the tower jettison timing. As you said things should be improved with the revamped parts when they arrive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 8 hours ago, Clamp-o-Tron said: Where did you get that that launch site? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcelo Silveira Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 1 hour ago, gabo04 said: Where did you get that that launch site? Here, I use the same mod as well Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 1 minute ago, Marcelo Silveira said: Here, I use the same mod as well Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta dart Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 Is there anyway to make a realistic looking recreation of Little Joe 1 with BDB parts alone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerbal01 Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 Algol motors in a tweak scaled structural tube, fins, SM decoupler, apollo CSM and LES. Thats how I did it when I wanted a little Joe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debaker02 Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 Re Saturn 1b to orbit:. Take some of the heat shield off as well. You do not need it. You may also defuel a bit even in orbital, don't need that much dv anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidy12 Posted September 18, 2020 Share Posted September 18, 2020 2 hours ago, debaker02 said: Re Saturn 1b to orbit:. Take some of the heat shield off as well. You do not need it. I like being as accurate as possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emilius73 Posted September 18, 2020 Share Posted September 18, 2020 Has anyone made Textures Unlimited configs to make the Apollo CM shiny? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappystein Posted September 18, 2020 Share Posted September 18, 2020 (edited) 14 hours ago, davidy12 said: I like being as accurate as possible. Then I would suggest doing as suggested, Because Ablator increases the mass significantly (and there isn't a good way to control it.) IRL the Ablator works completely differently than it does in KSP. In KSP it is treated more like a "Cooling Fuel," that you have to expend to be cool. In Real life, the hotter you come in, the more the Ablator protects you (assuming you have more than the minimum amount needed to cause the charring and thus the protective nature of the Ablator.) IRL you don't add more of the same ablative material, you have to change the ablative material to stand up to different requirements. Basically what I am saying is in real life the Ablator is no where near as mass-centric, as it is in KSP. And in Real life an heat shield does not just Ablate away (well not at anywhere near the level it does in KSP at-least.) I, sadly don't have the time to link the actual pictures or facts from the Apollo heat shield but it looses less than 10% of it's weight if I recall correctly from a moon landing.... And that is only a few % points (less than a percent) more than it looses from LEO. Most Heat-shields are actually not ablative... Sure they may be one use but rarely do they loose more than 20% of their mass (off the top of my head.) Yet nearly every heat-shield in game looses at-least half of it's mass when being used it seams..... Edited September 18, 2020 by Pappystein Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorg Posted September 18, 2020 Share Posted September 18, 2020 Delta IV Small 3.125m to 1.5m adapter, including an additional 1.875m option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidy12 Posted September 18, 2020 Share Posted September 18, 2020 Just now, Zorg said: What rocket stage is that exactly? Some uprated Agena? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debaker02 Posted September 18, 2020 Share Posted September 18, 2020 1 hour ago, Pappystein said: Then I would suggest doing as suggested, .... Most Heat-shields are actually not ablative... Sure they may be one use but rarely do they loose more than 20% of their mass (off the top of my head.) Yet nearly every heat-shield in game looses at-least half of it's mass when being used it seams..... Yeah I agree. TPS are complicated layers of all kinds of stuff. They don't melt away in the scale of ksp. It's more like the kerbal TPS is a model, and you are using it by bringing more or less ablator. They just set the max to a big number to make them enough to work at whatever use in kerbal. IMHO, is not a realistic enough simulation to care that much. It's your gaming experience, so go for whatever is the most fun to you. You might need to use the up-rated engines for more margins for now. Happy flying! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorg Posted September 18, 2020 Share Posted September 18, 2020 Just now, davidy12 said: What rocket stage is that exactly? Some uprated Agena? Yes its the smaller of the the two strap on tank Agenas cobalt added in a few months ago. Its missing a couple of components in this rushed test build. Strap on tanks were also considered for a reusable shuttle Agena which was brought up a few pages back. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19740024172 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappystein Posted September 18, 2020 Share Posted September 18, 2020 23 minutes ago, Zorg said: Yes its the smaller of the the two strap on tank Agenas cobalt added in a few months ago. Its missing a couple of components in this rushed test build. Strap on tanks were also considered for a reusable shuttle Agena which was brought up a few pages back. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19740024172 It is just too bad we don't either have the actual tank-age shown in figure 4.5-1 of that document, or an adapter to put an Agena engine on a Titan Tank to make that Agena version Likely the NON SOT equipped "Growth Agena" would have been what actually flew on shuttle (due to less/no space debris) I have kitbashed them together a few times back early in the Titan Dev cycle while awaiting the SOT tanks for Agena. But the Titan Tankage is much heavier than the Growth Agena would have been. Oh well, maybe I will build my own tank to interface... but no I suck at texturing... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorg Posted September 18, 2020 Share Posted September 18, 2020 Just now, Pappystein said: Likely the NON SOT equipped "Growth Agena" would have been what actually flew on shuttle (due to less/no space debris) From what i recall from the last time I read it, the reusable Agena would only have dropped the strap on tanks for missions that needed the margin. Otherwise the whole thing was recovered. 1 minute ago, Pappystein said: Oh well, maybe I will build my own tank to interface... but no I suck at texturing... Heh so did I, until I made one one part, and then another, and then another (and went back and revamped the first couple ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrbitalManeuvers Posted September 18, 2020 Share Posted September 18, 2020 Would any kind soul be willing to share a some VAB pictures of how you're using the Belle MPA? Since I finally figured out Fore By Throttle today, I figured I should tackle my other current mystery ... which this part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorg Posted September 18, 2020 Share Posted September 18, 2020 19 minutes ago, OrbitalManeuvers said: Would any kind soul be willing to share a some VAB pictures of how you're using the Belle MPA? Since I finally figured out Fore By Throttle today, I figured I should tackle my other current mystery ... which this part. The dual payload adapter? That er actually doesnt work properly. I should probably add in optional nodes to the relevant fairing bases so both a payload and the adapter can be attached. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrbitalManeuvers Posted September 18, 2020 Share Posted September 18, 2020 2 minutes ago, Zorg said: I should probably add in optional nodes to the relevant fairing bases ahh the mystery text in the part is now explained. ok thanks. i'll shelve it until further notice. 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.