SpaceFace545 Posted September 23, 2021 Share Posted September 23, 2021 Does anyone have any TU configs for Apollo that they would be willing to share? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted September 23, 2021 Author Share Posted September 23, 2021 (edited) Had to run early Up on Github tonight: S1 Block 1 engine mount Tank extensions for the S1 Saturn 1B texture switch for S-IVB tank and engine mount. Also got some good progress on the S-IV Edited September 23, 2021 by CobaltWolf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam-Kerman Posted September 23, 2021 Share Posted September 23, 2021 S-IVB Engine Mount seems weird... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted September 23, 2021 Author Share Posted September 23, 2021 On 9/23/2021 at 1:32 PM, Adam-Kerman said: S-IVB Engine Mount seems weird... Expand Uh... oops. Lol. Ok, I can fix that tonight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorg Posted September 23, 2021 Share Posted September 23, 2021 (edited) While github still doesnt seem have acknowledged the issue, I found out you can download the revamp branch just by forcing the correct URL. if you would rather not clone to desktop (which imo is a good idea) or fork the repo (bad idea cos you need to manually merge any new commits we make). you can just download from this linkhttps://github.com/CobaltWolf/Bluedog-Design-Bureau/archive/refs/heads/apollo-saturn-revamp.zip Edited September 23, 2021 by Zorg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RemonKewl Posted September 23, 2021 Share Posted September 23, 2021 Thanks, I thought I was going crazy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappystein Posted September 23, 2021 Share Posted September 23, 2021 On 9/23/2021 at 1:56 PM, Zorg said: While github still doesnt seem have acknowledged the issue, I found out you can download the revamp branch just by forcing the correct URL. if you would rather not clone to desktop (which imo is a good idea) or fork the repo (bad idea cos you need to manually merge any new commits we make). you can just download from this linkhttps://github.com/CobaltWolf/Bluedog-Design-Bureau/archive/refs/heads/apollo-saturn-revamp.zip Expand Thanks Zorg! While I use Github Desktop and web interface pretty extensively (and have the Saturn Branch in the desktop interface longer than the Github Issue has been happening,) it is not easy for someone new to Github to really use. Posting the link like this (maybe a temporary edit to the Front page @CobaltWolf?) is a big help to many who want to play with new toyz when they are broken and still being polished by the team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrbitalManeuvers Posted September 23, 2021 Share Posted September 23, 2021 Was the center F1 engine shutdown triggered by an unconditional T+x timing sort of thing, or was it a performance/detection type event, like G or Q or fuel levels or ... ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpaceFace545 Posted September 23, 2021 Share Posted September 23, 2021 On 9/23/2021 at 3:19 PM, OrbitalManeuvers said: Was the center F1 engine shutdown triggered by an unconditional T+x timing sort of thing, or was it a performance/detection type event, like G or Q or fuel levels or ... ? Expand I do believe it was triggered by excess acceleration Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starhelperdude Posted September 23, 2021 Share Posted September 23, 2021 On 9/23/2021 at 3:19 PM, OrbitalManeuvers said: Was the center F1 engine shutdown triggered by an unconditional T+x timing sort of thing, or was it a performance/detection type event, like G or Q or fuel levels or ... ? Expand are you referencing apollo 13? if yes, it wasn't the center F1 that shut down, it was the center J2 on the 2nd stage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorg Posted September 23, 2021 Share Posted September 23, 2021 On 9/23/2021 at 3:36 PM, Starhelperdude said: are you referencing apollo 13? if yes, it wasn't the center F1 that shut down, it was the center J2 on the 2nd stage Expand Deliberate center F1 shut down was standard on Saturn V. Around the 4G mark iirc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zakkpaz Posted September 23, 2021 Share Posted September 23, 2021 On 9/23/2021 at 4:08 PM, Zorg said: Deliberate center F1 shut down was standard on Saturn V. Around the 4G mark iirc. Expand i thought that was just in the last few launches so they could get rid of the ullage motors on the interstage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappystein Posted September 23, 2021 Share Posted September 23, 2021 (edited) On 9/23/2021 at 5:10 PM, zakkpaz said: i thought that was just in the last few launches so they could get rid of the ullage motors on the interstage? Expand No, that is an often stated miss-understanding. People didn't comment on it until after the Ullage motors were reduced and then removed.... Didn't mean it had anything to do with it... It is kind of like how the actions of a congressional aid putting a saturn drawing in the Nova Report causes everyone thinks Saturn was part of Nova. That would also be like me owning a 1974 AMC Javelin and calling it a Dodge because in the 1980s Dodge absorbed AMC.... Edited September 23, 2021 by Pappystein Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrdinaryKerman Posted September 23, 2021 Share Posted September 23, 2021 (edited) On 9/23/2021 at 5:10 PM, zakkpaz said: i thought that was just in the last few launches so they could get rid of the ullage motors on the interstage? Expand No, center engine shutdown at T+135s was always a thing (at least according to the last page of the 1968 NASA fact sheet the Wikipedia page references). On 9/23/2021 at 5:21 PM, Pappystein said: No, that is an often stated miss-understanding. People didn't comment on it until after the Ullage motors were reduced and then removed.... Didn't mean it had anything to do with it... It is kind of like how the actions of a congressional aid putting a saturn drawing in the Nova Report causes everyone thinks Saturn was part of Nova. Expand So why were the ullage motors gotten rid of, and how did they settle the second stage propellant without them? Edited September 23, 2021 by OrdinaryKerman add link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmateurAstronaut1969 Posted September 23, 2021 Share Posted September 23, 2021 On 9/23/2021 at 5:22 PM, OrdinaryKerman said: So why were the ullage motors gotten rid of, and how did they settle the second stage propellant without them? Expand From my knowledge, there was still enough gravity acting on the vehicle to settle the propellant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted September 23, 2021 Author Share Posted September 23, 2021 On 9/23/2021 at 2:50 PM, Pappystein said: Thanks Zorg! While I use Github Desktop and web interface pretty extensively (and have the Saturn Branch in the desktop interface longer than the Github Issue has been happening,) it is not easy for someone new to Github to really use. Posting the link like this (maybe a temporary edit to the Front page @CobaltWolf?) is a big help to many who want to play with new toyz when they are broken and still being polished by the team. Expand Was thinking the same thing, done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pappystein Posted September 23, 2021 Share Posted September 23, 2021 (edited) On 9/23/2021 at 5:22 PM, OrdinaryKerman said: No, center engine shutdown at T+135s was always a thing (at least according to the last page of the 1968 NASA fact sheet the Wikipedia page references). So why were the ullage motors gotten rid of, and how did they settle the second stage propellant without them? Expand I am not an expert on this portion so I will say I am not 100000000% certain. But We can intuit several factors. 1) while minuscule, AmatureAstronnaut1969 is not wrong about Earth Gravity. I don't think it, alone, would be enough to settle an un-settled fuel supply at the engine pump head... but then we get to 2 2) INERTIA. The Rocket is still moving forward Through/Away from the center of Earth Gravity. The 2nd stage is ignited as soon as the first stage's retros are kicked in. I *THINK* it was discovered that there was no need for Ullage because the fuel had not had a chance to MOVE AWAY from the engine as it was "pinned" in place by the Inertia of it's own mass. Summation: Now if it had coasted for many many seconds or minutes or any amount of time that an outside force could impart it's own vector of acceleration... then Ullage would still be needed. Thus we are left with the nearly zero delay of ignition from 1st stage separation, Inertia + acceleration of earth based gravity invalidating the need for Ullage on the S-II stage. Edited September 23, 2021 by Pappystein Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted September 23, 2021 Author Share Posted September 23, 2021 So, somehow this lil cutie got deleted 2 years ago right after it was revamped and never was released. It is now on GitHub, will be in the next release. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrbitalManeuvers Posted September 23, 2021 Share Posted September 23, 2021 On 9/23/2021 at 10:04 PM, Pappystein said: because the fuel had not had a chance to MOVE AWAY from the engine Expand If this is to be believed (no idea where I got it) then there's still positive G's on the fuel during the 3 seconds between OECO and S-II ignition, as opposed to the S-IVB's FECO where it drops to 0. Reveal hidden contents Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Son of Man Posted September 23, 2021 Share Posted September 23, 2021 (edited) Would anyone know why when you use the guidance units on a rocket it causes it to go absolutely haywire? I put one on one of my rockets and now it can barely get 600ft off the ground before turning aggressively and slamming back into the ground. Unless they are specifically tied too the rocket in the name and should only be used correspondingly? Edited September 24, 2021 by Son of Man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRoc2112 Posted September 24, 2021 Share Posted September 24, 2021 On 9/23/2021 at 10:36 PM, CobaltWolf said: So, somehow this lil cutie got deleted 2 years ago right after it was revamped and never was released. It is now on GitHub, will be in the next release. Expand Funny, a few months ago I was making a little science probe and was wondering why I couldn't find that little guy. Thanks for bringing it back, bud! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeaKaka Posted September 24, 2021 Share Posted September 24, 2021 help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Friznit Posted September 24, 2021 Share Posted September 24, 2021 On 9/23/2021 at 11:15 PM, Son of Man said: Would anyone know why when you use the guidance units on a rocket it causes it to go absolutely haywire? I put one on one of my rockets and now it can barely get 600ft off the ground before turning aggressively and slamming back into the ground. Unless they are specifically tied too the rocket in the name and should only be used correspondingly? Expand Are they upside down? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Son of Man Posted September 24, 2021 Share Posted September 24, 2021 (edited) On 9/24/2021 at 6:45 AM, Friznit said: Are they upside down? Expand They are not, tried the other way and it still causes the rocket to lose control very quickly. Did some more testing and it is only with SAS enabled. Flies straight up just fine without SAS but as soon as I turn SAS on it starts spinning and losing control. At first I thought maybe it is top heavy (which it is a bit) but it doesn't explain why it loses control as soon as I turn SAS on. Tried removing all control surfaces and fins just in case but still ended up with the same result. The only thing that worked was removing the whole top section past the fairing base and the fairing itself, then it would stop losing control when SAS is turned on. So I double checked everything in that section which was the Nose Cone, 4 battery packs, 2 antennas, 2 service bays, top filled with science instruments and Kerbal Engineering System part, bottom filled with more science instruments, Science Jr in the middle between the bays, followed by Thor X400 fuel tank and 48-7S Spark engine. Too my knowledge (which isn't much lol, new-ish at KSP) none of that would seem to mess with the guidance unit this much or at all? The guidance unit itself is clipped inside the Thor Upper Stage fuel tank, directly below the fairing base. Here is the rocket in question: Reveal hidden contents https://imgur.com/a/AQRIVGb Edited September 24, 2021 by Son of Man Extra details Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveyJ576 Posted September 24, 2021 Share Posted September 24, 2021 On 9/24/2021 at 10:11 AM, Son of Man said: They are not, tried the other way and it still causes the rocket to lose control very quickly. Did some more testing and it is only with SAS enabled. Flies straight up just fine without SAS but as soon as I turn SAS on it starts spinning and losing control. At first I thought maybe it is top heavy (which it is a bit) but it doesn't explain why it loses control as soon as I turn SAS on. Tried removing all control surfaces and fins just in case but still ended up with the same result. The only thing that worked was removing the whole top section past the fairing base and the fairing itself, then it would stop losing control when SAS is turned on. So I double checked everything in that section which was the Nose Cone, 4 battery packs, 2 antennas, 2 service bays, top filled with science instruments and Kerbal Engineering System part, bottom filled with more science instruments, Science Jr in the middle between the bays, followed by Thor X400 fuel tank and 48-7S Spark engine. Too my knowledge (which isn't much lol, new-ish at KSP) none of that would seem to mess with the guidance unit this much or at all? The guidance unit itself is clipped inside the Thor Upper Stage fuel tank, directly below the fairing base. Here is the rocket in question: Reveal hidden contents https://imgur.com/a/AQRIVGb Expand I ran into a similar problem a while back while trying to fly a Lunar Orbiter on an Atlas Agena. I would launch and the rocket would promptly flip upside down and crash. I was stumped because I had just flown a Ranger mission on a very similar rocket with no problems. I finally asked for help here and a poster revealed that the Lunar Orbiter is essentially assembled upside down in the VAB and (correctly) mounted on the rocket that way. If it remains as the root part then the rocket will think it is inverted and will try to correct that immediately upon launch. The offered solution was to reset the "Control from Here" to the Agena guidance section (or make it the root part) prior to launch. Once that was pointed out to me it made immediate sense, but I will admit that it wasn't intuitive in the beginning. From your description above it sounds like you have covered all the bases, but I wrote this to point out that it may be something subtle and unintuitive that is causing your rocket to crash. 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.