Rocket Poster (NOW TAKING REQUESTS)

[YNM]

1 hour ago, Canopus said:

Ariane for example.

They just enlarged the tanks and straps as many SRB as possible (except between 1-2-3-4 and 5). Ariane 6 would fall under Ariane 5 evolved, unless the go ahead with 2 massive SRBs.

1 hour ago, Canopus said:

Atlas V 401 and 551 for example

Still Centaur, just different diameter. H-II A and H-II B goes nearly the same, except it's the core booster that went larger.

[Dfthu]

4 hours ago, DAL59 said:

 

I got that one at Hobby Lobby, it also has a diagram of the R-7,V2, and the first liquid rocket on the bottom.

[Gargamel]

Being a wood worker, I'd go with an Apollo CSM bed.....  Like a tent, but cooler. 

[p1t1o]

I had this poster when I was younger, loved it:

[sevenperforce]

14 hours ago, VaPaL said:

@sevenperforce This site may help: https://historicspacecraft.com/Space_Graphics.html

This is...perfect.

Now to just get the list the way I want it.

[sevenperforce]

My newly-4yo got to get up just in time to watch InSight launch, then got this poster:

Not as many as I would have wanted but a good sampling nonetheless.

[NSEP]

57 minutes ago, sevenperforce said:

My newly-4yo got to get up just in time to watch InSight launch, then got this poster:

Not as many as I would have wanted but a good sampling nonetheless.

Very good poster! It contains the most historically significant rockets, of all different types. Shuttles, Reusables, Air-Launched, and Pioneering rockets. 

[sevenperforce]

12 minutes ago, NSEP said:

Very good poster! It contains the most historically significant rockets, of all different types. Shuttles, Reusables, Air-Launched, and Pioneering rockets. 

My 5yo saw it and said, "But where is the Atlas Five? And why will the Falcon Heavy not be man-rated?"

I had to assure him that I would do a separate poster for ULA LVs.

Him: "And once Falcon nine block five is man rated, you can make another one with the Dragon Two so that it can have little people under it!"

[NSEP]

1 hour ago, sevenperforce said:

My 5yo saw it and said, "But where is the Atlas Five? And why will the Falcon Heavy not be man-rated?"

I had to assure him that I would do a separate poster for ULA LVs.

Him: "And once Falcon nine block five is man rated, you can make another one with the Dragon Two so that it can have little people under it!"

He's smart for a five year old! I suggest taking his advice for later. If you were to make a new poster for later, I would also suggest adding in the Long-March and GSLV launch vehicles 

[wumpus]

3 hours ago, sevenperforce said:

My 5yo saw it and said, "But where is the Atlas Five? And why will the Falcon Heavy not be man-rated?"

I had to assure him that I would do a separate poster for ULA LVs.

Him: "And once Falcon nine block five is man rated, you can make another one with the Dragon Two so that it can have little people under it!"

I think it's a little odd to put so many people under Buran (which flew no cosmonauts, and never will) but none under any Falcons (which are still flying and block 5 is counting down flights to qualify).  The N-1 is even worse, the Buran at least made its flight.

[tater]

If he wants block 5 with people icons, you should also take the crew icons off Buran (or add BFS with 100 of them (as long as fantasy crew counts ).

[Ultimate Steve]

5 hours ago, wumpus said:

The N-1 is even worse, the Buran at least made its flight.

Technically, N-1 flew, it just never worked.

[sevenperforce]

18 hours ago, wumpus said:

I think it's a little odd to put so many people under Buran (which flew no cosmonauts, and never will) but none under any Falcons (which are still flying and block 5 is counting down flights to qualify).  The N-1 is even worse, the Buran at least made its flight.

The number of crew represents man-rated capacity. If I was going to add the man-rated Falcon 9 I would display it with the Dragon 2 on top.

The resolution on the finished poster isn't quite as nice as I would have liked. 

[wumpus]

16 hours ago, Ultimate Steve said:

Technically, N-1 flew, it just never worked.

Fortunately without the two cosmonauts inside.

[sevenperforce]

8 minutes ago, wumpus said:

Fortunately without the two cosmonauts inside.

Eh, they woulda been fine. N1 was no Voskhod.

[wumpus]

1 hour ago, sevenperforce said:

Eh, they woulda been fine. N1 was no Voskhod.

I thought it was the Soyuz T-10-a that had the exciting use of an abort tower (the crew had to wait to long [with 2 seconds to spare] for the abort rockets to fire).

[sevenperforce]

2 hours ago, wumpus said:

I thought it was the Soyuz T-10-a that had the exciting use of an abort tower (the crew had to wait to long [with 2 seconds to spare] for the abort rockets to fire).

Voskhod simply had no abort whatsoever.

[wumpus]

18 hours ago, sevenperforce said:

Voskhod simply had no abort whatsoever.

But Yuri Gargin had a parachute and everything!  Just like modern kerbals, oh wait...

[sevenperforce]

6 minutes ago, wumpus said:

But Yuri Gargin had a parachute and everything!  Just like modern kerbals, oh wait...

Vostok had an ejection seat and chutes; the capsule itself had no chutes and so Garagin had to bail out and chute down.

Voskhod, which followed the orbital launch of Gherman Titov on another Vostok, was the two-man capsule. The capsule had chutes, but the ejection seats were removed to make space and Voskhod had no provision for launch escape in the event of an RUD on the pad or in the first few minutes of flight. It was nearly as bad as the Shuttle.

IIRC, Voskhod and the STS are the only vehicles to ever fly crew without a launch escape system.

Does anyone know if ULA still offers the 4-meter-fairing for Delta IV Medium+? And do they still fly Delta IV Medium without any SRBs?

[sevenperforce]

Work in progress:

[YNM]

I suggest Titan (or if not enough, Titan family). Lofted Geminis and Voyagers that.

[Canopus]

1 hour ago, sevenperforce said:

Work in progress:

You made this? Looks really good and professional. The thing i'd change is that the Vulcan won't fly with the common version of centaur anymore. It starts flying with Centaur V which will already have ACES diameter.

[sevenperforce]

1 hour ago, YNM said:

I suggest Titan (or if not enough, Titan family). Lofted Geminis and Voyagers that.

There are no operational Titans, right?

23 minutes ago, Canopus said:

You made this? Looks really good and professional. The thing i'd change is that the Vulcan won't fly with the common version of centaur anymore. It starts flying with Centaur V which will already have ACES diameter.

Thanks! I used some existing graphics but essentially traced over them using MS Paint. It works pretty well.

Thanks for the flag on Centaur V; I'll fix that. Think I should do Vulcan+Centaur V without SRBs and Vulcan+ACES with?

[Canopus]

19 minutes ago, sevenperforce said:

Thanks for the flag on Centaur V; I'll fix that. Think I should do Vulcan+Centaur V without SRBs and Vulcan+ACES with?

Word on the Subreddit is that Vulcan Centaur might always fly with at least 2 SRB, information garnered from a graphic in this: https://www.spacefoundation.org/sites/default/files/tech-track-papers/Sampson-Melissa_Cislunar Economy and ACES_0.pdf

Although the Vulcan Mobile launch platform project manager couldn't give a clear answer.

 

Another thing is that the boosters on Vulcan the gem 36xl, will have conic noses as opposed to the slanted ones on Atlas. https://www.orbitalatk.com/flight-systems/propulsion-systems/GEM-Motors/docs/GEM 63_GEM 63XL.pdf

 

Edited May 7, 2018 by Canopus

[sevenperforce]

5 minutes ago, Canopus said:

Word on the Subreddit is that Vulcan Centaur might always fly with at least 2 SRB, information garnered from a graphic in this: https://www.spacefoundation.org/sites/default/files/tech-track-papers/Sampson-Melissa_Cislunar Economy and ACES_0.pdf

Although the Vulcan Mobile launch platform project manager couldn't give a clear answer.

 

Another thing is that the boosters on Vulcan the gem 36xl, will have conic noses as opposed to the slanted ones on Atlas. https://www.orbitalatk.com/flight-systems/propulsion-systems/GEM-Motors/docs/GEM 63_GEM 63XL.pdf

 

^^
Posts like this are why I made this thread and why I love this site.