[0.21+] Kosmos Spacecraft Design Bureau: Updated (9/27/13)

[Guest]

I have no idea, but that's literally the only stuff I could find about RD-0155. Single-nozzled boosters on Soyuz-3 concept art could be due to them using RD-120 engines (from Zenit), RD-0155 was planned for the interim Soyuz-2-3.

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

RD-120 is a weird engine it looks rather heavy for its chamber size lol.

[NoMrBond]

You can still buy one if you're keen

Only 1.125t dry weight, that's not bad

[Giggleplex777]

I do not believe that to be the RD-0155. any Soyuz 3 mockups have a single nozzel. russian designs have advanced beyond the need for multi nozzle designs like they once needed to solve large chamber instability. also, the quality of that photo is awful terrible for something that was "designed" in 2009.

edit: though I suppose the different fixed and gimbals chambers would explain he dual nozzles... not sure why they wouldn't just make the whole engine gimbal and have one nozzle.

It's for the 4 strap-on boosters.

[dimovski]

Even if its heavy, it is, in fact, the best engine in its class, in terms of ISP and thrust (we wont count hydrogen engines, now will we?), also...if youd, say rescale a Soyuz rocket to 1.25m, the engine would weigh in at around...220 kilo's, thats not bad, right? Compared to it, the LV-909 is REALLY, _REALLY_, heavy

[NoMrBond]

Direct translations often give really silly (in game) numbers, you really need to think about being "performance equivalent" when the planets are 1/10th size and dV requirements are less for a Duna return mission, than for just getting into orbit around Earth.

[dimovski]

Ahh please, it might be funny, yet I fail to understand why Kerbals wouldnt be able to create engines with high thrust-to-weight ratios, especially if they can create engines with 370 or 390s Isp (yet how did they fail to create hydrogen-fed engines is beyond me...Im not talking about the nerva, ofcourse)

[NoMrBond]

There aren't multiple fuel types yet, when there are (and possibly R&D) we could see some more diversification with higher-thrust/lower-ISP and lower-thrust/higherISP versions, NERVA's needing H₂ or other insanely Kerbal possibilities Humans wouldn't touch with a 10 foot pole on a PackBot from the next continent

The results for modelling direct translations really does give silly numbers, the NK-33 comes out at something like 1 ton with 1000kN @1.25m diameter which, while hilarious, isn't really in-game appropriate mechanics wise, and even that only give a TWR of 101.9 whereas the real thing is 136.6 so you could argue for 1 ton with ~1366 kN (well using g = 10 for an off the top of my head calc, should be 9.81 for Kerbin though) which is even sillier in the context of the game

Edited August 28, 2013 by NoMrBond

[dimovski]

Thats incorrect. It comes at roughly 540kn and some 0.25-0.3 tons or lower still. the true monster is the study-one with high chamber pressure, that one d have the same weight, more Isp, and approx. 750kn... I did convert an old nk-33...gimme a minute and Ill give you what I came up with

EDIT:there we go, 11D51M, thrust approx. 700kn, weight : 300 kilo

NK-33, 428kN at 300 kilo.

EDIT2:sorry, 11d51m > 694,1kN thrust, Isp 346s

http://www.astronautix.com/engines/11d51m.htm

AFAIK only difference is chamber pressure.

Edited August 28, 2013 by dimovski

[NoMrBond]

The real one is 1505kN for a 1.5m diameter, the shrink down to 1.25m diameter doesn't drop the power by that much.

[NoMrBond]

Except that a 11D51M is not a 11D111 (NK-33), that's a proposed version which was described with ~43% more thrust, and was never made.

[dimovski]

Encyclopedia Astronautica mentions them as engines of Blok A...I do recall I once called it a D111, also, I just went for a quick wikipedia search and I believe I saw 2m...might've been figures for NK-43 then. Nice chat

EDIT1:also, I did take vacuum thrust, which is around 1700kN, not 1500

[NoMrBond]

Yeah the 2m diameter listing in the NK-33 wikipedia entry is someone being ham handed with the rounding, that caught me at first as well and the first model made no sense

[dimovski]

True...Thats why I had them in the 500s then, close to the 191 (in fact, pretty much the very same...like 20kN difference)

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

what did they do to make this 11D51M so much more powerful?

[dimovski]

Chamber pressure.

EDIT:apropo UR-700

http://andegraf.com/rockets/rus_never.htm

The site has many many rockets. I hope ya like those...err, theyre called renders, right?

Edited August 28, 2013 by dimovski

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

wonder fi that required any physcial changes though

[dimovski]

Dunno, they /did/ fire an engine just recently, which was mothballed for like...40 years? And it worked flawlessly, Im quiet sure it could take the chamber pressure...then again, Im no specialist.

[NoMrBond]

Was that Orbital Sciences testing one of their Aerojet AJ26-58's (refurbished NK-33) for Antares?

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

Was that Orbital Sciences testing one of their Aerojet AJ26-58's (refurbished NK-33) for Antares?

if the Aj version of Nk-33 has more chmaber pressure maybe we should balance ours to that haha. hell we already have the most up to date RD-233 engine and RD-58 will be its most advanced form lawl.

[NoMrBond]

It's exactly the same engine wise with some gimbaling changes up top as far as I can work out, they could be running them a bit hotter though as the NK-33 was tested later at something like 120% of original output spec

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

Yeah original Nk-33 has no gimbaling ability as far as I am aware. The Areo jet version also turned some cases in the turbopump assembly to allow the fuel lines to run in for different directions. not that hard since they just had to upbolt and rebolt some pieces after rotating them a bit lol.

[CardBoardBoxProcessor]

Whoosh.

[dimovski]

And WTH is it again...lel?

Anyway...I never heard about a RD-233, what is it?

Also, I meant the firing for the Soyuz-2.

EDIT:Also, didnt they cut a bit of the nozzle from the NK-33 and named THAT an Aerojet?

Also, if you wanna create higher thrust, might as well be accurate 'bout it and add a NK-33-1 and NK-33A (one of them has an extender nozzle, but I'm too lazy to try figuring that out atm.

Edited August 29, 2013 by dimovski

[NoMrBond]

The RD-0233 is the 1st stage engine for the Strela/Rokot platforms

I thought Aerojet brought the NK-33's and just added the upper gimbal mount, the Aerojet Rocketdyne site does list 380000 lbf (1st stage configuration/sea level) for their modified AJ-26/58's, which is actually 1690kN or +12%ish, which puts it roughly in line with the RD-253 to RD-275M level improvements over the same period.

The 33-1 had the extendable nozzle so it could do the jobs of the NK-33 and NK-43 by extending the nozzle once it reached altitude