Legcutter Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 (edited) 7 hours ago, Beale said: Do you have some secret info? Well, okay. Since there's nothing about it in English wiki: It was assumed that there will be operated a whole launch vehicles family based on N-1 design, including the N-1F forced version and the modified N-1M with LOX/LH2 engines and higher payload mass, smaller versions like N-11 (three middle stages of N-1 - blocks B, V and G) and N-111 (third and fourth stages, V and G), and in further perspective - some bigger launch vehicles N-2, N-3 and N-4, wich were the two lower stages of N-1 rocket on top of an even more powerful first stages. N-111, N-11 and N-1 rockets No pics of N-2,-3,-4, sorry) Edited November 3, 2016 by Legcutter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 9 minutes ago, Legcutter said: Well, okay. Since there's nothing about it in English wiki: It was assumed that there will be operated a whole launch vehicles family based on N-1 design, including the N-1F forced version and the modified N-1M with LOH/LH2 engines and higher payload mass, smaller versions of N-11 (three middle stages of N-1 - blocks B, V and G) and N-111 (third and fourth stages, V and G), and in further perspective - some bigger launch vehicles N-2, N-3 and N-4, wich were the two lower stages of N-1 rocket on top of an even more powerful first stages. N-111, N-11 and N-1 rockets No pics of N-2,-3,-4, sorry) Any more details on the N-1F and N-1M? They sound interesting! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legcutter Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 (edited) 30 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said: Any more details on the N-1F and N-1M? They sound interesting! N-1F was a N-1 version with modified engines - NK-33 eigines instead of NK-15 on the first stage, NK-43 (high altitude model of NK-33) instead of NK-15V on the second stage, NK-31 instead of NK-21 on the third stage and NK-19 instead of NK-9V on the fourth stage. This rocket could make it to low orbit with 100 tons of payload, instead of N-1's 90 tons (34 tons instead of 31 to the Moon). N-1M was a project with LOX\LH2 engines and 155-175 tons of payload to low orbit. These engines were mever made, though. Edited November 3, 2016 by Legcutter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 1 minute ago, Legcutter said: N-1F was a N-1 version with modified engines - NK-33 eigines instead of NK-15 on the first stage, NK-43 (high altitude model of NK-33) instead of NK-15 on the second stage, NK-31 instead of NK-21 on the third stage and NK-19 instead of NK-9V on the fourth stage. This rocken can make it to low orbit with 100 tons of payload, instead of N-1's 90 tons (34 tons instead of 31 to the Moon). N-1M was a project with LOX\LH2 engines and 155-175 tons of payload to low orbit. These engines were mever made, though. Oh? I thought the N1 engines WERE NK-33? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legcutter Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 (edited) 18 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said: Oh? I thought the N1 engines WERE NK-33? Nope) NK-15 is a NK-33's father, a little less powerful and anvanced. It was specially designed for N-1 rocket and it was used in all four launches of N-1. Also there were NK-15V model for high altitude and NK-15F with amplified trust. Edited November 3, 2016 by Legcutter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 Just now, Legcutter said: NK-15 is a NK-33's father, a little less powerful and anvanced. It was designet for N-1 and uses in all four launches. Also there were NK-15V for high altitude and NK-15F with ampiofied trust. But then why did they have a warehouse full of NK-33s? Did they make them for N-1 and never use them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legcutter Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 (edited) 12 minutes ago, CobaltWolf said: But then why did they have a warehouse full of NK-33s? Did they make them for N-1 and never use them? They did make them for further N-1F launches alongside with two complete N-1F vehicles, and then soviet Lunar program was cancelled by Glushko (N-1 hater) and the N-1 program folloved, and these vehicles were destroyed. Engines should be destroyed too, but Kuznetsov managed to save them. Edited November 3, 2016 by Legcutter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted November 3, 2016 Author Share Posted November 3, 2016 15 hours ago, Legcutter said: Well, okay. Since there's nothing about it in English wiki: It was assumed that there will be operated a whole launch vehicles family based on N-1 design, including the N-1F forced version and the modified N-1M with LOX/LH2 engines and higher payload mass, smaller versions like N-11 (three middle stages of N-1 - blocks B, V and G) and N-111 (third and fourth stages, V and G), and in further perspective - some bigger launch vehicles N-2, N-3 and N-4, wich were the two lower stages of N-1 rocket on top of an even more powerful first stages. N-111, N-11 and N-1 rockets No pics of N-2,-3,-4, sorry) That's amazing info! Thanks a lot! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoFatalis Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 32 minutes ago, Beale said: That's amazing info! Thanks a lot! http://www.astronautix.com/n/n1.html This page has Huge amount of info ,including pictures and info about all the purposed versions of it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted November 3, 2016 Author Share Posted November 3, 2016 18 hours ago, Danny88 said: So I haven't really been following the thread. Does the interim fix fix the Tantares LV download as well? As of yet, no, but it should work okay? 17 hours ago, DBowman said: Thanks very much for the mod. So far I've played around with Soyuz in RO - it looks great. The orbiter mass doesn't seem to match some references I have ( e.g. spaceflight 101 though different parts of that page don't even match each other ). The total orbiter ripped off one of the RO craft files I think is too heavy and the Propulsion Module is 2360 kg and not enough propellent kg vs 2900 kg I expected. I'm guessing that the part really is matching Soyuz 7K (which has 500 kg fuel vs TMA 800 kg) ? Do you know what's the best reference for Soyuz MS (the current version) and what's the best way for me to make / get the parts - I'm comfortable creating .cfgs. Maybe (probably?) they already exist, if not I'm not sure the best way to make them so I can 'share them back' - copy rename to the MS version? and it could be merged to RO? I forgot to click 'notify me of replies' so pls quote or @ me. @DBowman if you ahve RO configs they are very welcome. Sadly I am not much help for this. 28 minutes ago, NeoFatalis said: http://www.astronautix.com/n/n1.html This page has Huge amount of info ,including pictures and info about all the purposed versions of it Even better! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted November 3, 2016 Author Share Posted November 3, 2016 New Vs. Old Better scaling? The N1 is another case where the drawings cannot be trusted... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VenomousRequiem Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 All of the nozzles for pretty much everything on N1 so far look way over-expanded... I feel the bottom of the nozzle should be thinner in diameter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joeybafoey Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 22 minutes ago, Beale said: New Vs. Old Better scaling? The N1 is another case where the drawings cannot be trusted... Looks great! I always did feel that the old one was a bit off scale. and angles were a little off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted November 3, 2016 Author Share Posted November 3, 2016 26 minutes ago, VenomousRequiem said: All of the nozzles for pretty much everything on N1 so far look way over-expanded... I feel the bottom of the nozzle should be thinner in diameter. Maybe, some of the drawings I am going from are not great. This can always be fixed! Under 20% taper Right 30% taper 6 minutes ago, Joeybafoey said: Looks great! I always did feel that the old one was a bit off scale. and angles were a little off. Sadly it will always be a little off, it does not fit very well into standard sizes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VenomousRequiem Posted November 3, 2016 Share Posted November 3, 2016 1 minute ago, Beale said: Maybe, some of the drawings I am going from are not great. This can always be fixed! -N1 snip- That looks so much better, actually! Thanks! It was bothering me... You might take a look at the nozzle on the upper stage as well. (Blok G? I forget what it's called) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legcutter Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 10 hours ago, Beale said: Maybe, some of the drawings I am going from are not great. This can always be fixed! Under 20% taper Right 30% taper Hm... third stage engine shape actually seems OK. 10% taper, maybe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Third_OfFive Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 Hey Beale, once you are finished with the N1, could you start doing IVA's? I know you said you don't have the time, but if I were to help by doing the modelling, would you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted November 4, 2016 Author Share Posted November 4, 2016 1 minute ago, Third_OfFive said: Hey Beale, once you are finished with the N1, could you start doing IVA's? I know you said you don't have the time, but if I were to help by doing the modelling, would you? Do the modelling, texturing and configs (The configs take more time than both combined) and sure I kid, but the modelling is the smallest issue for IVAs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Third_OfFive Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 Just now, Beale said: Do the modelling, texturing and configs (The configs take more time than both combined) and sure I kid, but the modelling is the smallest issue for IVAs I can do modelling, and configs texturing is the big issue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted November 4, 2016 Author Share Posted November 4, 2016 3 minutes ago, Third_OfFive said: I can do modelling, and configs texturing is the big issue It is a very big problem, IVAs require very high texel density to look good, it means: Have huge textures. Or blurry IVAs Or bake lightmaps (I don't know how to do this very well). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Third_OfFive Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 2 minutes ago, Beale said: It is a very big problem, IVAs require very high texel density to look good, it means: Have huge textures. Or blurry IVAs Or bake lightmaps (I don't know how to do this very well). Well the thing is I suck at texturing, let alone replicating your style. If you don't want to do it, that's ok. I just think that Tantares feels kind of incomplete without IVAs, and it would be really cool if we could arrange something to make it happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted November 4, 2016 Author Share Posted November 4, 2016 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Third_OfFive said: Well the thing is I suck at texturing, let alone replicating your style. If you don't want to do it, that's ok. I just think that Tantares feels kind of incomplete without IVAs, and it would be really cool if we could arrange something to make it happen. I am very sorry to be stubborn on this issue, but it is only two ways to do it: Somebody else does everything (Who knows, somebody might enjoy IVAs!). I continue to make them very slowly. Edited November 4, 2016 by Beale Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drtedastro Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 Your mod. Your IVA speed. I don't see ANY problems. Love your stuff, methods, looks and all stuff "Tantares".. Greatfull for all of your work and time put. Don't change anything or anyway(s) that you don't want to.... Cheers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpaceToad Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 Will Tantares LV be on the list for updating? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Third_OfFive Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 36 minutes ago, Beale said: I am very sorry to be stubborn on this issue, but it is only two ways to do it: Somebody else does everything (Who knows, somebody might enjoy IVAs!). I continue to make them very slowly. What's wrong with making them slowly? 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.