Replica Launchers [New Atlas V and Proton for 1.0.4]

[Kurotenshi]

Kurotech Inc. presents:

Replica Launchers

Pretty self-explanatory title here The craft are replica's of real world rockets and their respective payloads. Most are still active, though some are retired or still in developement.

Some standards I always use in my craft(unless mentioned otherwise):

- Advised max. payload is to a 75x75 km orbit (with 50 to 150m/s dV to spare)

- Action group 0 is always used for solar panels

- All subassemblies have 5 empty stages saved into them

- Tested with mechjeb (Turn start at 100m/s, Turn end at 60km, Final flight path angle 0°, Turn shape 70%)

Pictures too tiny? Click'em!

Roscosmos

Proton M

(60.0% real world scale)

[TABLE=width: 1000, align: center]

[TR]

[TD]

[/TD]

[TD]

The Proton is an expendable launch system used for both commercial and Russian government space launches. The first Proton rocket was launched in 1965. Modern versions of the launch system are still in use as of 2015, making it one of the most successful heavy boosters in the history of spaceflight. During it long years of service, it launched many payloads, some of which were quite famous, such as the Salyut stations and the TKS. Nowadays it mostly lanuches heavy satellites, using The Briz M upper stage, to propel the payload to higher orbits.

The Salyut programme was the first space station programme undertaken by the Soviet Union, which consisted of a series of four crewed scientific research space stations (DOS modules, or true Salyuts) and two crewed military reconnaissance space stations (OPS modules, aka Almaz). Salyut 1 and 4 were first generation stations, having only one docking port. Salyut 2, 3 and 5 were actually military Almaz stations, launched under the civilan Salyut name. Salyut 6 and 7 were second generation space stations, which had 2 docking ports, and were the transition from monolithic to mulit-modular stations.

The TKS spacecraft was a Soviet era spacecraft, designed for resupply flights to the military Almaz space station. It consisted of two spacecraft mated together, both of which could operate independently: The VA crew capsule, and the FGB (a station module-like vessel). Only 4 unmanned flights took place, the first was a solo test flight, while TKS-2 and TKS-3 docked with Salyut 6 and Salyut 7, respectively. The last flight was Kosmos 1686 (TKS-4), which had a modified VA craft. Much of the crew facilities (seats, parachute and deorbit motor) had been replaced with scientific equipement.

[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

[TABLE=width: 1000, align: center]

[TR]

[TD]Proton K

- Part count: 142

- Payload capacityto LKO: 22,0t

[/TD]

[TD]Proton M

- Part count: 212

- Payload capacityto GTO: 15,0t

- Payload capacityto GSO: 12,0t

[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

[table=width: 1000, align: center]

[tr]

[td]Salyut 1

- Part count on launch: 190

- Part count on orbit: 44

[/td]

[td]Salyut 4

- Part count on launch: 185

- Part count on orbit: 39

[/td]

[td]Salyut 6/7

- Part count on launch: 174

- Part count on orbit: 28

[/td]

[/tr]

[tr]

[td]Almaz

- Part count on launch: 185

- Part count on orbit: 39

[/td]

[td]TKS

- Part count on launch: 205

- Part count on orbit: 57

[/td]

[td]Kosmos 1686

- Part count on launch: 199

- Part count on orbit: 53

[/td]

[/tr]

[/table]

When launching, you'll have to throttle the first stage down during flight, or press 1 at approximately 15km. Everything else is pretty standard, as most of the launch protocol is dictated by the staging sequence. Payloads use the standard action group 0 to deploy solar panels and antennae. The Briz M has a functioning drop tank, but it is advised to shut the engines down when jettisoning it.

NASA

AtlasV

(65.6% real world scale)

[TABLE=width: 1000, align: center]

[TR]

[TD]

[/TD]

[TD]

Atlas V is an active expendable launch system in the Atlas rocket family. It is a 2-stage rocket, the first stage being the CCB, the second is a single engine Centaur stage, which de-orbits on it's own power. Each Atlas V booster configuration has a three-digit designation that indicates the features of that configuration. The first digit shows the diameter (in meters) of the payload fairing, and always has a value of "4" or "5". The second digit indicates the number of solid rocket boosters attached to the base of the rocket, and can range from "0" through "3" with the 4-meter fairing, and "0" through "5" with the 5-meter fairing. The third digit represents the number of engines on the Centaur stage, either "1" or "2".

The first stage will need throttling during ascent, which can be done through action groups (see below) or through manual throttle control.

The mentioned payload capacity is the real world capacity, but deviates in game for certain variants. The 501 is somewhat overpowered, as are the 401 and 421 variants (but far less than the 501). The 531 and 541 variants are unfortunately underpowered (the 541 just barely, but the 531 can't carry the full payload to LKO).

Approximate flight profile:

401/501 press 1 at 15 km, press 2 at 40 km

421/521 press 1 at 20 km, press 2 at 45 km

431/531 press 1 at 25 km, press 2 at 50 km

541/551 press 1 at 35 km

[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

400 series

[TABLE=width: 1000, align: center]

[TR]

[TD]401

- Part count: 58

- Payload capacity: 9,8t

[/TD]

[TD]421

- Part count: 70

- Payload capacity: 14,0t

[/TD]

[TD]431

- Part count: 76

- Payload capacity: 15,7t

[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

500 series

[TABLE=width: 1000, align: center]

[TR]

[TD]501

- Part count: 59

- Payload capacity: 8,1t

[/TD]

[TD]521

- Part count: 71

- Payload capacity: 13,5t

[/TD]

[TD]531

- Part count: 77

- Payload capacity: 15,6t

[/TD]

[TD]541

- Part count: 83

- Payload capacity: 17,6t

[/TD]

[TD]551

- Part count: 89

- Payload capacity: 18,8t

[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

Dream Chaser

[TABLE=width: 1000, align: center]

[TR]

[TD]

[/TD]

[TD]

The Dream Chaser is a reusable crewed lifting-body spaceplane, designed to carry up to seven people to and from low Earth orbit. However, this version can only carry up to 6 kerbals to orbit, but no pilot is required due to a probe core. Once docked to a station, it could fill up entirely to greatly enhance it's range (up to 1845m/s dV). It is launched using an Atlas V 402, meaning that there are 2 engines on the Centaur second stage. Before launching, clip the camera into the orbiter's nose, and select control from the probe core, in order to fly with a properly oriented navball. After liftoff, roll to the desired launch inclination, and follow a standard ascent profile. Press 1 at about 20km, and 2 at approximately 40km, in order to throttle the first stage down (this can also be done manually). Once in orbit, detach the second stage and deorbit it. If you choose to, you can pump some fuel from the spent stage to the orbiter, but leave some vapours in for the de-orbit burn. Don't forget to activate the fuel cell, which is hidden in the nose as well. It's advised to turn the fuel cell off when docked to a station.

87 parts on launch, 35 in orbit, 340-440 m/s dV

[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

Edited September 27, 2015 by Kurotenshi

[Giggleplex777]

Great launch vehicles! You should try building some more Russians ones too (eg Energia-M).

[Kurotenshi]

I already have two on the list to redo for 0.90 Proton is as good as finished, and comes with a Block D and Briz M upper stage. Soyuz got delayed by my tinkering with the STS, so nothing there yet. And now that you mention the Energia, might be interesting to see if it's viable in KSP to launch a payload like that. Maybe I'll try it some time

And a small sidenote; it might sound silly, but the reason the new Proton isn't upyet, is because KVV is broken, and transferring/adapting files to 0.25 breaks all the struts. And there's a lot of them in Russian crafts

[Fandor_Teron]

Woooow...very similar stock version! Good work! Continue your art

[JPmAn]

Saturn V?

goes with the Ariane v, "V", "V"

[Kurotenshi]

Ok so, redid the OP somewhat, I now categorized them according to their specific space agency, and put in some more text, for Roscosmos at least

Nasa and Esa flavour text will have to wait until have the time to come up with something decent

And as for a Saturn V, as a moon mission, perhaps, if I can get the lander right, but as an LV? It was never used like that, and it seems kinda silly to me.

So probably not going to be a top priority build, but I'll see what I can do.

[Jackvony]

How do you put a nosecone on the top of your fairing?

[Majorjim!]

How do you put a nosecone on the top of your fairing?

That's Fairings 101. Place a cubic or Ibeam on one side of the fairing and angle it 90 degrees horizontal.

Then place another cubic on the Ibeam or stack of cubics and place it facing 'up down'. Then attach the nose cone.

Edited December 22, 2014 by Majorjim

[Jackvony]

That's Fairings 101. Place a cubic or Ibeam on one side of the fairing and angle it 90 degrees to the horizontal.

Then place another cubic on the Ibeam or stack of cubics and place it facing 'up down'. Then attach the nose cone.

Thanks I just actually did something similar as I was buildings fairings for my new launcher line.

[Kurotenshi]

Coming up next: Apollo

So far, the Saturn IB and CSM are finished, haven't started on the LM yet. The Saturn V shown here is sort of a mock-up. It hasn't got the right fuel distribution and staging sequence yet (no ullage boosters, the interstage ring is attached to the first stage and the payload fairing is just there for show atm). The scale is about 60%

A Skylab replica is also planned before release

[JPmAn]

Good job!!!

- - - Updated - - -

some of the best stuff ive seen

[Marine07]

Your replicas are magnificent! They are so detailed!

[Darth Lazarus]

tried the Roscomos rockets today ... very nice looking, but the Proton is very Wobbly ... and i dont know why, but the fairings are generating lift to the side and SAS has a hard tiem fighting it =/

Edited January 7, 2015 by Darth Lazarus

[Kurotenshi]

Yes, the Proton has two structurally weak points: The connection between the first and second stage, and the connection between the payload and third stage.

The first one is because the 2m stages are only connected by a tiny cubic strut, and a whole bunch of struts. the second is the same issue, but with a 1.25m connection, and a little less unstable.

As I had only tested them using mechjeb, I tried flying TKS and Salyut 6 manually. One with ascent guidance path, the other completely unguided. My results:

TKS - Mechjeb ascent guidance (not autopilot): 80 x 77 km orbit, 0.14° inclination, more than 100 m/s left in the third stage.

Salyut 6 - Unguided (just orbit info): 75 x 75 km orbit, 0.12° inclination, 93 m/s left in the third stage.

I won't say it flies easy, due to the aforementioned structural weak points, but it's manageable. My idea is that if mechjeb can manage, a good pilot can as well. I did notice it pulling to the side like you said, but I don't think it's caused by lift, but still, maybe check if you have FAR or NEAR installed? I think it's the first stage and that pesky cubic strut connection. As soon as you make even the slightest correction, the rocket sort of bends. As it bends to the side, the CoM moves slightly off-centre as well, causing torque due to the CoT now being misaligned. As the first stage drains, the Com moves more and more upwards (it starts out at the top of the first stage, and ends about a third into the second stage) and this effect becomes worse. Just before you jettison the first stage, it's at it's worst, but once the stage is dropped, it becomes a lot more controllable, and only minor corrections are needed (and not continually pushing all the way to one side, just to keep on course, as is sometimes the case).

If anyone has any ideas of how to strengthen the connection, please do share. I don't think more struts is going to help much, and to make the connection wider, you either have to destroy the quad (and then it's not really a Proton anymore) or risk blocking the nozzles and or leaving something unsightly stuck between the engines.

[Giggleplex777]

Yes, the Proton has two structurally weak points: The connection between the first and second stage, and the connection between the payload and third stage.

The first one is because the 2m stages are only connected by a tiny cubic strut, and a whole bunch of struts. the second is the same issue, but with a 1.25m connection, and a little less unstable.

As I had only tested them using mechjeb, I tried flying TKS and Salyut 6 manually. One with ascent guidance path, the other completely unguided. My results:

TKS - Mechjeb ascent guidance (not autopilot): 80 x 77 km orbit, 0.14° inclination, more than 100 m/s left in the third stage.

Salyut 6 - Unguided (just orbit info): 75 x 75 km orbit, 0.12° inclination, 93 m/s left in the third stage.

I won't say it flies easy, due to the aforementioned structural weak points, but it's manageable. My idea is that if mechjeb can manage, a good pilot can as well. I did notice it pulling to the side like you said, but I don't think it's caused by lift, but still, maybe check if you have FAR or NEAR installed? I think it's the first stage and that pesky cubic strut connection. As soon as you make even the slightest correction, the rocket sort of bends. As it bends to the side, the CoM moves slightly off-centre as well, causing torque due to the CoT now being misaligned. As the first stage drains, the Com moves more and more upwards (it starts out at the top of the first stage, and ends about a third into the second stage) and this effect becomes worse. Just before you jettison the first stage, it's at it's worst, but once the stage is dropped, it becomes a lot more controllable, and only minor corrections are needed (and not continually pushing all the way to one side, just to keep on course, as is sometimes the case).

If anyone has any ideas of how to strengthen the connection, please do share. I don't think more struts is going to help much, and to make the connection wider, you either have to destroy the quad (and then it's not really a Proton anymore) or risk blocking the nozzles and or leaving something unsightly stuck between the engines.

I've made a prototype of a slightly redesigned second stage to first stage connection of the Gamma series last year. The cubic strut truss was lengthened and connects directly to the first stage tank. I then surface attached the 2.5m to 1.25 adapter to the tank and then, using the offset tool, I shifted it over to the center of the truss. Since the struts are connected to the adapter, you'll have to add a few more struts from that to the fuel tank below. For my tests, it's slightly sturdier than the original, but there are still improvements that could be made.

[Darth Lazarus]

reason for the first-secondstage wobble: the 1.25 to 2.5 adapter is wobbly and squischy like hell. this part is troublesome since it's introduction but i found a good work around...

on my proton i did this:

frist i used an I-Beam to attach the firststage tank to the second stage, then i placed at the edge the cubic struts for reinforcement, then i pulled the firststage away, removed the I-Beam, added the 1,25-2,5m adapter and put the firststage underneath the adapter. the struts now have a solid physical connection between first and second stage.

this connection is very solid.

edit: this is still my 0.25 version of teh Proton. Ideas for the 0.9Beta improvments are in work but this reinforcement works nevertheless

[Kurotenshi]

I've done what Giggle said, connecting the cubic strut to the tank, and then clipping the adapter in, so it's only there for looks really. One of my older Protons also had what you did there, connecting the struts to cubic struts attached to the tank. Now they start from the tank to the interstage.

But it still pitches, so you might have been right about the fairing producing lift. I only used the ones that shouldn't do that, but someway they do. I have a suspicion it has to do with the attachment method. They're attached to each other, and rotated, to eliminate the use of cubic struts with the gizmo's. I'm gonna test some stuff with fairings now, and figure out what's causing it

[Kurotenshi]

It seems that the Proton itself is the cause of the somewhat hard to control behaviour, can't really do much about it I'm afraid. But then again, I don't have to completely rework all of my fairings, so that's something

Also: update time!

- New Proton subassembly (different connection between the first and second stage, see above)

- Almaz scrapped indefinitely

- Reworked Salyuts

- Reworked Kliper, now Kliper and Parom, both launched on a Soyuz variant

- Info text corrected/added where necessary

[MK3424]

These replica's are just beautiful!

[Darth Lazarus]

just for Kuro, my new 0.9 Proton, fairings splits in half

[Kurotenshi]

The first stage is a little short, but it looks great overall, really nice fairing. I have some plans to redo my fairings as well, although I want to try to avoid using panels, as they're pretty heavy.

Lately, I found myself wishing for stock (procedural) fairings a lot It would save so much in part count, and avoid all the messing about that comes with building fairings now.

Edit: How's the wobble btw?

Edited January 10, 2015 by Kurotenshi

[Kurotenshi]

Oh crud...

So on my last test run of the new Apollo craft, the Saturn V launcher suddenly is botched. When it stages, the decoupler detaches from both sides, and becomes physicless, messing up the staging sequence and passing trough the just jettisoned stage. The second stage even happily comes zooming by when the third stage engine stops, as it cruises to apoapsis

Halp...

[Kurotenshi]

For the time being, the Apollo is shelved for the time being, due to frustrating issues...

In the meanwhile, I'm reworked the NASA pack, and I just uploaded the first update: Atlas V

It's now more realistic, properly scaled and with better fairings (some of my best yet in my own opinion)

A quick comparison between the old (left) and new (right) version:

Edited January 13, 2015 by Kurotenshi

[Kurotenshi]

Just uploaded the new Delta IV, see the OP

This versions has all the rockets in the family, whereas the Medium and M+ (4,2) variants were missing from the previous one.

[GusTurbo]

Oh crud...

So on my last test run of the new Apollo craft, the Saturn V launcher suddenly is botched. When it stages, the decoupler detaches from both sides, and becomes physicless, messing up the staging sequence and passing trough the just jettisoned stage. The second stage even happily comes zooming by when the third stage engine stops, as it cruises to apoapsis

Halp...

I might be able to help with this. Which stage are you having the problem with?