OHM Saturn C8 - Apollo Direct Ascent |v.2

[OrbitHangar]

Author: -fedex-

NEEDS SPACECRAFT3 AND MULTISTAGE2

*Update: added RCS and parachtues!

I have to thank Vittorio, of Forum Orbiter Italia, for his F-1 Engine's mesh!

This addon will simulate the Apollo Direct Ascent (one of the choices offered to go to the Moon).

Look at the Sovietic Lunar Program, too!
http://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=5004


DOWNLOAD

 

[Urwumpe]

Yay... this one looks like a nice candidate for including it in Velcro Saturns.

 

[Wolfer]

It seems the "spacecraft" folder is missing from the download.

 

[-FedeX-]

Ops! Sorry! I'll fix that right now

Fixed!

 

[orb]

Fixed!

Could you also remove the black color from description at OHM, starting from "choices offered to go to the moon..."? I use "Grey" theme at Orbit Hangar Mods, and black color description is hardly readable on it.

 

[-FedeX-]

Could you also remove the black color from description at OHM, starting from "choices offered to go to the moon..."? I use "Grey" theme at Orbit Hangar Mods, and black color description is hardly readable on it.

Fixed that, too.

 

[4throck]

Nice work. It's even better if you use the launch tower from AMSO. The rocket mesh is correctly positioned and looks great.

I didn't like to see the ISS in the launch scenario, as it is totally unrealistic. This is supposed to be an alternate Apollo, so we are in the 60s.

My constructive suggestion for further development would be to add RCS jets, improve the reentry module parameters and add the parachute.

Another option would be to try to use the service and command modules from AMSO (perhaps also the recovery situations).

From this diagram, the craft should look the same:
http://www.astronautix.com/graphics/z/zapcmlme.jpg

That way you could concentrate on the rocket, moon landing stage (animation?) and mission situations for future development.

Anyway, I'm having fun with it, so thanks for the time you put in and for sharing your work

 

[-FedeX-]

Nice work. It's even better if you use the launch tower from AMSO. The rocket mesh is correctly positioned and looks great.

I didn't like to see the ISS in the launch scenario, as it is totally unrealistic. This is supposed to be an alternate Apollo, so we are in the 60s.

My constructive suggestion for further development would be to add RCS jets, improve the reentry module parameters and add the parachute.

Another option would be to try to use the service and command modules from AMSO (perhaps also the recovery situations).

From this diagram, they craft should look the same:

That way you could concentrate on the rocket, moon landing stage (animation?) and mission situations for future development.

Anyway, I'm having fun with it, so thanks for the time you put in and for sharing your work

I have alredy do the RCS and the parachutes, and i'm improving the reentry capsule!
For the animation, that is on my "checklist".
In the next upgrade, all will be more accurate, and many things will be added!

 

[4throck]

Cool!

(I've updated my previous post to include the diagram I mentioned.)

And here's a nice photo of what an early Apollo capsule looks like. Notice that it doesn't seem to have the forward docking port.

 

[4throck]

The latest version looks great with RCS. :thumbup:
I haven't found any solid data on performance (fuel, heights, etc.) but it seems a little to powerful to me. I'd say you could go to Mars with it.
Nice work!:tiphat:

 

[DaveS]

Cool!

(I've updated my previous post to include the diagram I mentioned.)

And here's a nice photo of what an early Apollo capsule looks like. Notice that it doesn't seem to have the forward docking port.

That's a Block I CM. Block I CMs were strictly LEO-only with no docking capability. That was for Block II.

Also BLock I CMs were white painted while the Block II CMs had the reflective mylar coating.

Check this page for configuration differences between each flown CSM: http://apollomaniacs.web.infoseek.co.jp/apollo/cme.htm

 

[Columbia42]

The latest version looks great with RCS. :thumbup:
I haven't found any solid data on performance (fuel, heights, etc.) but it seems a little to powerful to me. I'd say you could go to Mars with it.
Nice work!:tiphat:

The LM alone has enough dv to escape solar orbit.

 

[Urwumpe]

The LM alone has enough dv to escape solar orbit.

well, it was meant to land on the moon, take off again and return to Earth... of course it needs serious Δv.

If my memory is not completely wrong, landing on the moon from lunar orbit, or taking off from the moon to lunar orbit is each 2400 m/s Δv.

 

[Columbia42]

well, it was meant to land on the moon, take off again and return to Earth... of course it needs serious Δv.

If my memory is not completely wrong, landing on the moon from lunar orbit, or taking off from the moon to lunar orbit is each 2400 m/s Δv.

Lunar orbital velocity is only about 1.2 km/s so I don't think you'd need 2400 km/s to get into orbit. Also the direct ascent LM didn't just land on and take off from the moon it also preformed most of the TLI manuever as well as LOI (Not sure about TEI).

EDIT: Whoops! Just saw that you said 2400 m/s not km/s.

 

[Urwumpe]

Lunar orbital velocity is only about 1.2 km/s so I don't think you'd need 2400 km/s to get into orbit. Also the direct ascent LM didn't just land on and take off from the moon it also preformed most of the TLI manuever as well as LOI (Not sure about TEI).

Yes, but you need to include the gravity and control losses for ascent and descent - and the gravity losses are pretty much easily estimated, as they are directly depending on the work the spacecraft needs to do for moving in the gravity potential.

EDIT: Whoops! Just saw that you said 2400 m/s not km/s.

Yes, never ignore the SI prefix.

 

[Wishbone]

A very good add-on, some rambling thoughts and comment:

1. A doc file would do nicely.
2. Scenarios should ideally have some description of what the intended mission is (a C8 stack in the 0th scenario has no dV to go to the Moon directly, as far as I could tell).
3. Think the directory structure inside the archive should contain Config etc. directly, and not the Saturn C8 upper folder, to keep up with conventions at OHM.
4. The landing points of the upper stage are 54 meters off the ground.
5. The red pipes from the upper stage engine mesh don't touch the body of the stage.

Thanks again for the C8!

 

[4throck]

That's a Block I CM. Block I CMs were strictly LEO-only with no docking capability. That was for Block II.

Also BLock I CMs were white painted while the Block II CMs had the reflective mylar coating.

Check this page for configuration differences between each flown CSM: http://apollomaniacs.web.infoseek.co.jp/apollo/cme.htm

DaveS, for Apollo Direct, being a simpler (no docking) and earlier plan (as opposed to the actual flown Apollo missions) I guess that a realistic configuration would be the mylar reflective coating but with no docking port.
So I stand corrected.

Here's some info for the Apollo 2 man direct version: http://www.astronautix.com/craft/apot2man.htm

Perhaps the data is usefull regarding realistic performance.

And check this PDF http://www.astronautix.com/craft/apot2man.htm for some nice instrument/inside diagrams of the alternate 2 crew member Apollo CMS.

 

[lyianm]

great add on! But I have a problem with your vessel it disparait has every time!

 

[Urwumpe]

It disappears (My French is not the best, but existing)? Did you already install the 2010 patch for multistage2.dll? It is called "stage.dll", fixes the disappearing bug.

 

[lyianm]

Or find your this patch please?

---------- Post added at 11:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:39 PM ----------

It is good I found it! Thank you my friend!

---------- Post added at 11:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:43 PM ----------

Sorry but that does not still work! The lander do not be there! The fuel is in zero and I meet in the middle of the space!