OHM R-7 Early Missions

[OrbitHangar]

Author: igel

Very accurate reconstruction of early 2-stage R-7 missions. All three historical first satellites. All three generations of boilerplate and operational warheads. As bonus - a fully functional Polyot spacecraft (an ASAT demonstrator). Significant playability and usability improvements. Full automation of launch and flight. Authentic look, realistic behavior. Stunning visual and sound effects. Integration with Google Earth for post-flight analysis. Documentation in English and Russian.


DOWNLOAD

 

[Notebook]

Just downloaded and going through the documentation, and first flight. Its marvellous stuff, everything you could want from a historical add-on, and then it keeps getting better!

N.

 

[Thorton]

Great addon, very accurate. Nuckear blast is really cool :thumbup:

 

[garyw]

ASAT Demonstrator? Got to give that a go! many thanks!!

 

[the.punk]

Very nice and cool effects. The whole thing is just so realistic.:thumbup:

How can I fire the nuke in manual control?

 

[chameleon]

That's very well
I this rocket

 

[Thorton]

How can I fire the nuke in manual control?

You cant, there is automatic explosion only.

One of the coolest thing, after you nuke city , you can see in GoogleEarth consequences of this explosion :speakcool:

 

[Eraser]

You cant, there is automatic explosion only.

Correct to say that you can not detonate the warhead using manual control, but you may set the target coordinates either through scripting variables or in the R-7 launchpad, as described in the manual at page 13. :thumbup:

 

[Shadow Addict]

Amazing! Your historical addons are always so high quality.

 

[igel]

Thanks, everyone, for your high opinions! Have fun

 

[jgrillo2002]

Very Nice. Im hoping he can update the Molina and the Luna missions as well for the launch sounds

 

[garyw]

Is it possible to use the KML exporter in non-R7 scenarios?

 

[Thorton]

No.

 

[igel]

Indeed, no. It On top of "just trajectories", looks for very particular events specific to this particular vessels - and "other" vessels simply don't have them. Also, other vessels don't know how to communicate with the exporter.

But it can be used as a sample of how this feature can be implemented, and if useful, any coder can implement it for his (her? ) addon. Or it even can be added as Orbiter feature in some future versions, or as universal plugin... In fact, the feature is relatively easy to code.

 

[garyw]

Indeed, no. It On top of "just trajectories", looks for very particular events specific to this particular vessels - and "other" vessels simply don't have them. Also, other vessels don't know how to communicate with the exporter.

But it can be used as a sample of how this feature can be implemented, and if useful, any coder can implement it for his (her? ) addon. Or it even can be added as Orbiter feature in some future versions, or as universal plugin... In fact, the feature is relatively easy to code.

That's what I thought and having something like that would be useful. It's already possible to do it with the flight recorder MFD plugin as that generates everything it needs, I've already messed around with it a little.

 

[igel]

Yea, I did not think of it, but it is another way, to simply convert the already existing flight recorder data to whatever GPS format needed: kml, gpx, etc.

 

[garyw]

Yea, I did not think of it, but it is another way, to simply convert the already existing flight recorder data to whatever GPS format needed: kml, gpx, etc.

Exactly - a small test taking flight recorder MFD data and converting it to KML.

 

[igel]

Great! So quick, so simple - and so impressive!

 

[Lunar_Lander]

Hi igel,

the rocket is really great! I also like the failure implementation and the option to look at the flight in Google Earth.

I only have two questions:

1.) In Sputnik 2, the tumbling jet fires and starts to tumble the stage and the satellite, whereas it should be two jets to push the rocket away from the fairing.

2.) I tried to simulate the failure in the first attempt to launch Sputnik 3 and self-destructed the rocket after 88 seconds. The satellite however was somehow ejected and transmitted until it burned up. I think it should rather be destroyed when the rocket is destroyed, what do you think?

 

[igel]

Thanks! Good to know you liked it!

1. With Sputnik-2 (unlike with other payloads) pressurization gas is dumped through two vents (rather than one), specifically to prevent tumbling. Well, almost: it is impossible to do it perfectly symmetrical, so small residual rotations always remain. With regular payloads, the tumbling is intentional, to speed up spent stage breakup on reentry.

The rocket did not have any retro jets. Payloads (and fairings) were separated by springs.

2. It is not uncommon for payloads to survive - almost intact - even very spectacular "events". What we usually see as the "explosion" of the liquid-fueled rocked, is in most cases simply "very fast uncontrolled burning", with some interesting physics. Conditions in these "fireballs" vary a lot, and not always "immediately bad". And those early probes were made sturdy! And they did not have any fuel on board to blow up by themselves...

During the famous launchpad explosion of the first American space launcher Vanguard, the satellite fell from the rocket to the ground through the fireball, rolled away into some ditch - and was still transmitting signals through all this ordeal! So, I took some discretion in what should be destroyed right away and what can live longer during the failed launch .