Iron Hill Project Thread

Kennedy Space Center weather forecast indicates 30% chance of thunderstorms and rain for the next several days. We'll see what happens Sunday morning, but we may have to delay the mission...

Felipi, are you ready to do that drive yet?
 
How about tomorrow? What time will you be available?

---------- Post added at 11:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:28 AM ----------

Partly cloudy at the Cape. So far, we're looking good for 4:15 EDT:)
 
TMac3000 said:
How about tomorrow? What time will you be available?

---------- Post added at 11:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:28 AM ----------

Partly cloudy at the Cape. So far, we're looking good for 4:15 EDT:)
Click to expand...

If it's at 4:15 EST, I can't make it; I have to work:(
 
No problem. You'll be there in spirit;)
Are we on standard time yet? I thought that wasn't until next month:shrug:

Also, Felipi, I'd like you to be pilot on the flight home, starting next month. I'll command, and RickD will be payload specialist.
 
G'd afternoon fellow Orbinauts

I used last night for a fair bit of progress work on the Shuttle-D, making a lot of hard decisions on what to scrap for 1.0 release. As part of all this, I updated the VacISP to something that seemed fairly realistic-5000 kg/N/s, or whatever the metric units for ISP are. I finally had my first SECO, when attaching the ship to the back of a Themis launcher, but I have noticed that the realistic ISP has caused fuel consumption to grow immensely, to the point where using the ship as the D6 project lander would be, ... challenging, meaning that its going to take a heck of a good pilot to land it safely in any gravity well moon-sized or deeper. That being said, the current realism estimates are extremely conservative, given that the Quasar LV docs list ISP values, comparitively a lot higher than Apollo-Era hardware. My request is for someone to take a half hour or so, sometime in the next week or 2, and get me a list of plausible Propellant types, their ISP, thrust range (give or take), and density (ie how much does the main tank hold in prop-mass). Hopefully with that info, I can come up with a engine situation that satisfies reality, while not handcuffing you guys landing on one of the Gallilean moons.

That being said, the project, scaled back a bit is quite close to release, and should easily be ready for the D6 launch.

Concerning drawing up a preliminary flight plan, I was wondering if one of the A-Crew members could describe the trajectory Odyssey took for me? Im not sure whether to adjust the orbital inclination before or after MOI.
 
I used last night for a fair bit of progress work on the Shuttle-D, making a lot of hard decisions on what to scrap for 1.0 release. As part of all this, I updated the VacISP to something that seemed fairly realistic-5000 kg/N/s, or whatever the metric units for ISP are. I finally had my first SECO, when attaching the ship to the back of a Themis launcher, but I have noticed that the realistic ISP has caused fuel consumption to grow immensely, to the point where using the ship as the D6 project lander would be, ... challenging, meaning that its going to take a heck of a good pilot to land it safely in any gravity well moon-sized or deeper. That being said, the current realism estimates are extremely conservative, given that the Quasar LV docs list ISP values, comparitively a lot higher than Apollo-Era hardware. My request is for someone to take a half hour or so, sometime in the next week or 2, and get me a list of plausible Propellant types, their ISP, thrust range (give or take), and density (ie how much does the main tank hold in prop-mass). Hopefully with that info, I can come up with a engine situation that satisfies reality, while not handcuffing you guys landing on one of the Gallilean moons.
Click to expand...
Hmmm...I don't know an awful lot about ISP and fuel density, but it seems to me that good old fashioned LH2 ought to do the trick. You can find some factoids about it here:
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/technology/hydrogen/hydrogen_fuel_of_choice.html

Concerning drawing up a preliminary flight plan, I was wondering if one of the A-Crew members could describe the trajectory Odyssey took for me? Im not sure whether to adjust the orbital inclination before or after MOI.
Click to expand...
We just used IMFD to set up an off-plane launch starting from LEO. (We used the XR-5 as a crew ferry to get ourselves up to Odyssey.) The flight took 110 days, and we had to aim for a polar orbit to line up with Chao-Meng-Fu Crater. We currently have about 62% of our fuel left for the trip home:)
 
Last edited:
TMac3000 said:
Hmmm...I don't know an awful lot about ISP and fuel density, but it seems to me that good old fashioned LH2 ought to do the trick. You can find some factoids about it here:
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/technology/hydrogen/hydrogen_fuel_of_choice.html


We just used IMFD to set up an off-plane launch starting from LEO. (We used the XR-5 as a crew ferry to get ourselves up to Odyssey.) The flight took 110 days, and we had to aim for a polar orbit to line up with Chao-Meng-Fu Crater. We currently have about 62% of our fuel left for the trip home:)
Click to expand...

Yeah, LOX/LH2 is a pretty common fuel choice, but Im trying to figure out whether theres a fuel/oxidizer combination, or an engine design strategy I could use to have a higher ISP and stay within reasonably realistic limits. Ill have to do some more independent research then, but I would appreciate any help.

an off-plane from LEO? If its anything more than 5 degrees that must've used a ton of Delta-V. Can you give me an inclination for Discoveries current orbit? It would be good to know in advance, so as to plan the plane changes ahead of time.

From my understanding of the subject, Plane changes are best done when moving slow, but the more out of plane you are when ejecting from a planetary orbit to a solar one, the more you have to bend your trajectory angle when moving slow...

The problem is more in distance than in velocity in that case, I think

with regards to the encounter, I guess what Im getting at is that It would make more sense to bend the Mercury encounter trajectory underneath or above one of the poles of the planet, than to try to change inclination in mercury orbit. So, Ill probably build that into the flight plan right?

I would appreciate if you could list the current status of the B-crew roster for me, and maybe PM them to get everyone involved? I have yet to see a single post in our social group.

But, anyways, Payload matters:

I could use a list of what the A-crew carried for, ... uh IHPMSEP :lol: (experiments), any new surface base (do we have a name for it?) modules, but I would like to make a major component of the Discovery payload to be carrying the core modules of a small space station/instrumentation package that we can release in Mercury polar orbit. If youre okay with that, would anyone care to suggest some ideas for which modules to take? I would be happy to do basic Dlls for any good SC3 ones that we like
 
sorindafabico said:
Chronus is inside VAB. Is that correct?
Click to expand...
It is:yes:
You'll have to walk some distance to get there. And make sure you put all the team members aboard Chronus...

---------- Post added at 03:59 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:54 PM ----------
an off-plane from LEO? If its anything more than 5 degrees that must've used a ton of Delta-V. Can you give me an inclination for Discoveries current orbit? It would be good to know in advance, so as to plan the plane changes ahead of time.
Click to expand...
You ain't jokin'...the launch burn took twelve minutes, and the insertion burn took about twenty. Discovery is in a roughly equatorial orbit around Earth...about 23 degrees from the ecliptic, I think.

with regards to the encounter, I guess what Im getting at is that It would make more sense to bend the Mercury encounter trajectory underneath or above one of the poles of the planet, than to try to change inclination in mercury orbit. So, Ill probably build that into the flight plan right?
Click to expand...
That's exactly what we did. IMFD's Planet Approach program is very handy for that kind of thing. I just had to enter a 90* inclination and a periapsis of about 350 km, do the burn from waaaay out, and bingo, we were already set up for insertion when we got there:)

I'll PM you the playback, so you can see exactly what we did:) But that will probably happen tomorrow, as my schedule is going to be a little crazy tonight.

---------- Post added at 04:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:59 PM ----------
Yeah, LOX/LH2 is a pretty common fuel choice, but Im trying to figure out whether theres a fuel/oxidizer combination, or an engine design strategy I could use to have a higher ISP and stay within reasonably realistic limits. Ill have to do some more independent research then, but I would appreciate any help.
Click to expand...
I understand what you're trying to say, but I'm afraid I'm more of a pilot than an engineer. I suggest you talk to PhantomCruiser, Tommy, or Urwumpe. They know a lot more about aerospace engineering than I do:(
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Vessel Can anyone recommend me a vessel?
Replies
0
Views
1K
GodAtum
G
G
Challenge Artemis III - Landing on the Moon
Replies
19
Views
8K
gattispilot
gattispilot
LinuxWannabe
KSP Player incoming...
Replies
6
Views
3K
Buck Rogers
Buck Rogers
G
IMFD IMFD trouble Earth to Moon
Replies
4
Views
3K
BrianJ
B
N_Molson
Project Ares V Launch Vehicle + Mars cruiser
Replies
4
Views
2K
N_Molson
N_Molson
Back
Top