StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Shroom Man 777 wrote:Hey, Air MacMillan can totally work on the Mach 3 bird by designing all those creature comforts, from the super-awesome seats with auto-massage functions and the flat-screen Shroom-Definition telescreens, to the stratellite intertube uplinks, to the awesome supersonic toilet bowls, to the various food storage thinggies, and all sorts of fun stuff!


EDIT:

Can't you cut your Moon Eagle Ship to two pieces, launch each piece into space, and then connect both pieces in space?

You will need to work out a way to dock both aircraft, ensure that they stay tight, and can withstand the g-forces.

On the other hand, seeing that Apollo 13's joint could withstand the blast of a rocket, maybe it's possible.

Haha, Czech gets shafted!

But, shit, Tian Xia had nuclear weapons in Frequesue? Holy shit. I never knew that! That's an outrage!

Well, well... I expected something like this. Another one bites the dust, and a swift reminder to folks that ceding your sovereignity in exchange for "cool military stuff" might not be the best idea

Stas Bush wrote:Well, well... I expected something like this. Another one bites the dust, and a swift reminder to folks that ceding your sovereignity in exchange for "cool military stuff" might not be the best idea

A politically unreliable governor is useless anyway.

Shroom Man 777 wrote:Haha, Czech gets shafted!

But, shit, Tian Xia had nuclear weapons in Frequesue? Holy shit. I never knew that! That's an outrage!

So long as nothing goes boom, I'm happy.

Stas Bush wrote:Well, well... I expected something like this. Another one bites the dust, and a swift reminder to folks that ceding your sovereignity in exchange for "cool military stuff" might not be the best idea

::makes notes, cede territory, will be killed for being stupid::

Also, how will Tian Xian relations in the God-damned F-ing Continent change now?

SiegeTank wrote:I just spent nearly four months patiently building up my space program until I got to this point, I'm really quite unwilling to speed things up now just because people haven't got the patience to get to where they want to go. Vaguely accelerating feasible tech development, sure, I can live with that, but not wholesale accelerating of the game.

Honestly I feel very closely aligned with this. In the last game and in this one I've invested a HUGE chunk of my country's money into a next generation of naval surface combatants along with the associated C4I architecture. Moreover there has been the time investment and even granted that this year will see the launch of the first 4 STAR Destroyers and the first 3 STAR Cruisers it will be another 10-12 months before I can finish upgrading my fleet and actually puting a fully integrated defense network in place. Its a matter of priorities, I've put money into being the undisputed King of the Oceans while others have put time and money into a whole host of other projects to be first amongst equals. Changing the timeline does unfairly penalize those who invested in a paticular track.

The proposed prograssion of FASTA manned flight programs:

Mercury+Atlas-Sputnik: initial manned program, to test shit and work out procedures.

Soyuz I+Soyuz Booster: two-man capsule, runs a series of EVAs, rendezvous and docking, orbital maneuvers, toilet tests.

Soyuz II+Soyuz Booster: first three-man capsule tests.

Soyuz II+Proton: tests of the Selene configuration sans lunar lander, lunar flybys and orbits. Lunar missions may be changed to Saturn just to test the rocket

Selene+Saturn: Final test flights of the full lunar configuration Soyuz, lunar landing

That's for stuff up to the lunar landing. Later we'll see things like ready-made Direct Ascent lunar bases such as the LK-700, Eagles and other weird shit

PeZook wrote:The proposed prograssion of FASTA manned flight programs:

Mercury+Atlas-Sputnik: initial manned program, to test shit and work out procedures.

Soyuz I+Soyuz Booster: two-man capsule, runs a series of EVAs, rendezvous and docking, orbital maneuvers, toilet tests.

Soyuz II+Soyuz Booster: first three-man capsule tests.

Soyuz II+Proton: tests of the Selene configuration sans lunar lander, lunar flybys and orbits. Lunar missions may be changed to Saturn just to test the rocket

Selene+Saturn: Final test flights of the full lunar configuration Soyuz, lunar landing

That's for stuff up to the lunar landing. Later we'll see things like ready-made Direct Ascent lunar bases such as the LK-700, Eagles and other weird shit

I believe, eventually we should work towards Energia rockets and Ares IV. Ares IV in particular could be looked at as an extremely refined Saturn V rocket, and cheaper, and Energia and its successors like Energia II and Angara are reusable rockets.

A Saturn V rocket is extremely expensive to launch.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote: I believe, eventually we should work towards Energia rockets and Ares IV. Ares IV in particular could be looked at as an extremely refined Saturn V rocket, and cheaper, and Energia and its successors like Energia II and Angara are reusable rockets.

Well, yeah, that's the obvious next step. The Saturn will fly us to the moon, but development won't stop there, but to refine the design we'll naturally have to fly it first

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:A Saturn V rocket is extremely expensive to launch.

Per pound it was IIRC about as expensive as most disposable rockets. The semi-reuseable rockets like the Energia II (and to a lesser extent the Shuttle) have a big advantage, of course.

PeZook wrote:

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote: I believe, eventually we should work towards Energia rockets and Ares IV. Ares IV in particular could be looked at as an extremely refined Saturn V rocket, and cheaper, and Energia and its successors like Energia II and Angara are reusable rockets.

Well, yeah, that's the obvious next step. The Saturn will fly us to the moon, but development won't stop there, but to refine the design we'll naturally have to fly it first

I'm pondering whether we should either develop a Ares V type with multiple Zenits or 2 SSSRB (Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster) or going the Vulkan route...

The Vulkan is, essentially, an Energia with a lot of boosters strapped on

PeZook wrote:The Vulkan is, essentially, an Energia with a lot of boosters strapped on

With a few differences here and there. The main body is slightly longer since the cargo will be inside the main Energia body.

We are heading in that direction, but given that we are developing technologies related to the Ares V, it'd be a waste to let them sit on the backburner after we have developed them, and spent billions.

The F-1 engine as it is, while some technologies in them were used elsewhere, pretty much was a dead end. The J-2 were not since they had other uses like in the Ares program. On the other hand, it think it might be possible to do a Ares V using multiple Zenits to achieve the same effect, but then we have the Vulkan and some additional designing might drive it up to match the load carried by the Ares V...

Choices... Maybe multiple design routes might be a better idea, but it will cost.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote: We are heading in that direction, but given that we are developing technologies related to the Ares V, it'd be a waste to let them sit on the backburner after we have developed them, and spent billions.

Well, what we'll call the Vulkan will probably be significantly different from the real thing, since we're doing a hybrid russian/american space program.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:The F-1 engine as it is, while some technologies in them were used elsewhere, pretty much was a dead end.

I'm not sure about that...it's a bigass first-stage hypergolic engine with a lot of thrust. If we don't put our superheavy booster development on hold, we could find a lot of uses for the basic design, or at least the flight data and engineering expertise.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote: Choices... Maybe multiple design routes might be a better idea, but it will cost.

We shouldn't baloon the amount of programs, really. Private enterprise will kick in once the initial work is done to develop commercial boosters and the like, while government should concentrate on building infrastructure and pushing the envelope further.

Karmic Knight wrote:
Lonestar, So no, Gizmonic Air can't join the Mach 3+ Freighter team?

I've decided that, no, Gizmonic Air will not be joining the team. For one thing we already have a gaggle of major integrators, for another Gizmonic Air doesn't really make anything that indicates that have special know-how that adds to the team. If one of the other team members wants to subcontract some stuff to you, then okay fine. But you will not be a primary team member.


Stas, I think I'm going to need a support and logistics contract for the 15 Su-34s I've acquired from former Shepistani stocks. Parts and(some) labor for 5 years, plus ODAAF airmen and pilots sent to the CSR for technical training?

PeZook wrote:Well, what we'll call the Vulkan will probably be significantly different from the real thing, since we're doing a hybrid russian/american space program.

Possibly. Technically, it's possible to substitute the RD-170 with the F-1. However, the RD-170 has its own benefits, like leading to the Zenit rocket and other derivative rocket engines.

I'm not sure about that...it's a bigass first-stage hypergolic engine with a lot of thrust. If we don't put our superheavy booster development on hold, we could find a lot of uses for the basic design, or at least the flight data and engineering expertise.

True, but I would point out that the RD-170 has slightly more thrust and the Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster has even more. A variant of the SSSRB is being used for the Ares V, with a pair of them at the side of the Ares V. Which is why I am wondering whether to put money into the SSSRB and develop them.

We shouldn't baloon the amount of programs, really. Private enterprise will kick in once the initial work is done to develop commercial boosters and the like, while government should concentrate on building infrastructure and pushing the envelope further.

Well, even most of the newest boosters coming up are designed with government money. It will be a while before private enterprise kicks in.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote: Possibly. Technically, it's possible to substitute the RD-170 with the F-1. However, the RD-170 has its own benefits, like leading to the Zenit rocket and other derivative rocket engines.

It's also a bit easier to produce (doesn't require the huge engine bell of the F-1) but there are four combustion chambers. So it's a tradeoff in one direction or another, really, but I personally think the RD-170 is a better choice for mass-produced boosters, yeah.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote: True, but I would point out that the RD-170 has slightly more thrust and the Space Shuttle Solid Rocket Booster has even more. A variant of the SSSRB is being used for the Ares V, with a pair of them at the side of the Ares V. Which is why I am wondering whether to put money into the SSSRB and develop them.

Well, Shuttle SRB's are incredibly awesome stuff. The Shuttle assembly weighs 2/3 of the Saturn V, can deliver almost the same payload (112 tonnes) and is partially resuseable, and the SRB's can be simply extended with extra sections! We should aim for our Energia II to be as awesome

Well, even most of the newest boosters coming up are designed with government money. It will be a while before private enterprise kicks in.

Of course. I propose we should have the following programs open:

1) Heavy and superheavy liquid-fuelled rockets (Saturn V, then Ares-Energia and Vulkan)

2) Solid fuelled strap-on boosters (like SRBs for use with lower-throw weight systems, San Dorado has some experience in that already)

3) Buran+space fighters (weaponization!)

4) A space station

5) A super-large hypergolic engine (to gather experience for other rockets)

6) A medium, mass-produceable hypergolic engine (to allow cheaper production of rockets)

7) Solid-fuelled engines

PeZook wrote:Well, Shuttle SRB's are incredibly awesome stuff. The Shuttle assembly weighs 2/3 of the Saturn V, can deliver almost the same payload (112 tonnes) and is partially resuseable, and the SRB's can be simply extended with extra sections! We should aim for our Energia II to be as awesome

Hmm.. Perhaps our Energia II should utilise strap on boosters either similar to the SSRB, or use a more powerful derivative of the RD-170 design with a lot more thrust.

Of course. I propose we should have the following programs open:

1) Heavy and superheavy liquid-fuelled rockets (Saturn V, then Ares-Energia and Vulkan)

Ares-Energia combination with modularity actually sounds like an interesting idea which I have been thinking about for a while. It will make use of all the available engines, and then we add on modules as required for the mission. The Vulkan with either Shuttle SRB or Zenit boosters will be the heaviest.

So it would actually end up looking a bit like the Ares-V, a central core stage with attached solid rocket boosters? Cool with me

How much thrust does the RD-170 have? Sources I have point all over the place...

PeZook wrote:So it would actually end up looking a bit like the Ares-V, a central core stage with attached solid rocket boosters? Cool with me

How much thrust does the RD-170 have? Sources I have point all over the place...

The RD-170 is supposedly comparable to the F-1 with comparable thrust. Slight more apparently. Some sites state 7550 KN at sealevel.

Erm...the F-1 has something like 6.6-7 MN at sea level (yes, MEGANewtons)...how is it remotely comparable?

PeZook wrote:Erm...the F-1 has something like 6.6-7 MN at sea level (yes, MEGANewtons)...how is it remotely comparable?

Erm.. you might like to note, that 7550KN = 7.55MN...

Shroom Man 777 wrote:Can't you cut your Moon Eagle Ship to two pieces, launch each piece into space, and then connect both pieces in space?

Easy enough; send the cargo pod and the transporter up separately. They're meant to be detachable.

EDIT: Remember, the Eagle only needs to be taken up into orbit-- it can make the trip to the moon by itself from there, so the total costs of the Saturn-V aren't necessarily applicable. We won't need a Command Module, a LEM, etc. Just the 'get out of gravity' initial stage.

Our characters know such a thing is possible since we all know about the Space Shuttle; its only our scientists here who haven't seen it. We can give them the idea and simply appear to be really imaginative, visionary people who pays attention to space stuff.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:

PeZook wrote:Erm...the F-1 has something like 6.6-7 MN at sea level (yes, MEGANewtons)...how is it remotely comparable?

Erm.. you might like to note, that 7550KN = 7.55MN...

*facepalm*

Yeah, talk about screwing up the basics

Hurnh...that's actually not bad, fully 1/6 more thrust, and doesn't require complex engineering (the F-1 engine had a lot of trouble with burn instability because of its sheer size)

Coyote wrote: EDIT: Remember, the Eagle only needs to be taken up into orbit-- it can make the trip to the moon by itself from there, so the total costs of the Saturn-V aren't necessarily applicable. We won't need a Command Module, a LEM, etc. Just the 'get out of gravity' initial stage.

Actually, you need a Saturn or STS. The Saturn Vs payload was actually the uppermost stage (S-IVB) and the Apollo stack. The Eagle is somewhat lighter, so we'll need a rocket slightly smaller than the full Saturn V.

And, of course, the thing isn't even tested,and I'm not putting actual astronauts on it untill it's made at least five-six flights. And, well, since even a cut-up Eagle will need a rocket already capable of lifting what we need for the basic Moon mission...

PeZook wrote:Hurnh...that's actually not bad, fully 1/6 more thrust, and doesn't require complex engineering (the F-1 engine had a lot of trouble with burn instability because of its sheer size)

The RD-170 was the product of decades of Soviet engineering. The Americans on the other hand kinda.. slowed down development of liquid fueled rockets, and hence the first variants of the Shuttle engines were actually not as well designed as the Soviet counterpart in the Buran.