1.1.0 Thoughts on Gemini EOR Lunar Program (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Modern] >> Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager



Message

stilicho410 -> 1.1.0 Thoughts on Gemini EOR Lunar Program (12/8/2014 5:15:47 AM)

A couple of thoughts on this program:

1. Astronaut Fatalities: All or nothing.
After going through all the preliminary missions, tragedy struck when I attempted my first Lunar Landing mission.
After a successful landing and Lunar EVA, I had a catastrophic failure on Step 25, "Lunar Liftoff". Well, these things can always happen, but BOTH astronauts were declared dead. I would think that in this case, the astronaut in the lander would be doomed, but the other astronaut who remained in the Gemini spacecraft could still survive.

I realize that modifying this might require a change to the mission database design, as each mission step would have to define whether the entire crew or just some crew members were at risk. I understand if such an update is postponed for future expansions.

2. Gemini Lunar Landing EOR/LOR: Data Entry Error for Langley Light Lunar Lander?
Currently, spacecraft components of a Gemini Lunar Landing EOR/LOR are as follows (not counting spacesuits)

Booster "A" (Total 15200)
S-IVB Space Tug 15200 kg

Booster "B" (Total 28717)
Gemini Spacecraft: 3851 kg
Gemini EOR Service Module: 10064 kg
Langley Light Lunar Lander: 14696 kg
Spacesuits (a few more kg)

As currently defined, the only American rocket that can serve as Booster "B" is the Saturn V.
This rather defeats the purpose of EOR, which was to avoid the need to develop larger boosters.

I think there might have been a data entry error here, as the Langley Light lander weighs exactly the same (14696 kg) as the Apollo LEM!

If the Light Lander were closer in mass to the Gemini spacecraft (say around 3500 kg, it looks pretty small), then a Saturn 1B could serve as Booster "B".
This would make Gemini EOR an interesting choice in the game, as one would need to research more components, but would not need to build the final stage of the Vehicle Assembly Building or Saturn V.



AndyW -> RE: 1.1.0 Thoughts on Gemini EOR Lunar Program (12/8/2014 7:43:48 PM)

It's not quite that small.

I think for the N2O4/UDMH designs 3200->4600Kg was what I've seen.

The early LO2/LH2 designs are much lighter, maybe 1200->2000Kg, but that's not what the picture is of on the R+D screen...



stilicho410 -> RE: 1.1.0 Thoughts on Gemini EOR Lunar Program (12/10/2014 4:35:41 AM)

If the Light Lunar Lander were reduced in mass to say 4500 kg, then a Saturn 1B, with an LEO capacity of 18600 kg could serve as Booster "B".

Gemini Spacecraft: 3851 kg
Gemini EOR Service Module: 10064 kg
Langley Light Lunar Lander: 4500 kg
One Gemini EVA Suit: 15 kg
One Light Lunar EVA Suit: 91 kg
Total Payload 18521 kg

As it is, the current EOR configuration with its overweight lander doesn't make much sense. If a Saturn V is required as Booster B, why should you need Booster A to carry up an S-IVB? The Saturn V already has one.

In any case, the current mass of the light lander of 14696 kg is way off; that's the same mass as the Apollo LEM.



seydlitz_slith -> RE: 1.1.0 Thoughts on Gemini EOR Lunar Program (12/10/2014 11:11:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: stilicho410

If the Light Lunar Lander were reduced in mass to say 4500 kg, then a Saturn 1B, with an LEO capacity of 18600 kg could serve as Booster "B".

Gemini Spacecraft: 3851 kg
Gemini EOR Service Module: 10064 kg
Langley Light Lunar Lander: 4500 kg
One Gemini EVA Suit: 15 kg
One Light Lunar EVA Suit: 91 kg
Total Payload 18521 kg

As it is, the current EOR configuration with its overweight lander doesn't make much sense. If a Saturn V is required as Booster B, why should you need Booster A to carry up an S-IVB? The Saturn V already has one.

In any case, the current mass of the light lander of 14696 kg is way off; that's the same mass as the Apollo LEM.


You might be on to something here about the light lander weight being too heavy. I also questioned how Gemini EOR was cheaper if I had to upgrade the VAB and build the Saturn V. That made the EOR both more expensive and more risky since there were more moving parts. Either the weight is wrong on the light lander or there should be a third rocket launch on the mission to carry part of the "stack" so you don't need Saturn V.



N_Molson -> RE: 1.1.0 Thoughts on Gemini EOR Lunar Program (12/11/2014 10:47:47 AM)

quote:

Langley Light Lunar Lander: 14696 kg


Hello,

I just checked the game data and indeed there is a bug. The mass of the Langley should be comparable to the Soviet LK (a bit heavier, because the LK uses the N1 Block D for powered descent). I'm forwarding this to the Lead Developer.

Thanks ! [;)]



Nacho84 -> RE: 1.1.0 Thoughts on Gemini EOR Lunar Program (1/9/2015 11:45:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: seydlitz


quote:

ORIGINAL: stilicho410

If the Light Lunar Lander were reduced in mass to say 4500 kg, then a Saturn 1B, with an LEO capacity of 18600 kg could serve as Booster "B".

Gemini Spacecraft: 3851 kg
Gemini EOR Service Module: 10064 kg
Langley Light Lunar Lander: 4500 kg
One Gemini EVA Suit: 15 kg
One Light Lunar EVA Suit: 91 kg
Total Payload 18521 kg

As it is, the current EOR configuration with its overweight lander doesn't make much sense. If a Saturn V is required as Booster B, why should you need Booster A to carry up an S-IVB? The Saturn V already has one.

In any case, the current mass of the light lander of 14696 kg is way off; that's the same mass as the Apollo LEM.


You might be on to something here about the light lander weight being too heavy. I also questioned how Gemini EOR was cheaper if I had to upgrade the VAB and build the Saturn V. That made the EOR both more expensive and more risky since there were more moving parts. Either the weight is wrong on the light lander or there should be a third rocket launch on the mission to carry part of the "stack" so you don't need Saturn V.


Hello seydlitz,

Indeed, the mass of the Light Lander was wrong (I created that row by copying and pasting the LEM and forgot to update the value!). This has been fixed, you'll get it in the next patch (SPM v. 1.2.0).

Cheers,



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.7802734