Now taking craft file submissions over on discord! (The craft files from this video have also been upload) Send me your vehicles, and I'll tear them a new one - discord.gg/hHBMmeVhaK
My caveman design: redstone with 2 bees on top. Although bit tricky innitially, once you figure out angle at which you fire the bees, it will get you trough first few satelites
My design is literally a combination of American and Russian tech with a more Russian design... absolute mess and took be 100k + and more than 4 failed lauches due to the bee failing..... but at the end I was able to gain my first ever orbital satilite.
@@hakairyu1 it's a simple question. Seethe. Mald. Cry about it. Your nation will never amount to anything. Go ahead, joke about America, while the ESA and Roscosmos fail to do what America did way back in the 70s. 55 years and both agencies still can't do it. Here, take this L.
The Smol Russian is pretty much my first orbital rocket design I will say as well if you havent noticed yet Space Bee multi engine stages are nerfed with the variable thrust causing any stage without heavy rcs to just lose control
yeah the stage I used on the standard did wobble quite a bit, still worked but much less reliable than they used to be haha! Also had it not been a sim, any one of those failing would have spelt instant disaster. I need to go back and see If I can figure out how to get that Russian LV working with MJ ascent guidance, it really did not enjoy that craft in the slightest hmmm
@@Carnasa Yea, I'll go back and look at my specific set up for that if I can (that save no longer exists cause it broke and I upgraded to 1.12 and P&LC), I dont know why you're having issues with mechjeb for it
@@Carnasa for the smol russian design, stage away the fairings shortly before RD-0105 ignition, this improves aerodynamic stability for the penalty of slightly higher drag (around 8m/s in drag losses), that combined with a somewhat lofted pitch programm allows using PVG with that design.
After a month on and off I barely made it to orbit in a "flimsy" design. Then like even god got frustrated with me you bring out this video, so thank you!
@10:52 I am in a Russian-mostly playthrough and also found the RD-0105 would flip. In ascent guidance there's a setting for Qα limit. Before the RD-0105 stage I turn this down from the default 4000 to 100 to force the rocket to a small AoA. Once the stage lights it quickly exits the atmosphere and this can be turned up again - don't forget or it will be the default for your next launch, sapping dv.
My caveman design used A9s (upgraded A4s running on Hydyne)... A9 core stage, 2 or 4 boosters with A9 engines (looks like mini Soyuz in the 4 booster version), XLR11 2nd stage and aerobee upper stage... I don't know what was I thinking designing this, maybe that it will be cheap and fast with using what's basically 1940s tech
for first orbit, I'm using the RD108 with an aerobee aj10 upper stage and the aj10 early for guided ascent (both under 60t). With an RD0105 upper stage after unlocking it, it gets me 1t payload into orbit I'm using integral/isogrid and not seperate structure tanks though
I wonder if it is still possible to launch a starting tech rocket on the starting launch pad? Apparently some guy did it in the forums in 2016, wonder if it would be still possible?
I don't believe so! There have been many many updates to tanks, engines and avionics over the years, the starting tech you get now would probably end up being some 1000t monster If you wanted to go that route, that's an interesting thought though, and If I ever did another one of these it might be fun to try a vehicle that only uses starting tech!
@@Carnasa Heavy tanks, and engines with abysmal thrust to weights... I built one good for 6 tons to orbit and it was only *slightly* lighter than a Saturn V. Recreated that with mid-60's tech and it was a 100 tons... Crazy how a bunch of seemingly small improvements add up to so much.
My main stay orbital rocket that's good for 1.5 tons to LEO uses an entirely Russian assent with two liquid fueled boosters on the first stage. And the second stage? Well, I didn't realize mechjeb had a mode for RP-1 which let you stop it from doing a coast phase, so I had to use engines with more than one ignition... So I ended up using 4 of that liquid fuel rocket motor they tested on the Mig-21. Worked just fine in testing. But for actual launches I did have to turn down testflight so it'd actually work, given each of those rocket plane engines only has a 75% chance of actually igniting.
You'll be pleased to know I mention Discord TWICE in this video ;P and I'm hoping one of the mentions should bring a bit of traffic, because it actually involves involvement heh
Small question, what do you mean by integral tanks in the vanguard one? Maybe I'm stupid but I can't find the name in the tech tree. Otherwise looks great!
Ive got a version of the russian but smaller that is full guidance, and use it for all of the early satellite launches. I use integral tanks, and with stretched tanks (requires a bigger pad) is good for molniya and tundra orbits.
I used a craft similar to a seymonsters video with a rd 103 core stage, rd200 boosters, a stentor upper, and a aerobee kick stage. Very easy to fly and can do all 4 early satellite missions fairly easily. Also good because the DU Carrie’s into the bigger RD engines and as you said the rd 100 series are great sounding rocket engines which I also used for any guided launches.
you REALLY don't need the bee on the "standard" a thor-able with an lr-79 and an aj-10 using integral tanks will get you there with much less jank :p AND you have room for RCS to allow the Able stage to coast it's also slightly more expensive at 1.9k but mine has a fairing so you could save a bunch of weight and cost there
@@quohime1824 Or try hot-staging, that also works without the need of RCS (and probably gives you a bit advantage since there is less gravity loss? not sure)
Awesome video, I'm using the Baby Russian with integral now as my current launch vehicle. My initial launch vehicle (after the janky rocket for the first 5 or so flights) was basically the same, but used an AJ-10 to get flying earlier. The Baby Russian will probably keep flying until like 1959, as it can easily lift 1000kg to LEO. Could you perhaps do a similar video for the 'medium lift' category, like late 50s early 60s, for like 3-10 metric tons to LEO, and a medium-heavy (10-30t) and full on heavy?
Currently working on a moon rocket video of similar style, although with the designs I’ve got right now not a lot of them are too serious! (Although there are a few) But I absolutely could do different categories of LV’s in other videos and probably will! :)
@@Carnasa Ah, great! Would love to see them, as for me the game only really begins once I get to the 1t to LEO mark (early lunar exploration and interplanetary, etc.)
my first orbital rocket in RP1 was build in a univers where soviet and americans work together to build a R7 like rocket with Atlas engine... it works but i can't go to orbit without a third stage powered by an gama 201 engine but soviet rocket with americans engine are cool to watch x), my goal is go to the mun with a NK15 powered Saturn 5 (or N1 rocket powered by F1 engine, dont know yet)
@Carnasa, for "The Russian, But Smaller" the secret to getting ascent guidance to fly properly is to place one or two big HTP thrusters around the vernier nozzles on the RD-105 and then programming ascent guidance to get a low Angle of Attack at staging. Mechjeb reports about 3* at staging on my version with 50m/s 0.55*/s turn. Also make sure you hot-stage the second stage which allows the engine to be spooled when it is released so what little gimbal is there can help the HTP thrusters, as the biggest ones you get only have about 100N of thrust. I use a 2m diameter stage as that gives you a reasonable aspect ratio and moves the CG farther from the gimbal and thrusters. Finally, use the smallest possible fairing you can contain your payload with to reduce the area that the upper atmosphere has to act on and flip your stage. Oh, and don't forget to turn on RCS so the thrusters can actually do their job. Oops.
Calling them "Russian" is a misnomer. The Soviet rocket scientists, especially in the early years, were a mix of different nationalities, Ukrainian, Russian, etc.
You using the same tanks I was? Think I mentioned what tanks in this vid but I forget, it is like a 2 year old video 😅 Also been many changes to RO/RP-1 since this but the vehicles should still be roughly the same as I don’t think there’s been any drastic changes to engine performance or stuff like that, mostly just the career side of things.
My first was a huge randomness... my rocket is a combination of American and Russian designs and rockets, the worse part was that I was only able to get 9,005m/s delta V, but afterall it's my first ever.
On the one hand, R-7 is definitely not the most efficient FO/FSO rocket. On the other, like the real R-7, it is big enough and powerful enough to be used pretty much forever as a lower stage for many of your bigger rockets (Vostok, Voshkod, Soyuz), obviously not crewed lunar missions. And with all that flight time, it will become very reliable.
For your "For All Kerbal Kind" series can we get a couple upside down rockets? I mean you are going to need something special to one up the Krussians and the Amerikan'tskys, so why not do something unique.
"having multiple engines means a much greater chance of failure" You're not spinning it hard enough. I had a successful 3000 downrange sim with a 3-stage, no technology vehicle that had FOUR OUT OF SEVEN engine failures on the second stage before their rated burn time and only reduced the range by miniscule amount. Something with a completely overkill TWR, as all early middle and upper stages will have if they are designed at or just above their rated burn time, doesn't need to worry about single engine failures if it is sufficiently spin-stabilized.
![ДОЛГОЖДАННАЯ ДЮНА | Kerbal Space Program №9 [2 СЕЗОН]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/otQ42gw-tPQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Now taking craft file submissions over on discord! (The craft files from this video have also been upload) Send me your vehicles, and I'll tear them a new one - discord.gg/hHBMmeVhaK
My caveman design: redstone with 2 bees on top. Although bit tricky innitially, once you figure out angle at which you fire the bees, it will get you trough first few satelites
My design is literally a combination of American and Russian tech with a more Russian design... absolute mess and took be 100k + and more than 4 failed lauches due to the bee failing..... but at the end I was able to gain my first ever orbital satilite.
I didn't realise you meant aerobee engines and just thought you were making a shitpost about bees, lol.
Isn't that what N9 did in FAK?
@@msidc1238 nope, he made classic Explorer 1 with baby sargeants
as someone who has no idea what any of these names are, i am imagining a redstone block with 2 bees on it
You missed "The American". Flip the height and diameter of tanks around.
😂
Which nations landed men on the moon?
@@stellarsub-orbital9922Kind of a pathetic reaction to have to a joke
@@hakairyu1 it's a simple question. Seethe. Mald. Cry about it. Your nation will never amount to anything. Go ahead, joke about America, while the ESA and Roscosmos fail to do what America did way back in the 70s. 55 years and both agencies still can't do it. Here, take this L.
The Smol Russian is pretty much my first orbital rocket design
I will say as well if you havent noticed yet Space Bee multi engine stages are nerfed with the variable thrust causing any stage without heavy rcs to just lose control
yeah the stage I used on the standard did wobble quite a bit, still worked but much less reliable than they used to be haha! Also had it not been a sim, any one of those failing would have spelt instant disaster.
I need to go back and see If I can figure out how to get that Russian LV working with MJ ascent guidance, it really did not enjoy that craft in the slightest hmmm
@@Carnasa Yea, I'll go back and look at my specific set up for that if I can (that save no longer exists cause it broke and I upgraded to 1.12 and P&LC), I dont know why you're having issues with mechjeb for it
@@Carnasa for the smol russian design, stage away the fairings shortly before RD-0105 ignition, this improves aerodynamic stability for the penalty of slightly higher drag (around 8m/s in drag losses), that combined with a somewhat lofted pitch programm allows using PVG with that design.
After a month on and off I barely made it to orbit in a "flimsy" design. Then like even god got frustrated with me you bring out this video, so thank you!
@10:52 I am in a Russian-mostly playthrough and also found the RD-0105 would flip. In ascent guidance there's a setting for Qα limit. Before the RD-0105 stage I turn this down from the default 4000 to 100 to force the rocket to a small AoA. Once the stage lights it quickly exits the atmosphere and this can be turned up again - don't forget or it will be the default for your next launch, sapping dv.
This seems like a really cool concept for a video, nice!
Thanks! Hope you enjoy it when it releases :D
10:10 that's basically how R-9 missile was made
My caveman design used A9s (upgraded A4s running on Hydyne)... A9 core stage, 2 or 4 boosters with A9 engines (looks like mini Soyuz in the 4 booster version), XLR11 2nd stage and aerobee upper stage... I don't know what was I thinking designing this, maybe that it will be cheap and fast with using what's basically 1940s tech
I can't help but love the absurdity of the Budget Saturn V, what an aberration.
for first orbit, I'm using the RD108 with an aerobee aj10 upper stage and the aj10 early for guided ascent (both under 60t). With an RD0105 upper stage after unlocking it, it gets me 1t payload into orbit
I'm using integral/isogrid and not seperate structure tanks though
I wonder if it is still possible to launch a starting tech rocket on the starting launch pad? Apparently some guy did it in the forums in 2016, wonder if it would be still possible?
I don't believe so! There have been many many updates to tanks, engines and avionics over the years, the starting tech you get now would probably end up being some 1000t monster If you wanted to go that route, that's an interesting thought though, and If I ever did another one of these it might be fun to try a vehicle that only uses starting tech!
@@Carnasa Heavy tanks, and engines with abysmal thrust to weights... I built one good for 6 tons to orbit and it was only *slightly* lighter than a Saturn V.
Recreated that with mid-60's tech and it was a 100 tons... Crazy how a bunch of seemingly small improvements add up to so much.
One time i built a caveman design that had something like 13 engines on the first stage. Safe to say, it was a nightmare to fly.
dear lordy what is that saturn v
cursed. Very cursed.
Carnasa that’s a really great video !!!
My main stay orbital rocket that's good for 1.5 tons to LEO uses an entirely Russian assent with two liquid fueled boosters on the first stage. And the second stage? Well, I didn't realize mechjeb had a mode for RP-1 which let you stop it from doing a coast phase, so I had to use engines with more than one ignition... So I ended up using 4 of that liquid fuel rocket motor they tested on the Mig-21. Worked just fine in testing. But for actual launches I did have to turn down testflight so it'd actually work, given each of those rocket plane engines only has a 75% chance of actually igniting.
Heya guys, hopefully everyone enjoys! This was a message brought to you by the pr department
You'll be pleased to know I mention Discord TWICE in this video ;P and I'm hoping one of the mentions should bring a bit of traffic, because it actually involves involvement heh
@@Carnasa ooooh nice
Small question, what do you mean by integral tanks in the vanguard one? Maybe I'm stupid but I can't find the name in the tech tree. Otherwise looks great!
isogrid ones
"The Russian"
I feel like this isn't much better than you could do with starting parts.
Of course we want a series for our crafts!
Ive got a version of the russian but smaller that is full guidance, and use it for all of the early satellite launches. I use integral tanks, and with stretched tanks (requires a bigger pad) is good for molniya and tundra orbits.
Oooh thats good to know, but yeah not sure why MJ was having a bad time with my design, I flew it about 4 times and every time ended in failure D:
I just go Thor able
how did you get the boattail for the juno i can't find it
I used a craft similar to a seymonsters video with a rd 103 core stage, rd200 boosters, a stentor upper, and a aerobee kick stage. Very easy to fly and can do all 4 early satellite missions fairly easily. Also good because the DU Carrie’s into the bigger RD engines and as you said the rd 100 series are great sounding rocket engines which I also used for any guided launches.
"The Australian" is a newspaper - y wanna call your rock something more aussie like "The Sheila" or "The Ranga" (red head Sheila)
where can i get the rp1 i dont see it on ckan
you REALLY don't need the bee on the "standard" a thor-able with an lr-79 and an aj-10 using integral tanks will get you there with much less jank :p
AND you have room for RCS to allow the Able stage to coast
it's also slightly more expensive at 1.9k but mine has a fairing so you could save a bunch of weight and cost there
every time I try and light the aerobee in the standard I get vapor in fuel lines
nvm, I needed to use the RCS to push the fuel back into the engine
@@quohime1824 Or try hot-staging, that also works without the need of RCS
(and probably gives you a bit advantage since there is less gravity loss? not sure)
I was curious what tufx profile you used throughout the video?
Ballistic fox’s lukewarm :)
@@Carnasa Thank you for the fast reply!
Missing the sea dragon 🙁
Not sure that really falls under the first orbital launch vehicles category haha :p
Awesome video, I'm using the Baby Russian with integral now as my current launch vehicle. My initial launch vehicle (after the janky rocket for the first 5 or so flights) was basically the same, but used an AJ-10 to get flying earlier. The Baby Russian will probably keep flying until like 1959, as it can easily lift 1000kg to LEO.
Could you perhaps do a similar video for the 'medium lift' category, like late 50s early 60s, for like 3-10 metric tons to LEO, and a medium-heavy (10-30t) and full on heavy?
Currently working on a moon rocket video of similar style, although with the designs I’ve got right now not a lot of them are too serious! (Although there are a few)
But I absolutely could do different categories of LV’s in other videos and probably will! :)
@@Carnasa Ah, great! Would love to see them, as for me the game only really begins once I get to the 1t to LEO mark (early lunar exploration and interplanetary, etc.)
My goto russian rocket early on: RD108 + Pumpscud (1956-57 Rocketry)
What’s your tufx config
I just used a modified Atlas, works for me…
British were inspired by an excited dog...
YT notifications betrayed me only got notified now :*(
my first orbital rocket in RP1 was build in a univers where soviet and americans work together to build a R7 like rocket with Atlas engine... it works but i can't go to orbit without a third stage powered by an gama 201 engine
but soviet rocket with americans engine are cool to watch x), my goal is go to the mun with a NK15 powered Saturn 5 (or N1 rocket powered by F1 engine, dont know yet)
Haha both cool ideas! KGR was basically the same premise, every engine was available because the world wanted to work together :P
@Carnasa, for "The Russian, But Smaller" the secret to getting ascent guidance to fly properly is to place one or two big HTP thrusters around the vernier nozzles on the RD-105 and then programming ascent guidance to get a low Angle of Attack at staging. Mechjeb reports about 3* at staging on my version with 50m/s 0.55*/s turn. Also make sure you hot-stage the second stage which allows the engine to be spooled when it is released so what little gimbal is there can help the HTP thrusters, as the biggest ones you get only have about 100N of thrust. I use a 2m diameter stage as that gives you a reasonable aspect ratio and moves the CG farther from the gimbal and thrusters. Finally, use the smallest possible fairing you can contain your payload with to reduce the area that the upper atmosphere has to act on and flip your stage.
Oh, and don't forget to turn on RCS so the thrusters can actually do their job. Oops.
imagine needing a tutorial and not just slapping shit together and watching it explode until it doesnt (im joking but this is how i would do it)
Then theres me that follows tutorials but sees my rockets miserably fall apart because they spin too much
Calling them "Russian" is a misnomer. The Soviet rocket scientists, especially in the early years, were a mix of different nationalities, Ukrainian, Russian, etc.
IT'S NOT ALL UPSIDE DOWN REEEEE
Next video title, 10 Epic Early Upside Down Orbital Rockets for KSP RP1! ;P
I have 1000 less ms of delta v
Edit: don’t launch a Sputnik core because it’s too heavy for some of these
You using the same tanks I was? Think I mentioned what tanks in this vid but I forget, it is like a 2 year old video 😅
Also been many changes to RO/RP-1 since this but the vehicles should still be roughly the same as I don’t think there’s been any drastic changes to engine performance or stuff like that, mostly just the career side of things.
When new comming home redux video?
TFW I cant do vanguard because Im doing P&LC and my main LC is 18-22 Tons and vanguard is 10 tons lmao
My first was a huge randomness... my rocket is a combination of American and Russian designs and rockets, the worse part was that I was only able to get 9,005m/s delta V, but afterall it's my first ever.
i build a budget r-7
On the one hand, R-7 is definitely not the most efficient FO/FSO rocket.
On the other, like the real R-7, it is big enough and powerful enough to be used pretty much forever as a lower stage for many of your bigger rockets (Vostok, Voshkod, Soyuz), obviously not crewed lunar missions. And with all that flight time, it will become very reliable.
For your "For All Kerbal Kind" series can we get a couple upside down rockets? I mean you are going to need something special to one up the Krussians and the Amerikan'tskys, so why not do something unique.
"having multiple engines means a much greater chance of failure"
You're not spinning it hard enough. I had a successful 3000 downrange sim with a 3-stage, no technology vehicle that had FOUR OUT OF SEVEN engine failures on the second stage before their rated burn time and only reduced the range by miniscule amount. Something with a completely overkill TWR, as all early middle and upper stages will have if they are designed at or just above their rated burn time, doesn't need to worry about single engine failures if it is sufficiently spin-stabilized.