Go Back   Alternate History Discussion Board > Discussion > Alternate History Discussion: After 1900

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #161  
Old April 22nd, 2012, 10:28 AM
wingman wingman is online now
Colonel Hawk Hunter, U.A.A.C
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Ware Shoals SC ( Oh yes, i am back!)
Posts: 1000 or more
Send a message via Yahoo to wingman
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahamut-255 View Post
Titan V 11022 - One SSME. One RL-10. Two 5-segment SRBs. Two 7-segment SRBs.

Titan V 12022 - One SSME. Two RL-10s. Two 5-segment SRBs. Two 7-segment SRBs.

Does that help to clear things up?

space shuttle main engine?

oh i got a artwork type pic of a Titan with Shuttle -Type SRB'S.

~edit~ found it.
Attached Images
 
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rooster Cogurn View Post
"Fill your hands, you son of a bitch!"
Reply With Quote
  #162  
Old April 22nd, 2012, 02:22 PM
Michel Van Michel Van is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Liege Belgium Europe
Posts: 1000 or more
This Titan V would look more like the Ariane 5 launcher
The core fuel tank (for SSME) is 5.4 meter , build like Shuttle ET (also build by Martin Marietta)
or even smaller in order to keep stage long for connect the Booster
those SRB are those UA1205 and UA1207 ?

so i can make calculation and graphics how it looks like
Reply With Quote
  #163  
Old April 22nd, 2012, 02:52 PM
Bahamut-255 Bahamut-255 is offline
Space Lover
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by e of pi View Post
I got that. I meant performance.
Ah. Well that means:

Titan V 11022 - 38,000Kg

Titan V 12022 - 41,400Kg
__________________
Your help here would be much appreciated.
Reply With Quote
  #164  
Old April 22nd, 2012, 03:20 PM
Bahamut-255 Bahamut-255 is offline
Space Lover
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michel Van View Post
This Titan V would look more like the Ariane 5 launcher
The core fuel tank (for SSME) is 5.4 meter , build like Shuttle ET (also build by Martin Marietta)
or even smaller in order to keep stage long for connect the Booster
those SRB are those UA1205 and UA1207 ?

so i can make calculation and graphics how it looks like
It does resemble the OTL Ariane 5 LV, but it is a US design. The Core Stage diameter is actually set at 510cm for two reasons. It keeps the payload shroud synonymous with the STS Payload Bay. And allows you to fit the 5/7 segment SRBs with relative ease - 'I' Beams to help support it ala STS ET.

If you want to make some graphics. Go ahead!
__________________
Your help here would be much appreciated.
Reply With Quote
  #165  
Old April 22nd, 2012, 08:22 PM
Michel Van Michel Van is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Liege Belgium Europe
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahamut-255 View Post
It does resemble the OTL Ariane 5 LV, but it is a US design. The Core Stage diameter is actually set at 510cm for two reasons. It keeps the payload shroud synonymous with the STS Payload Bay. And allows you to fit the 5/7 segment SRBs with relative ease - 'I' Beams to help support it ala STS ET.

If you want to make some graphics. Go ahead!
it could work,
i got tank size of 30 meter long x 5.1 meter
the UA1205 with 25.91 meter can be connected on this tank with no problem
lower connection at base of tank were engine thrust-structure meet tanks
and upper connection on inter-structure between LH2 LOX tanks.

the UA1207 with 34.5 meter long is problematic
upper connection must place on interstage of Core stage and Centaur-T
or you make the corestage like Ariane 5 EPC were inter-structure on top is extends, to connect the Solid booster

normal length of Titan V with Payload fairing is 53 meter, total length 63 meter
Reply With Quote
  #166  
Old April 22nd, 2012, 08:48 PM
Bahamut-255 Bahamut-255 is offline
Space Lover
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michel Van View Post
it could work,
i got tank size of 30 meter long x 5.1 meter
the UA1205 with 25.91 meter can be connected on this tank with no problem
lower connection at base of tank were engine thrust-structure meet tanks
and upper connection on inter-structure between LH2 LOX tanks.

the UA1207 with 34.5 meter long is problematic
upper connection must place on interstage of Core stage and Centaur-T
or you make the corestage like Ariane 5 EPC were inter-structure on top is extends, to connect the Solid booster

normal length of Titan V with Payload fairing is 53 meter, total length 63 meter
Actually, the Core Stage is 40.00 x 5.10 metres. I'm using 'I' Beams, similar to the ones used on the Shuttle External Tank to help it handle the loads imposed on it.

The details are in the PM I sent you earlier.
__________________
Your help here would be much appreciated.
Reply With Quote
  #167  
Old April 26th, 2012, 03:33 PM
Michel Van Michel Van is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Liege Belgium Europe
Posts: 1000 or more
here my version of Titan V
Attached Images
 
Reply With Quote
  #168  
Old April 26th, 2012, 04:42 PM
e of pi e of pi is offline
Turbine Printer
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Halfway to Anywhere
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michel Van View Post
here my version of Titan V
That's really nice-looking, Michel! Bahamut, is that no-upper-stage version used very often? I suppose since it's sort of stage-and-a-half anyway with a hydrolox core the payload might not be terrible...
__________________
Eyes Turned Skywards
An alternate post-Apollo space age
Atomic Rockets Seal of Approval, Turtledove Nominee 2011
Visit the wiki page for details
Reply With Quote
  #169  
Old April 26th, 2012, 05:13 PM
Michel Van Michel Van is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Liege Belgium Europe
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by e of pi View Post
That's really nice-looking, Michel! Bahamut, is that no-upper-stage version used very often? I suppose since it's sort of stage-and-a-half anyway with a hydrolox core the payload might not be terrible...
about no-upper-stage version
the Titan IIID had no third stage to launch of heavy Spysat like KH-9 to KH-11

on my graphic the engines on Core stage modular system
it easy to adapt it, to drop one SSME+support after the mass of Core stage+payload is lower for one SSME thrust.
you lose more 3526 kg death weight
Reply With Quote
  #170  
Old April 26th, 2012, 08:17 PM
Bahamut-255 Bahamut-255 is offline
Space Lover
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Thanks for the illustration Van! It really helps! If I have to nitpick though, it's three points:


1) The 5 segment SRBs use dummy segments in order to match the length of the 7 segment SRBs, as so to simplify the Core Stage somewhat.

2) I had expected the SRBs to be mounted a little lower, so the exhaust plumes wouldn't risk harming the SSME or the SSME support structure. Though I'll admit that being a regeneratively-cooled engine, it may not matter too much, while a protective cover for the SSME supports can resolve that department.

3) I hadn't actually factored in a no-Centaur Upper Stage, so it came as a small surprise to see it here.


But these really are niggling issues, and really don't detract from the work you've done. Which I thank you for again. Almost exactly what I had pictured in my head.


Quote:
Originally Posted by e of pi View Post
That's really nice-looking, Michel! Bahamut, is that no-upper-stage version used very often? I suppose since it's sort of stage-and-a-half anyway with a hydrolox core the payload might not be terrible...
Actually E, I hadn't factored in a no-Centaur Upper Stage in my works. But a small Upper/Circularisation Stage can work only on the single SSME Core Stages. I base this on the projected burn times of the single and dual SSME Core Stages - 420 and 225-240 seconds respectively. I would expect it to meet the - rather large - interim payload gaps between the Titan V 22400 and Titan V 11020 - and be built accordingly.

I'll work on it just as soon as I have the time.
__________________
Your help here would be much appreciated.
Reply With Quote
  #171  
Old April 26th, 2012, 08:41 PM
e of pi e of pi is offline
Turbine Printer
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Halfway to Anywhere
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahamut-255 View Post
2) I had expected the SRBs to be mounted a little lower, so the exhaust plumes wouldn't risk harming the SSME or the SSME support structure. Though I'll admit that being a regeneratively-cooled engine, it may not matter too much, while a protective cover for the SSME supports can resolve that department.
I suspect this comes from setting the forward mounting point on the 7-seg at the interstage, then working backwards. The LH2 tank is longer than the booster at that diameter, so the SSME ends up stick backwards. I'm not sure there's any particular legacy for the 5.1 m, so an increase to about 5.7 or so might allow the booster and LH2 tank lengths to synergize better. It may mean a step-down interstage to the 5.1 m of the Centaur-G/T and fairing, but that's not a huge deal.
Quote:
Actually E, I hadn't factored in a no-Centaur Upper Stage in my works. But a small Upper/Circularisation Stage can work only on the single SSME Core Stages. I base this on the projected burn times of the single and dual SSME Core Stages - 420 and 225-240 seconds respectively. I would expect it to meet the - rather large - interim payload gaps between the Titan V 22400 and Titan V 11020 - and be built accordingly.

I'll work on it just as soon as I have the time.
Cool. I was a bit surprised to see it myself, I hadn't thought of operating it without the upper stage either,
__________________
Eyes Turned Skywards
An alternate post-Apollo space age
Atomic Rockets Seal of Approval, Turtledove Nominee 2011
Visit the wiki page for details
Reply With Quote
  #172  
Old April 26th, 2012, 08:50 PM
wingman wingman is online now
Colonel Hawk Hunter, U.A.A.C
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Ware Shoals SC ( Oh yes, i am back!)
Posts: 1000 or more
Send a message via Yahoo to wingman
has anyone done a "orbiter 2010 type" pic of the Titan V?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rooster Cogurn View Post
"Fill your hands, you son of a bitch!"
Reply With Quote
  #173  
Old April 26th, 2012, 09:00 PM
Michel Van Michel Van is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Liege Belgium Europe
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahamut-255 View Post
Thanks for the illustration Van! It really helps! If I have to nitpick though, it's three points:


1) The 5 segment SRBs use dummy segments in order to match the length of the 7 segment SRBs, as so to simplify the Core Stage somewhat.

2) I had expected the SRBs to be mounted a little lower, so the exhaust plumes wouldn't risk harming the SSME or the SSME support structure. Though I'll admit that being a regeneratively-cooled engine, it may not matter too much, while a protective cover for the SSME supports can resolve that department.

3) I hadn't actually factored in a no-Centaur Upper Stage, so it came as a small surprise to see it here.

But these really are niggling issues, and really don't detract from the work you've done. Which I thank you for again. Almost exactly what I had pictured in my head.
THX see it as early Titan V Prototype version
for the Grafic i look on traditional Titan IIIC/E/D/ payload and take no-third Upper Stage
also the original form of UA1205 and UA1207

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahamut-255 View Post
Actually E, I hadn't factored in a no-Centaur Upper Stage in my works. But a small Upper/Circularisation Stage can work only on the single SSME Core Stages. I base this on the projected burn times of the single and dual SSME Core Stages - 420 and 225-240 seconds respectively. I would expect it to meet the - rather large - interim payload gaps between the Titan V 22400 and Titan V 11020 - and be built accordingly.

I'll work on it just as soon as I have the time.
bear in mind, Bahamut
the SSME or RS-25 is capable of throttling between 67% and 111% of thrust.
there allot to gain on Titan V22000 payload with this
also 1-1/2 stage were one RS-25 is drop the other brings core-stage in orbit, also with throttling on engine.
Reply With Quote
  #174  
Old April 26th, 2012, 09:39 PM
Bahamut-255 Bahamut-255 is offline
Space Lover
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by e of pi View Post
I suspect this comes from setting the forward mounting point on the 7-seg at the interstage, then working backwards. The LH2 tank is longer than the booster at that diameter, so the SSME ends up stick backwards. I'm not sure there's any particular legacy for the 5.1 m, so an increase to about 5.7 or so might allow the booster and LH2 tank lengths to synergize better. It may mean a step-down interstage to the 5.1 m of the Centaur-G/T and fairing, but that's not a huge deal.
I picked 5.1 m so that the payload fairing would match that of OTL Titan IV and be synonymous with the Shuttle Payload bay. On the single SSME versions, the payload shroud can be jettisoned at the 3-4 minute mark without the risk of it hitting the Core Stage. More payload that way - if not a huge amount.


Quote:
Cool. I was a bit surprised to see it myself, I hadn't thought of operating it without the upper stage either,
Ah. Guess we both missed that one.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Michel Van View Post
THX see it as early Titan V Prototype version
for the Grafic i look on traditional Titan IIIC/E/D/ payload and take no-third Upper Stage
also the original form of UA1205 and UA1207
I think I will.


Quote:
bear in mind, Bahamut
the SSME or RS-25 is capable of throttling between 67% and 111% of thrust.
there allot to gain on Titan V22000 payload with this
also 1-1/2 stage were one RS-25 is drop the other brings core-stage in orbit, also with throttling on engine.
Van. Stage-and-a-half was not on my mind when I designed the Titan V. Rather use the boosters and throttling range of the SSME(s) to both get as much payload up as is practically possible with each variant as well as limiting the maximum acceleration forces on it. Since I know full well what happens if the LV structure is overstressed. Read: Ariane 501.

I get a peak of ~6.7G assuming 109% rated thrust on the Titan V 22000 which I can cut to ~4.2G with the SSMEs throttled to 67%.
__________________
Your help here would be much appreciated.
Reply With Quote
  #175  
Old April 26th, 2012, 09:54 PM
e of pi e of pi is offline
Turbine Printer
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Halfway to Anywhere
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahamut-255 View Post
I picked 5.1 m so that the payload fairing would match that of OTL Titan IV and be synonymous with the Shuttle Payload bay. On the single SSME versions, the payload shroud can be jettisoned at the 3-4 minute mark without the risk of it hitting the Core Stage. More payload that way - if not a huge amount.
It's not too hard to rig it so that the fairing will still fall clear of the booster--check out the hinging of the solids on Japan's HII. I mean, the question is which is going to drive the diameter of the core--a desire to keep a constant-diameter stack for payload fairing jettison (essentially letting a legacy fairing drive the entire stack's design) or a desire to directly integrate the SRB attach point at the interstage while also avoiding the core sticking out below the SRB exhausts (letting the booster and core simplicity drive the design). Personally, since doing the latter doesn't really inhibit using the 5.1 m fairing, except for a slight increase in complexity, while it'll result in significant savings in complexity on the core, I'd favor it. On the other hand, it's your TL.
__________________
Eyes Turned Skywards
An alternate post-Apollo space age
Atomic Rockets Seal of Approval, Turtledove Nominee 2011
Visit the wiki page for details
Reply With Quote
  #176  
Old April 26th, 2012, 10:23 PM
Bahamut-255 Bahamut-255 is offline
Space Lover
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by e of pi View Post
It's not too hard to rig it so that the fairing will still fall clear of the booster--check out the hinging of the solids on Japan's HII. I mean, the question is which is going to drive the diameter of the core--a desire to keep a constant-diameter stack for payload fairing jettison (essentially letting a legacy fairing drive the entire stack's design) or a desire to directly integrate the SRB attach point at the interstage while also avoiding the core sticking out below the SRB exhausts (letting the booster and core simplicity drive the design). Personally, since doing the latter doesn't really inhibit using the 5.1 m fairing, except for a slight increase in complexity, while it'll result in significant savings in complexity on the core, I'd favor it. On the other hand, it's your TL.
Perhaps, but I think I'll keep the 5.1 m core for now. I also have to remember the Hercules USRMs that OTL Titan IV switched to in the mid/late 1990s - and the ones proposed but rejected for STS. I can always use either of them to 'resolve' the issue.
__________________
Your help here would be much appreciated.
Reply With Quote
  #177  
Old April 26th, 2012, 11:43 PM
e of pi e of pi is offline
Turbine Printer
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Halfway to Anywhere
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahamut-255 View Post
Perhaps, but I think I'll keep the 5.1 m core for now. I also have to remember the Hercules USRMs that OTL Titan IV switched to in the mid/late 1990s - and the ones proposed but rejected for STS. I can always use either of them to 'resolve' the issue.
I think it's also worth noting that the fairing's going to need some redesign to properly clear the vehicle anyway--I think it can't just slide past the sides or it'll hit the solids. So it's gotta use some kind of mechanical or pyrotechnic (or mixed) system to get the fairing segments clear of the vehicle. So just beef that up a bit, and you can have your 5.1 m legacy fairing without having to extensively modify you legacy solids or complicate the design of the new core.
__________________
Eyes Turned Skywards
An alternate post-Apollo space age
Atomic Rockets Seal of Approval, Turtledove Nominee 2011
Visit the wiki page for details
Reply With Quote
  #178  
Old April 27th, 2012, 12:42 AM
Bahamut-255 Bahamut-255 is offline
Space Lover
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by e of pi View Post
I think it's also worth noting that the fairing's going to need some redesign to properly clear the vehicle anyway--I think it can't just slide past the sides or it'll hit the solids. So it's gotta use some kind of mechanical or pyrotechnic (or mixed) system to get the fairing segments clear of the vehicle. So just beef that up a bit, and you can have your 5.1 m legacy fairing without having to extensively modify you legacy solids or complicate the design of the new core.
It won't hit the solids at all! They'll be jettisoned before the fairing is!
__________________
Your help here would be much appreciated.
Reply With Quote
  #179  
Old April 27th, 2012, 01:37 AM
e of pi e of pi is offline
Turbine Printer
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Halfway to Anywhere
Posts: 1000 or more
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahamut-255 View Post
It won't hit the solids at all! They'll be jettisoned before the fairing is!
True, I suppose. Still, you'll want it well clear of the booster for good clearance, by at least several meters. If you're already designing it to do that, you can make it get around a 5.7 m core just fine. You're letting a trivial mechanical detail drive other, non-trivial engineering decisions.
__________________
Eyes Turned Skywards
An alternate post-Apollo space age
Atomic Rockets Seal of Approval, Turtledove Nominee 2011
Visit the wiki page for details
Reply With Quote
  #180  
Old April 27th, 2012, 11:15 AM
Michel Van Michel Van is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Liege Belgium Europe
Posts: 1000 or more
i look on Titan V22000 (core 2 SSME and 2 RL-10 Centaur) variation

i got total minimum dry mass of 17670 kg for Corestage
so original 20000 kg mass look good, it's leave a margin
payload of 17000 kg get in 255 orbit,

About liftoff Thurst on V22000
if this is 1.2 x total mass of rocket (224746 kg) that's 3336 kN or 2xSSME on 65% trust
after launch on 142 seconds, the mass of rocket drop that only one SSME is needed
drop one SSME sound good, it work well, but it gain only 500 kg more payload.
but there is interesting alternative
one SSME on 109% thrust or 2310 kN and two GEM-40 with each 485 kN = 3336 kN
after 63 seconds the Gems are jettisoned and the SSME thrust reduce

so is there need for 2 SSME on Corestage ?
only if there are used as alternative booster for the Corestage
3 corestage: 2xtwo SSME, 1xone SSME with Centaur upper stage
get around 45000 kg payload in 255 km orbit
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.