Request Russian Lunar Lander

[Athena]

So, i just downloaded AMSO and it made me wonder if there's a soviet counterpart to the american Lunar Module, i found none...i was wondering if anyone would like to make one? (depends on them how detailed the addon would be)

Here's some info on the lander:

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/lk.html (most of the useful info is here)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LK_(spacecraft)
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/lk.htm (alot of info here too)
http://www.deepcold.com/deepcold/lk_main.html
Photo Gallery

 

[N_Molson]

I'm pretty sure there's a LK mesh around, and maybe even an addon ?

 

[Pipcard]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=55VeMPrzDRc

(I currently can't access YouTube right now because I'm at school, so I can't check the video description to see if the link to the add-on is there and working)

 

[Urwumpe]

I'm pretty sure there's a LK mesh around, and maybe even an addon ?

If I would have the time and a good mesher around, I would be motivated making a LK/LOK with realistic VC (OK, maybe with alternative English labels). There is a lot of documentation by the designer of the cockpits around for making a realistic version of it.

I know that it is a pretty cynical add-on then... it would show how really close the USSR had been really launching to the moon, if they would have taken the money into the hands for proper testing, even if late.

 

[N_Molson]

Yep, they tried a "lightweight" approach, which was interesting. The LK is a small thing compared to the US LEM.

 

[Urwumpe]

Yep, they tried a "lightweight" approach, which was interesting. The LK is a small thing compared to the US LEM.

It is also a completely different style of spacecraft. The computer was only slightly less capable than the Apollo AGC, but far less visible, because it was a really integral part of the cockpit, and not a separate instrument, as it appeared in Apollo (despite not being it)

 

[Cosmic Penguin]

Speaking of that.... I wonder what are the current status of these two add-on developments? :hmm:

 

[Athena]

I'm pretty sure there's a LK mesh around, and maybe even an addon ?

I don't think so...

I know that it is a pretty cynical add-on then... it would show how really close the USSR had been really launching to the moon, if they would have taken the money into the hands for proper testing, even if late.

Don't you think they should have redesigned the N1? And i think the LK was tested in earth orbit... :hmm:

 

[DaveS]

Try this add-on: [ame="http://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=5004"]Sovietic Lunar Program[/ame]

 

[BruceJohnJennerLawso]

Speaking of that.... I wonder what are the current status of these two add-on developments? :hmm:

N_Molson seems to be forever in development with that kind of stuff, but it does appear stalled unfortunately.

My lander project should appear soon as well

 

[Urwumpe]

Don't you think they should have redesigned the N1?

At least, they should have properly tested it. Many problems of the failed N-1 launches could have been found by proper testing programs, but there was no money available - it should launch, but rather untested, simply expecting it to fly after 3 launches.

The N-1F version was already pretty well designed, only some minor tweaks had been needed maybe.

 

[4throck]

Well, my panel meshes / textures are available if anyone needs them. I did them for both the LK and LOK if I remember correctly ;-)

 

[Urwumpe]

Well, my panel meshes / textures are available if anyone needs them. I did them for both the LK and LOK if I remember correctly ;-)

Didn't you do cube skyboxes for the panel photographs?

 

[N_Molson]

N_Molson seems to be forever in development with that kind of stuff, but it does appear stalled unfortunately.

Always keep hope

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Wlell, the engines for the N-1 were superb. It's the control system that had issues. If an engine went out, the opposite engine was supposed to shut down. One flight ended in disaster when the opposite happened: one engien failes, and the engine opposite it kept running, but every other engine shut down... :facepalm:

 

[Columbia42]

I started making an N1/L3 Soviet lunar mission addon a while ago and I have a pretty good Spacecraft3/Multistage2 implementation using some amazing meshes made for Celestia by Jean-Marie le Cosperec. The project was stalled due in part to my lack of coding skills but mostly because of my inability to import the meshes into a program and edit them (seperate the LOK into its component parts, for instance) and retain their complex texturing scheme.

 

[4throck]

Didn't you do cube skyboxes for the panel photographs?

That was for the Soyuz 7K. It made sense since that VC was non functional.
For the LK / LOK, I did the panels in 3D.


Here are the textures:http://www.orbiter-forum.com/showthread.php?p=283856&postcount=50

And here's a 3D view : http://www.orbiter-forum.com/showthread.php?p=284962&postcount=67

Columbia42 posted some images of those panels on a full 3D VC.

 

[statickid]

o.o

it's

so

COOL LOOKING!!!

looks submersible

 

[4throck]

The project was stalled due in part to my lack of coding skills but mostly because of my inability to import the meshes into a program and edit them ....

Yes, that is a common problem.
The best approach would be to split the meshes in their original format, and them convert them one by one into Orbiter...

As for implementation, I know from experience that having multiple spacecraft components in SC3 can be difficult. I did the Soyuz 7K with 3 docked vessels. It works but it is clumsy.

But in the end it's up to you to release a usable but less than perfect add-on, or not to release at all :thumbup:

 

[Urwumpe]

Ah, remember it, had pushed it far into the shelves of my memory because Columbia42 already doing it.

Well, the problem is, that it isn't a full mesh, but rather just a collection of panel objects. Also I would need the switches and buttons to be made animated... And some mechanisms for faster indicator light painting included... Well, I look at meshes from the coders point of view.