|
Oct 13 2017
Operations Summary – Week of 10/9/17
Oct 12 2017
September Deuce Crash Report & Future Plans
The investigation of the Deuce crashing into the Kerblantic during its last test flight has been concluded. Investigators were once again able to do a complete study on the entire aircraft, with the engines dredged up from the seafloor and both flight recorders intact. Mechanical inspection of the aircraft turned up no signs of flaw, with systems all operating normally and two good engines running without issue up to the moment of impact.
Review of the flight recorders shows that Captain Jeb was initially making a good approach, as he had on two previous flights to land the Deuce safely on the runway, but coming out of base leg onto his final approach when he went to roll the aircraft level he did not apply enough rudder to keep the nose pointing in the direction the plane was headed. This sideslip caused his airspeed to drop, but not dangerously so, he was still traveling above 60m/s approach speed. Jeb applied rudder late, but was able to counteract the sideslip and return the plane to an almost nominal flight path.
Unfortunately the aircraft was still slipping enough that when he then went to lower the landing gear immediately afterwards, the bay doors dropped at an angle into the airstream enough to create a significant increase in drag. This keeled the aircraft over and caused it to plunge almost straight down into the water from a height of 380m, hitting with a speed of 83m/s and a momentary force of 24Gs, which was largely absorbed by the nose cone’s crush core. Still, Jeb suffered a minor concussion as his chair was partially ripped from the floor and his head flung into the instrument panel, knocking him out for a short period.
As the concept of retractable landing gear is still new, it is understandable that Jeb would not have considered the implications of lowering his gear while the plane was in a sideslip, however minor. C7 engineers in the Genesis program have been spending more time experimenting with deploying the landing gear in various flight regimes in the wind tunnel to determine the full range of effects the bay doors and the gear themselves have on the aircraft. Training will be updated accordingly.
Oct 12 2017
Introducing the Progeny Mk5 Block II
The Mk5 Block II has been finalized! This bigger variant of the Mk5 adds power with 4 strap-on boosters and an extended liquid fuel tank. The strap-on boosters are an upgraded version of the Mk1-B booster, which can now output 21.795kN of thrust at sea level with greater efficiency as opposed to 18.75kn. Upon liftoff all 5 lower boosters will ignite for a total thrust-to-weight ratio of 5, which is 1G greater than the Mk5 Block I to help compensate for both the increased mass & length, which could cause the rocket to stand up a bit more as lift at the nose will have a greater torque effect with the nearly 1m extension. The strap-on boosters will burn for just over 6 seconds before being decoupled to leave the core booster firing with enough thrust to continue pushing at 3+Gs for another 15 seconds before it too is discarded. The third stage booster has been set to a TWR of 2 at 9km ASL and once ignited will burn for 15.5 seconds. The stage four liquid booster will be able to burn well over a minute or two depending on how its throttle is set during ascent.
The added power of the Block II should allow us to extend our reach into space beyond the boundaries of Low-Kerbin Orbit (LKO) which extends from 70km – 250km above Kerbin’s atmosphere. Although the rocket is almost 500kg heaver than the Block I it still manages to deliver almost 1km/s more deltaV, which when modeled with the highest Mk5 trajectory pushed our apokee out beyond 300km – and that was assuming a coast period up into the vacuum of space after the LF/O engine burnt out so with a continuous burn from the Block II’s double-capacity liquid fuel tanks we may even be able to get higher.
All this speculation will be put to the test when we launch our first Block II, which is currently scheduled to occur no earlier than November 15th. The launch date & time will be finalized later this month after we see how the Block I performs, as any defects found with it will also most likely affect the Block II. Despite the 4 added boosters Lead Engineer Simon reports that the VAB will only need two additional days to install them, giving us roughly a 2.5 week minimum turnaround between Block II launches as opposed to the 2 weeks needed for the Block I. Additional details can be viewed in the blueprint below.
Oct 10 2017
Civvie Science Flight 26
Commander Valentina gathers more air samples to help monitor pollen levels further west in the Grasslands over Zone 8KKZ then heads north to Sector IBL0TR over Mount Kermon for an aerial survey
![]() |
![]() |
Oct 05 2017
Low-Altitude Science Survey 25
Specialist Bob, still aboard MSV Tongjess, launches from Sector RP-010 to gather pressure data for Kerbolyov Design Bureau while Specialist Bill stands by in the event of a land recovery due to winds
Oct 05 2017
Progeny Mk5 Design Review & Block I
Progenitor teams have been spending the last few weeks pouring over data gathered from the flights of the Progeny Mk4 and Mk5 to see how they have compared in order to judge the overall performance of the new Mk5 after its initial series of 5 launches last month to develop & test our automated control software. The Mk5 sports the M-315 automated control unit and replaces the old control unit with an extra battery, which makes it only 36kg heavier than the Mk4 when both lack payload instruments. The inline control unit adds a bit of length to the third stage, with the Mk5 measuring in at 9.5m tall versus the Mk4’s 9.3m. The only other variation for the Mk5 was that we launched it at an initial pitch of 87° versus the Mk4 which was launched at 85°. While we expected most if not all of these launches to reach similar heights of the Mk4 or even exceed them, none actually did.
The two related reasons behind the inability of the Mk5 to surpass the Mk4 were initial pitch and coast duration between staging. Although the rocket launched at 87°, the initial drag at the nose pitched it up to as high as 89.4° within 1 second. Ascending so close to vertical gave the Mk5 a slower start due to having to fight gravity more, and it never caught up to the Mk4 in terms of ascent speed, even if we account for the Mk4’s slightly lesser mass. Since the rocket was standing up so straight, it also took a longer time to pitch over, which meant the coast periods were longer, during which the Mk5 lost more speed than it would gain back between the first and second stages compared to the Mk4. Let’s go to the graphs!
Oct 04 2017
Low-Altitude Science Survey 24
Specialist Bob heads to Sector RT-M0H aboard the Maritime Service Vessel Tongjess to launch & recover after gathering temperature data for Zaltonic Electronics
Oct 03 2017
Civvie Science Flight 25
Captain Jebediah follows up on Commander Valentina’s previous atmospheric observations with a more complete survey over Area KP-879 for the Field Research Team’s pollen level studies
![]() |
![]() |















