Jupiter III and Jupiter V

Lemniscate Biscuit

ㅤㅤHelp DeskㅤㅤRL10 Expert
Modder
Team Judge
TEAM HAWK
Moon Maker
Atlas
Under Pressure
Registered
MOTY 2023
#1
I know this isn't [really] about SFS, and mods you can move this where you think it belongs.

Can we just talk about the Jupiter III and Jupiter V?
Screenshot 2023-11-22 185656.png

Screenshot 2023-11-22 185731.png

Screenshot 2023-11-22 185807.png

Screenshot 2023-11-22 185823.png

Screenshot 2023-11-22 185836.png

Jupiter III is wild.






Screenshot 2023-11-22 185415.png

Although the Jupiter V (The one on the far right) is even more Kerbal.

The Jupiter III can get 160 tons to LEO and the Jupiter V can get 1000 tons.
Screenshot 2023-11-22 190359.png


Jupiter V Flickr Gallery Here

Somebody make these rockets in SFS.
 

Orion

Nuclear bombs in space, die-hard WALL-E fan.
Modder
Team Judge
TEAM HAWK
Swingin' on a Star
Atlas
Fly me to the Moon
Under Pressure
Registered
#2
NASA should use these instead of the SLS. I might use them for my rp.
 
#4
If I were them, I would use something more reusable. The SLS and the Jupiter V may be powerful as hell, they are by no means practical with the SLS costing up to 2.5 billion per launch. If you take one good look at the Jupiter V, it looks several times more expensive.

The reason they’re so expensive is because they aren’t reusable. If you take a reusable rocket, like the Falcon Heavy, which is also pretty powerful, you get a cost of 97 million, mere pocket change compared to the insane amount required by the SLS.

The best solution would be to build a powerful AND reusable rocket. Something like the SLS, if reusable would be easily the most efficient rocket ever in terms of cost per amount of power.
 

Orion

Nuclear bombs in space, die-hard WALL-E fan.
Modder
Team Judge
TEAM HAWK
Swingin' on a Star
Atlas
Fly me to the Moon
Under Pressure
Registered
#5
If I were them, I would use something more reusable. The SLS and the Jupiter V may be powerful as hell, they are by no means practical with the SLS costing up to 2.5 billion per launch. If you take one good look at the Jupiter V, it looks several times more expensive.

The reason they’re so expensive is because they aren’t reusable. If you take a reusable rocket, like the Falcon Heavy, which is also pretty powerful, you get a cost of 97 million, mere pocket change compared to the insane amount required by the SLS.

The best solution would be to build a powerful AND reusable rocket. Something like the SLS, if reusable would be easily the most efficient rocket ever in terms of cost per amount of power.
Counterpoint: the Jupiter series looks awesome.
 

Lemniscate Biscuit

ㅤㅤHelp DeskㅤㅤRL10 Expert
Modder
Team Judge
TEAM HAWK
Moon Maker
Atlas
Under Pressure
Registered
MOTY 2023
#7
That's 4 external tanks, with 2 SRBs each. Meaning 8 Shuttle SRBs.
Screenshot 2023-11-22 210714.png
 

Orion

Nuclear bombs in space, die-hard WALL-E fan.
Modder
Team Judge
TEAM HAWK
Swingin' on a Star
Atlas
Fly me to the Moon
Under Pressure
Registered
#8
Imma build that for my rp. It will use mods for simplicity and functionality though.
 

Lemniscate Biscuit

ㅤㅤHelp DeskㅤㅤRL10 Expert
Modder
Team Judge
TEAM HAWK
Moon Maker
Atlas
Under Pressure
Registered
MOTY 2023
#12
It saves a bit of development cost too by being semi-modular, right? I want to believe that's how it works
I got this straight from the TeamVision paper:

Basically, shuttle-c (the cargo version of the space shuttle) had some problems, most notably the fact it was side mounted. TeamVision went "Hmm.... How 'bout we get two shuttle-c's and line them up such that the two orbiters are touching!". After some talking, the two orbiters became the core stage of the Jupiter III. Becuase the are lined up "back-to-back" the forces of the two shuttles cancel out, making such that it won't fall or tip over like the side-mounted space shuttle.
 

Prox_xima

TEAM HAWK
Atlas
Under Pressure
Registered
#13
I got this straight from the TeamVision paper:

Basically, shuttle-c (the cargo version of the space shuttle) had some problems, most notably the fact it was side mounted. TeamVision went "Hmm.... How 'bout we get two shuttle-c's and line them up such that the two orbiters are touching!". After some talking, the two orbiters became the core stage of the Jupiter III. Becuase the are lined up "back-to-back" the forces of the two shuttles cancel out, making such that it won't fall or tip over like the side-mounted space shuttle.
Exactly the type of forward thinking this company needs