Optimizations based on Jotawi's Falcon 9 Crew Dragon 2 [RSS]. Some logo dimensions have been changed to make them more realistic, and some details have been added, such as the connection structure between the Dragon spacecraft and the secondary hull
GENERAL INFO
- Predecessor: Falcon 9 Crew Dragon 2 [RSS]
 - Created On: Android
 - Game Version: 1.3.204.1
 - Price: $48,599k
 - Number of Parts: 625
 - Dimensions: 66 m x 5 m x 5 m
 
PERFORMANCE
- Total Delta V: 12.1km/s
 - Total Thrust: 10.1MN
 - Engines: 15
 - Wet Mass: 6.26E+5kg
 - Dry Mass: 41,420kg
 
STAGES
| Stage | Engines | Delta V | Thrust | Burn | Mass | 
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 9 | 4.1km/s | 9.0MN | 2.6m | 6.26E+5kg | 
| 2 | 1 | 7.1km/s | 968kN | 7.1m | 1.37E+5kg | 
| 3 | 4 | 833m/s | 37kN | 3.6m | 10,884kg | 
| 4 | 1 | 95m/s | 118kN | 7s | 8,868kg | 
12 Comments
- Log in to leave a comment
 - 
        1,845 STC11 days ago
@JotaVe If the fuel is used rationally, even if it is manually controlled, it can land safely on the premise of using only the fuel that comes with the return capsule, and if it is really not enough, you can add a fuel tank to replenish the fuel
 - 
        1,845 STC11 days ago
@JotaVe I also have a solution to this problem, that is, use a new control module, connect it to a shaft that can rotate 180 degrees, and reverse the direction of the control module to achieve automatic ignition when using automatic combustion, but I am lazy and did not install this design, which I will implement in the next version
 - 
        1,872 JotaVe12 days ago
@STC Translation is good, because the overpowered gyro of the capsule makes it stable, but roll, yaw and pitch...
 - 
        1,872 JotaVe12 days ago
@STC Yes, I know the Dracos located in the nose cone have a better efficiency because they are aligned with the craft, but in game, when auto burn is used, the craft will face the burn node, so the engines will burn facing the opposite direction. That's the reason I had put those Dracos together with the RCS.
 - 
        1,872 JotaVe12 days ago
@STC Ah, I had thought about that, because of the landing legs in the second stage. But then there will be more fuel needed
 - 
        
 - 
        1,845 STC12 days ago
@JotaVe There is indeed a problem with the RCS engine control logic, but the spacecraft I use can still smoothly dock with the space station and return to the atmosphere, and there will be no rotation problems as you mentioned, but the control direction of the spacecraft's roll and up and down directions is the opposite of the normal control system. However, I will release a version that fixes these issues in the future
 - 
        1,845 STC12 days ago
@JotaVe The Dragon's orbital maneuvering engine is positioned around the docking port of the head of the return capsule, rather than on the side of the return capsule, which you did wrong in the original work
 - 
        1,845 STC12 days ago
@JotaVe The parachute was removed because I wanted the return capsule to land with a thrust reverser, as Space X had envisioned earlier
 - 
        
 - 
        1,872 JotaVe12 days ago
There are some wrong things in it: you took off the OM Dracos (pointing backwards); you took off the parachutes; misconfigured the AGs, like the capsule-trunk sep and Dracos activation in the same AG and the capsule is in a wrong rotation for some reason, so when only the RCS is on, it tends to faces the opposite direction and rolls uncontrollably.
 
                    
              
              
              
              
                  
                  
                  
@STC But if you need to abort the launch? There will be needed more fuel to land, and you will have to count with the fuel of the RCS Draco, so it will be heavier, needing even more fuel. You can change the fuel type though, to make all engines use only monoprop