Jump to content

Luuko

Members
  • Posts

    39
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

26 Excellent

Profile Information

  • About me
    Rocketeer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hrm. Well that gives me a few points to consider at least. To clarify, work has me doing some geopositioning big data stuff and I saw a possibility to try to understand how one might handle such in KSP. Thank you for your time and consideration.
  2. Out of morbid curiosity, we know the altimeter provided in stock KSP is Mean Sea Level MSL, not above terrain. To get Above Ground Level (AGL), how would we go about doing this? Do we calculate AGL akin to how we convert between earth's MSL and AGL via comparing them against the WGS84 model (A rough geoid measurement of earth's surface) or are should we measure from the center of mass of the vehicle and straight to the center of the sphereoid and note just where it stops and how far/long the distance is? Thoughts?
  3. Found this earlier and figured I'd post it for others to enjoy. Helped me get a better handle of the environment they're in. Funnily enough, it kind of reminded me of being back on an LA-class submarine when I was Active Duty. Anywho, maybe someone can draw inspiration from such or something.
  4. @Bob (Calisker) - Take a gander at http://lacy.timduru.org/ for costuming and such. They're well reputed within some of the circles I sometimes circulate in.
  5. An amusing side-note that might make for a fun quote somewhere... We burned O2 candles on a couple subs for extended durations while I was in the Navy. They stink. Very memorable smell.
  6. It's been awhile since my last doing so, but yes. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/22230-Rite-of-Passage-Functional-Shuttle-ExcaliburShuttle-1-%28Stock-17%29
  7. Not really no. Once you get them up there, the small probe fuel tank and tiny engine or the 1m rcs tank and thrusters are generally more than sufficient to get into proper orbit.
  8. I tend to favor getting all my sats up at once with a single launch vehicle. Usually an RCS tank, 4x RCS thrusters, 2x solar panels, 1x 1m battery, a probe core, a sat dish and 2-4x omni antennas. Usually 4-6 sats in a single launch. I'll launch, get my parent taxi craft into orbit, detach all the sats and send the taxi craft back for recovery. Then it's childs play to use the RCS to get the sats into differing orbits to adjust their orbital period before bringing them back down into a single orbit, spaced out. I'll do the same when I send craft to other planetary bodies - each ship is multi-purpose and usually carries a sat network with it. Examples: Early Multi-Mission Craft Recent Duna Mission
  9. Havn't posted in awhile, so I thought I'd share a project I've been working on. (Update-1: Replaced the drive-unit assembly and added in a series of drop-tanks along the spine. Also added 4x Comms Sattelites, 2x probe landers, and 2x probe tugs. In addition, added in a lander unit for the CommandModule/Heavy Tug.) This is the core craft and posted specs. At 90+ tonnes in the displayed configuration it's on the heavy side, but is liftable as a single unit using stock parts. There are some non-stock parts displayed, but they can be swapped for comparable stock parts fairly easily. The core, stock config has 4200+ Delta V available on the drive-units, enough to bet most places one-way in the Kerbal System. It is designed to utilize a drop-tank(s) docked behind the drive-unit between the nacelles to extend this range. This 4200 m/s deltav is not taking into account the additional delta-v gained by utilizing dropp-tanks or modules that are jettisoned. Mission modules, landers, sattelites and rovers are to be attached in orbit to the available docking nodes. Once in orbit and mission modules are detached, the craft becomes a space-station for the associated planetoid. If refueled, the drive section can serve as either a fuel depot or the craft can be reuitlized for other missions. Intended for an 11 man crew. (3 in the detachable tug/cockpit, 8 in the escape pods docked alongside) but again mission modules can adjust this accordingly. I'm most proud of the comms and the power modules. Comms because I like the design (even if it is mostly wasted mass) and the power module because it allows retracting the main solar panels to within the diameter of the craft itself while having plenty of storage. All modules are reconfigurable and detachable. Modules (Fore to aft): * Command Module/Orbital Tug - Large and standard sized docking ports and a ton of RCS fuel. If a lander mission module is provided, can also serve as a reusable lander. * CrewTank - Crew storage and work facilities. If a lander mission module is provided this can be utilized as a ground unit. * Hull - Main point of docking mission modules. * Escape Pods - These are currently a mod-item, but a stock 1-man command pod + parachute + a couple sepratrons attached to a docking port would suffice for the same. * Main Power. 10x 1M batteries, 2x large folding solar arrays, and ancillary stationary arrays. Allows solar arrays to be retracted and protected by the bulk of the craft. * Comms Array - 2x dishes on dorsal and ventral of the craft plus 2x ancillary docking nodes and ancillary comms antennas. * Main Drive Module - Fuel tank + 4x Nuclear Nacelles attached radially. Capability for adding additional modules aft - intended for drop-tanks, though others could be utilized. * Lander Module for Command Module/Tug - Added in lander capabilities for the command-module. Also serves as small drop-tank for the main-drive if needed to extend range. Current issues: * Design for the Core lifter likes to have the last booster stage collide and explode against the drive unit. This destroyed the drive section and the comms module immediately before it, necessitating achieving an stable, but ecliptic orbit with just RCS which had to be later circularized. Suspect I need to reinforce the last booster stage with struts to maintain structural integrity post achieving Apoapsis, and pre-Periapsis. * Mechjeb was tested for this craft, and was found wanting in fuel-efficiency using RCS for maneuvering and docking. Burning through 3x large RCS tanks is not acceptable just to attach a new drive and comms section. Will be performing future maneuvers manually and regulating mechjeb to only an informational display as clearly the system is not ready for main-stream general usage. * Docking the drop-tanks aft will prove to be... interesting. The nacelles in their current iteration extend beyond the main fuel tank. Future revisions of the craft will need to consider shortening the nacelles and perhaps reducing them to less than 4 engines for a variety of reasons. * May look into adding quantum fuel transfer nodes - still debating if that addon helps with the main-craft or would be best utilized on ground vehicles and craft where docking is difficult for refueling and fuel-xfer. Will look to reduce mass while retaining multi-mission capabilities and increasing fuel efficiency for future revisions. (Update 1 Notes: Craft is at minimum mission status. Debating launching now as adding additional modules at this stage is questionable due to system performance. Already down to a few frames per second to the point where I don't dare leave too much else orbiting nearby or unnecessary modules attached. Next edition of this class of craft will likely combine the power module with the comms section, reduce the number of engines, change the drop-tank module to a single large tank, remove the escape pods, and in general reduce parts across the board. Also will be needing to rethink my staging for parts - lander section for the command-pod may be stuck up towards the bow rather than attached at the stern. Determining destination now - will launch this evening as-is depending on what the next launch window is... probably Moho, though Duna is also a possibility.) Thoughts are always welcome. R/ Luuko
  10. Ah - thank you daj148! I'm afraid my PC took a bit of a nose-dive and I just got it back up and running so was unable to respond to this.
  11. Hrm... Depends on how much Drag really affects things. As-is, it's a capable glider, if a bit nose-heavy if one jettisons the main engine on final approach. I was mostly playing with thrust-to-centre of mass with it, hense the odd fueling arrangement, while trying to keep the mass down. I'll look into it - thanks for the thought!
  12. Next stop - Duna. Should be a bit harder with it's thin atmosphere, which means parachute landings are certainly out for the moment.
  13. Update on ExcaliburShuttle-1. It's Interplanetary capable, as proven by a Eve Splashdown. Getting back is another matter, but it can get there! Thread: ExcaliburShuttle-1
  14. Oh! Right-click and 'save-as'. Otherwise your browser may try to open it as a text file.
  15. Interesting - in the standard configuration or the shuttle's main engine changed to a nuclear or torid spike?
×
×
  • Create New...