Speeding Mullet

Shuttle Challenge v4 - The 1.2.x STS thread [Stock and Mod Friendly] [NEW MISSION 10.02.17]

351 posts in this topic

How fast m/s were you going into the half loop?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey all.

 

I have completed STS-2a Commander.

Imgur http://imgur.com/a/qKrgX was appended

My mission report was also appended.

The gist:

A small tug was fitted in the cargo bay.

Orbiter climbed above 350km.

Released the tug and came back to the KSC.

The tug raised it's Ap to 2 863 334.06 m or thereabout.

Then raised is Pe to 1225km to get a difference of 2 hours between Ap and Pe.

Every orbit a satellite is released and circularize it's orbit.

Spoiler

rKsLv2L.pngJOfcrQL.png

iMdP2Vc.png

iuhB823.png

uyfjCdI.png

SBN5I5R.png

The new satellites are at 1, 5 and 9 o'clock.

I therefore claim the STS Commander Rank 2 Badge. WUvoQpP.jpg.

 

 

Thank you for the read.

 

Now STS-2b. Should be all right as I have practising with and without the tank when I redesigned my shuttle.....I don't think I tinkered with it since.....We'll see.

 

ME

 

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Nightmare said:

How fast m/s were you going into the half loop?

I think about 1300m/s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Nightmare said:

How fast m/s were you going into the half loop?

Ha, turns out I was going about the same in my desperation manuver, but I turned horizontal instead of vertical - and look at how much room and height the turn cost !

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to formally. claim the STS-3A commander badge.

A lot of unexpected events occured during this mission that could have spelled disaster. During SRB separation, one of the SRBs managed to clip the aft of the external tank luckily only causing some minor damage. During the reentry, the orbiter also overshot the runway, and a 180 degree turn was necessary. But alas, I present you the STS-3A mission report:

http://imgur.com/gallery/JpdhX

And mandatory teasers:

dx8Ldl9.png

xfWKMNI.png

3G2R1Sa.png

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@AeroGav I did a vertical turn instead of a horizontal one because I figured it would get me to the runway quicker, and judging by your video I was right. Your turn looked safer but left you quite far over the ocean away from the KSC as well as off course for the runway, whilst mine allowed me to stay on approximately a straight line, killing off all horizontal velocity and using gravity to regain some speed in the opposite direction (which was then the direction of the runway). I wish I could've taken a video of my first landing for this challenge, since that one had some quite sharp maneuvers that I'm somewhat surprised I actually managed to pull off.

Edited by eloquentJane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all, and @Speeding Mullet in particular.

I noticed that the HST refered to for the STS-3 mission has not been updated for 1.2.x, which made me try and see what I could make. I think I achieved a very nice result, owing in part to several things new to 1.2.x.

Can you please let me know if the below HST design fulfills the requirements for the STS-3 mission payload? If it is considered appropriate for the challenge, I don't mind it being used until the others are updated.

https://kerbalx.com/swjr-swis/HLST-1a

Two differences in particular: it weighs less than Alchemist's version; I hope that's not a disqualifier, but if it is, fuel can be added to the tanks to make up for the difference. Also more importantly, I integrated the MMUs in the solar panel assemblies - in other words, the Kerbals ride the panel assemblies themselves, and then EVA out of the seat back to the shuttle. It seemed like a good idea at the time... hopefully it does not violate the spirit of the requirements (2 panels, 2 MMUs).

I plan on doing some of the STS challenges; time is a bit limited at the moment though, so it may take a while.

Picture album is linked from the craft page, but a few teasers here:

Spoiler

sm9n2dd.png

XzWjcDJ.png

XZxp1no.png

 

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, eloquentJane said:

@AeroGav I did a vertical turn instead of a horizontal one because I figured it would get me to the runway quicker, and judging by your video I was right. Your turn looked safer but left you quite far over the ocean away from the KSC as well as off course for the runway, whilst mine allowed me to stay on approximately a straight line, killing off all horizontal velocity and using gravity to regain some speed in the opposite direction (which was then the direction of the runway). I wish I could've taken a video of my first landing for this challenge, since that one had some quite sharp maneuvers that I'm somewhat surprised I actually managed to pull off.

I was too chicken !

Half looping straight down gets you into the thicker atmosphere, so your wings can create more g force, so you can get the turn done sharper.  Of course, it's best to not overshoot and need to do this in the first place.  I reckon I could have aimed a long way short of the KSC and glide a long way from 30km 1300m/s, if I was just going in  a straight line.   I think you need to do a test flight on your shuttle to see how far it glides from such conditions, to know approximately how far ahead to aim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, swjr-swis said:

XzWjcDJ.png

 

I like it.

I think the consensus is that you make your own. Weight doesn't seem to be an issue either.

I really dig the reflectors. Using the nodes of the fairing is pure genius.

I might have to dump the telescope I built and replace it with something inspired by yours.

 

ME

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Martian Emigrant said:

Hey all.

 

I have completed STS-2a Commander.

Imgur http://imgur.com/a/qKrgX was appended

My mission report was also appended.

The gist:

A small tug was fitted in the cargo bay.

Orbiter climbed above 350km.

Released the tug and came back to the KSC.

The tug raised it's Ap to 2 863 334.06 m or thereabout.

Then raised is Pe to 1225km to get a difference of 2 hours between Ap and Pe.

Every orbit a satellite is released and circularize it's orbit.

  Hide contents

rKsLv2L.pngJOfcrQL.png

iMdP2Vc.png

iuhB823.png

uyfjCdI.png

SBN5I5R.png

The new satellites are at 1, 5 and 9 o'clock.

I therefore claim the STS Commander Rank 2 Badge. WUvoQpP.jpg.

 

 

Thank you for the read.

 

Now STS-2b. Should be all right as I have practising with and without the tank when I redesigned my shuttle.....I don't think I tinkered with it since.....We'll see.

 

ME

 

 

Very original shuttle design! How much fuel do you typically have left after your reentry maneuvers? Do you need to dump any?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, AeroGav said:

I think you need to do a test flight on your shuttle to see how far it glides from such conditions, to know approximately how far ahead to aim

See this is what's kind of strange. On both launches of my shuttle (two different variants but with near-identical aerodynamic properties) I ended up having to do the same maneuver to reach the KSC after overshooting. However, the second launch used a sub-surface periapsis as opposed to the positive periapsis used in the first flight (I think that was a 20km periapsis but I can't remember). The second shuttle shouldn't have overshot the KSC, but somehow it did anyway. Or perhaps the first shuttle just burned off more velocity on the turn before landing. I can't really remember, but the two re-entry trajectories were very different and yet led to the same maneuver being needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, vladd148 said:

Very original shuttle design! How much fuel do you typically have left after your reentry maneuvers? Do you need to dump any?

I don't know.

Originally I wanted to burn it all as I had COG issues but the current design seem quite tolerant. I just burn what is needed (For all I know if I burn it all I will stall).

I went looking for a landing picture with fuel displayed and found this one (I never use the engine in atmosphere, so call it 700 Unit:

r3pFLhS.png
 
ME
Edited by Martian Emigrant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, eloquentJane said:

See this is what's kind of strange. On both launches of my shuttle (two different variants but with near-identical aerodynamic properties) I ended up having to do the same maneuver to reach the KSC after overshooting. However, the second launch used a sub-surface periapsis as opposed to the positive periapsis used in the first flight (I think that was a 20km periapsis but I can't remember). The second shuttle shouldn't have overshot the KSC, but somehow it did anyway. Or perhaps the first shuttle just burned off more velocity on the turn before landing. I can't really remember, but the two re-entry trajectories were very different and yet led to the same maneuver being needed.

If you watch my "Baby Shuttle Landing"  video from the beginning you will see that I fly from 70km down to 30km in the map screen, with the Nav ball visible so i can see my angle of attack, but also know what effect this is having on my trajectory.   I use the mechjeb HUD to keep track of the critical thermal %.

The thing is, your lift:drag ratio during re-entry can have an enormous impact on how far downrange you end up, far more than whether you retro burn to 20km PE or 0km  or shift the aim point east or west a few hundred km.

This mk2 spaceplane of mine has wings angled at 5 degree incidence, so it makes best lift:drag when SAS is set to prograde hold.  I burned to a 30km PE and left it on Prograde.    We entered the atmosphere on the night side, and passed through 48km at dawn.

20161216190152_1_zpsv3wlonbn.jpg

Not this dawn however.    It actually kept skimming off the upper atmosphere and circumnavigated Kerbin , finally dropping below 25km / mach 4.5 when the sun came up a second time.   So you can see that if you hold a good gliding attitude in something fairly slick (your mini shuttle falls into this category !) you can literally end up on the other side of the planet from where you where aiming, or go all the way around completely and end up back at your original aim point.

That is why, much as i enjoy the views, i no longer sit and watch the flames lick around the wings as the landscape scrolls beneath , i stay in map view until we're down to a speed / altitude where we can actually see the runway and actually make meaningful turns.

edit - ps - that ssto of mine accidenctally ended up looking a bird of some sort - Auk? If i could work out what it reminds me of, i might think of a better name for the thing

steinar-lund-rainbird-logo.jpg

edit 2 -  found it! that's what it reminds me of. Serious retro gaming there....

Edited by AeroGav
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy Crap that second mission is not easy at all. "How hard can it be?" I said. " 's just a bunch of sats and return something I threw into orbit with one hand tied on my back!" I said. Boy was I wrong!

Current Status: 3 Sats are well in geostationary orbit, all at 2863.3 Mm. Also I did rendezvous with the payload and already ran into a severe problem: Those Solar Panels are not retractable! It is not possible to get them inside the bay again - OP please share a payload that fixes this issue. Use the Solar Panels that are sealed in that white box. (I had the same issue when I built my shuttle)

Spoiler

 dfnApR0.png

So, what I did was to try to dock it "sideways", say the small 1.25m port on the back of my craft. Didn't work, the payload is just a little too long. OK then, let's use the OTHER 1.25m port on the front! Yeah, that's better:

Spoiler

4WZBU4I.png

Came down, just to KSC after several F9s, headed for landing but due to instabilieties I was forced to run the main engine. She was fine and just perfect on landing - until the fuel ran out and she nosedived into the ground :-( ... F9 ...

Spoiler

HYspEGr.png

MJbCUFg.png

 

Next try I removed the solar panels with Whack-a-Kerbal (the mass is negligable) and docked the payload internally. As you can see I had to try to get closer to the runway in order to save fuel. It worked out somehow, also the craft was much more stable but the cargo wasn't too happy when I have arrived. I guess this doesn't count as accomplished :-p

Spoiler

0dJhiem.png

oog8jMe.jpg

j3lIjEi.png

Q8qucRl.png

 

No worries, I have a quicksafe in orbit, just at decent. I'll try to get that baby down sound and safe - and earn that god damn badge!

Here is the so far successful part of the mission: https://imgur.com/a/IlVFE I'll update it once I'm done.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shadow dream said:

 Those Solar Panels are not retractable! It is not possible to get them inside the bay again - OP please share a payload that fixes this issue. Use the Solar Panels that are sealed in that white box. (I had the same issue when I built my shuttle)

I did mention it some post earlier. This is a busy thread. It went unnoticed.

I built my own for 1.2.0 as the tank is built in 1.2.2 and is not compatible with my game.

My own:

haAf7ty.png
 
 
ME
Edited by Martian Emigrant
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to claim the STS-4 Commander badge after a daring rescue of what was initially supposed to be a standard crew rotation mission.

It is therefore my pleasure to present you all with the mission and the commentary.

http://imgur.com/gallery/DZfAD

And a few shameless teasers:

KM4YXMg.png

QnYj4Zr.png

o2K5Yif.png

 

Cheers!

7 hours ago, AeroGav said:

Ha, turns out I was going about the same in my desperation manuver, but I turned horizontal instead of vertical - and look at how much room and height the turn cost !

 

I wish my shuttle could glide like that... I'm typically 20-25 degrees nose down on my approach! It falls like a freaking brick, identical to the real shuttle!

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I HATE THE GLITCH WHERE MY AUTOSTRUTTED AND RIGID ATTACHMENT WINGS WILL TEAR THE SHUTTLE APART WHEN THEY ARE SUBMERGED IN WATER!!!!!!!! IT RUINED MY MISSION!!

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0eMT8zRijNmYU54ckZ4eEtjcXM

Everything was going well until the I lost control and couldn't regain it during reentry until after I had commited myself to a water landing on the emergency parachutes, forgetting that this glitch would tear apart my craft and would have killed my Kerbals had I not moved them back to the Mk3 passenger module for fear of the cockpit overheating. Then my mission that was finally going well after several failed attempts ended in disaster, and I had forgot to quicksave as well. I had been lucky earlier on that a different glitch hadn't destroyed my relays and that the relays had their own engines, but GRRRRRRRR!

At least the extended fuel tank is working well.

sorry about the rant, just had to try to calm myself down a little.

Edited by 53miner53
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't seem to resist doing these STS challenges =p

For STS-1b full stock, via my Shuttle Resolution https://kerbalx.com/Naito/Space-Shuttle-Resolution---NASA-Replica

(KOS plugin is installed, but was not used for this challenge)

AP: 802,442m

PP: 802,428m

Full album: https://imgur.com/a/ziUS3

 

Haha well there's plenty here for you to do!  Great mission, pity you came so close to KSC but fell short by the looks of it.  Still here's your badge :)   et2p8E4.jpg  I will update the OP Soontm.

 

12 hours ago, Martian Emigrant said:

Hey all.

 

I have completed STS-2a Commander.

Imgur http://imgur.com/a/qKrgX was appended

My mission report was also appended.

For some reason the pictures are all out of order, and mixed in with another mission, but I got the gist of it and can see that you have indeed claimed your badge correctly!  WUvoQpP.jpg

 

12 hours ago, vladd148 said:

I would like to formally. claim the STS-3A commander badge.

A lot of unexpected events occured during this mission that could have spelled disaster. During SRB separation, one of the SRBs managed to clip the aft of the external tank luckily only causing some minor damage. During the reentry, the orbiter also overshot the runway, and a 180 degree turn was necessary. But alas, I present you the STS-3A mission report:

http://imgur.com/gallery/JpdhX

And mandatory teasers:

Another really high quality gallery and image report so well done!  I'm liking the ability for everyone to come up with their own scopes and MMU's.  It really forces you to make some design decisions on top of designing a good shuttle.  Here's your badge!   neSFTQk.jpg

 

12 hours ago, swjr-swis said:

Hi all, and @Speeding Mullet in particular.

I noticed that the HST refered to for the STS-3 mission has not been updated for 1.2.x, which made me try and see what I could make. I think I achieved a very nice result, owing in part to several things new to 1.2.x.

Can you please let me know if the below HST design fulfills the requirements for the STS-3 mission payload? If it is considered appropriate for the challenge, I don't mind it being used until the others are updated.

https://kerbalx.com/swjr-swis/HLST-1a

Two differences in particular: it weighs less than Alchemist's version; I hope that's not a disqualifier, but if it is, fuel can be added to the tanks to make up for the difference. Also more importantly, I integrated the MMUs in the solar panel assemblies - in other words, the Kerbals ride the panel assemblies themselves, and then EVA out of the seat back to the shuttle. It seemed like a good idea at the time... hopefully it does not violate the spirit of the requirements (2 panels, 2 MMUs).

That is really a very novel design, and amazing use of fairings and nodes!  I actually really love this.  I think the MMU's are supposed to be separate in the spirit of the challenge as it makes for more complexity, and also creates a challenge around properly packing everything into the cargo bay.  In terms of nominating it as the designated payload I won't do that I'm afraid.  Not that its not exceptional (I think it is and better than the original) but I really want people to create their own - Precisely for seeing things like what you have produced.  Rep +!  Weight is fine by the way I'm not fussed about that :).  I'm also going to take the liberty of awarding you the Skunkworks badge for outstanding and original design!   km1jmmp.jpg

 

7 hours ago, Shadow dream said:

Here is the so far successful part of the mission: https://imgur.com/a/IlVFE I'll update it once I'm done.

Oops sorry about the payload.  More on that in a second!  Here's your badge for the Can you Hear me portion of the challenge.  Nice work!   WUvoQpP.jpg

 

6 hours ago, Martian Emigrant said:

I did mention it some post earlier. This is a busy thread. It went unnoticed.

It's amazing how much it's increased over the last 24 hours!  More on the payload in just a second, and sorry I missed your earlier comment about it :)

 

5 hours ago, vladd148 said:

 

I would like to claim the STS-4 Commander badge after a daring rescue of what was initially supposed to be a standard crew rotation mission.

It is therefore my pleasure to present you all with the mission and the commentary.

http://imgur.com/gallery/DZfAD

And a few shameless teasers:

 

Don't you just hate it when 90% of your mission occurs in the dark!  Still nice images, the story on the wings was a nice addition, as was the internal details on the cockpit in flight.  Here's your well claimed badge.  You are rocketing through these!  Bit like @michal.don!   neSFTQk.jpg
 

5 hours ago, luizopiloto said:

I did this mission just for the fun... :P
The shuttle itself is full stock. https://kerbalx.com/luizopiloto/STS---Bravura

I'll admit I didn't watch the full hour, but I did watch the salient points of the video.  First up incredible shuttle and great to see it flying again.  The accuracy and level of detail you put into things is astonishing, which brings me on to your station.  I absolutely love it!  The little MMU's are super functional, it really is a working station.  All finished off with a beautiful re-entry profile and landing smooth as you like!  I'm not sure what I can do for you really.  A badge?   sE1QW9Q.jpg .  I could even give you this one again  km1jmmp.jpg.  Basically thanks for showing up and kicking it with us in the Shuttle thread :) 

 

In other news - The 40t payload specifically, it was a real derp not to spot the fail on the solar panels.  I've just created one with closing panels that weighs exactly the same and will upload it very shortly and change the original link.  For those of you who have the payload up there already feel free to F12 the new one into existence so you can do the retrieval mission!

Also sorry for not taking part in some of the conversation too much - it was just a lot to review in one sitting and I have to pick my battles :)

SM

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Speeding Mullet said:

For some reason the pictures are all out of order, and mixed in with another mission, but I got the gist of it and can see that you have indeed claimed your badge correctly!  WUvoQpP.jpg

 

Hi.

That's because I claimed for STS-2a:

But while you were awol I loaded pictures for STS-2b. Imgur http://imgur.com/a/qKrgX

The pics are at the top, last one first.

I have complete STS-2b.

The mission report is appended:

Run-o-the-mill takeoff. Good rendez-vous.....In the bloody dark but that's OK it means loading in daylight.

7CoDWNJ.png

 

Spoiler
vgZsftd.png
 
LQJcj8X.png
 
tLDeVNC.png
 
MKLrju9.png
 
The Orbiter didn't like the COG that came with the load. I had to keep the speed up to keep control.
 
EADiitm.png
 
But did make the runway.
 
LNmn9Wz.png

 

 

Terribly sorry for the work load. One more badge please: YbUvgWK.jpg

 

My telescope and MMUs are ready. Don't go to far.

 

ME

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a minimum mass for the space telescope? I said before that I wouldn't go below the mass of the existing subassembly, but since the requirements have changed to allow people to use their own designs I'm wondering if there's still a mass limitation (partly because I'm working on a rather...unconventional shuttle design and if I can design a space telescope which fits in its cargo bay I'll probably use that as the basis for the payload limit for the shuttle).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, eloquentJane said:

Is there a minimum mass for the space telescope? I said before that I wouldn't go below the mass of the existing subassembly, but since the requirements have changed to allow people to use their own designs I'm wondering if there's still a mass limitation (partly because I'm working on a rather...unconventional shuttle design and if I can design a space telescope which fits in its cargo bay I'll probably use that as the basis for the payload limit for the shuttle).

Hello EJ.

I thought that one was answered as "Do what you want".

On a different note I designed one that was going to be light ....

Spoiler

But when I got to orbit and wanted to move fuel around I see this. WTH?

ODr9XKF.png
 
I am going to help you. There are2 tanks that should have exactly no-fuel. The Oscar and the Rockomax.
 
I took a telescope of 12.01t to 550km with an inclination of 28°:0.0::blush::cool:
 
a3FCBCa.png
 
Xd3K0nB.png
 

Live and learn.

 

ME

Edited by Martian Emigrant
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So now here is the final take on Mission 2b:

First of, I loaded my savegame in space with the broken tank. Kicked it out, F12ed a fixed version into the 130km orbit (where the original was deployed in Mission 1b) and loaded that one in. Since I still used the same craft I actualy lost dV for that maneuver - but doesn't matter, I had plenty left after landing =)

So here is the album: https://imgur.com/a/IlVFE - it's the complete one, so scroll to the last few images if you missed my first post

Blooper: Decent was easy, but I came in a little too high. So slam the rudder, bleed of speed, turn to the island runway and burn the engine to not nosedive the lady! Come in for a perfect landing once again aaaannnnndddd.... Fuel failed me again! :sticktongue:

Spoiler

wGoyPtD.png

wQb64nB.png

Qm30KT3.png

k2EfWcR.png

0v47GAt.png

I'll help myself to the next badge, thx!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, eloquentJane said:

Is there a minimum mass for the space telescope? I said before that I wouldn't go below the mass of the existing subassembly, but since the requirements have changed to allow people to use their own designs I'm wondering if there's still a mass limitation (partly because I'm working on a rather...unconventional shuttle design and if I can design a space telescope which fits in its cargo bay I'll probably use that as the basis for the payload limit for the shuttle).

The real Hubble weighs 11tons, according to Google.  The space shuttle orbiter was 70 tons, empty.  A Kerbal shuttle built out of CRG100 bay, mk3 cockpit, etc. (closest to real shuttle in appearance) comes to about half that mass, so i'd say 5.5 tons is a reasonable weight, on the assumption that most things in KSP are half the mass of the real thing.  With the exception of the Vector engine of course, which is even heavier than the RS-25.

That's the weight i'm targetting.  Trouble is i'm not at all artistic...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now