Kerbin Mini Shuttle

[Kerbal01]

Could you make the launcher energia type?

[CaptRobau]

I'm amazed that I haven't seen this thread before. Your work is absolutely superb. Can't wait for a release.

I do have a suggestion though. Perhaps it's more fitting of the stock KSP style, if the shuttle didn't have a name on it aka Dauntless. Everyone names there ship differently, so it'd might be weird too see Dauntless on the side even tough you named it Clipper or something. Don't know how the rest feels about this though.

[Devo]

I'm amazed that I haven't seen this thread before. Your work is absolutely superb. Can't wait for a release.

I do have a suggestion though. Perhaps it's more fitting of the stock KSP style, if the shuttle didn't have a name on it aka Dauntless. Everyone names there ship differently, so it'd might be weird too see Dauntless on the side even tough you named it Clipper or something. Don't know how the rest feels about this though.

Yeah have to agree on that one, I love the ship, not fond of the name on the side, Dauntless sounds a bit meager for me, I'd call it the Intrepid or something like that, I can see that little puppy being taken across the galaxy and back several times.

Eagerly awaiting the release of this one!

[OopsThatNotWork]

Not a huge shuttle fan, but im not gonna be able to pass up on this one haha. Well done.

[runmug]

i suggest that you make different cockpits with different names a simple re-texturing and one with no name at all.

[sirkut]

i suggest that you make different cockpits with different names a simple re-texturing and one with no name at all.

No reason to make multiple cockpits if he uses snjo's firespitter plugin and use the noseart feature.

[Hocki]

This looks really cool!There is a lot of talented modders in this community. Can't wait to see this released. Are you planning on making the shuttle one part or many? Many as in one for the nosecone, cockpit, cargo bay, cargo bay doors, one for each wing and so on. If not, why? And is it possible to make it one part?

Edited August 2, 2013 by Hocki

[Guest]

I'm amazed that I haven't seen this thread before. Your work is absolutely superb. Can't wait for a release.

I do have a suggestion though. Perhaps it's more fitting of the stock KSP style, if the shuttle didn't have a name on it aka Dauntless. Everyone names there ship differently, so it'd might be weird too see Dauntless on the side even tough you named it Clipper or something. Don't know how the rest feels about this though.

Yeah have to agree on that one, I love the ship, not fond of the name on the side, Dauntless sounds a bit meager for me, I'd call it the Intrepid or something like that, I can see that little puppy being taken across the galaxy and back several times.

Eagerly awaiting the release of this one!

I'll probably end up naming my first one Flattery, because I'm sure that until I get the hang of it, it won't be getting me anywhere.

[helldiver]

Not sure quite what you mean - I have not seen in the images examples of the engine nozzles rotated to different vectors, or have I overlooked them?

Do you mean the nozzle pivots around this point, that is embedded back in the engine itself? Would this not make the nozzle visibly detach from the rest of the engine while rotating? Or is it just the thrust vectoring that rotates around this point?

What I am saying is that the nozzle should be attached to the thrustTransform, which should be placed at the origin of the nozzle, so that it rotates correctly. Stock engines do this so that thrust vectoring is visible in the nozzle. If you find that you need the thrustTransform to be translated away from the nozzle origin for particle effect reasons you can have a separate gimbal rotation transform which thrustTransform is then a child of. You would then need to set the gimbal transform name explicitly in the part config file, as the default is to use "thrustTransform".

Yes.

Also, just to clarify, this should be done for all of the engines, especially the main engines.

Here's a video to answer your questions:

Note that you manually pivot the engine to set it at the correct angle. You should be able to set this up using action hotkeys. It will rotate in 10 degree increments. This will allow you to set the engine at the proper angle for the orbiter or for other uses.

The second pivot point is the gimbal effect of the nozzle. This is done automatically by RCS, your mod, etc. Players don't have control of this movement.

The firewall, note the third spot is covered. You can attach a third engine there. I also made the Orbitz Omnimax (the OMS engine) 10% larger or so to better fit the area, and make up for the loss of the third.

Your RCS portholes; took five hours to get that set up. Basically they pop out Batmobile style and the two doors then open.

Sorry for the bad lighting

Edited August 2, 2013 by helldiver

[Itsdavyjones]

I just saw this and this has some real great potential. Will be keeping an eye on it.

[helldiver]

Yeah have to agree on that one, I love the ship, not fond of the name on the side, Dauntless sounds a bit meager for me, I'd call it the Intrepid or something like that, I can see that little puppy being taken across the galaxy and back several times.

and

I do have a suggestion though. Perhaps it's more fitting of the stock KSP style, if the shuttle didn't have a name on it aka Dauntless. Everyone names there ship differently, so it'd might be weird too see Dauntless on the side even tough you named it Clipper or something.

and

I'll probably end up naming my first one Flattery, because I'm sure that until I get the hang of it, it won't be getting me anywhere.

The first orbiter you see above, the Dauntless, is for testing purposes and getting it in game. Once that is all done, as well as the IVA cockpit and such, I'll then get to work on those "extra" features.

The Firespitter mod you guys suggested seems excellent for this. We can then hold a vote or thread on a series of names the community wants. I'll then stamp out a bunch of diffuses with those names so you can use the Firespitter mod to switch between different names of orbiters; Dauntless, Intrepid, Flattery, Adjective, HMS Beagle, what ever

Could you make the launcher energia type?

I am not making a launch vehicle. See earlier in the thread. You can make your own launch vehicle with the parts available on the spaceport.

Are you planning on making the shuttle one part or many? Many as in one for the nosecone, cockpit, cargo bay, cargo bay doors, one for each wing and so on. If not, why? And is it possible to make it one part?

Earlier in the thread you see completed images of all the parts. The shuttle is not one piece, however, the pieces are designed to fit like a jigsaw puzzle, which means they will be difficult to be used with other mods. The only parts that are general and don't have orbiter-shape specific geometry is the avionics, the engines, and the docking module.

[Tiberion]

By the way, the Tiberdyne Shuttles are named Odyssey and Intrepid. I don't care if you re-use them, just thought you ought to know beforehand. There's an Explorer on the drawing board, but I dunno when it'll get past that stage.

And I like Dauntless. Its a fine naval name.

[aquilux]

Oops, did something weird. ignore this post.

Edited August 2, 2013 by aquilux
Oops.

[Mekan1k]

I shall name is SQUISHY!

*Kinda ominous for a vehicle that needs to re-enter the atmosphere, ain't it?

[deadshot462]

Cool. Looks like the X-37B (which has been n Earth orbit right now since December)

Edited August 2, 2013 by deadshot462

[helldiver]

Got a technical problem with the Gimbal pivot point of the Thrustmax.

I usually solve issues like that by simply using a Skin Modifier, but I don't know how that will be handled in Unity and if KSP can do that.

Note how the cooling plumbing crosses over the pivot location I'll be doing. That means that the nozzle has to gimbal independent of the vector point. The only way to do this without getting nasty clipping is to put a skin modifier on the those hoses so that they deform properly as the nozzle gimbals.

Is the skin modifier allowed in that situation?

[DisarmingBaton5]

I shall name is SQUISHY!

*Kinda ominous for a vehicle that needs to re-enter the atmosphere, ain't it?

That's what I thought about "Atlantis." (As in the NASA one) Doesn't it sound like foreshadowing?

And if I may suggest a name: Icarus

Fits in with the foreboding theme!

[Stevincent]

Got a technical problem with the Gimbal pivot point of the Thrustmax.

I usually solve issues like that by simply using a Skin Modifier, but I don't know how that will be handled in Unity and if KSP can do that.

Note how the cooling plumbing crosses over the pivot location I'll be doing. That means that the nozzle has to gimbal independent of the vector point. The only way to do this without getting nasty clipping is to put a skin modifier on the those hoses so that they deform properly as the nozzle gimbals.

Is the skin modifier allowed in that situation?

I dont think a great deal of gimbling isnt necesarry and on the space shuttle only the engine nozzle is visible the engine elements are on the interior of the craft. As for your question I am not sure. Also this is a damn impressive model, love the texture job, look forward to seeing it in game!

[pina_coladas]

This is super amazing, but I'm a little concerned that the OMS engines and main engines will clip through each other as they gimbal due to their close proximity. As it's been mentioned, if you use kerbcom avionics the main engines will need a fairly large gimbal range to work well (without resorting to differential thrust). It's pretty cramped back there, especially for the third optional OMS engine.

That's about all I can do for useful commentary. Your artwork is excellent and I can't wait to try it out!

[ZRM]

I did not realise that you had a separate engine pivot as well as a gimbal. That could complicate matters as by default my mod will have no direct control over it. Unless you have the normal large gimbal range (which would make the pivot redundant) the pivot will probably need to move quite a bit during ascent as different stages activate and the fuel distribution changes. It will be difficult to get the correct movement without a flight computer controlling it. I could write a custom solver for it, but that would take time. On the other hand, at least the gimbal range itself would no longer need to be anywhere near as large if the pivot is managed correctly.

[helldiver]

ZRM no need for that.

The player just sets the vector angle manually using action groups and then leaves it alone.

The gimbal is done by your program.

The new updated Thrustmax with full gimbal range nozzle. I cut the hoses off since I didn't want to deal with the skin modifier issue in Unity-Kerbal. Although they really should think about that.

Not how you can set manually the vector of the engine (+/- 30 degrees?) plus it gimbals.

The vectoring is so that you have manual control on the angle of the assembly. I don't want to fry the engine in a set position. Not sure if I am clear.

I'm a little concerned that the OMS engines and main engines will clip through each other as they gimbal due to their close proximity. As it's been mentioned, if you use kerbcom avionics the main engines will need a fairly large gimbal range to work well (without resorting to differential thrust). It's pretty cramped back there, especially for the third optional OMS engine.

The gimbal range is roughly +/- 10 degrees as suggested by ZRM. Only at maximum gimbal range does it clip slightly

[helldiver]

This is what I mean:

His mod does it: http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/pitch-vector-engine/

I wanted a similar function (the vector part), that you could set manually before launch.

[ZRM]

ZRM no need for that.

The player just sets the vector angle manually using action groups and then leaves it alone.

The gimbal is done by your program.

The new updated Thrustmax with full gimbal range nozzle. I cut the hoses off since I didn't want to deal with the skin modifier issue in Unity-Kerbal. Although they really should think about that.

http://i.imgur.com/GyliUEy.jpg

Not how you can set manually the vector of the engine (+/- 30 degrees?) plus it gimbals.

The vectoring is so that you have manual control on the angle of the assembly. I don't want to fry the engine in a set position. Not sure if I am clear.

The gimbal range is roughly +/- 10 degrees as suggested by ZRM. Only at maximum gimbal range does it clip slightly

Ok, I suppose that works and makes it more adaptable to varied launch vehicles. Well done, I never thought of that. I suppose we can think of this as the default position for the engines, which on the STS is an inclination of about 5° to 10°. For different launch vehicles you use different pivot points, but it is unlikely that you would change the pivot within one flight.

[helldiver]

Ok, I suppose that works and makes it more adaptable to varied launch vehicles. Well done, I never thought of that. I suppose we can think of this as the default position for the engines, which on the STS is an inclination of about 5° to 10°. For different launch vehicles you use different pivot points, but it is unlikely that you would change the pivot within one flight.

Correct. I just didn't want to fry the engine into a set position since then it could pretty much -only- be used for specific applications.

With the variable thrust vector, a player can set it to 0° and use it on a rocket or a different vehicle entirely.

[CaptRobau]

Might I suggest an adapter part so that the Shuttle can also be lifted on top of a normal rocket, à la the Dreamchaser?