• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by pTrevTrevs

  1. 37 minutes ago, sturmhauke said:

    @pTrevTrevs, your carrier airplane looks just as good as your orbiter. The only question I have is whether you released the orbiter for the glide test at 5 km or above. Other than that, everything looks to be in order.

    To be honest I don’t remember, this was a few weeks ago. I’m pretty sure it was over 5000 meters though since I had a few minutes of free flight time from separation to touchdown.

  2. Before Pathfinder made its first flight, I conducted an Approach and Landing Test with a prototype orbiter. I think it fits the profile for STS-1T too.





    The only relevant difference between this orbiter and the spaceworthy ones is that this one has no fuel in its tanks. Orbiters preparing reentry will dump their unused OMS fuel before atmospheric contact, but will retain whatever RCS monopropellant is left in the fore tanks, while the ALT orbiter flies its tests entirely dry.

  3. 12 hours ago, sturmhauke said:

    Ah, you came, welcome! That is a nice replica shuttle! I'm curious, what are those blocky parts you used to build the OMS pods, I don't recognize those. For the rest, your satellite is technically not part of the STS-1a requirements, and the launch pads and decals are essentially cosmetic. Your shuttle appears to be stock otherwise.

    Yep, those are the RoveMate probe cores; they’re a really great part for all kinds of aesthetic uses, especially now that they have silver and gold mylar versions.

    I do have TAC Life Support hardware hidden inside the shuttle cockpit, but like I said, they don’t really affect the function of the shuttle.

  4. Well, I've got a shuttle I've started using in my career save. Didn't design it with this challenge in mind but I think the last mission I flew fits the profile for STS-1A. Relevant parts mods include TAC Life Support, Conformal Decals, Kerbal Engineer, Near Future (only used on the payload), and Modular Launch Pads (irrelevant after launch). Technically this is STS-2 in my own save, but the first flight probably doesn't qualify since it landed short of the runway.


    The orbiter used on this flight is OV-101 Pathfinder, carrying a crew of two Kerbals for a two day flight. STS-2 is the second R&D flight for the shuttle and the first mission to carry an operational payload. Its primary objective include the testing of the Shuttle Robotic Manipulator Arm, deployment of the QBESAT-DataTracker 1, and the operation of several scientific instruments mounted on a pallet in the shuttle's payload bay. Like all planned R&D Shuttle missions the targeted landing site is the Kojave Sands Air Base from KerbinSide.


    Launch pad is LC-39A from Tundra Space Center. Literally a few hundred meters north of the stock KSC launch pad.


    I'm using StageRecovery to recover the solid rocket boosters after their jettison.


    The external tank, of course, is not reusable, and burns up in Kerbin's atmosphere after the shuttle reaches orbit.


    The payload includes the Shuttle Robotic Manipulator Arm, a scientific instrument carrier pallet, and a small satellite held inside a protective housing to the rear. The SRMA test involves grappling the QBESAT and extracting it from its storage tube.




    The satellite itself uses several Near Future parts, and the scientific instrument carrier has a Near Future capacitor and a set of solar panels, but none of them proved influential to the mission.


    I'm also using the Trajectories mod to navigate during deorbit and reentry.




  5. 1 hour ago, Kerbalwerks said:



    Bought this from the Federation Bone Yard they said it was a good deal and a fixer upper, not sure if I got scammed or not/

    What's the serial number? If it's above 254000 it's probably one of the models built with outsourced chinesium parts. Nothing beats the classic Dinklestein manufacturing, but it's so hard to find these days.

  6. 3 hours ago, TheSaint said:

    My father worked in a union job at a bakery for 19 years. He was involved in an accident at work, which was judged to be the company's fault by Worker's Comp, but which left him with 80% disability. When he came back, he was able to perform all of the job responsibilities that his supervisor position required, but he was no longer able to perform all of the extra work that he had been performing, such as picking up other guys slack when they weren't able to finish their work by the end of their shift. So the company "eliminated his job position" and hired a younger guy to do the exact same job with a different title. So he filed a complaint with the union against the company. And the union turned him into a bargaining chip. They went into the conference room with management and said, "Look, if you give us this contract concession and this contract concession, we'll just let this complaint go away." And they did. And my dad knew for a fact that this happened because (unbeknownst to both the management and the union leadership) the guy who was the union ombudsman at the time, who sat through the entire meeting, just happened to be my dad's best friend at work, John, who told him the whole story afterwards.

    So my dad filed suit against the company and the union for his lost pension and wages. So what did the union do? They lined up guy after guy after guy to testify at the hearing, all guys my dad had worked with for ten, fifteen years. All of them got up there and told bald-faced lies. That he stole from the company but they looked the other way. That he was a sloppy worker they had to cover for. That he played favorites with the schedules and monkeyed around with the times on the timesheets. And they did that because the union told them to. And then the company tried to say that this was the real reason they let him go. And they all turned white as sheets when my dad's attorney called John as a witness, and he testified about the closed-door meeting where the union sold Dad down the river. And, wouldn't you know, the company and the union decided to settle in the hallway before it went to the jury. John quit the next day with 17 years on the books, he couldn't stand to look at any of them anymore.

    So, no, I've never been impressed with unions.

    Reading this made me twice as libertarian as I already was.

  7. 21 hours ago, tehmattguy said:

    Back again with yet another Soyuz variant! The new update gives us better control when building fairings, so I rebuilt all the fairings on my Soyuz to achieve a smoother and more accurate fuselage shape. I was also able to make use of the new decal parts to help complete the look.

    Hey, it'd be real cool if you'd put up a tutorial on how you make those fold-out solar panels.

  8. In my current career game I've been using the Bishop I as my standard manned launch vehicle for flights to LKO. Its first stage is a large solid rocket booster with a set of four small vernier engines to provide control. The second stage is liquid-fueled, and the spacecraft adapter fairing has a small amount of room for mission-specific equipment which can be retrieved after launch. It's a pretty cheap vehicle for its size, and I'm planning on upgrading it in the future to have a reusable first stage and more modularity.


    Its primary payload is Polaris, the multipurpose spacecraft I've developed for space station servicing, commercial tourism flights, and eventually Lunar missions. The pictured vehicle is a Block I spacecraft, used for missions in low orbits.



    There's also the Abbot; a family of unmanned launch vehicles. It's pretty similar to the Titan III, but there are other versions with different numbers of SRBs and upper stages for differing payloads. It's slowly becoming obsolete, however, as my payloads keep getting heavier and their destinations grow farther and farther away.


  9. I don't remember the last time I actually posted here; it must have been at least a year ago. But I set up a new install of the game tonight and started working on a helicopter using the Breaking Ground parts. So I guess I'm back, at least for a little while.


    One of the most annoying things I've ever tried to do, not least because I couldn't find many other examples of conventional main/tail rotor helicopters. But oh how satisfying it was when I got this thing *halfway* working!

    Honestly though it flies really badly; it keeps wanting to roll to the left or right, and changing tail rotor pitch to control yaw is a really sluggish way of doing things. I know there are people on here who were building helicopters long before these parts were even in the game; maybe they can help me here?

    Also, I'm not sure if this is a bug or what, but sometimes when I engage the torque on the main rotor, the engine block itself spins rather than the rotor mast:



    It's only a picture but hopefully it illustrates what's going on. It's really bugging me because I don't know why it's doing this or how to prevent it; my best guess is that it comes down to a dice roll as to whether or not this will happen when I launch the craft. When it does, I have to reload back to launch because I can't fix the engine or get it to actually turn the blades.

    If the problem persists I'll make a bug report or ask in the support forum, but for all I know it could be gone next time I load the game.


  10. On 3/14/2019 at 11:49 PM, pTrevTrevs said:

    Maybe this has been discussed before and I'm too lazy to read through years of thread history, but is this name in reference to the Titan I in Cordele, Georgia?


    I've driven through that town dozens of times since I was a kid, and I still have no idea why or how they got their hands on it.

    By God I’m actually back already

    I’d timestamp this or directly embed my image, but I’m on mobile and I just drove past it.