Speeding Mullet

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

899 Excellent


About Speeding Mullet

  • Rank
    Shuttle Program Director

Profile Information

  • Location Re-entering on an asteroid

Recent Profile Visitors

4471 profile views
  1. Annnnnnd back on topic: This is my current early stage build of an interplanetary shuttle. It's doing a few Mun missions to shake down before going into a partial re-design to ready it for extended Jool Operations: I've made absolutely heaps of shuttles though. Here are a few that I can remember: Here's a micro shuttle: Here's my copy of a JSC Shuttle IIc, with a fully functioning abort to space or abort from orbit cockpit ejection system: Rockwell C-1057 Breadbox Shuttle. Never worked properly: My Buran (my most successful shuttle to date: A nice midi sized Mk 2 Shuttle: Don't even know what I called this monster. Those windows are from the Mk1 crew cabins: Another Micro Shuttle: My dreamchaser (I call it the Screamchaser): As you can see I quite like building shuttles. It's definitely one of the more challenging things to do well! Sorry to turn your first page into a wall of pictures SM
  2. I'd definitely check out this challenge, which is pretty much what you are aiming at. Last post was in June, and last OP visit in July: If you are re-booting might be worth contacting the OP @Der Anfang out of courtesy to check if they consider the existing challenge thread to be dead. If you don't get a reply within a reasonable time period you are probably good to go. The premise is so ridiculous it's just the kind of thing us KSp'ers are likely to try, but only given a decent looking challenge thread with some sort of form to it. things you need to think about are: 1) Why no SRB use allowed? Seems like a perfectly reasonable rocket part to me. 2) How are you scoring this - You can have a smaller number of parts but a much heavier rocket. In my (but not everyone's) opinion the lighter rocket should score higher. Parts number isn't always the way to go as you just end up with 3 or 4 minimum part solutions and then the challenge is basically over, and some people really like over building. You might want to think about some scoring system. 3) Think about categories - Stock, Modded, stock only etc and create a couple of scoreboards 4) Added interest - Awards for doing remarkable things. Check out the current TOTM The K-Prize thread for an example of this done well 5) Presentation - Super important. A badly formatted challenge gives the impression you don't care and are likely to drop the challenge at a moments notice. Entries for this might take some time to create so people want to know that you are going to invest as much energy into the thread as they will. Good well thought out presentation always helps 6) Badge - Helps draw the crowds in Over all - It's a challenge that has previously proved rather popular. If you put a little energy into the OP you will likely see quite a lot of interest. In it's current form probably little to none, or 5 pages of questions and clarification requests (EDIT - My point made my Ninja ^^) Good luck! SM
  3. Haha, "You should have seen the first stage" That's probably the largest edifice ever to grace the screens of the Shuttle challenge! SM
  4. Haha yep, very early in development though, so I may have to "weak" your 50t down the line . How did you package that into the shuttle?! SM
  5. Thanks for the badge! It's great to be back in service. Thanks for the comments Payload to LKO I'm really not sure of, but payload to Mun surface is only about 7.5t at this stage - Mostly as the shuttle is carrying about 12t of deep space habitation and ISRU equipment, but also as the ET was literally thrown together in about 10 minutes just to test the thing, and really isn't fit for purpose. I'm hoping to be able to get 54t to LKO, which would be a Rockomax Jumbo-64 and an X200-32 joined together, or the maximum physical size for the tail sections cargo bay. Just in process with Mun STS 2-4 at the moment, designing the payload for STS 3. The weight constraint I'll stick with as the next ET upgrade is only scheduled for the Duna Missions. EDIT - I totally agree with you on @Alchemist's incredible Jool 5 mission and the Skunkworks badge!! SM
  6. Alrighty then! Since I had a couple of hours to play with today, I decided to finish off a Shuttle I was working on and take it on a test flight. Meet the Mullet Dyne Interplanetary Shuttle X (Definitely for wont of a better name at this stage): As you can see there are multiple sections. The cockpit first which is generally a good idea. Then there is an expansive crew quarters as a permanent feature as this Shuttle is designed for long and ultra long duration missions. Next comes the ISRU deck, before the tail section which is made up of a large cargo bay. This shuttle is Stock, and no mods were used at all, even visual. no MJ either so this one was totally hand balled from start to finish. Shooting for Mun STS-1 commander level, but I think I interpreted the "Aerocapture" slightly loosely, so if it's Pilot, then I'm not fussed. Basically instead of pure aerocapture (which the shuttle is absolutely capable of), I burned from cismunar to aerobrake without completing a single orbit, then just smashed into the atmosphere at 2.5 km/s and let the shuttle sort the rest out. Let's check out the mission report: Hope you like it . Good to be back and flying again!! SM
  7. Well I took my A380 to it's illogical conclusion, creating the A380 Stupor Krumbo Choad Goliath Beluga Guppy. Affectionately know as "Baron Von Kraken" in the inner circles. Definitely the stupidest (fully functioning) aircraft I have made. 1024 seats... 568.76t landed at the island runway. The slightest wrong move results in, well let's just check out the mission report: SM
  8. It's a good suggestion, but if this is the answer to my issue then I guess I'd rather wait until the landing legs are fixed I think . It looks scrappy compared to landing legs, even if you've done a great job of making the cubic octagonal strut look aesthetically pleasing. It would be a shame to have to resort to this solution and accept that landing legs are "as is" for the foreseeable future..... EDIT: @Foxster - Your pictures did make me think that making the module longer might be a good solution. At the moment the legs autostrut to the Mk2 crew cabin as the heaviest part, so perhaps I could place a heavier part in between two of them to extend the module, and force the landing legs to default to their own module, rather than the next one over. SM
  9. Hmm, maybe I will have a play around with the leg placement and see if that helps things. I have advanced tweakables on, and unless I have missed something this isn't an option, specifically for landing legs. Also happy to be proved wrong I should probably have mentioned in the OP this is in 1.3! I have nothing else at all strutted, it's just the legs with autostruts. I reckon adjusting the positions of the legs (or heaviest part) as per @Spricigo may be the answer, if undesirable. I'll have a play around and report back. If anyone else reads this and wants to provide some more information or ideas then please feel free to post SM
  10. My word the new badges look so shiny. My regret @FCISuperGuy that I didn't ever get round to putting them into the v4 challenge, but very pleased they are now in their rightful place . Now I'm not running the challenge I may well get time to design a new shuttle, and get round to actually finishing some of the later stage challenges that I never completed (Duna, Jool, Mun, and landing an asteroid for commander level). Really look forward to seeing how this challenge develops! Best luck with taking it forwards to new highs @michal.don SM
  11. MAJOR THREAD ANNOUNCEMENT Hello fellow Shuttle builders! I've been running the Shuttle Challenge for a year almost to the day. I've spanned multiple versions and revisions, 1132 posts, 46 pages, and seen some of the most brilliant engineering and flying I've ever witnessed on KSP. The community in this thread, the volume of knowledge leaned and imparted, and the quality of banter and discussion have been a marvel, and you are all a credit to the wider KSP community. It's been an absolute pleasure from start to finish, but finish it must. I've increasingly found that I do not have the time to properly admin this thread, as well as providing you all with new and exciting missions to do. The best thing to do from here is to let someone else pick up the mantle, and that person is @michal.don. @michal.don has done an amazing job of helping out over the past few weeks, has completed all the missions, and is never short of good advice and new ideas so I know that he will do a brilliant job of moving this Heritage Challenge forward. I'm sure you will all wish him the best as he refreshes and reposts this challenge. This thread will stay open for roughly 24 hours so I can accept all the glory, well wishes and likes, and then I will request a moderator to close it. Look forward to seeing you all on the new thread. This one is now closed for entries! SM
  12. Preface - I've performed a perfunctory search and come up with - Lots of landing legs and auto-struts are probably not clever. So this question is kind of a two part-er. Background - I am designing a stock base+ system, largely aimed at Duna and to be developed et released as a scale-able, fun, and user friendly way of building up a permanent presence on the red planet. I've done it before, but not for general release. Issues - I am experiencing phantom torques that wildly spin the modules apart when about 3 or more are joined. When 2 or more are joined it tends to float over the surface or just jiggle in it's place. Explosions. Lot's of explosions. Also it irritates me that I am not forced to build in a realistic way - The assembly vehicle is "glued" to the module and floats due to auto-strutting, and feels very cheaty. Part 1 - Can you help me understand the "why"? Part 2 - Can you help me get around, over, or under the problem. I'm not really looking for an answer that is simply "Just don't use landing legs" here, unless it is genuinely the only way forwards at this time. If it is, then I'd also love to hear whether this is on the cards to be fixed at all soon? I've read bits and bobs about unity bugs and the requirement for auto-struts until unity fixes something, so it concerns me a little that base building might be kinda borked for the long term . My thoughts - I'm sure there is a way to mitigate this, and I'd love to know what. Should I just use half the legs so for a base module to be supported it needs two modules joined? This still wouldn't allow me to build nearly as big as I want. It doesn't strike me that my auto-struts are too long, but when you join two modules together, half the struts from one module flick the next as the heaviest part becomes nearer. I wonder if this is the main cause. Perhaps there's some clipping with the landing leg that I have missed. I really hope that base building with landing legs is not a lost cause as I felt I was onto a good design streak here. Let me fill you in on the details. Firstly, the two modules: Module 1 - When 2 are joined it floats and jitters, when 3 or more are joined it experiences wild spinning, explosions, and general tomfoolery. 4 means insta-Kraken if you can get that far. Module 2 - Joining this to the structure just turned the base into a Catherine wheel. So, are the days of epic bases gone? Have I just pointed out something that has been discussed to death, talked about extensively in KSP weekly and my searching prowess needs work? Is a fix as close as the very next update? I hope there's a potential route to me being able to do this again, because it's a huge part of enjoying this game and I'd like for that to not be over SM
  13. I'd better up vote your answer then! SM
  14. Returning a shuttle from Eve surface Mini Announcement: It gives me great pleasure to announce that @michal.don will be Admin for the Shuttle challenge for the next 3 weeks. @michal.don has extensive experience in entering the challenge, and has been kicking around the thread long enough to know how we do things around here. I'm sure that you will all welcome him, and treat him well while I am not around SM
  15. ^ Very likely MJ's auto deploy solar panel option. Go to the MechJeb Settings menu and click Disable Auto-Deploy, then report back. SM