Jump to content

Make shuttles easier to make.


Recommended Posts

Shuttles are currently very hard to balance in KSP without clipping or other means. It doesn't make any sense to add shuttle wings if they can only be used by a few people and take hours to design. Here's how I would make them easier.

1. Add new external tank parts that dont have as much fuel as an equivalent kerbodyne but have a much higher center of mass that stays in the same place as it drains (to represent the different fuel locations of the real shuttle ET).

2. Add a 3 x KS-25 engine cluster with very high gimbal rates with its thrust initially pointed at the center of mass of the shuttle stack.

3. Make Big-S wings longer so they actually match a full shuttle fuesalge (cargo bay + 2 monoprop) and slightly increase the drag and lift values

4. Take the larges srb and rescale it to 1.875m (as a new part) with much more fuel and thrust. In comparision to the real shuttle and SLS 1.25 m and 2.5 m are way to small or large.

5. Add Stockalike OMS and nose RCS pods that are balanced

6. Match Mk3 monoprop with Mk3 cargo bay texture (just aesthetic but this is so annoying).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even Mech-Jeb isn't space bar to orbit- but seriously, who wants to rely on others designs that use exploits and hacks to get to orbit. Many people cant even use those replicas because the part count is so high. Besides that, your skipping the point. You shouldn't need mods and config-editing to build something that was meant to be working in stock. If we get airliner wings in KSP we should at least get working shuttles.

I don't mean they should be extremely easy, just easier than things like SSTO's

Edited by clivman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally i don't see why building a shuttle should be made easier... the whole point is that they are challenging to build and therefore vastly more rewarding when you are successful.

No, I have'd made a working one myself yet but I don't want one to be just handed to me... I want to do it my way.

If you think space planes are easier why not just be satisfied with building those instead?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally i don't see why building a shuttle should be made easier... the whole point is that they are challenging to build and therefore vastly more rewarding when you are successful.

The whole point of a shuttle is reusability, not using mods to overcome left out parts of the stock game.

No, I have'd made a working one myself yet but I don't want one to be just handed to me... I want to do it my way.

Same reason I don't want to use someone else's shuttle. I tried to build shuttle's in both .90 and 1.02 without RCS build aid or clipping reaction whells. Needless to say it completely failed. Correct me if I'm wrong but I have only seen one completely balanced shuttle on these forums and it used solids.

If you think space planes are easier why not just be satisfied with building those instead?

Because shuttle's were used for 30 years in RL and SSTO's haven't even been built yet.

Edited by clivman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be nice to build both shuttles and rockets without having to be an engineer or rocket scientist. Right now, I can't even get a relatively simple multi-stage rocket into orbit without it twirling end over end. If there were easier indicators in the VAB to show potential problems that would be fine - but the basic CoM, CoL, and CoT give very little indication of potential issues.

Another irritation fro me is the silly flashing heat indicator and bar. While I don't mind the item itself as I see a use for it at times, there isn't a global setting to turn it off? I'd rather turn it on when I have a problem ship, than the other way around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be nice to build both shuttles and rockets without having to be an engineer or rocket scientist. Right now, I can't even get a relatively simple multi-stage rocket into orbit without it twirling end over end. If there were easier indicators in the VAB to show potential problems that would be fine - but the basic CoM, CoL, and CoT give very little indication of potential issues.

Another irritation fro me is the silly flashing heat indicator and bar. While I don't mind the item itself as I see a use for it at times, there isn't a global setting to turn it off? I'd rather turn it on when I have a problem ship, than the other way around.

No, sadly you would have to get a utilities mod to get rid of them, but there are quite a few around the add-on releases forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even Mech-Jeb isn't space bar to orbit- but seriously, who wants to rely on others designs that use exploits and hacks to get to orbit. Many people cant even use those replicas because the part count is so high. Besides that, your skipping the point. You shouldn't need mods and config-editing to build something that was meant to be working in stock. If we get airliner wings in KSP we should at least get working shuttles.

I don't mean they should be extremely easy, just easier than things like SSTO's

Explain where hacks are used in space shuttles. And there are PLENTY of space bar to orbit shuttles around; look at the section titled "Spacecraft Exchange"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

KSP physics is not like RL physics, and not allow us to develop parts specific made for specific designs like the things involving a shuttle, unless you use mods. So... You have to adapt and change the lifter concept...

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/122320-Shuttle-M3

The only "exploit" in this one are the use of prograde assist right after launch to not flip... and it's basically stock, since the only mod it uses is Adjustable Landing Gear... :P

Edited by luizopiloto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shuttles are currently very hard to balance in KSP without clipping or other means. It doesn't make any sense to add shuttle wings if they can only be used by a few people and take hours to design. Here's how I would make them easier.

1. Add new external tank parts that dont have as much fuel as an equivalent kerbodyne but have a much higher center of mass that stays in the same place as it drains (to represent the different fuel locations of the real shuttle ET).

2. Add a 3 x KS-25 engine cluster with very high gimbal rates with its thrust initially pointed at the center of mass of the shuttle stack.

3. Make Big-S wings longer so they actually match a full shuttle fuesalge (cargo bay + 2 monoprop) and slightly increase the drag and lift values

4. Take the larges srb and rescale it to 1.875m (as a new part) with much more fuel and thrust. In comparision to the real shuttle and SLS 1.25 m and 2.5 m are way to small or large.

5. Add Stockalike OMS and nose RCS pods that are balanced

6. Match Mk3 monoprop with Mk3 cargo bay texture (just aesthetic but this is so annoying).

Hi an avid shuttle builder here. I've had good success so far with current parts better than I have ever had. I still believe the Dev's should impliment 1 or two things to really help out the building of shuttles, mainly a solid 3.75m high gimbal high thrust engine is really neccessary to replace the usual 3 Skippers, or single "Rhino" setup.

1. You can make this using a multi-compartment Design with the fuel drain at the top(largest tank is on top, smaller sized tanks further down the stack, connect to cockpit ). I've more or less fixed fuel balance issues using this setup. It keeps your COM high up all the way to orbit.

2. YES, really a 3x KS-25 engine cluster with high gimbal in general would be oriented to shuttles. Currently the "Rhino" can work for mid sized designs (think KSO sized shuttles) but loses out to 3 Skippers in looks and thrust. But there is no happy medium and higher gimbal will always help.

3. I currently Use the Big -s wings for my smaller sized shuttle design. Simply put both of the new "shuttle wings" work well for a mid to smaller size shuttle design. Which currently is the ONLY size "supported" in career and in sandbox without extensive workarounds.

4. This will never happen. Add multiple boosters together to get what you need, I don't see the Devs creating a new part size class just for historical SRB size.

5. This is to specific even for a shuttle enthusiast. Nothing stops us from setting up perfect recreations using the current RCS thrusters. the OMS pods are little more difficult but having two alternatives "MK-55, Thud" (The radial mouted one) and the basic "LV-909 Terrier" makes asking for even more dedicated OMS pods difficult.

6. Haven't noticed it, but yea do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole point of a shuttle is reusability, not using mods to overcome left out parts of the stock game.

I never said anything about using mods?

The whole point of a spaceplane is reuse-ability, the fact that we don't have them in real RL is irrelevant, Kerbal is just a game.

Let us agree to disagree on this I'm happy to have some things in the game that are more challenging than others, for me it adds to the fun and increases longevity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

High gimbal engines are missing for ages nd currently they are one of the biggest obstacles in building a shuttle.

as for SRBs - yes, please. I hoped to see larger SRBs in SLS release but instead got taller boosters that look way too thin for SLS o_O no idea why such decision was made. We really could use thiker boosters. Also: they should have gimballed thrust. In fact most if not all of the modern SRBs are gimballed, and yet none of them in the game are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi an avid shuttle builder here. I've had good success so far with current parts better than I have ever had. I still believe the Dev's should impliment 1 or two things to really help out the building of shuttles, mainly a solid 3.75m high gimbal high thrust engine is really neccessary to replace the usual 3 Skippers, or single "Rhino" setup.

1. You can make this using a multi-compartment Design with the fuel drain at the top(largest tank is on top, smaller sized tanks further down the stack, connect to cockpit ). I've more or less fixed fuel balance issues using this setup. It keeps your COM high up all the way to orbit

4. This will never happen. Add multiple boosters together to get what you need, I don't see the Devs creating a new part size class just for historical SRB size.

5. This is to specific even for a shuttle enthusiast. Nothing stops us from setting up perfect recreations using the current RCS thrusters. the OMS pods are little more difficult but having two alternatives "MK-55, Thud" (The radial mouted one) and the basic "LV-909 Terrier" makes asking for even more dedicated OMS pods difficult.

1. I meant a tank setting for improved fuel flow logic.

4. They're probably going to add 1.875 m anyways, there is a big gap in the tech tree where it should be.

5. Part count will stop many people, and I wasn't asking for new engines, just new base parts like the nosecone in mk3 expansion packs or the shuttle shoulders in space shuttle engines

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2.5 is fine as is, External tanks could be cool. They DEFINITELY need bigger Big-S parts,Some people like The Winter Owl and me like colo(u)r coding. I said this in my thread but OMS could be cool. more booster options could be cool [Zenit boosters from the Buran would be nice]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...