[1.4.X] Taerobee - Stockalike X-1 and More [27/01/2017]

[pTrevTrevs]

this mod is becoming very cool! kinda like Tantares 2 america edition.

I hope so, I certainly hope so...

#TantaresISS2015

[Beale]

this mod is becoming very cool! kinda like Tantares 2 america edition.

I hope so, I certainly hope so...

#TantaresISS2015

Many thanks!

Interesting perspective on it

So with the nose cone being a fuel tank and no fairingd or service bays to speak of what career mode work is there to do with the bumper?

Very good question...

Not much!

I suppose altitude / speed records, but those can be achieved in a single flight.

Some science gear would be good.

With Sounding rockets parts, a two stage Bumper with a 0.3125m upper stage and 0.3125m science packages could be a real science miner in the early game.

Thoughts?

Working control surfaces!

My first ever!

Oh I am very happy how these turned out. Always a good feeling to make a new type of part the first time!

[kenbobo]

I love it! I want it so bad!

[Beale]

I love it! I want it so bad!

Ask and ye shall receive.

Put in parts folder.

Bumper Beta

Couple of bugs I know of.

• Control unit is under fuel tank section.
  
• Too much Delta-V (Though I welcome solutions).
  
• Fins are quite effective, too effective, how they can be tweaked is very wanted to hear.
  

Edited September 9, 2015 by Beale

[passinglurker]

• Control unit is under fuel tank section.
  
• Too much Delta-V (Though I welcome solutions).
  

Does it become too little if you take the fuel out of the nose tank? yes not historically accurate but it makes it possible to put stuff like the probe core, a fairing base, decouplers, parachutes, a goo pod styled after one of the soviet space dog harnesses, etc all on top instead without necessarily having to resort to a new size. (I'm curious about why rover dude went with 0.35m for his sounding rocket mod though...)

• Fins are quite effective, too effective, how they can be tweaked is very wanted to hear.
  

could it be because the center of lift is close to the center of mass that the rocket is very "responsive"?

[Lucius]

Hmmm don't seem to see any names or descriptions or manufacturers for the Bumper in their config files

Don't see any bumper parts showing up on the parts list.

Just me?

IGNORE THIS PROBLEM WAS JUST LOOKING IN THE WRONG PLACE ALL IS WELL (wasn't expecting the control core in the fuel tank section)

Edited September 10, 2015 by Lucius

[OTmikhail]

Oh man! I'm loving the Bumber Rocket!!!! New Favorite 0.625 Parts. Pictures Incoming.

[CaptRobau]

Just tested the Taerobee parts in a X-1 like configuration and I find it a bit overpowered. It could be easily flown off the runway, reach speeds of over Mach 2 while climbing at 45° and the fuel didn't run out until I got a 150k suborbital apogee. I checked the Isp and I think that that's one of the issues. It gets to around 350 in the upper atmosphere, which is way to much for a 40s rocket engine.

[hraban]

Just tested the Taerobee parts in a X-1 like configuration and I find it a bit overpowered. It could be easily flown off the runway, reach speeds of over Mach 2 while climbing at 45° and the fuel didn't run out until I got a 150k suborbital apogee. I checked the Isp and I think that that's one of the issues. It gets to around 350 in the upper atmosphere, which is way to much for a 40s rocket engine.

Well,

i do some adjustments:

Weigt of Parts changed:

Engine = 0.6

NoseCone = 0.3

Command = 0.1

Body = 0.2

Fins = 0.05

ISP set to:

key = 0 240

key = 1 203

Thrust set to:

65 kN

Result:

The Bumper reach a max Apoapsis of ~120 km

Have Fun

Edited September 11, 2015 by hraban

[tjsnh]

Just a thought - assuming you're planning to put the Corporal on top at some point, consider making the part with flexibility for dual-use as Explorer 1.

[passinglurker]

Just tested the Taerobee parts in a X-1 like configuration and I find it a bit overpowered. It could be easily flown off the runway, reach speeds of over Mach 2 while climbing at 45° and the fuel didn't run out until I got a 150k suborbital apogee. I checked the Isp and I think that that's one of the issues. It gets to around 350 in the upper atmosphere, which is way to much for a 40s rocket engine.

I think thats all fine when you consider...

• A) you can't make and fly a b29 carrier plane so it needs the efficiency to have the fuel needed to take off by itself.
  
• not everyone wants parts that are nerfed for historical accuracy. Especially when the mod claims the "stock alike" tag
  
• C) In kerbal scale It's bigger than the real thing in order to fit standard part diameters.
  
• D) Its about the size of a suborbital rocket you could make with stock parts
  

[Beale]

Oh man! I'm loving the Bumber Rocket!!!! New Favorite 0.625 Parts. Pictures Incoming.

Really nice to hear!

Hmmm don't seem to see any names or descriptions or manufacturers for the Bumper in their config files

Still writing them

Well,

i do some adjustments:

Weigt of Parts changed:

Engine = 0.6

NoseCone = 0.3

Command = 0.1

Body = 0.2

Fins = 0.05

ISP set to:

key = 0 240

key = 1 203

Thrust set to:

65 kN

Result:

The Bumper reach a max Apoapsis of ~120 km

Have Fun

This does work, but playing around with the dry-masses like that makes the parts useless outside of replicas

D) Its about the size of a suborbital rocket you could make with stock parts

Heck, you can build an orbital rocket only a little bigger than the X-1 cockpit!

But, CaptRobau makes a fair point, I think the currently released X-1 can almost reach orbit, which is a little lot crazy. I have nerfed the engine a little (though it is still not too far behind stock engines).

Just a thought - assuming you're planning to put the Corporal on top at some point, consider making the part with flexibility for dual-use as Explorer 1.

Nice idea!

Currently working on unclad bumper engine, pictures soon.

Edited September 11, 2015 by Beale

[tjsnh]

Nice idea!

I'll confess that my motives are selfish in this case.

I'll be adding in support for this pack into my NASA Career Mode mod (alongside tantares and omsk), and currently there's nothing suitable to replicate explorer 1 (and I _REALLY_ don't want to bring in FASA or something like not-stock-alike just for one part). Since Explorer1 was grafted onto a Corporal-like rocket, if you had the corporal body/nose be one part (which could be modded as a probe core), or have the nosecone/tip as a probe core, or something along those lines it would give the part some great dual-use as an explorer1 sat. I had been using one of the LES parts as an explorer 1 probe, but it's clunky.

Again, just throwing the idea out there. My favorite thing about your parts pack(s!) are that everything is multi-use.

Edited September 11, 2015 by tjsnh

[NathanKell]

Wait, what?

Explorer 1 was placed atop a tub of solid rocket kick motors, and that placed atop a Redstone, which is like a straight-sided, 2x scale V-2. Nothing to do with the Corporal, which was an early Army ballistic missile which, AFAIK, no one has modeled, and also has nothing to do with the WAC Corporal, which is the thing that was put atop some V-2s in Project Bumper (as Bumper-WAC).

(The WAC was, broadly, a test of the engine propellants used in the Corporal, but that's about it--totally different scale, unguided, etc.)

Juno I carrying Explorer 1 (note Explorer 1 is 6.25in in diameter)

Bumper-WAC (note, WAC Corporal has a tank diameter of 12in)

Corporal missile:

[tjsnh]

Wait, what?

"Corporal-like", referring to the final stage.

A part for one could be used for the other, especially at the scale Beale is using, without much trouble.

[OTmikhail]

Here is something cool I made with the new Bumper parts and Tantares (sorry haven't upgraded to 14 yet)

And finally a Nice Probe based on your new Small probe core with the Bumper Upper Stage still attached. Its my early career MapSat.

- - - Updated - - -

Wait, what?

Explorer 1 was placed atop a tub of solid rocket kick motors, and that placed atop a Redstone, which is like a straight-sided, 2x scale V-2. Nothing to do with the Corporal, which was an early Army ballistic missile which, AFAIK, no one has modeled, and also has nothing to do with the WAC Corporal, which is the thing that was put atop some V-2s in Project Bumper (as Bumper-WAC).

(The WAC was, broadly, a test of the engine propellants used in the Corporal, but that's about it--totally different scale, unguided, etc.)

Juno I carrying Explorer 1 (note Explorer 1 is 6.25in in diameter)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a9/Juno-1_explorer-2.jpg

Bumper-WAC (note, WAC Corporal has a tank diameter of 12in)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/29/Bumper_wac_01.jpg

Corporal missile:

http://www.theseamericans.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/hap1063.jpg

I would love to see the WAC Corporal as an upper stage to this mod. The small rocket itself should be easy enough although not sure what size to use (I imagine close to Sepatron size in diameter...) I think the hardest part would be that interesting decoupler to separate the Corporal from the Bumper as far as modeling goes...Poor Beale. Unless its shape is just an auto shroud like the awesome Soyuz decouplers.

And Explorer 1's upper stage solid rockets were Seargent Rockets, which are loosely based on/evolution's from the Corporal.... I think. Don't forget about Private missiles as well. Ah 1940's rockets......

Edited September 12, 2015 by OTmikhail

[NathanKell]

tjsnh:

Right. Because this

totally looks like the bottom half (the top half is the probe, not the motor) of this:

I'm just not seeing it, beyond "both are cylinders that are smaller than 5ft in diameter"

OTmikhail: Neat!

The Baby Sergeant was derived from, as its name implies, the MGM-29 Sergeant tactical missile (which replaced the Corporal, but did not derive from it; the Sergeant was a solid fuel missile). Don't forget the Recruit!

(Corporal was related to Private in that Private tested the fin stabilization to be used; Recruit, Sergeant (aka Castor), Baby Sergeant, etc, were all the fruit of the first big round of military solids birthed from JPL.)

Edited September 12, 2015 by NathanKell

[passinglurker]

tjsnh:

Right. Because this

http://www.daviddarling.info/images/WAC_Corporal.jpg

totally looks like the bottom half (the top half is the probe, not the motor) of this:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/Explorer_1_conference.jpg/220px-Explorer_1_conference.jpg

I'm just not seeing it, beyond "both are cylinders that are smaller than 5ft in diameter"

OTmikhail: Neat!

The Baby Sergeant was derived from, as its name implies, the MGM-29 Sergeant tactical missile (which replaced the Corporal, but did not derive from it; the Sergeant was a solid fuel missile). Don't forget the Recruit!

(Corporal was related to Private in that Private tested the fin stabilization to be used; Recruit, Sergeant (aka Castor), Baby Sergeant, etc, were all the fruit of the first big round of military solids birthed from JPL.)

Geez explorer is so small you don't even need a rocket just stick it on a strong enough decoupler

... actually designing explorer like that would make it much less single purpose without breaking it up into crazy tiny kitparts it would essentially be a nose cone core like the stayputnik, but extra pointy! we should call it the exploder!

[OTmikhail]

tjsnh:

Right. Because this

http://www.daviddarling.info/images/WAC_Corporal.jpg

totally looks like the bottom half (the top half is the probe, not the motor) of this:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/Explorer_1_conference.jpg/220px-Explorer_1_conference.jpg

I'm just not seeing it, beyond "both are cylinders that are smaller than 5ft in diameter"

OTmikhail: Neat!

The Baby Sergeant was derived from, as its name implies, the MGM-29 Sergeant tactical missile (which replaced the Corporal, but did not derive from it; the Sergeant was a solid fuel missile). Don't forget the Recruit!

(Corporal was related to Private in that Private tested the fin stabilization to be used; Recruit, Sergeant (aka Castor), Baby Sergeant, etc, were all the fruit of the first big round of military solids birthed from JPL.)

Ah I totally forgot about Recruit!!!! Also your right that Sergeant replaced Corporal but was not derived from it. I could have refreshed myself with Google, but I wanted to be corrected. LOL

[tjsnh]

tjsnh:

Right. Because this

http://www.daviddarling.info/images/WAC_Corporal.jpg

totally looks like the bottom half (the top half is the probe, not the motor) of this:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/Explorer_1_conference.jpg/220px-Explorer_1_conference.jpg

I'm just not seeing it, beyond "both are cylinders that are smaller than 5ft in diameter"

OTmikhail: Neat!

The Baby Sergeant was derived from, as its name implies, the MGM-29 Sergeant tactical missile (which replaced the Corporal, but did not derive from it; the Sergeant was a solid fuel missile). Don't forget the Recruit!

(Corporal was related to Private in that Private tested the fin stabilization to be used; Recruit, Sergeant (aka Castor), Baby Sergeant, etc, were all the fruit of the first big round of military solids birthed from JPL.)

Forget I said anything if it makes you happy, but incase you hadn't noticed the parts that KSP modders make aren't always "to scale" relative to each other - sacrifices are made for the sake of making the parts fit into the game, doubly so with a stock-alike modder like Beale.

That said, look at the size of the Bumper rocket in this pack. Stand a Kerbal next to it. Now imagine what the Corporal rocket on top would look like.

If it still bothers you that I think that Corporal part would be useful as an explorer 1 stand-in, especially when mounted on a 1.25m rocket, I'm not sure what to say.

Edited September 12, 2015 by tjsnh

[NathanKell]

I'm not trying to pick a fight. At the start I was just trying to clear up some confusion, and in general making the point that a 6 inch cylinder made of one part probe (Explorer) and, halfway down, one part solid motor (Baby Sergeant--the picture shows them combined), is very different from a 12 inch cylinder with big fins and big liquid fuel tanks (WAC), is very different from a 36in diameter guided missile (Corporal).

Besides, we already have an Explorer and a Baby Sergeant.

Now, that's not at all to say you can't use a WAC however you like, same with all the other parts. That's the beauty of KSP. But there's no reason to make sacrifices you don't have to make, in your terminology.

[ThatOneBritishGuy...]

Thinking of it, any chance of some sort of small early version of the launch clamps for the Bumper? I believe the real one had something along the lines of this:

[Beale]

tjsnh:

Right. Because this

http://www.daviddarling.info/images/WAC_Corporal.jpg

totally looks like the bottom half (the top half is the probe, not the motor) of this:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/Explorer_1_conference.jpg/220px-Explorer_1_conference.jpg

I'm just not seeing it, beyond "both are cylinders that are smaller than 5ft in diameter"

I would love to see the WAC Corporal as an upper stage to this mod. The small rocket itself should be easy enough although not sure what size to use (I imagine close to Sepatron size in diameter...) I think the hardest part would be that interesting decoupler to separate the Corporal from the Bumper as far as modeling goes...Poor Beale. Unless its shape is just an auto shroud like the awesome Soyuz decouplers.

And Explorer 1's upper stage solid rockets were Seargent Rockets, which are loosely based on/evolution's from the Corporal.... I think. Don't forget about Private missiles as well. Ah 1940's rockets......

Heh! I certainly have a bad eye for scale.

I would have though the size difference between those two was minimal at a glance.

@OTmikhail I agree a lot the mating of the WAC to the Bumper body will be a tricky thing to do (whilst keeping parts as un-niche as possible!).

Scale is tricky, 0.3125m is far too big.

0.15625m (half 0.3125m again) is quite a lot better.

Here is something cool I made with the new Bumper parts and Tantares (sorry haven't upgraded to 14 yet)

http://i.imgur.com/bjQQtE4.png

http://i.imgur.com/hfnNn4G.png

http://i.imgur.com/rCgjPfL.png

And finally a Nice Probe based on your new Small probe core with the Bumper Upper Stage still attached. Its my early career MapSat.

http://i.imgur.com/Jj3XRy0.png

Very nice!

Thinking of it, any chance of some sort of small early version of the launch clamps for the Bumper? I believe the real one had something along the lines of this:

http://www.wsmr-history.org/Photos/BumperAction2.jpg

I could have a look into this.

I'm having some great difficulty with the unclad engine, at least in terms of polycounts (I'd like to keep the polygon density in line with other parts otherwise it looks a bit odd).

Edited September 13, 2015 by Beale

[minepagan]

Heh! I certainly have a bad eye for scale.

I would have though the size difference between those two was minimal at a glance.

@OTmikhail I agree a lot the mating of the WAC to the Bumper body will be a tricky thing to do (whilst keeping parts as un-niche as possible!).

Scale is tricky, 0.3125m is far too big.

http://puu.sh/k9PE6/27e4c269f3.jpg

0.15625m (half 0.3125m again) is quite a lot better.

http://puu.sh/k9PK8/90550f6617.jpg

Very nice!

I could have a look into this.

I'm having some great difficulty with the unclad engine, at least in terms of polycounts (I'd like to keep the polygon density in line with other parts otherwise it looks a bit odd).

http://puu.sh/k9OO7/bd4c8f9258.jpg

http://puu.sh/k9P9Z/e8ce917ef1.jpg

You could drop *some* of the greeble at the top.

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

As to fins: I refer you here: http://www.v2rocket.com/ Specifically here: http://www.v2rocket.com/start/others/survivors.html specifically here: http://www.v2rocket.com/start/others/munich.html with this image: