Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

That looks great to me! Then you could swap out the WAC bits for a simple weighted nosecone for single-stage use.

Absolutely :)

Beale

to relocate the avionics block in a part of the nose of the Bumper is not a good idea. Where is the practical, modular idea?

No worries! The current parts will not be changing, instead this will be an alternate layout & parts to facilitate the WAC stage.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think an X-15 would be a nice addition to this pack. It's not really "pre-Sputnik", but it would fit well with the X-1 and Bumper.

Edited by Vanamonde
Link to post
Share on other sites
Although this guy does seem an awful lot like a certain person who has given Beale troubles in the past, I think an X-15 would be a nice addition to this pack. It's not really "pre-Sputnik", but it would fit well with the X-1 and Bumper.
Indeed it would. I'll say go pro X-15.

The X-15 seems a little advanced to me - powerful, highly throttle-able and restart-able main engine (Okay those last two apply to all Vanilla KSP engines).

It also seems a little more dependent on its carrier aircraft for the initial take-off than the X-1.

Thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites
The X-15 seems a little advanced to me - powerful, highly throttle-able and restart-able main engine (Okay those last two apply to all Vanilla KSP engines).

It also seems a little more dependent on its carrier aircraft for the initial take-off than the X-1.

Thoughts?

The first ones flew a year or two after sputnik so it was at least on the drawing board before that. Also initial versions used an improved version of the same engine the x1 series used before its own fancy pants engine was finished. it was airdropped like the x1. Its shape would fit well with mk2 parts making it a good progression from the x1. There was talk of making it go orbital by strapping a bundle of surplus rocket boosters from the canceled navaho cruise missile project to its belly space shuttle style. these navaho boosters would definitely be pre sputnik. I'm not particularly invested either way I can live without the x15 but you'd be hard pressed to find much else besides tiny sounding rockets to add to the pack so it might be worth the stretch if you are willing to make it all it'd really need is the cockpit probably.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh? Does the unclad engine have gimbal? I don't think it does as I can not see the vector arrow moving when testing gimbals with RCSBuildAid in the editor. I can see the reg gustave does as expected. It is on purpose or an oversight? I see no issue with transforms names as they are the same for both. Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you mean Eugen Sänger and Irene Bredt in the 1930s (indeed, DynaSoar is a direct descendent of Silbervogel by way of RoBo/BoMi and Walter Dornberger). ;)
ah yes i was probably thinking of the V9 Program
Link to post
Share on other sites

On the topic of X-15 I think there may be difficulty with regard to the tail control surfaces, especially the bottom one which may make takeoff difficult. Plus I think most of the fuselage is easily accomplished with mk2 parts. Perhaps a 1.25 cockpit with a 1.25 to mk2 adapter, and possibly the engine would be good? I think it'd be interesting to see those skids as well if you felt up to it, not sure how you feel about landing gear.

Edited by Vanamonde
Link to post
Share on other sites

Updated Bell X-1 Flight:

kmqObPXl.pngEQJegIql.png

l4F4tQAl.pngzTtOxgol.png

The craft file for the B-29 is suuuper stable, though it requires some SXT parts, and TweakScale. If anyone wants the file, let me know.

The new engine balance for the X-1 is fantastic. It flew steadily just above the speed of sound and produced some really nice mach effects for the whole flight. Nice balance work. :)

Custom wings are still a must though. There aren't currently any wings in the game that look the part. Great update. :)

On the X-15: Let's let Beale get the X-1 finalized and out the door before we start bugging him for totally new sets of parts, eh? Generally, it's in bad form on the KSP forums to constantly request parts. You'll get ostracized and loose some respect here if you do. Really, if you want a part no one has made yet, download Blender or Wings3D, and try modeling yourself. There are plenty of tutorials around here, and plenty of people willing to assist you.

Edited by Vanamonde
Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't quote me on this but its either because your style of writing may be similar to someone who bothered Beale in the past with endless requests, or it's because you are currently bothering Beale with repetive requests without anything constructive i.e. no feedback or suggestions, just 'make this' and 'make that' over and over.

But I could easily be wrong.

On the topic of X-15 I think there may be difficulty with regard to the tail control surfaces, especially the bottom one which may make takeoff difficult. Plus I think most of the fuselage is easily accomplished with mk2 parts. Perhaps a 1.25 cockpit with a 1.25 to mk2 adapter, and possibly the engine would be good? I think it'd be interesting to see those skids as well if you felt up to it, not sure how you feel about landing gear.

I literally can't agree with you more. Regarding the endless requests, of course, we'd all love as many craft in this pack as possible, with as much quality as possible, but Beale (although it might not seem like it at times) is in fact only human. That being said, I'd personally love to see an X-15 in the pack, although perhaps it is a couple years out of the pre-Sputnik era.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't quote me on this but its either because your style of writing may be similar to someone who bothered Beale in the past with endless requests, or it's because you are currently bothering Beale with repetive requests without anything constructive i.e. no feedback or suggestions, just 'make this' and 'make that' over and over.

But I could easily be wrong.

On the topic of X-15 I think there may be difficulty with regard to the tail control surfaces, especially the bottom one which may make takeoff difficult. Plus I think most of the fuselage is easily accomplished with mk2 parts. Perhaps a 1.25 cockpit with a 1.25 to mk2 adapter, and possibly the engine would be good? I think it'd be interesting to see those skids as well if you felt up to it, not sure how you feel about landing gear.

Considering the fact that this individual's last alt account also had the word lemon in the username, as well as this guy's request for fairly unrelated parts, most of which can be done in stock anyway (I've seen or done all three of his requests at least once), I can say there's a high chance of this being that particular forum user, who has messed with Beale previously

Updated Bell X-1 Flight:

http://i.imgur.com/kmqObPXl.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/EQJegIql.png

http://i.imgur.com/l4F4tQAl.pnghttp://i.imgur.com/zTtOxgol.png

The craft file for the B-29 is suuuper stable, though it requires some SXT parts, and TweakScale. If anyone wants the file, let me know.

The new engine balance for the X-1 is fantastic. It flew steadily just above the speed of sound and produced some really nice mach effects for the whole flight. Nice balance work. :)

Custom wings are still a must though. There aren't currently any wings in the game that look the part. Great update. :)

On the X-15: Let's let Beale get the X-1 finalized and out the door before we start bugging him for totally new sets of parts, eh? SuccinctLemon, I'm mainly talking to you. Generally, it's in bad form on the KSP forums to constantly request parts. You'll get ostracized and loose some respect here if you do. Really, if you want a part no one has made yet, download Blender or Wings3D, and try modeling yourself. There are plenty of tutorials around here, and plenty of people willing to assist you.

What cockpit did you use on the B-29? I want it.

X-15 with Mk2 fuselages is in fact very easy to do. I made a really accurate X-15 + B-52 one time, but I never released a DL and it probably doesn't work in 1.0. It was amazing though, and I could probably do it even better with new parts and somewhat better aero. And I also want to push for custom wings for the X-1.

Edited by pTrevTrevs
No. Little strake thing= Stupid Idea
Link to post
Share on other sites

huzzah on topic conversation!

where did you get the skid?

I really need to upload my "kaptain kaboom" mini shuttle a made a little while ago >.>... you know what they say any harrowing glide half way around the world on rentry and almost burned up landing you can walk away from is a good landing <.<...

Link to post
Share on other sites
huzzah on topic conversation!

where did you get the skid?

I really need to upload my "kaptain kaboom" mini shuttle a made a little while ago >.>... you know what they say any harrowing glide half way around the world on rentry and almost burned up landing you can walk away from is a good landing <.<...

Kerbal foundries

used tweak scale to make it larger

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Very much looking forward to the next release!
The loaf becomes more unsettling in its every next appearance. Parts are looking great!

Many thanks!

Here's some WAC parts.

91a66b4f3f.jpg

caad52ba0c.jpg

9125fd7d4b.jpg

f5d1b5c319.jpg

142561853d.jpg

The Rocket itself.

a6d86e71da.jpg

So what about scale?

It is a little off, as this WAC is a little wide, A desire to keep "stock" sizing (I.E. half 0.625m, then half again).

be0dd2d98f.jpg

But, in ratios it matches the WAC almost exactly.

671287e5b3.jpg

One 256x256 sheet.

e171fff007.jpg

Edit!

Another options is to use 0.125m (Left below) for the micro parts.

This size is "kinda-okay" in my logic, as 1/10th of the Mk1 size.

And after then match the orthographic drawings perfectly.

86e03790f0.jpg

Edited by Beale
Link to post
Share on other sites
How does the physics work at such a small scale? I know KSP can struggle with part joints at such a small scale.

To tell the truth I do not yet know.

They are a similar size to the Cubic octagonal strut, but that part has PhysicsSignificance tag, which causes instability.

I think they will be fine, just as long as the engine does not provide a lot of thrust (Stresses on the part joints).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we'd have figured out by now if KSP had problems with them. Since RO/RP-0 has been using 0.3m (1ft) and smaller parts for...quite some time.

Beale, looking good! I obviously prefer the scaling metric that allows correct in-aspect scaling :)

Link to post
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.

×
×
  • Create New...