Speeding Mullet

Shuttle Challenge v3 - The 1.1.x STS thread [Stock and Mod Friendly][11.10.2016 - CLOSED FOR REFURBISHMENT]

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Bev7787 said:

STS-1 Submission- Mallard

*Gallery Snip*

Mods: Stock Visual Enhancements

Kerbal Joint Reinforcement

MechJeb

Kerbal Alarm Clock

StageRecovery

KW Rocketry (Not used in any of the shuttle parts, but the OP says all mods)

Kerbal Construction Time (Not used)

Distant Object Enhancement

Texture Replacer with Rareden's Skybox installed

Camera Tools

Note: I might modify the shuttle slightly with a different rcs fuel tank layout. Currently they're inside the cockpit.

Nice work and a good looking shuttle.  There's a few different ways to arrange the RCS system for sure so have a play around.  Maybe you could lose some weight on the OMS engines by only having two instead of 4 also?

Due to the use of KJR you are in the modded category, but this doesn't mean the achievement is any less worthy than the stock entries.  As previously mentioned you can modify your shuttle intra-mission as you see fit, even skipping in and out of the mod and stock category.  Good luck with your next mission and here's your badge to get you started commander!   8joD5Di.jpg

SM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 08/06/2016 at 9:29 AM, Speeding Mullet said:

It's cute as a button but unfortunately doesn't meet the entry requirements, which I think you know judging by your later post which I will get to shortly!

By my reckoning Bloojay's micro-shuttle is pretty close though. It just needs RCS and a cargo. (And Ain't No Rule about how big the cargo has to be for STS-1 pilot/commander ranks). It's also completely awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Speeding Mullet said:

Nice work and a good looking shuttle.  There's a few different ways to arrange the RCS system for sure so have a play around.  Maybe you could lose some weight on the OMS engines by only having two instead of 4 also?

Due to the use of KJR you are in the modded category, but this doesn't mean the achievement is any less worthy than the stock entries.  As previously mentioned you can modify your shuttle intra-mission as you see fit, even skipping in and out of the mod and stock category.  Good luck with your next mission and here's your badge to get you started commander!   8joD5Di.jpg

SM

I prefer four due to CoM and because I don't like burning for 3 minutes with two LV-909s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, cantab said:

By my reckoning Bloojay's micro-shuttle is pretty close though. It just needs RCS and a cargo. (And Ain't No Rule about how big the cargo has to be for STS-1 pilot/commander ranks). It's also completely awesome.

Totally agree on it's awesomeness, and you are absolutely right - the cargo bay can be any size for Pilot or Commander - Rank 1, but beyond that really a Mk3 cargo bay is required to further progress.  I am a big fan of small shuttles, having designed a few myself (although nothing at all on this incredibly tiny scale)  Few examples:

Mullet Dyne Scream Chaser:

Q0ToqN5.png

 Mullet Dyne Midi Shuttle:

4zcNaNE.png

Mullet Dyne Micro Shuttle:

uD3szM4.png

 

I absolutely welcome people who just want to certify a non Mk3 shuttle to Rank 1 to take part in the challenge.  It's not really happened all that much in the past so yeah bring it on I say (as long as the shuttle follows the rules)

16 minutes ago, Bev7787 said:

I prefer four due to CoM and because I don't like burning for 3 minutes with two LV-909s.

Yeah fair enough - It's your Shuttle!

 

SM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a couple of questions before I start:

1- What do you mean by spin stabilization (on the comsat mission)

2- Do we need to have separate oms engines or can we just use the main engines for orbital maneuvering?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cipher_077 said:

1- What do you mean by spin stabilization (on the comsat mission)

Stabilize the direction of the apoapsis raise burn of the satellites not by using SAS but by making them spin. There are couple of separatrons built into them - stage them when releasing the satellite to get it spinning and then send them to transfer orbit without stopping the spin. (Tip: don't forget to orient the shuttle for this to work! And don't forget to turn SAS off before releasing the satellite)

Quote

2- Do we need to have separate oms engines or can we just use the main engines for orbital maneuvering?

There was at least one entry using the same engines for both launch and OMS. So, as long as they are balanced well enough for both uses, this should work.

Edited by Alchemist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, how much delta-v do you shove into your OMS? I believe I'm curious, 'cause I'm probably overcompensating by making my OMS nuclear...

*Determination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Speeding Mullet said:

Unfortunately not.  Rule 6 is:  All missions require either an Imgur album showing each stage of the flight, or a continuous (1 take only) video showing all stages of the flight.

You only have 3 screenshots.  Review some of the other mission reports in this thread and you will see kind of detail that is required for a challenge submission.

My bad, I really should read more closely.

Re-submitted a full launch, release, landing album.

Only to a 1,055,031 x 1,055,104m orbit this time, but I left a bunch of fuel in the ET as the initial orbit periapsis was getting a little high for a legit shuttle insertion orbit with ET disposal and was worried I wouldn't have enough OMS fuel left to de-orbit after circularizing.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, OrbitalBuzzsaw said:

Working on one that takes off horizontally - WE HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY!

As long as it conforms to the Shuttle definition then you can start it underwater upside down for all I care - Love the diversity in design that comes with a challenge like this!

 

6 hours ago, SpaceplaneAddict said:

So, how much delta-v do you shove into your OMS? I believe I'm curious, 'cause I'm probably overcompensating by making my OMS nuclear...

*Determination.

As much as you are comfortable with basically.  My Buran has Nukes for moving around in space, and it's just about capable of getting to the surface of Duna and back again :).

VPJtpkF.png

 

You may or may not be seeing a glimpse of STS-11 here :wink:

 

4 hours ago, Naito said:

My bad, I really should read more closely.

Re-submitted a full launch, release, landing album.

Only to a 1,055,031 x 1,055,104m orbit this time, but I left a bunch of fuel in the ET as the initial orbit periapsis was getting a little high for a legit shuttle insertion orbit with ET disposal and was worried I wouldn't have enough OMS fuel left to de-orbit after circularizing.

*Gallery Snip*

It's all good - At least you came back :)  1055.10km takes you rocketing into second place on the Stock Leader-board (I'm assuming you are running a stock shuttle?) and unfortunately @Norcurion is knocked off.  Sorry!

Nicely designed shuttle, particular commendations on your choice of fairing use for the OMS blisters!  I'll update the leader-board shortly but here are you two badges.  STS Pilot Rank 1, and the flight director badge!

  Rvs3vgQ.jpget2p8E4.jpg

 

It seems this challenge is gathering momentum - Great to see!

SM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Speeding Mullet said:

You may or may not be seeing a glimpse of STS-11 here :wink:

Oh.... My.....

Kolumbia flies rather like a brick even in Kerbin thick atmosphere, I can't even imagine how it will perform at Duna...... I guess a bunch of parachutes it is then :D

Michal.don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hah! I finally got my interplanetary shuttle to glide using the PWings mod.

It turned out that @Speeding Mullet is right - even a single Mainsail on it is overkill. A single Vector is really quite nice for the task. (In theory, at least)

Right now I am practicing in interplanetary transfers. The shuttle is going to be my third interplanetary mission so far. I have launched seven probes before, but only two (!) of them reached the target - Duna and Laythe. The others... 

Eve one was missing dV. Moho one burnt in the sun. Dres one collided into the surface because of low orbit. Eeloo one collided (!) into an asteroid (!!) while in Kerbin's SOI (!!!). I think with that happening, I should begin the ARM with a shuttle :)

Right now doing a Buran with a ShadowJet technology. Not gonna tell you yet...

Also - do the ARM and interplanetary missions need to be performed in one flight? Thought about putting an interplanetary tug on LKO with a rocket. Or at least with a shuttle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, the OP currently has two STS-9's listed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, I've got a question about STS-1's bonus fuel pod mission. I've managed to take my shuttle up to an extremely high altitude (not disclosing ATM), but I can't get the orbit within 100m - there is no possible way to do so, not even with HyperEdit (and yes, I've tried). The game's physics are too finicky at that altitude for precise orbits. I don't think the original rules had a provision for such insane heights... How would you rule on this @Speeding Mullet?

Edited by FCISuperGuy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Speeding Mullet said:

It's all good - At least you came back :)  1055.10km takes you rocketing into second place on the Stock Leader-board (I'm assuming you are running a stock shuttle?) and unfortunately @Norcurion is knocked off.  Sorry!

Nicely designed shuttle, particular commendations on your choice of fairing use for the OMS blisters!  I'll update the leader-board shortly but here are you two badges.  STS Pilot Rank 1, and the flight director badge!

Awesome, thanks!!  Yes the shuttle is fully stock, same model as downloadable here https://kerbalx.com/Naito/KSP1-Shuttle2016, manually flown, no mods used at all.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me get this straight - if I have to do one mission, I have to do all the ones leading up to it?

i.e, if I want to do STS 3, then I would have to do STS 1 and 2?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The HTHL shuttle I was working on didn't work - Going with a 3/4 full bay (I wish we could have that, CRG 75) Mk-3 shuttle, 2 vectors, will add video - Working on balancing for STS-1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, michal.don said:

Oh.... My.....

Kolumbia flies rather like a brick even in Kerbin thick atmosphere, I can't even imagine how it will perform at Duna...... I guess a bunch of parachutes it is then :D

Michal.don

Haha I can tell you that landing on Duna was on the edge of possibility.  Unless you have the glide path exactly right for the last couple of km before you hit the deck then hit the deck you absolutely will.  I'm not necessarily fixed on the next mission being a landing, but it's one of the missions I'm toying with.  I'll keep you updated and you'll see it published probably in the next 24 hours!

 

12 hours ago, cantab said:

By the way, the OP currently has two STS-9's listed.

Thanks very much, have changed the OP to correct the error!

 

12 hours ago, Alchemist said:

*Video Snip*

I love the way you said "Lift off" at the start of the video :).  I've actually just learnt something from your video which makes me feel like an absolute amateur.  I never focus on the target body to arrange the interplanetary transfer and so end up sometimes making 2 3 or even 4 adjustments on my way in to get the approach I want.  Nice "Pro tip"!  Anyway, another superb video and beautifully run mission.  The Aerocapture at Duna looked tense on the nose cone popping, and the 3.4 km/s aero-capture at Kerbin on the way home was an education in thermal management!  You lost your body flap, but seriously great work!  I wonder if that's on the limit of aero-capturing a shuttle?  For example a high energy transfer from Jool may be a bit of a difficult one.  Even the second pass was verging on explody. Without those radiators not possible I don't think!

Here is your very very well earned badge Commander!   FRzVvWG.jpg

 

11 hours ago, FCISuperGuy said:

Hey, I've got a question about STS-1's bonus fuel pod mission. I've managed to take my shuttle up to an extremely high altitude (not disclosing ATM), but I can't get the orbit within 100m - there is no possible way to do so, not even with HyperEdit (and yes, I've tried). The game's physics are too finicky at that altitude for precise orbits. I don't think the original rules had a provision for such insane heights... How would you rule on this @Speeding Mullet?

Hi FCI!  Thanks for letting me know.  I had never even considered this, so thanks very much for pointing this out, and also helping with advice on acceptable tolerances at various altitudes!

RULING: Tolerance table to be inserted in to the OP as follows, to allow for varying tolerances at higher altitudes.  If people exceed these altitudes and find that extra tolerances are needed then I can add in extra as people go ever higher!

70-1999km - 100m

2000-4999km - 500m

4000-5999km - 1km

6000-8000km - 10km

8000km+ - 50km

 

11 hours ago, Naito said:


Awesome, thanks!!  Yes the shuttle is fully stock, same model as downloadable here https://kerbalx.com/Naito/KSP1-Shuttle2016, manually flown, no mods used at all.  

Cool I thought it was stock, well done!

6 hours ago, CheckYoStaging said:

Let me get this straight - if I have to do one mission, I have to do all the ones leading up to it?

i.e, if I want to do STS 3, then I would have to do STS 1 and 2?

Yes, the missions are designed to be run in sequential order as the missions are designed around a progression in difficulty and rank.  The exception is Rank 1 which can be done with or without the fuel pod.

1 hour ago, OrbitalBuzzsaw said:

The HTHL shuttle I was working on didn't work - Going with a 3/4 full bay (I wish we could have that, CRG 75) Mk-3 shuttle, 2 vectors, will add video - Working on balancing for STS-1

Nice look forward to seeing your mission report!

 

SM

13 hours ago, awfulhumanbeing said:

Hah! I finally got my interplanetary shuttle to glide using the PWings mod.

It turned out that @Speeding Mullet is right - even a single Mainsail on it is overkill. A single Vector is really quite nice for the task. (In theory, at least)

Right now I am practicing in interplanetary transfers. The shuttle is going to be my third interplanetary mission so far. I have launched seven probes before, but only two (!) of them reached the target - Duna and Laythe. The others... 

Eve one was missing dV. Moho one burnt in the sun. Dres one collided into the surface because of low orbit. Eeloo one collided (!) into an asteroid (!!) while in Kerbin's SOI (!!!). I think with that happening, I should begin the ARM with a shuttle :)

Right now doing a Buran with a ShadowJet technology. Not gonna tell you yet...

Also - do the ARM and interplanetary missions need to be performed in one flight? Thought about putting an interplanetary tug on LKO with a rocket. Or at least with a shuttle.

Sorry I missed this out in the post above.  Too much quoting going on!!

I'm not entirely sure I'm right about what you are asking here, but here goes:  All the missions have to be run sequentially and separately.  You cannot wrap up for example STS 9 and 10 in one mission for example. (The only exception being STS -1 and the fuel pod mission can be conducted at the same time).

I think you have completed STS-1, so you have to do STS-2, then 3, then 4 etc etc next :).

I hope that's both what you were asking, and the answer you were looking for.

 

SM.  Thought those mainsails would be overkill!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought I'd give the Fuel Pod challenge one more try.

I didn't screenshot spam as much as the last one, and I made one big mistake that I didn't realize until re-entry: I accidentally launched without any Kerbals!!  Still didn't manage to land on a runway, and had a tailstrike on landing, but still intact.

Hope this still qualifies as I'm quite proud of the final orbit: 2,000,013m x 2,000,027m :)

Same shuttle, just topped up the ET tanks a bit more.  The default config the ET tanks are a little short fueled to simulate the real ET's "oxidizer on top, fuel underneath" layout.  Then I flew an ascent path that didn't care about ET disposal and just went for maximum apogee and perigee.

Also had to go for a skip-reentry to manage heating from such a high altitude.  During practice runs, the nosecap kept exploding if I came in directly.

edit: still bone stock install, manually flown.

 

Edited by Naito

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, before I post this, I'd like to say sorry to @Naito for stealing your glory so soon after your post...

I present to you: the STV-1 Valkryie! My greatest creation yet, this behemoth can lift the 42t fuel pod to an absolutely epic altitude of 8500km! (Specifically, 8501x8532km)

As proof, here is the mission's AAR (Imgur album):

MOD DECLARATIONS

Used

  • BetterBurnTime
  • Kerbal Engineer Redux
  • Scatterer
  • Stock Bug Fixes (Stock Plus addons all disabled)
  • Trajectories
  • Kerbal Alarm Clock

Not Used (Still Installed)

  • Kerbal Konstructs/KerbinSide (Launched from KSC, did not land at airbase/airport)
  • HyperEdit
  • NavyFish Docking Port Alignment Indicator
  • Pilot Assistant (Are we allowed to use this during reentry for the 'Stock' category?)
  • Stock Bug Fixes - StockPlus Modules (disabled; only bug fixes active)
  • Transfer Window Planner

EDIT: I just realized I forgot to take pictures of the final apoapsis/periapsis of the deployed pod in map view. Here they are (taken post-flight - show final Ap/Pe with more detail (all digits):

 

Edited by FCISuperGuy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, FCISuperGuy said:

First off, before I post this, I'd like to say sorry to @Naito for stealing your glory so soon after your post...

Allow me to say with truly only the best intentions possible - you b@$tard! :D:D:D WOW!!  I don't think mine can get much higher than 2000km, unless my launch profile is THAT inefficient.  Then again, I didn't do a proper Hohmann transfer like you did.  Great flying!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Naito said:

Allow me to say with truly only the best intentions possible - you b@$tard! :D:D:D WOW!!  I don't think mine can get much higher than 2000km, unless my launch profile is THAT inefficient.  Then again, I didn't do a proper Hohmann transfer like you did.  Great flying!

So we're good, yes? :D Thanks! I actually took quite a bit of inspiration from your shuttle (for instance, the rearwards body flap is heavily based off of yours, as are the boosters). Once again, thanks, and GG :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Naito said:

I thought I'd give the Fuel Pod challenge one more try.

I didn't screenshot spam as much as the last one, and I made one big mistake that I didn't realize until re-entry: I accidentally launched without any Kerbals!!  Still didn't manage to land on a runway, and had a tailstrike on landing, but still intact.

Hope this still qualifies as I'm quite proud of the final orbit: 2,000,013m x 2,000,027m :)

Same shuttle, just topped up the ET tanks a bit more.  The default config the ET tanks are a little short fueled to simulate the real ET's "oxidizer on top, fuel underneath" layout.  Then I flew an ascent path that didn't care about ET disposal and just went for maximum apogee and perigee.

Also had to go for a skip-reentry to manage heating from such a high altitude.  During practice runs, the nosecap kept exploding if I came in directly.

edit: still bone stock install, manually flown.

*Gallery Snip*

Nice work, I'll update your altitude record shortly.  Unfortunately as noted by FCI it's not going to change your rank, but should make your place much harder to take over :)  Have another badge(s)!   Rvs3vgQ.jpget2p8E4.jpg

 

2 hours ago, FCISuperGuy said:

First off, before I post this, I'd like to say sorry to @Naito for stealing your glory so soon after your post...

I present to you: the STV-1 Valkryie! My greatest creation yet, this behemoth can lift the 42t fuel pod to an absolutely epic altitude of 8500km! (Specifically, 8501x8532km)

As proof, here is the mission's AAR (Imgur album):

*Gallery Snip*

MOD DECLARATIONS

Used

  • BetterBurnTime
  • Kerbal Engineer Redux
  • Scatterer
  • Stock Bug Fixes (Stock Plus addons all disabled)
  • Trajectories
  • Kerbal Alarm Clock

Not Used (Still Installed)

  • Kerbal Konstructs/KerbinSide (Launched from KSC, did not land at airbase/airport)
  • HyperEdit
  • NavyFish Docking Port Alignment Indicator
  • Pilot Assistant (Are we allowed to use this during reentry for the 'Stock' category?)
  • Stock Bug Fixes - StockPlus Modules (disabled; only bug fixes active)
  • Transfer Window Planner

EDIT: I just realized I forgot to take pictures of the final apoapsis/periapsis of the deployed pod in map view. Here they are (taken post-flight - show final Ap/Pe with more detail (all digits):

*Gallery Snip*

Wow and wow!  Knowing your previous shuttle as I do, I can definitely see heritage there with the design.  I didn't get what you meant by you can see your house from here, but I presume it's either something to do with an approximation to earth's geography, or possibly just that KSC is visible?  Can't wait to see what else this shuttle is capable of as you progress through the missions, and a massive well done for coming first in the altitude rankings!  Unfortunately @n.b.z. you've been knocked off the leaderboard for the moment :(

 

Here's your badges @FCISuperGuy!!   et2p8E4.jpg   Rvs3vgQ.jpg

 

SM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.