michal.don

Shuttle Challenge v5 - The STS thread [Stock and Mod Friendly] - NEW MISSION - MINMUS STS-1 - 19.8.2019

Recommended Posts

Ok, I performed the launches of the first two (well, two and part of a third) modules of my station for STS-5-8. As I was going to be launching two shuttles, I figured I might as well perform the required rendezvous and crew transfer for the commander badge of the STS-4/4R, since I had only qualified for the pilot badge when I originally did so. I hope it is ok that I did this. I mean, I can do it again separately, but I just thought it was more fun coordinating everything together. :D 

Summary:

Shuttle 1 (Opportunity) with 6 crew aboard launched into a high inclination 310km orbit where it deployed the first station module, then maneuvered into a 305km 30 degree inclined orbit.

Shuttle 2 (Intrepid) with 2 pilots then rendezvoused with Opportunity, and received its crew to fill its cabin space with 8 crew. It then, with the assistance of "range extension modules" (ion drive units), rendezvoused with the first station module in the high inclination orbit and deployed the second main module, as well as an adapter that was too bulky to bring with one of the next launches. Finally, the Intrepid returned to Kerbin. Meanwhile the Opportunity will be left in orbit for a few months, unmanned, to determine effects of long term exposure on the vehicle

 

Edited by EpicSpaceTroll139

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, sh1pman said:

MH contains some very useful quality-of-life parts that aren't OP at all

This is why I want the MH entries be considered stock. I don't want people to not be able to use these parts which reduce part cound and make designing a shuttle more comfortable, while bringing no serious advantage.

But yeah, about the engines. I'll have to add a few lines to the rules anyway, because of:

10 hours ago, wrench-in-the-works said:

IIRC, the four wing-mounted engines have an ISP of 2000 in a vacuum with a maximum thrust of 600 kn, but the efficiency nosedives hard once you get into an atmosphere.

But, the two "main" engines at the back (the 3.75m ones) blow those ones out of the water, they have an ISP of 3000 across all altitudes, and produce 1500 kns of thrust each. So about as efficient as ion engines with none of the thrust issues. 

This....

 

This is the first time I consider banning a modded part neccessary, and while I really don't like that, I don't see any other way to keep the challenge fair. 

To put that into perspective - the first one has a thrust of 10 NERV engines and 2.5x the ISP, the latter has the thrust of a Mainsail while having almost 10x the ISP. 10k m/s dV is enough to take you to Duna from LKO, land, take off again, burn back to Kerbin, circularize in LKO without aerobraking, go back to Duna, land again, go to orbit again, and return to Kerbin and land. In one stage, with decent thrust ad reasonable safety margins.

So, @wrench-in-the-works, I'm really sorry, but I won't accept any more entries with those engines - It would not be fair to the other guys, because these engines make the missions too easy compared to the conventional chemical ones. I hope you'll understand, and design a new awesome shuttle to complete the rest of the missions :wink:

13 hours ago, biomecaman said:

Thank you! yes, sorry for being lazy i think i was in a rush since i did all of 5-8 in one day
I updated the Imgur album with better descriptions, and a poem on STS-7

I'll sure take a look on that soon :)

13 hours ago, biomecaman said:

you're right though, time to graduate to the big leagues! thanks for the badge. What's the difference between the commander and pilot lvl badges?

as @hoioh said, the badges have the shiny golden stars :) Tha main diifference indeed is a requirement of a precision landing in every mission, and usually the mission objectives are a bit more challenging (more complex payload, higher/inclined orbit etc)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, EpicSpaceTroll139 said:

I hope it is ok that I did this. I mean, I can do it again separately, but I just thought it was more fun coordinating everything together. :D 

No problem with that, at all :) Just one thing - to complete the STS 5-8 for commander level, you have to land the firt (last?) one on the runway, too :wink:

Impressive piloting by the way - precision landings from that high inclination are pretty tricky.

So, until you finish the station building, here's the badge for the rescue, congrats!

2LypmZP.jpg?1

Michal.don

Share this post


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

So, @wrench-in-the-works, I'm really sorry, but I won't accept any more entries with those engines - It would not be fair to the other guys, because these engines make the missions too easy compared to the conventional chemical ones. I hope you'll understand, and design a new awesome shuttle to complete the rest of the missions :wink:

Completely understandable. Of course, I'd be lying if I said I hadn't prepared for a scenario like this and already have a redesign ready... one with even more dv since ions are still a thing.

Although I have to ask... can I still use the wing mounted engines for their jet capabilities? That's the one thing I don't currently have a replacement for on the redesign.

Edited by wrench-in-the-works
wrong link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm creating an entry for this, however for some reason it spontaneously disassembles itself whenever I quickload. In order to prevent this, I have to use unbreakable joints for about 5 seconds while physics loads. Is this OK within the rules?

Also, are we allowed to use jet engines within the atmosphere in order to land? To aid those of us with dubious piloting abilities!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/17/2018 at 3:27 PM, GKXS said:

I'm creating an entry for this, however for some reason it spontaneously disassembles itself whenever I quickload. In order to prevent this, I have to use unbreakable joints for about 5 seconds while physics loads. Is this OK within the rules?

Also, are we allowed to use jet engines within the atmosphere in order to land? To aid those of us with dubious piloting abilities!

I don't think anyone's going to disqualify you for using one of the cheats briefly to circumvent the kraken. Also in the OP you can see one of the example shuttles has jet engine, so there must not be any rule against them .

Anyways, speaking of Kraken, I was just loading Space Shuttle Intrepid with the final modules for my station, and it looks like something in one of them borked the craft, as the boosters now do not move with the rest of the vehicle in the VAB, and on launch spawn sideways, with one clipped into the launchpad and the other floating in the air.

iqPVPFM.jpg

Also that solar wing isn't there in the VAB.

Good thing I have backups of the shuttle from numerous missions, and one on KerbalX.

Forgot to mention that on the 3rd launch of stuff for the station, I had an... interesting experience with those solar wings. Will see in next video.

Edited by EpicSpaceTroll139

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16. 3. 2018 at 4:45 PM, wrench-in-the-works said:

Completely understandable. Of course, I'd be lying if I said I hadn't prepared for a scenario like this and already have a redesign ready...

I'm glad you understand my reasons. The numbers I see in your screenshot are pretty wild again, so I'd like to know the stats of all the engines you'd like to use - I have to keep an eye on you for now :wink: Thanks!

 

On 17. 3. 2018 at 8:27 PM, GKXS said:

I have to use unbreakable joints for about 5 seconds while physics loads. Is this OK within the rules?

If this is just to avoid the bug/kraken/whatever that is, that's completely fine

On 17. 3. 2018 at 8:27 PM, GKXS said:

Also, are we allowed to use jet engines within the atmosphere in order to land? To aid those of us with dubious piloting abilities!

Yes, jets are allowed. I don't personally use them, as they bite too much into the payload capacity, but they are completely fine according to the rules

 

8 hours ago, EpicSpaceTroll139 said:

Anyways, speaking of Kraken, I was just loading Space Shuttle Intrepid with the final modules for my station, and it looks like something in one of them borked the craft, as the boosters now do not move with the rest of the vehicle in the VAB, and on launch spawn sideways, with one clipped into the launchpad and the other floating in the air.

That's.... interesting :D I have not met this kind of kraken yet - mine usually just explode stuff, yours are much more creative - rearanging parts and adding solar panels :)

 

Michal.don

Share this post


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

I'm glad you understand my reasons. The numbers I see in your screenshot are pretty wild again, so I'd like to know the stats of all the engines you'd like to use - I have to keep an eye on you for now :wink: Thanks!

Well, the pressure's on now I guess. Anyway, that was taken with a pair of LF-9 "Colossus" magnetoplasmadynamic engines from nertea's near future stuff, packed with enough lithium to make a few million batteries. Unfortunately, that number was taken with lithium tanks everywhere, including the entire cargo bay. More of a "how much can I get out of this", since the Artemis is grounded for the time being, and was only serving as a testbed in the aforementioned image (and the fact that I don't have KER yet).

Unfortunately, the new shuttle isn't quite ready yet. It's still being built from the ground up, with 0% of it being comprised of OPT engines. It is planned to have at least four "Repulsor" (i think that's what they're called) pulsed inductive thrusters (again from near future tech), which, provided you have sufficient power generation and heat management capabilities (to balance both additional heat output from the engines and the reactor to power it), can give you up to 9380 ISP. I can't say much else about the design of the new shuttle, or what engines it'll use since it's still not completed, and probably won't be for a week or so, IRL stuff has been and still is happening.

As the design evolves I'll try to message you things about it to avoid cluttering up the thread more, if that's alright with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ugh. Realized when I was at the station after I had exited and returned to the game, quicksaved, etc., that sometime in-between being pulled off my station model in the VAB to become a subassembly, and being put in the shuttle and launched to space, a docking port got removed from my station's service module, so I had to rearrange all the modules. I think I have spent more time docking on this particular mission than in any 5 other missions in my entire KSP career combined. Yes that includes my first docking, as I had a decent idea of how to work it before I first tried because I'm a nerd xD.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, sorry for double post, but my understanding is that you won't get notifications if I just edit the one I already made.

Olympus station is complete!

Mission Summary:

Space Shuttle Unity, having received repairs for the minor damage incurred in landing the MulletDyne tank earlier, took off on STS-5-8-3 1 carrying solar panels and a docking hub for the station, as well as a satellite for a survey company. After deploying the satellite, the Unity went to the station 2 and deployed the aforementioned station parts. The Kraken then decided to pay an unexpected visit, however it was in a playful mood and thankfully did not destroy anything.

SS Unity then rendezvoused and docked with the unmanned SS Opportunity 3, which was given a thorough inspection by the crew. Once it was confirmed flightworthy, both it and Unity returned to Kerbin.

Space Shuttle Intrepid, with the experimental addition of small aerodynamic plates added to the OMS pods at the suggestion of R&D engineers, then took off on STS-5-8-4 4 carrying a service module, hygiene/shelter module, external experiments module, propulsion module, and propellant depot. That's a lot to put in one sentence lol. It rendezvoused with the station and during deployment I discovered I had managed to delete a docking port off the service module, so I had to do some impromptu station redesign. I already needed to shift modules around as I had put them in temporary holding spots earlier, but I had to do a lot more of it than I intended. Anyways, the station had some extra ports, so I was able to get it in a reasonable configuration. 5

Finally the Intrepid returned to computer, concluding the STS-5-8 series of missions. 6

Use these times referenced in the summary if you want to skip to the important bits.

1   0:00, 2    2:30, 3   14:20,  4   22:21, 5   35:50, 6   38:54

Edit: for the record, the station contains: 1 Habitation module with room for 8 Kerbals at max capacity, 1 Hygeine/shelter module, 1 Processing lab, 1 docking hub, 1 External Experiments Lab, and 1 Service Module + 1 Fuel depot + 1 propulsion module + 2 Solar arrays + 2 mini tugs which provide power, propulsion, RCS, and all stock resources.

Edited by EpicSpaceTroll139

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 21. 3. 2018 at 12:35 AM, EpicSpaceTroll139 said:

Olympus station is complete!

Great report, thank you! Also, your shuttle just looks so... elegant, for a lack of a better word :) Interesting station design as well, and I have to admire the prefect gliding to the runway, again.

Awesome job, and a well deserved badge:

t3gSvqs.jpg?1

Congratulations, and happy potato hunting :wink:

 

On 21. 3. 2018 at 2:46 PM, biomecaman said:

HULLLOOO! Someone order a space potato? Hope yall like it extra crispy.

Nice :) A shuttle this big makes it almost look easy, but landing an asteroid is no easy task at all!

Good job on the last Kerbin mission, here is your badge, and I wish you good luck going interplanetary!

5OZu2Rj.jpg?1

 

Michal.don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question.... Sts2a - does it need to be perfectly circular orbit at 2,863,352 speed 1009.8 or does within a few metres count?

So frikkin fiddly to try with no assist!

Share this post


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

Question.... Sts2a - does it need to be perfectly circular orbit at 2,863,352 speed 1009.8 or does within a few metres count?

So frikkin fiddly to try with no assist!

It doesn't have to be perfect, just as close as you can get it. If you can get it perfect you will receive nothing but extra credit (because it's due). Just see how close you can get, but don't go overboard on the exactness of your orbits. You can look over the thread to see some achievements that have been deemed succesfull and make your way from there. (Mine was certainly not to the exactest of exact to be sure! But mechjeb made my life a LOT easier.)

Edited by hoioh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16.3.2018 at 8:50 AM, michal.don said:
On 15.3.2018 at 4:11 PM, sh1pman said:

MH contains some very useful quality-of-life parts that aren't OP at all

This is why I want the MH entries be considered stock. I don't want people to not be able to use these parts which reduce part cound and make designing a shuttle more comfortable, while bringing no serious advantage.

I like most of the new parts in MH. Some of them are useless atm, because of buggy implementation. I hope they'll get fixed, soon(TM). A key of this challenge is imho the freedom to design what somehow fits the rules of a shuttle. Otherwise we wouldn't see such a great variety of ships here.

I think this challenge should accept MH as stock as it is without nitpicking parts or engines, even if some are misplaced or have weird stats compared to the existing ones. In case that Squad decides to change some properties later on, fine. But nothing we can influence directly. TMLSS: "Take it all or nothing!"

 

1 hour ago, Andetch said:

Question.... Sts2a - does it need to be perfectly circular orbit at 2,863,352 speed 1009.8 or does within a few metres count?

So frikkin fiddly to try with no assist!

I'd go for an orbital period of 6h +-1s or so. Easier and meets the requirements better than a fixed altitude.

Edited by funk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whew, it may have taken me several months, but I finally finished the Von Braun mission.

Album OHYUC will appear when post is submitted Looks like the imgur plugin mangled it...  correct album: https://imgur.com/a/OHYUC

There are two caveats with this submission:

1) I forgot to take screenshots during the initial launch.  I hope the fact that this shuttle has flown many times already will suffice.
2) My old save game got lost, so I Alt-F12'ed a station into orbit around Duna.  Is that ok?

Edited by zolotiyeruki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, zolotiyeruki said:

Whew, it may have taken me several months, but I finally finished the Von Braun mission.

Album OHYUC will appear when post is submitted

 

There are two caveats with this submission:

1) I forgot to take screenshots during the initial launch.  I hope the fact that this shuttle has flown many times already will suffice.
2) My old save game got lost, so I Alt-F12'ed a station into orbit around Duna.  Is that ok?

I think you've accidentally linked the wrong album there mate

Share this post


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

Whew, it may have taken me several months, but I finally finished the Von Braun mission.

Yep, it seems you posted an incorrect album link. If there isn't a shuttle hiding somewhere in that forest.... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Grrr, it looks like the forum used the code as an image link instead of an album code.  Here is the album:

https://m.imgur.com/a/OHYUC

It appears that despite my best efforts, imgur scrambled the order of my images. And forgot a bunch of captions. I'll fix that asap.

I suppose it could have been a lot worse--the image code might have linked to a NSFW image....

Here's a sample:

KLjc5VT.jpg

Spoiler
Spoiler

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys, New guy here

When i first noticed this is a challange, i had to do it.
This challange had a lot of firsts for me, like first docking of mk3 Capsules, First landing on runway, First MMU.

So I am sorry if i accidently did something that isn't allowed (or left out anything)

Other than that I am Giving yee (plurar you) guys the STS-1A, 2A, 3 and 4R mission reports

 

STS 1A
STS 2A
SRS 3
SRS-4R

 

Bye bye!

P.S. Don't know if i have to mention michal.don, if not sorry

@michal.don

Edit: Mods that would effect performance: KER (For inclination and these stuff)
Edit2: 4R link fixed :)

Edited by Artienia

Share this post


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

SRS-4R

 

 

this does not follow through to imgur, anyone else? it just takes me back to the ksp forum. other links are ok

I like your design. don't be afraid of asymmetrical designs, u just need to work the thrust limiter, your shuttle is very... Shuttle-y i like it, i also like the in atmosphere flight capability. Check out the plans for the original Buran Shuttle. It included turbojets. One question with your design, is there a reason you are using small landing gear in the rear and not large? generally, a nose up position is only used for aircraft that take off from the runway, a nose-down position is easier to land usually, as the rear gear are bigger and thus can handle more stress.

btw, Welcome to the Shuttle Challenge!
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, biomecaman said:

this does not follow through to imgur, anyone else? it just takes me back to the ksp forum. other links are ok

I like your design. don't be afraid of asymmetrical designs, u just need to work the thrust limiter, your shuttle is very... Shuttle-y i like it, i also like the in atmosphere flight capability. Check out the plans for the original Buran Shuttle. It included turbojets. One question with your design, is there a reason you are using small landing gear in the rear and not large? generally, a nose up position is only used for aircraft that take off from the runway, a nose-down position is easier to land usually, as the rear gear are bigger and thus can handle more stress.

btw, Welcome to the Shuttle Challenge!
 

Link is broken? I think it is fixed now

This was my first shuttle so i needed to start easy.
I always (thought) to knew that having larger grears in the front will make easier to land.
Guess this is not the case

Also thank you. I have been refreshing every 10 min for a new post to get inspiration

i am trying to get the STS-9 (asteroid one) to get it to work. haven't done the station one but that would be easy. every time i catch a potato i just.... booom crashed. i have an idea for an INLINE asteroid storage (made out of 1x1 and 2x2 panels) but i don't know how that would go oiut. only way is to find out!  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Artienia said:

every time i catch a potato i just.... booom crashed

I experienced a similar problem when I did my own potato hunt. I found that the fewer parts you have in between your main structure and the potato catcher (grappling hook) the lees likely you are to experience BOOM when catching. Also, make sure to use the "autostrut" function in the right click menu in the editor to strut the catcher to the heaviest part of your ship, it will make for much more pleasant hunting of asteriods. And whatever you do, never put a docking port between your ship and your potato catcher, it will severely increase the likelyhood to go BOOM. (At least, in my experience.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, hoioh said:

I experienced a similar problem when I did my own potato hunt. I found that the fewer parts you have in between your main structure and the potato catcher (grappling hook) the lees likely you are to experience BOOM when catching. Also, make sure to use the "autostrut" function in the right click menu in the editor to strut the catcher to the heaviest part of your ship, it will make for much more pleasant hunting of asteriods. And whatever you do, never put a docking port between your ship and your potato catcher, it will severely increase the likelyhood to go BOOM. (At least, in my experience.)

...i had a docking port... and it was FLIPPY FLOPPY FUN ALL TEH WAYS DOWN!!! :sticktongue: no boom boom though..

@Artienia looks fixed now, though im in shock that the mk1 passenger compartment survived re-entry
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Artienia said:

Link is broken? I think it is fixed now

Yep, it is working now.  Welcome!  By the way, it's not necessary to summon michal.don into the forums, he checks the challenge quite regularly, but I don't think it's a problem if you do so. :) 

About the potato catcher, I'd say the ammount of parts between the main structure and the claw do not matter at all as long as you secure them with a few struts to hold in position.  I had no idea about the docking ports, do they really make the ship explode??  Wow!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.