A more realistic spaceship / enterprise.

[SpaceMouse]

Still playing with the front. Haven't quite decided how I want to do the bridge, originally I stuck it on the very top but, it looked stuck on, and I wasn't real fond of it. I like this a little better but would still really like some opinions. How do I change it? what do I put on the bottom of the front module? 

[StarStreak2109]

It's coming along nicely! Looking forward to try this out!

Maybe put some addition sensor equipment on the bottom?

[SpaceMouse]

8 hours ago, StarStreak2109 said:

It's coming along nicely! Looking forward to try this out!

Maybe put some addition sensor equipment on the bottom?

That's kinda what I was thinking. I don't really have any dedicated spots for 'science' parts so I cut out one for something oversized.

[SpaceMouse]

Did some work on the business end. Doors will get magnetic coils too, I'll add a bunch of coolant lines for reactor mode, and it'll get a hydrogen inlet.

[bjornadri]

how's this coming along? looking really good so far!

[SpaceMouse]

22 hours ago, bjornadri said:

how's this coming along? looking really good so far!

Thanks! I'm about at texturing stage. I've added some details to the main drive, I have to add them to the doors, and should probably do some hinge assembly thing for the front hangar doors. I bounce around between projects a lot but wanna get some stuff wrapped up including this in the next couple months.

Edited August 7, 2018 by SpaceMouse

[bjornadri]

Real Nice! keep on doing what you do!

[SpaceMouse]

Did a bit of fiddling with the SSTO today. Was gonna ditch the vectoring nozzles for more RCS style huge directional ports, but then decided It wouldn't be too hard to make them retractable, and stuck a vent in back so they could still run in 'aerodynamic' mode.

I'd love some criticism on my physics here.

[Fengist]

 

[SpaceMouse]

1 hour ago, Fengist said:

 

Meh, I'm running closer to 30 Gigawatts. Maybe Jiggawatts will be a upgrade.

[SpaceMouse]

Fiddled with the intakes, and now gear, and gear-door placeholders.

[Jesusthebird]

14 hours ago, SpaceMouse said:

Fiddled with the intakes, and now gear, and gear-door placeholders.

*Heavy breathing* im itching to try this

[StarStreak2109]

@SpaceMouse This looks awesome!

[SpaceMouse]

Thanks everyone. I've got a few projects i NEED to finish first. I'm aiming to have this done by Christmas. No promises though, I keep on thinking of things i want to change.

@FreeThinker or (anyone), what might you suggest for directional lift thrust on non-atmospheric worlds? I was thinking maybe some 'afterburner' system in the thrust nozzles, Or perhaps some high-efficency attached rockets.

[FreeThinker]

10 minutes ago, SpaceMouse said:

 

@FreeThinker or (anyone), what might you suggest for directional lift thrust on non-atmospheric worlds? I was thinking maybe some 'afterburner' system in the thrust nozzles, Or perhaps some high-efficency attached rockets.

1

On the plus side, next release, the thermal nozzles and some electric engines will respond linear, which should theoretically make it easier to use kspie engines for vertical lift.

Edited September 17, 2018 by FreeThinker

[SpaceMouse]

1 minute ago, FreeThinker said:

On the plus side, next release, the thermal nozzle and some electric engines will respond linear, which should theoretically make it easier to use thermal engines for vertical lift.

Linear throttle would make things much easier. Honestly, turbines are kinda a pain since they can't change speed anywhere near fast enough. Flying the Harrier in X-Plane is a good example of this. Another reason i was thinking about secondary thrust is improved directional control.

I've had the thought before, tiny rockets in the Harriers nozzles would have probably made flying it significantly easier.

[FreeThinker]

6 minutes ago, SpaceMouse said:

Linear throttle would make things much easier. Honestly, turbines are kinda a pain since they can't change speed anywhere near fast enough. Flying the Harrier in X-Plane is a good example of this. Another reason i was thinking about secondary thrust is improved directional control.

I've had the thought before, tiny rockets in the Harriers nozzles would have probably made flying it significantly easier.

Well, technically you could simply attach a few nozzles on the bottom of your vessel which you enable/disable by action group. SAS should be able to do the rest.

6 minutes ago, SpaceMouse said:

Linear throttle would make things much easier. Honestly, turbines are kinda a pain since they can't change speed anywhere near fast enough.

 

Well a positron powered reactor should be able to give quick and powerful enough for your needs I think. Stay Positive

Edited September 17, 2018 by FreeThinker

[SpaceMouse]

2 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

Well, technically you could simply attach a few nozzles on the bottom of your vessel which you enable/disable by action group. SAS should be able to do the rest.

Gonna need RCS thrusters anyway.

[FreeThinker]

1 minute ago, SpaceMouse said:

Gonna need RCS thrusters anyway.

You should look for RCS that perform well in the atmosphere, which generally is not the case. Alternatively, use you Mach Drive which RCS works anywhere

[SpaceMouse]

1 minute ago, FreeThinker said:

You should look for RCS that perform well in the atmosphere, which generally is not the case. Alternatively, use you Mach Drive which RCS works anywhere

Eh, I'm not sure what i want to do with the whole reaction-less thing here. I think I'd rather stay away from it but, i was contemplating giving the main ship a reactionless module to save fuel and de/accelerate within a magnetic field. But if i did that, i should really redesign a whole bunch of things since all these thrusters would be largely dead weight.

[FreeThinker]

46 minutes ago, SpaceMouse said:

Eh, I'm not sure what i want to do with the whole reaction-less thing here. I think I'd rather stay away from it but, i was contemplating giving the main ship a reactionless module to save fuel and de/accelerate within a magnetic field. But if i did that, i should really redesign a whole bunch of things since all these thrusters would be largely dead weight.

What we need is some rcs thruster which could feed directly from a reactor thermal power.  If only I had a suitable model  ...

Edited September 17, 2018 by FreeThinker

[SpaceMouse]

6 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

What we need is some rcs thruster which could feed directly from a reactor thermal power.  If only I had a suitable model  ...

Hey now, i can't make ALL of KSPI myself.

Although a glorified valve probably wouldn't take that long. Although i can't imagine it would be useful outside of a atmosphere.

Edited September 17, 2018 by SpaceMouse

[FreeThinker]

13 minutes ago, SpaceMouse said:

Hey now, i can't make ALL of KSPI myself.

Although a glorified valve probably wouldn't take that long. Although i can't imagine it would be useful outside of a atmosphere.

Why not? For starters, it would be a lot lighter than electric rcs, and you can use the propellant to keep it cool, causing it to generate less waste heat than electric RCS. isp Performance would be between stock rcs and electric rcs, but thrust would be superior when fed directly from the reactor without the nasty waste heat problems. Besides landing you could also use it to perform extreme manoeuvres in space, like dodging other vessels or missiles.

Edited September 17, 2018 by FreeThinker

[SpaceMouse]

2 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

Why not? For starters, it would be a lot lighter than electric rcs, and you can use the propellant to keep it cool, causing it to generate less waste heat than electric RCS. isp Performance would be between stock rcs and electric rcs, put thrust would be superior

Wouldn't it feeding directly off power require some kind of reaction mass? You can pump all the air as reaction mass in a atmosphere you want, but in space you need something, and i thought KSPI already had arcjet RCS. Unless your talking something much simpler like just purging hot coolant.

[FreeThinker]

14 minutes ago, SpaceMouse said:

Wouldn't it feeding directly off power require some kind of reaction mass? You can pump all the air as reaction mass in a atmosphere you want, but in space you need something, and i thought KSPI already had arcjet RCS. Unless your talking something much simpler like just purging hot coolant.

Yes of cource you need some propellant which could be either stored propellant or directly from an air intake. The point is that the RCS system is much simpler, you just combining thermal heat and some propellant, and could even use the propellant as an open cycle coolant, that your able to generate high amount of thrust for average ips ranges, for long durations. An electric engine main problem is that it cannot use open cycle cooling and electric power is a lot harder to generate due to all conversion steps. What I intend to do is clone the electric RCS thruster into a thermal  RCS thruster controller. The only requirement is that the engine model is compatible with RCS thrusters.

Edited September 17, 2018 by FreeThinker