Jump to content

[1.5] KOOSE mini reentry pod aka escape pod


Recommended Posts

I know this is not supposed to be used as a launcher, but I wanted to try it on a test rocket in early career, because is can be used unmanned and manned.

For whatever reason the SRBs fired on launchpad after scene load without any staging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Gordon Dry said:

I just found some of these obscure *nix encoding question marks in the MM cache, like this:


tags = capsule cmg control ?eva fly gyro ?iva moment pilot react rocket space stab steer torque

 

@Gordon Dry Why don't you post a bug report in the ModuleManager thread?  It seems that MM is not handing the UTF8 characters properly.

Regarding this, those probably aren't bad chars (not sure), they may be part of the tag syntax

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@linuxgurugamer Well, I've seen these question marks so much in all different kinds of files, just because I use Windows and not Linux ... they appear in the middle of description texts or where ever, just likely that they don't belong there.
This only occurs when the file encoding is some *nix kind of.
 

It seems that a Linux user will never see it before converting it to Windows encoding ... and then scratching the head and asking "Why?" - for real, what is the purpose of hidden/invisible characters in the middle of a text?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Gordon Dry said:

@linuxgurugamer Well, I've seen these question marks so much in all different kinds of files, just because I use Windows and not Linux ... they appear in the middle of description texts or where ever, just likely that they don't belong there.
This only occurs when the file encoding is some *nix kind of.
 

It seems that a Linux user will never see it before converting it to Windows encoding ... and then scratching the head and asking "Why?" - for real, what is the purpose of hidden/invisible characters in the middle of a text?

Yes, but in this specific case, they can be part of the tag syntax.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Gordon Dry said:

I just found some of these obscure *nix encoding question marks in the MM cache, like this:


tags = capsule cmg control ?eva fly gyro ?iva moment pilot react rocket space stab steer torque

 

They're standard entries for the "tags" field.  For example the Mk1-3 pod has the following

#autoLOC_501807 = capsule cmg control ?eva fly gyro ?iva moment pilot react rocket space stab steer torque

 

4 hours ago, Gordon Dry said:

@linuxgurugamer Well, I've seen these question marks so much in all different kinds of files, just because I use Windows and not Linux ... they appear in the middle of description texts or where ever, just likely that they don't belong there.
This only occurs when the file encoding is some *nix kind of.
 

It seems that a Linux user will never see it before converting it to Windows encoding ... and then scratching the head and asking "Why?" - for real, what is the purpose of hidden/invisible characters in the middle of a text?

The "let's blindly convert from character encoding to different character encoding" entries are usually things like "smart" quote marks or emdashes and so on.  EG: the quote marks from Mac documents used to show up around the internet as weird Q-like characters.  It's just a feature of taking one extended character set and blindly assuming you can use a different extended character set.  The characters making weird symbols usually aren't invisible, but they might be functionally invisible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I've updated the Spacedock (and thus CKAN) release.  It IS compatible with KSP 1.4.5, but spacedock isn't yet.

I've included a bunch of patches written by other people, called out in an updates license doc.  Also, I've put in some custom rocket plumes;

48qO5x8.png

Those are mostly there because the stock RCS just didn't really get small enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So since I didn't see anyone post this... Bug report.  Koose Parachute in beginning VAB.   Koose on top of a rocket is 12.2m tall...  Add the Parachute to the Koose pod and it auto-magically grows to ~35m tall.   I don't know if KSP is using the DEPLOYED height for calculation the Koose Parachute but that appears to be it.  I am using Realchute/Safechute if it matters.   I was just building a small rocket at the start to test out manned flight...  Figured an almost Safety orange capsule would make a good 1st launch :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can confirm the above. Not sure it presents an actual problem though, it's just weird. The first part I picked to use for the test was a cockpit from another part mod, and that claimed to be 25m tall on its own, so I think it's just internal KSP weirdness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd change out the retro-rocket for a monoprop-retrothruster to reduce weight and resource count (increase total RCS fuel to compensate.)

I'd also add a view-port inside the docking clamp to serve as a window for the IVA.  (I would add a second display panel above the kerbal's head in IVA as well.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/14/2018 at 9:00 AM, Pappystein said:

So since I didn't see anyone post this... Bug report.  Koose Parachute in beginning VAB.   Koose on top of a rocket is 12.2m tall...  Add the Parachute to the Koose pod and it auto-magically grows to ~35m tall.   I don't know if KSP is using the DEPLOYED height for calculation the Koose Parachute but that appears to be it.  I am using Realchute/Safechute if it matters.   I was just building a small rocket at the start to test out manned flight...  Figured an almost Safety orange capsule would make a good 1st launch :)

 

I meant to reply to this earlier. I would guess its adding the parachute canopy. But also I never even noticed ksp calculates the vessel height. I need to check this. It's possible with some config for real chute that the issue could go away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a cool model and good artwork IMO.  

It did get me thinking though.  I know escape pods are pretty common in a sci-fi and video games, but does it really make sense?   Something like this would really only be good for one planet, like earth where you need the heat shield to survive reentry and it has an atmosphere where a parachute would work.  And its not like you can live in the pod for long, so you know you need to land somewhere that you can get out and still survive.  So yeah, if you want to build a spacecraft that never leaves earth, then these would be a great safety measure to have.  

Also thinking about life boats?  Say you have a disaster scenario where the main reactor that powers the ship is going to explode.  Everyone gets to the life boat and escapes the destruction.  You have cramped quarters and limited supplies to wait for a rescue, but your still in orbit so rescue would be easier, there is always that.  What if it happens in orbit of mars vs in orbit of jupiter.  Each situation would need dramatically different capabilities from the life boat for the crew to have a reasonable chance of it being useful, meaning every emergency situation would require a different type of escape vehicle.  Soon you are devoting as much weight to escape systems as you are to the main mission.  

So, I ask, do escape systems from spacecraft in general make sense?   Like in our exploding reactor scenario, the escape pod weight could have been used to make the ship segmented and able to ditch the reactor and save the main crew areas, at least then they may survive long enough for a rescue.  Or if you do have a life boat escape system do you also need multiple redundant and independent supply caches that are pre-deployed to ensure the crews ability to survive disaster scenarios?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@eberkain I use a KOOSE Nest for career rescue missions. Instead of launching new rockets for each rescue mission, I  have a ship docked at the station to go retrieve lost Kerbals and bring them back to the station. The escape pods do the final leg of getting them back to the surface. When the Nest is empty I cut it loose, and ship up a full one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎8‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 6:00 PM, Pappystein said:

So since I didn't see anyone post this... Bug report.  Koose Parachute in beginning VAB.   Koose on top of a rocket is 12.2m tall...  Add the Parachute to the Koose pod and it auto-magically grows to ~35m tall.   I don't know if KSP is using the DEPLOYED height for calculation the Koose Parachute but that appears to be it.  I am using Realchute/Safechute if it matters.   I was just building a small rocket at the start to test out manned flight...  Figured an almost Safety orange capsule would make a good 1st launch :)

 

Are you using the Animated Attachment mod?  I seem am seeing stuff get attached and it seems to distort the height and width using drag cube values or something.  If I disable the animated attachment then attach a part it does seem to work correctly most of the time.  (Not fully tested)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@eberkain they don't make any sense in reality. They're pretty much only useful for reentry from something like a LEO station, where you'd presumably have reentry capable craft docked matching what crew you have anyway.

Maybe in an ISS scenario where you use something like the shuttle fitted out for passenger transport there might be a window of opportunity for needing something. But the reality is that they're a staple of science fiction, not reality. But people still want them in ksp. And as with all ksp things, people will find a use for them.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Atomic Rockets has a good page on this:  http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/emergency.php

I wouldn't go so far as to say they don't make any sense - A large orbiting platform in low orbit around a habitable planet is useful after all.  Having a supply of small escape craft if something goes wrong with the station makes sense - get to the surface if there's a problem in orbit.  Sure.  And on a large station with some permanent population, I can easily see not having normal reentry craft available for all of them, in which case augmenting that with some minimalistic escape pods makes sense.

Note that's for a space station.  For a ship - that has an engine, and is intended to *travel* places - they make no sense, unless you have ships that basically 'jump' between planetary orbits, somehow.  (Or if you have some hybernation tech that's sufficiently small and robust - but you don't want to use it to put the crew to sleep during the journey.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's also fairly critical the planet below is at least more habitable than a space station undergoing whatever emergency you're having. I can't see these in use over venus for instance.

But yes, basically there are reasons for them, but humanity has never been in a position where they make sense.

one is case that is possible in rl but not ksp is covering for reentry is the main reentry vehicle has a fault and there's an urgent need to leave. Maybe a mm strike that takes out the lifesupport and Soyuz on iss for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, TiktaalikDreaming said:

one is case that is possible in rl but not ksp is covering for reentry is the main reentry vehicle has a fault and there's an urgent need to leave. Maybe a mm strike that takes out the lifesupport and Soyuz on iss for example.

Or the foam that hit the space shuttle's heat tiles...

'An urgent need to leave' only means you're out of lifesupport after all.  It doesn't have to be big.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Vaga said:

Are you using the Animated Attachment mod?  I seem am seeing stuff get attached and it seems to distort the height and width using drag cube values or something.  If I disable the animated attachment then attach a part it does seem to work correctly most of the time.  (Not fully tested)

No,  I have BDB and attendant attachments (B9PartSwitch, CRK and the OPT re-config my Jadeofmaar.)   Beyond that it is simple gizmos like Diazo's VVC, NavHud and RealChute/SafeChute.    I did notice this on several chutes so a possibility that Realchute is applying things incorrectly can not be left out.....   I will remove Realchute/Safe chute and check again.

 

PS Craft height only matters when doing a full career.   I launched a single Koose on a 3 Vanguard first stage (ala Delta IV / Falcon9H) arrangement before I had even unlocked 1.25m or any other 0.9375m rocket parts.

43 minutes ago, DStaal said:

Or the foam that hit the space shuttle's heat tiles...

'An urgent need to leave' only means you're out of lifesupport after all.  It doesn't have to be big.

 

I can actually think of a LOT of reasons these craft DO make sense.    IF placed 1 per module on a space station (and not in a centralized nest.... SORRY! :) )

  • The Module between me and the rest of the station has ruptured but I was able to close this module off before total de-compression.
  • A catastrophic structural failure of the docking ports with new craft
  • the afor mentioned Micro-Meteorite scenario
  • The Apollo 13 Scenario.

The question isn't if these are useful it is rather is a Kerbal's life worth the cost/space/mass/resources used to crate these buggers up and HOPE you never have to  use them

 

Edited by Pappystein
Added Concluding line
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/16/2018 at 10:23 AM, Pappystein said:

No,  I have BDB and attendant attachments (B9PartSwitch, CRK and the OPT re-config my Jadeofmaar.)   Beyond that it is simple gizmos like Diazo's VVC, NavHud and RealChute/SafeChute.    I did notice this on several chutes so a possibility that Realchute is applying things incorrectly can not be left out.....   I will remove Realchute/Safe chute and check again.

 

My understanding is that with realchute, but no config for the chute, you have a part that has an animation (deploying the chute) that isn't ties to anything.  And so it probably counts towards the height.  Especially as with this chute (and most others that I'm aware of) the chute is animated by shrinking the canopy mesh for when it's not deployed.  Rather than a small mesh that is expanded.  So the "unanimated" state is actually with the parachute fully deployed.  But, I haven't really had time to look yet.  Maybe this weekend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can confirm the height silliness is a factor with no parachute altering mods installed, and that it's these chutes, and stock chutes don't exhibit this behaviour.

And I can confirm the same behaviour with other parachutes I've made for other mods.  :(

I suspect I've missed some layering.  Off to find details, and then update EVERYTHING.  (Actually, just a couple of extra mods, NAR_MEM, and aggregate)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can think of a use for them, if you tinker with them a bit and give them a slightly larger range, point in case, the "new" lost in space on netflix, the jupiter's are technically lifeboats of the main transport ship.

 

Link to comment
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...