Starliner looks Kerbalized

[DeadJohn]

In KSP terms, it looks like different artists picked mismatched colors/textures for the upper capsule and lower service module

[mikegarrison]

It really kind of does, doesn't it? Mix and match components, thrusters spammed everywhere (and good thing, too!), random parts just slapped on with radial attachment points, non-flush rivets and fasteners, etc.....

[PlasmaIndustries]

Agreed.

[tater]

The whole stack to be honest is the most Kerbal thing, ever.

Large dia sustainer, small SRBs, decrease diameter to Centaur, increase to SM/capsule.

Definitely no tweakscale, and no clipping on that one.

[DeadJohn]

^ also the Starliner skirt without any taper; the real engineers don't agree with us that connected parts should have the same node size. Real life aero is bugged.

[Minmus Taster]

I agree, the whole thing is very Kerbal if you really think about it.

This kind of feels like something that should be in the main thread though.

[magnemoe]

The things who bugs me is the black plate with 3-2-3 holes, its looks weirder than anything else and they had to launch with that thing?
Else I agree, its like most other stuff Jeb has gone into orbit on  

[mikegarrison]

2 hours ago, magnemoe said:

The things who bugs me is the black plate with 3-2-3 holes, its looks weirder than anything else and they had to launch with that thing?

I believe that device controls where the shock attaches, or something like that. I think that's what they explained in one of the videos.

[tater]

I actually like the capsule. It seems perfectly suited for the task—a taxi to a LEO station.

[kerbiloid]

And if recall its unstoppable RCS work on docking, it doesnt just look Kerbal. It's controlled by MechJeb and kRPC.

[CFYL]

What do they have in the SM fuel tank? monopropellant? Do they bring ISRU to ISS and drag aestroid 1989 JA to LEO, where they can produce liquid fuel and oxidizer, which can feed all bipropellant engines?

[Nuke]

19 hours ago, tater said:

The whole stack to be honest is the most Kerbal thing, ever.

Large dia sustainer, small SRBs, decrease diameter to Centaur, increase to SM/capsule.

Definitely no tweakscale, and no clipping on that one.

was it just me or did it seem like one of the srbs was offset. every time i watch the launch it seems off.  i know ive made that mistake a couple times in ksp, usually with explosive results.

Edited May 25, 2022 by Nuke

[tater]

18 minutes ago, Nuke said:

was it just me or did it seem like one of the srbs was offset. every time i watch the launch it seems off.  i know ive made that mistake a couple times in ksp, usually with explosive results.

Yep:

 

[Nuke]

i think this may very well be the ugliest rocket ever sent to space. 

[mikegarrison]

15 minutes ago, tater said:

Yep:

 

There can be from 0-5 SRBs on an Atlas V rocket, and none of them are  radially symmetric (except 0, depending on how you define symmetric).

They all have some offset to avoid the pipes and raceways on the outside of the tank.

 

The Starliner version is the N22 -- N for no fairing, 2 for the number of SRBs, and 2 for the number of Centaur engines.

14 minutes ago, Nuke said:

i think this may very well be the ugliest rocket ever sent to space. 

Also so far the one with the highest success rate.

Edited May 25, 2022 by mikegarrison

[kerbiloid]

They should try the part clipping.

[tater]

57 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:

The Starliner version is the N22 -- N for no fairing, 2 for the number of SRBs, and 2 for the number of Centaur engines.

Looking at the offset makes me wonder about the roll program. Does it roll to put the center of the smaller gap between the 2 SRMs up, down, or is that not a concern.

[sevenperforce]

5 hours ago, tater said:

6 hours ago, mikegarrison said:

The Starliner version is the N22 -- N for no fairing, 2 for the number of SRBs, and 2 for the number of Centaur engines.

Looking at the offset makes me wonder about the roll program. Does it roll to put the center of the smaller gap between the 2 SRMs up, down, or is that not a concern.

It wouldn't make any difference. All of the SRMs are identical; they each have an angled nozzle that aligns the thrust vector above the center of mass of the vehicle up through burnout. Thrust vectoring on the RD-180 handles the rest.

When I have built Atlas V clones in KSP, I've built an SRM subassembly with clipped-in liquid tanks and Thud engines clipped into the nozzle that fire at an angle to make the sum thrust vector angled properly. That way it doesn't matter where the SRM goes or how many I place.

18 hours ago, tater said:

I actually like the capsule. It seems perfectly suited for the task—a taxi to a LEO station.

Yeah it works pretty well for what it is. And landing on airbags is pretty cool for reuse. It's not like heat shields REALLY need to be reused, after all. Feeding the LAS engines from the OMS/RCS tanks is more efficient but a little squicky...although at least it's not as bad as having the LAS tanks inside the capsule itself.

Imagine if we'd had all the kinks worked out a decade ago and we had been flying a capsule like this since the end of the Shuttle program.

9 hours ago, CFYL said:

What do they have in the SM fuel tank? monopropellant? Do they bring ISRU to ISS and drag aestroid 1989 JA to LEO, where they can produce liquid fuel and oxidizer, which can feed all bipropellant engines?

The capsule itself has roll, pitch, and yaw thrusters fed by hydrazine monopropellant. The service module is 100% bipropellant hypergolic. Same as Orion, except that Orion has a completely separate solid-fueled launch abort tower, and Starliner uses four large engines on the service module for aborts.

[steve9728]

As a fan of symmetry and fairings, I like rockets all over the world. Except Atlas V…

Who the *** design this!

[Geonovast]

21 hours ago, Nuke said:

i think this may very well be the ugliest rocket ever sent to space. 

Ariane 4 would like a word with you.

 

I do really like the Atlas V, despite it being... wonky.  Even in the N22 config.  I think mainly because it's so... modular, and that scratches all the right itches for me.  Atlas V would definitely be my second choice to go watch launch in person, after a Falcon 9 (ideally RTLS).

I seem to recall Scott Manley mentioning in an Atlas V video that the weird offsetness of the SRBs was from the general design not being initially made for SRBs, so all the piping gets in the way.

[tater]

I like the 500 series.

[kerbiloid]

3 hours ago, steve9728 said:

As a fan of symmetry and fairings, I like rockets all over the world. Except Atlas V…

Who the *** design this!

They.
 

Spoiler

 

[Kerb24]

On 5/25/2022 at 1:20 PM, mikegarrison said:

There can be from 0-5 SRBs on an Atlas V rocket, and none of them are  radially symmetric

You have just ruined the Atlas V for me.

[kerbiloid]

They use the Throttle Controlled Avionics mod, and it works well with asymmetric engines.

[Gargamel]

Let’s keep this thread to the discussion of how kerbal Starliner, and all other discussion to the linked thread.