Jump to content

Kerbin Mini Shuttle


helldiver

Recommended Posts

I meant with some form of alternate cockpit and such.

Alternate cockpit module, not alternate cockpit, right? I would imagine not--the Soviet Buran was intended to fly with a crew, but it only few completely unmanned, so it could be used for both. I imagine it's going to be the same for this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think its great you're going for accuracy out of the box with liquid hydrogen engines. It's a bit odd not to be using solid boosters in that case, though. Looks odd without that big exhaust plume.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think its great you're going for accuracy out of the box with liquid hydrogen engines. It's a bit odd not to be using solid boosters in that case, though. Looks odd without that big exhaust plume.

I agree, I want SRB's too, also, the liquid hydrogen is for the low density of fuel in the tanks, so you can get more fuel without increasing the mass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, I want SRB's too, also, the liquid hydrogen is for the low density of fuel in the tanks, so you can get more fuel without increasing the mass.

Wow, the way you say it makes it sound like an advantage. :)

In the end it all comes down to the rocket equation, and unless you can accelerate your propellant to extreme speeds (read: Tintin and the secret of the ion engine) what really matters for your fuel is mass, not volume. In that sense LH is a liability; you'll need extreme large tanks (using a precious amount of material and thus weight) to hold fuel with a certain amount of mass (compared to, say, kerosene). There are some advantages to luiquid hydrogen (otherwise it wouldn't be used), but “it doesn’t weigh a lot†isn’t one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not weighing a lot is a huge deal, given the exponential nature of the rocket equation. Weight isn't the whole story, it's energy/mass ratio, but H2 is an ideal fuel for upper stages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not weighing a lot is a huge deal, given the exponential nature of the rocket equation

I looked at the rocket equation five times now. For the life of me I cannot find a single reference to "volume," only to "mass," and 1kg of H2 is not lighter or heavier than 1kg of parafine or kerosine. So how it's an advantage for fuel that it takes up a large volume to carry a certain amount of mass of it is beyond me. It is true that H2 has higher specific energy than oil based fuels, and as long as that doesn't get offset by the extra weight required to carry all that volume there will be an advantage. Hence the use of it in upper stages.

Keep in mind that my response was to:

liquid hydrogen is for the low density of fuel in the tanks, so you can get more fuel without increasing the mass

Which suggested that H2 was great because you'd get less weight for a specific volume, which suggests an important omission in understanding the very nature of kinetic (rocket) engines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen this thread before but just now took a closer look. This looks awesome, and I love the coziness inside of the shuttle. :) Does the nose of the shuttle stay pointed up on landing? That has always been an issue when I use space planes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen this thread before but just now took a closer look. This looks awesome, and I love the coziness inside of the shuttle. :) Does the nose of the shuttle stay pointed up on landing? That has always been an issue when I use space planes.

Not sure what you mean. Does the nose stay pointed up? What do you mean?

i1Omybg.jpg

JkhoJ6o.jpg

Go a couple pages back to the imagur album I posted you can see the whole sequence from launch to landing.

If you attempt to somehow land it engines down as if it was a command capsule/moon lander, it'll explode. It's not designed for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest links123

If you go a few pages back you will see the whole sequence from the launch to landing. The nose stay pointed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was talking about when there is not enough torque to keep the plane pointed up for landing, so it hits the ground nose first. Great job on the design, it looks like it lands well. I think it's what you call a "lawn dart." Thanks, sorry for confusing you. :)

Edited by Woopert
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was talking about when there is not enough torque to keep the plane pointed up for landing, so it hits the ground nose first. Great job on the design, it looks like it lands well. I think it's what you call a "lawn dart." Thanks, sorry for confusing you. :)

If you have that problem it is not the airframe's fault but pilot error. If you don't have enough control you have a deficiency in speed. In English: SPEED UP!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The aircraft flies perfectly once you get down to atmospheric effect. Before that it falls through the atmosphere like a tumbling rock. That's just temporary as right now my alpha copy doesn't have functional RCS. Hence once I'm done in space I just tumble down, not like I can do much in space without RCS. Again keep in mind I just have an Alpha copy of the project and physics, weights, instruments are missing. They are a lot further ahead on ZRM's version of the project.

You'd have to do a descent procedure that gets you close enough to the area you wish to land. You need a runway or very flat land, I've ended up out near the foothills a few times without enough altitude to glide down to KSC, ended up tearing the whole thing apart minus the cockpit.

Once you get down to few Km above ground, the control surfaces kick in and the KSO becomes very easy to handle. You just need enough altitude to coast and glide down to KSC. The KSO is very light and very balanced currently, so much so that if you're not careful it'll balloon up easily. So it's just a matter of placing the FPM at about the halfway point to 3/4 down the runway.

At least in the current build, and even at release, your biggest concern is getting it and keeping it centered on the runway horizontally (roll). Vertically (pitch) you'll be fine, but that is subject to change since I'd like a little more weight on the nose, or an adjustable elevator trim tab. I don't want ZRM to change the handling or the runway/flat surface requirement, it's just too perfect :D

I mean it's just perfect man it flies like a Cessna.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply. I was just saying that my planes in general (or rather my piloting) result in catastrophic failure from crashing into the ground. You're making good progress and this looks very promising. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the IVA intended to be that dark or will there be a light option? I understand the glowing from the instruments is significant and needs to be seen, but I also would like to enjoy the detail you put into the cockpit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is the IVA intended to be that dark or will there be a light option? I understand the glowing from the instruments is significant and needs to be seen, but I also would like to enjoy the detail you put into the cockpit.

There's actually a light switch in the cabin. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's actually a light switch in the cabin. :)

What doesn't it have lol... so looking forward to flying this thing, possibly more than any other mod i've seen made. Besides the mod, the progress reports in this thread are pretty cool, I have to admit I have learned alot from Helldiver. His ego doesn't overstep his talent and he explains things very well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...