sumghai

[WIP] Sum Dum Heavy Industries Service Module System (Stockalike)

Recommended Posts

As I've hinted a few times in the FusTek Station Parts Expansion threads, I've also been musing with the idea of making a service module and associated accessories for use with the in-game Mk1-2 Command Pod. While there are a number of similar solutions currently available from other modders, I'm aiming for geometry very loosely inspired by NASA's Orion MPCV, but with stockalike aesthetics to ensure compatibility with other stock parts in-game.

At the time of posting, I already had some prototype parts working in-game; however, I delayed making the announcement because:

- The prototypes are purely functional with little to no geometry

- This parts pack is (partially) dependent on the the IACBM docking ports I made for the FusTek pack

But anyways, I suppose I can get started now.


Progress Report, 1 September 2013

I've cobbled together a rather crude graphic outlining key components in this system - two of these would be modified version of stock parts, while the majority of rest I will make from scratch to match the stock aesthetic.

ksp_sdhi_sms_wip_1_sept_2013_by_sumghai-d6kj5f5.png

Fig 1 - SolidWorks mockup depicting system components. Retractable solar panels and RCS thrusters have been omitted for clarity.

The first thing I wanted to address was the Service Module. Supernovy has made two versions of a combined Service Module (Fuel/RCS/Battery/Reaction Wheel), and while I am currently happily using it for my own setup, I personally found the pre-0.18-eqsue texture to be a little jarring. Also, while the Apollo Service module was mostly exposed during launch, I didn't like the idea of RCS thrusters and stowed solar panels being subjected to atmospheric drag at liftoff (retracting the latter does prevent breakage, but it is not aesthetically pleasing). As such, my intention is for my Service Module design to have a 2.5 m-ish mating section with the Command Pod as well as a narrower rear section covered by ejectable side fairings containing the solar panels, thrusters, and some other neat little surface-attached accessories I had in mind for future releases.

Secondly, I've noted that some folks had concerns over the use of docking ports and parachutes. Currently, the only stock solutions are to either choose between having a docking port or a parachute at the apex of the pod, or to carefully position radial parachute packs into the sloped sides of the pod (no easy feat). My current idea is to combine both into one assembly, with the parachute stowed in a side compartment built into the docking port and triggered through staging or action groups as usual. MODEL{} nodes would allow me to reuse the mesh of the stock Clamp-o-tron for this purpose.

I've also realized that the new IACBM docking ports from my FusTek pack are (deliberately) incompatible with Clamp-o-trons, and so I will be including an IACBM variant of the parachute-enhanced docking port as well.

In terms of the Service Module's main engine, I decided that just the stock Rockomax LV-909 would suffice; however, it will come as a variant without the auto-fairings (since I already have fairings for the Service Module proper).

A heat shield has been thrown in for good measure; I have no idea how to make it Deadly Reentry compatible (as I don't use the mod myself).

Finally, I won't be making an Escape Tower, since not everyone would use one, and mods like KSPX and BFGfreak's Prilla LES would already suffice.


Work In Progress (WIP) parts available for download

Dropbox - this link will be updated irregularly with newly-completed parts, so check back regularly!

Edited by sumghai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick question, are your IACBM's the same thickness as the stock clamp-o-trons? If not wouldn't that shift the attachment point of the shroud?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quick question, are your IACBM's the same thickness as the stock clamp-o-trons? If not wouldn't that shift the attachment point of the shroud?

They're not the same thickness. Using two attachment nodes in the shroud would let one part handle either dock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or, since he plans on creating modified versions of both docking ports any way, he could add an addition attachment node to both ports for the shroud to attach to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"Sum Dum"

Dum Dum?

Night at the museum? :D

As much as I enjoyed the film and its sequel, SDHI isn't named after the bubblegum-chewing Moai statue.

Rather, it's based on two ideas:

- Asian Original Equipment Manufacturers who make stuff that other companies sell under the latter's own brands (case in point: the Karmony variants are branded as "FusTek")

- The classic "Some Dumb" glacier joke

Quick question, are your IACBM's the same thickness as the stock clamp-o-trons? If not wouldn't that shift the attachment point of the shroud?
They're not the same thickness. Using two attachment nodes in the shroud would let one part handle either dock.
Or, since he plans on creating modified versions of both docking ports any way, he could add an addition attachment node to both ports for the shroud to attach to.

My 1.25m IACBMs are shallower than the Clamp-o-trons in terms of top and bottom stack attachment nodes (0.19 vs approximate 0.28 m). I plan to make this particular 1.25m IACBM variant thicker to match for the following reasons:

- A 0.09m different in attachment node locations for the shroud would result in a horrible "jiggle" as the VAB editor struggles to resolve between the two (very close) connections

- Part of the Mk1-2 Command Pod clips through the standard IACBM rather hideously

- Extra volume for the parachute compartment and Yellow-bordered hatch

This way, the shroud will only need one attachment node for either docking ports and one for the escape tower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As much as I enjoyed the film and its sequel, SDHI isn't named after the bubblegum-chewing Moai statue.

Rather, it's based on two ideas:

- Asian Original Equipment Manufacturers who make stuff that other companies sell under the latter's own brands (case in point: the Karmony variants are branded as "FusTek")

- The classic "Some Dumb" glacier joke

It always makes me think of Fuji Heavy Industries, probably better known to most people as* Subaru.

*Fuji Heavy Industries school for kids who want to make cars good, but probably do other stuff good too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It always makes me think of Fuji Heavy Industries, probably better known to most people as* Subaru.

*Fuji Heavy Industries school for kids who want to make cars good, but probably do other stuff good too

I'm of Oriental descent, and I LOL'ed as soon as I got the reference.

All comments in jest aside, I'm currently doing an emergency fix for some FusTek parts, and will get back to you guys shortly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bigger IACBM makes sense. I get the feeling this is going to be the second part pack I won't be able to go without (you could probably guess the first).

Also, I do use Deadly Re-entry, so when you release the heat shield I could probably set it up.

Edited by Archer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Progress Report, 6 September 2013

A couple of detours dealing with some real life stuff and a few bugfixes for the FusTek stuff later, and the first SDHI part is pretty much complete - a heat shield designed specifically for use with the stock Mk1-2 Pod:

ksp_sdhi_sms_heatshield_final_6_sept_2013_by_sumghai-d6l7nu0.png

Fig 2 - SDHI Heat Shield for Mk1-2 Pod - Final Testing

The design and functionality of the heat shield were inspired by a mix of various real-life systems - a carbon fibre carrier for multiple-use ablative PICA-X tiles (SpaceX Dragon - Ref 1, Ref 2, Ref 3) supported by an internal titanium skeleton (NASA's Orion MPCV - Ref 1, Ref 2). In particular, the internal frame meshes perfectly with the supports on the bottom of the Mk1-2 Pod, while the curved rims intersect with the pod mesh to ensure good conformal protection of the bottom area.

Some of you may note the six little circles inscribed into the surface of the heat shield, as well as the corresponding metal support "rings" - these are where the tension ties for afixing the pod, heat shield and service module together will be located. Prior to re-entry, these ties are explosively severed in order to separate the pod from the service module, as described in the Operations Handbook for Block II version of the Apollo Spacecraft (Page 39 / Fig 2.9-30). I'm not 100% sure how such a structural connection worked without compromising the surface of the heat shield, but if it's been done in real life, I presume it's doable in KSP as well.

(ASIDE - I'm a little annoyed that there is no clear area for a power/data umblical connection between the Mk1-2 Pod and any Service Modules. I guess this is an oversight on SQUAD's part, so for now I'll pretend one of the hold-down points is also used for said purpose.)

Also note that, contrary to what the bottom-right hand picture may suggest, I don't have heat emissives in this model - that's just the standard KSP shader that makes any part glow red hot during (very steep) re-entry.

Next Up: The Service Module itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed it meshes well :) In fact this heatshield looks like integral part of the capsule - well done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That heat shield is so perfect that I hope you'll release it right now before the rest of the parts. Wow, I want.

Any of us experienced with deadly reentry will be able to easily write cfgs for that.

About the rest of the design, it appears you are modeling after the original Orion Service Module design not the newer ATV based design, is this correct?

Will you be designing custom Solar Panels or designing the module to fit stock solar panels?

All in all looking forward to this to improve my Cucumber CTV, that's currently flying my crew transfer missions to my FusTek based Melon space station.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That heat shield is so perfect that I hope you'll release it right now before the rest of the parts. Wow, I want.

Here you go - this zip will automatically be updated as I finish prototyping new parts, so check back regularly.

I'll quickly update my first post with this link as well.

Any of us experienced with deadly reentry will be able to easily write cfgs for that.

Right now I've just copy and pasted sample configs from the Deadly Reentry mod, although I don't know if DR has any other specific requires in order for parts to be considered "shielded".

About the rest of the design, it appears you are modeling after the original Orion Service Module design not the newer ATV based design, is this correct?

Correct - specifically, I'm aiming for something similar to the 606 configuration.

Will you be designing custom Solar Panels or designing the module to fit stock solar panels?

For V1.0, the service module/fairing combo will be designed with the following stock solar panels in mind:

- OX-4W 2x3

- OX-4L 1x6

- SP-A (Shrouded)

- SP-B (Shrouded)

(The Gigantor XL will be far too big to fit under the ejectable fairings)

V1.1 will probably see the addition of a stock-textured version of Lionhead Aerospace's Circular Solar Panels as well.

All in all looking forward to this to improve my Cucumber CTV, that's currently flying my crew transfer missions to my FusTek based Melon space station.

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the heat shield should have a decoupler. That is, the decoupler that decouples the service module should be integrated in the heat shield rather than the service module, if only because that would make it more generally useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The heat shield looks fantastic, however, i feel it has unnecessarily high detail on the inside with the frame. Since the only time it will be seen is when intalling in the VAB, or for a couple seconds when ejecting, have you thought about reducing the detail on the metal structure to reduce polys? Also, when a decoupler is mounted below the heat shield, does a shroud appear similar to engines or Bobcat's HOME heatshield?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That shouldn't matter Blaylock, nearly every 3d engine out there has Occlusion, where it doesn't draw the polys you wouldn't be able to see. I'm sure Unity has the same thing, it would be silly for it not to.

It does not have an autofarring at this time, I hope he adds one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Progress Report, 10 September 2013

A little over one weekend of banging and shouting later, I've prototyped the Service Module itself and its associated staging adapter, as well as re-CFGing a version of the stock LV-909 engine to disable its original auto-fairings:

ksp_sdhi_sms_wip_10_sept_2013_1_by_sumghai-d6lq7df.png

Fig 3 - (WIP) SDHI Service Module System (1)

ksp_sdhi_sms_wip_10_sept_2013_2_by_sumghai-d6lq7js.png

Fig 4 - (WIP) SDHI Service Module System (2)

ksp_sdhi_sms_wip_10_sept_2013_3_by_sumghai-d6lq7to.png

Fig 5 - (WIP) SDHI Service Module System (3)

As mentioned previously, the Service Module itself is loosely based on the Orion MPCV pre-ATV 606 design, with its distinctive stepped fuselage configuration consisting of an avionics ring decoupler recess (where the heat shield will sit snugly within) and a somewhat reduced-diameter propulsion section (containing 360 LF / 440 LO as well as 100 MonoPropellant and 100 ElectricCharge). I'm fairly happy with the fuel capacity as-is, given that it is sufficient for a round-trip to the Mun with ample Delta-v for circularisation / departure burns without being too overpowered.

One thing that has me really stumped is painting a stock-like texture on these parts. Unlike my shiny white FusTek stuff with regular, consistent and repeatable areas, I'm finding it rather difficult to paint all the little smudges and highlights in the right colors and brush sizes required to match the Mk1-2 Pod. Volunteers with experience texturing stockalike parts would be greatly appreciated.

Next Up: Side fairings, perhaps?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another excellent part :D But, for some strange reason i feel that Dragon-style solar panels would look better. But that's just me ;D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

does it have enough oomph to shove a lander to mun (but not back), Apollo style? Speaking of, I wish we had a nice LEM style 'service module' to stick under lander can mk2 that would be compact enough to not be tall and wobbly but also still have enough room to shoehorn in an ascent stage insde the descent stage ( leaving the descent stage behind, apollo style). Also, all of it being narrow enough to fit inside a 2.5m fuselage... so again, Apollo style you could pull it out of the upper stage without it banging into the fairings or w/e or just simply having exploding fairings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the lander can mk2 is actually way larger and heavier than it ought to be, if you wnat to use it for mun landings - the LEM was basically made of tinfoil, and the lander can is about 4 times what it should be, unless it has integral RCS tanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another excellent part :D But, for some strange reason i feel that Dragon-style solar panels would look better. But that's just me ;D

Actually, I agree - the test vessel with those Lionhead Aerospace panels was something I just threw together quickly to check clearance for fairings. But for now, I'll probably revert to using stock panels.

does it have enough oomph to shove a lander to mun (but not back), Apollo style?

I hope so - as it is right now, the Service Module is able to circularize into a stable orbit around the Mun and perform a Kerbin-return departure burn on its own with delta-v to spare, so pushing a lander as well shouldn't be out of the question.


Progress Report, 11 September 2013

Managed to get the staging adapter to have some semblance of stock textures (at least, closely matching the Mk1-2 Pod):

sdhi_service_module_adapter___final_testing_by_sumghai-d6ltudh.png

Fig 6 - SDHI Service Module Adapter - Final Testing

Share this post


Link to post
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.