LitaAlto

No, at 30 km DOWN, during re-entry. I'm talking about the chutes. I'm pointing retrograde during re-entry until about 30 km, at which point the ship flips, and then I'm not able to get out of prograde. The chutes open behind the craft, and when they fully deploy, they tear the ship apart. This is all new behavior that didn't occur before. BUT--I strongly suspect that's because the CoM is rather high, given how much fuel I still had on board. So, I'm testing that theory by flying to the Mun and back. I've already landed, planted one flag, then went scouting for a better (future) landing site. I'll plant a flag there, then return--at which point I should have so little fuel left that the CoM should be close to its final position. And once I return--I'm taking the strakes off.

I'll probably save my SSTOs--the Trident and Jupitec lines--but start fresh otherwise. And then I'm testing the SSTOs to see if they even work in 1.0.

Yeah, GameFramer is in alpha and pretty much all of its stats are off. It's got promise though.... On the Jupitec 7 the chutes are above the command pod. I think the problem is the use of wing strakes--they are causing the ship to flip around at around 30 km up. At least, that's with mostly full tanks. As they didn't flip before, I presume I just need to shift the center of mass by using up fuel. So I sent it to the Mun, landed, and got a return trajectory--but the game crashed and got weird, and the last quicksave was prior to the Mun transfer. But I'm confident I can land there and return. YAY. Thank you again for the help!

Also: OMG I'm getting 3200 m/s delta-V left over after some of my test orbits with a slightly modified version of your ascent--vertical to about 4 km, then maintain roughly 100 m/s vertical speed (somehow) until air runs out. Aside from swapping some of my FL-T200 Fuel Tanks for Mk1 Liquid Fuel Fuselages, I've made no other changes. ...Although I am having some problems landing it now, without the thing flipping over the wrong way and tearing apart upon full chute deploy. I'll figure it out though.

Thank you for all the advice. Don't be sorry, that was a first stab and is nowhere near release-ready. I may not immediately replace the adaptors in the 10 though, since I'd be tempted to provide some sort of fairing no matter what. Maybe I'll wind up using struts, as little as I like doing so, just to reduce weight a bit. But I'll certainly increase the fuel. Also, I wasn't sure what exactly would constitute "the right amount" of air intakes. TBH I've already been accused of airhogging, with the preliminary photos of the 10 I released, and you're telling me I don't have nearly enough, so... Which tanks? And what changes did you make to the action groups, if I may ask? I've considered making a separate Munar lander--but if I go that route, I may as well set up fueling stations and use Jupitec 4-ADs for all Kerbin system traffic. (Which is actually the direction I'm leaning, in terms of game play, provided these crafts won't need much retuning after 1.0 drops.)

Very nicely done! I'm interested in trying your flight trajectory--so you're flying to 10 km, then a 25% curve dropping to... 20% I'd guess? Then go back to a higher percentage curve. Is that right? The Jupitec 10 was an attempt to maximize delta-V for Mun landings. But if you're able to get 2607 m/s with the Jupitec 7, that implies the 7 can actually reach the Mun under ideal circumstances.

I'm really looking forward to this!

Thanks! I was initially inspired by the Buck Rogers/Destination Moon look but given the parts it wound up looking like it came from an 80s SF movie. I'm not complaining.

This one's very simple but worth illustrating, and very handy to know.

The latest and perhaps final iteration in the Jet Propelled Test Craft project, the Jupitec 4-AD is a stock SSTO rocket designed to efficiently transfer two crew to and from orbits up to 250 km, with fuel left over for softer landings. Its main use will be for space station crew transfers, but with fueling stations in place, it could conceivably be used for travel to the Mun and Minmus. Its RAPIER dual-mode engines can utilize air intakes for fuel efficiency in lower atmospheres. A shallow ascent curve--after sufficient vertical velocity is achieved--can maximize air-breathing time for even more efficiency. The oxidizer supply is therefore lower, proportionally, than the liquid fuel supply, for weight savings. Use Action Group 1 to shut the air intakes after switching from air-breathing to closed-cycle, to reduce drag during the final part of the ascent. Ladders are keyed to the Gear Action Group. Craft file available at GameFramer.

The latest update to the Jet Propelled Test Craft project brings us the Jupitec 4-AD, fully capable of 250 km orbits with fuel to spare for soft landings. Craft file available on GameFramer.

Speaking about bugs--has anyone tried this with Kerbal Joint Reinforcement? Seems KJR stiffens joints so much that it seriously inhibits rotation. Without KJR, things spin.

I've been working on SSTO rockets for the Jet Propelled Test Craft project. The Jupitec 7, AKA "The Flying Buttress," is the latest in this line, and the first to be rated for Kerbin-Minmus shuttle traffic. It also just happens to resemble a Kothig castle. Download it here at GameFramer.

Is anyone aware of mod conflicts with Camera Tools? It was working fine for me until recently--and I am having a tricky time figuring out what changed in-between--but now any camera mode centers the camera inside the rocket, and when you press End to return to the game camera default, it displays sideways. There's a chance another mod update broke this but admittedly I haven't been careful about seeing what updates CKAN notices and installs. (And no, I'm not using Time Control.)

"Jupitec" has that "tec" syllable at the end, which makes people think of technology. What does the "v" do for you? - - - Updated - - - I did some testing of the Jupitec 7 "Flying Buttress" to see if I could conserve delta-V with a shallower ascent curve. Since the Flying Buttress breathes air during the first part of the ascent, keeping it in atmosphere for as long as possible helps to build speed, which leads to needing less delta-V to complete the orbit. Of course you still have to deal with gravity and drag, so you can't go too shallow. Using MechJeb to edit the ascent curve, I ran a launch multiple times, each with a different turn shape. Here are the turn shape percentages, and the final post-orbit delta-V estimates I get. The lower the turn shape percentage, the flatter the ascent curve, and thus the more time is spent in the region where intakes still work. 40% -- 1741 m/s 35% -- 1825 m/s 30% -- 1929 m/s 20% -- 2166 m/s 15% -- 2184 m/s I wish I had done a 25% turn shape--but it's pretty obvious to me its results would be somewhere between 2029 m/s and 2066 m/s> And of course, as you get under 20%, drag and gravity starts to take a toll. 15% can get you a bit more delta-V--but not much. I did attempt a 10% turn curve, but it became clear the craft was struggling to ascend at that point, offsetting any speed gains I could've had.

Thanks! I haven't attempted a Mun landing yet. I think the 7 doesn't have quite enough delta-V for the task, but I'm experimenting with ascent paths to shave off some more delta-V beforehand. I also want to completely exhaust the fuel at some point so I can determine how much oxidizer I should (further) leave behind. If that doesn't get me enough, I'll probably come up with another iteration with a bit more fuel and see if that works.

This would be amazing to have as a part in KSP. For one thing, think about the escape pods you could have. References and sources: http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4308/ch11.htm#382 http://amyshirateitel.com/2011/05/22/losing-rogallo-from-gemini/ The animation might be tricky, but I'm not sure how you'd handle the drag and lift--have an initial drag that increases but is displaced by lift at the end of the animation, maybe? At any rate, this sounds really nifty and I hope someone takes it on.

When KSP administration approached Cuzican Aerospace with their Jet Propelled Test Vehicle project, and their initial prototype, the JPTV-1, we asked them to stop trying to design and name ships and let us handle making it awesome. Then we asked for the specs. We had to make a SSTO craft capable of landing on Minmus and returning safely. And they were keen on air-breathing engines for fuel economy. Which we did. To spec. And it just so happened that, during the development phase, we went from a rocket with jet engines on the fins to a craft with massive air-breathing nacelles and a strong resemblance to a Kothig castle. And thus the Flying Buttress was born. It should be able to reach an 80 km orbit around Kerbin with enough fuel to transfer to Minmus, land, and return safely. The RAPIER engines are on automatic by default. It is recommended that you shut the air intakes (Action Group 1) when the engines switch from air-breathing to LOX. Doing so reduces drag noticeably, improving delta-V. If you prefer, you can redo the action groups for manual switching of air-breathing and LOX modes, tied into the closing of the intakes. The mobility enhancers (ladders) are keyed to the Gears action group as well--a legacy from earlier designs where landing gear and ladders would deploy at the same time. Further testing will be done on the potential of shallower ascent curves allowing for greater speeds during air-breathing ascents. Update 1: I'm able to achieve 2166 m/s in leftover dV if I use a 20-degree ascent angle, versus 1741 m/s with a 40-degree ascent angle. Will soon try a hybrid--go 9 km straight up, then go on the 20-degree ascent until the engines cut, then switch to 40-degree to clear atmosphere and reduce drag effects. Update 2: Thanks to the advice of Radam, I've got a more optimal launch plan. If you launch straight up, then turn at 4 km and maintain (roughly) a 100 m/s vertical velocity until flameout/switchover, you can conserve about 3200 m/s in delta-V, ample to land on the Mun and return safely. I've also got a variant, the Jupitec 7-A, which effectively replaces the Jupitec 7. Download the Jupitec 7-A from Gameframer. (Note: Gameframer is in alpha, and its delta-V estimates should be taken with a grain of salt.)

I'm probably going to upgrade to 0.3.2 today and get off the debug version you created, as uploads have been working more or less. I do note the delta-V is way off--not just for want of vacuum delta-V--on my latest craft. The height is off too. Here's the GameFramer craft page, with stats. And here's a screenshot of the craft in the VAB. Note the MechJeb delta-V figures, and the height listed in the Craft Stats in the lower right corner. And I'm not sure what's up with the beheaded Kerbals in this mission page.

I made a quickie mod spotlight video for KIS. It... didn't end well.

I've kept spreadsheets before, but nothing reusable like this. Nice work!

I tested out the video recording option last night. It works really well, for the most part--but there is a weird effect where the camera appears to skitter, as if it is no longer centering the ship. It's obvious in the launch and first flight anigifs, here: http://gameframer.com/#/ksp/mission-details/3691973772

Some of this, especially the lander legs, is in SpaceY Heavy Lifter Parts. I'd love to see the aerodynamic steering fins as a part too, though.

Thanks! I really appreciate the feedback! In testing the stock version can get to a 250 km orbit with the 8.25 ton payload, and have about 500 m/s in delta-V left for deorbiting and soft-landing. Under 500 m/s, you increase the risk of not being able to soft-land adequately. The SpaceY version, as I mentioned, is about six tons lighter, so you can definitely carry about 14 tons to the 250 km orbit and still have at least 500 m/s left. Also, there is every chance I was not using the most efficient launches possible. I was tweaking MechJeb's ascent curve and it might be too low. It's something I can look into anyhow. And, this is with stock aerodynamics as it stands in 0.90.0--obviously, with FAR, NEAR, or KSP 1.0+, the delta-V will probably be higher due to better drag/lift calculations.

Thank you for fixing the flicker so quickly! I really like the Mission Controller idea, too! This is what I found in KSP.log: [LOG 05:45:19.371] 3/4/2015 5:45:19 AM, KAR, TakleAndGetScreenshot took 29ms [ERR 05:45:19.374] Could not allocate memory: System out of memory! Trying to allocate: 25379812B with 32 alignment. MemoryLabel: Texture Allocation happend at: Line:411 in Memory overview [ ALLOC_DEFAULT ] used: 516783646B | peak: 0B | reserved: 547707372B [ ALLOC_GFX ] used: 683328179B | peak: 0B | reserved: 730235540B [ ALLOC_CACHEOBJECTS ] used: 464840B | peak: 0B | reserved: 12582912B [ ALLOC_TYPETREE ] used: 20472B | peak: 0B | reserved: 4194304B [ ALLOC_PROFILER ] used: 484920B | peak: 0B | reserved: 8388608B [ERR 05:45:19.376] Unable to retrieve image reference [ERR 05:45:19.376] No Texture memory available to upload [ERR 05:45:19.376] Unable to retrieve image reference [LOG 05:45:19.397] 3/4/2015 5:45:19 AM, KAR, TakleAndGetScreenshot took 21ms [ERR 05:45:19.400] Could not allocate memory: System out of memory! Trying to allocate: 25379812B with 32 alignment. MemoryLabel: Texture Allocation happend at: Line:411 in Memory overview [ ALLOC_DEFAULT ] used: 516784112B | peak: 0B | reserved: 547707372B [ ALLOC_GFX ] used: 683328179B | peak: 0B | reserved: 730235540B [ ALLOC_CACHEOBJECTS ] used: 464840B | peak: 0B | reserved: 12582912B [ ALLOC_TYPETREE ] used: 20472B | peak: 0B | reserved: 4194304B [ ALLOC_PROFILER ] used: 484920B | peak: 0B | reserved: 8388608B [ERR 05:45:19.402] Unable to retrieve image reference [ERR 05:45:19.402] No Texture memory available to upload [ERR 05:45:19.402] Unable to retrieve image reference [LOG 05:45:19.470] 3/4/2015 5:45:19 AM, KAR, Uploader start [EXC 05:45:19.483] NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object UnityEngine.WWWForm.AddBinaryData (System.String fieldName, System.Byte[] contents, System.String fileName, System.String mimeType) Gameframer.WWWClient.AddBinaryData (System.String fieldName, System.Byte[] contents, System.String fileName, System.String mimeType) Gameframer.VesselUploader.Start () So maybe it's just part overload? I'm going to remove some part mods and see if that helps. Also, I noticed the Launch Profile Altitude portion doesn't properly record warps--that odd peak is where I warped to my apoapsis and circularized, followed by a planned landing. Also, the game crashed on initial landing and I had to start again, which is why the LPA curve repeats itself at the end. I don't know if there is any way of dealing with such factors...?