VaPaL

@Nansuchao Thanks

VPL Technologies – ViComm Ø About: The idea behind this mod is to create a more complex and varied communication and relay network with addition to new types of antennas and connections. It adds 5 high gain antennas (HGA), 4 medium gain antenna (MGA) and 5 low gain antennas (LGA). The inspiration for creating this mod came from the spaceflight101’s “One Week to Jupiter – NASA’s Juno Spacecraft en-route to Gas Giant after five-year Journey” article more specific from this passage: “Setting up for JOI, Juno will switch to its Medium Gain Antenna that has a larger boresight and enables the vehicle to communicate with Earth at greater off-axis angles. Two hours before the maneuver, Juno will begin sending tones – a very basic form of communication as the spacecraft selects from 256 available semaphores, either sending heartbeat tones to signal it is still alive and doing well or transmitting tones corresponding to specific mission events or statuses. [...] Because the Earth moves out of the Medium-Gain Antenna boresight, Juno has to switch to even lower bitrate comms through the Low Gain Antennas at TIG-37 minutes.” Ø Features: o Auto-reconnect attempt; o 2-way communication; o Line-of-sight and physical antenna direction taken into account; o Different gain antennas (high, medium and low) with different function and performance; o Integration with MechJeb by sarbian, Kerbal Engineering Redux by cybutek, USI-LS & USI MKS by RoverDude and Outer Planes Mod by CaptRobau (kOS in the future, maybe). o User GUI to personalize your experience per save. Ø Auto reconnect attempt: Unless you are out of power, your spacecraft will try to reestablish connection. To do so it will follow this sequence (the flowchart still needs some more refining): Ø 2-way communication: The range of both antennas (yours and relays) are take into account, if both are in range of each other the communication is optimal and it’s possible to send and receive data. If only one is in range of another communication is deprived and the one without range can’t send data but still able to receive. If your ship can send but not receive data, it will be unable to receive any inputs, it will do all preprogramed burns and you will have access to all of your ships information. If your ship can receive but not sent data, you will be able to control, do experiments and transmit them, but you won’t have access to any of your ship information (remaining fuel/dV, electric charge, etc) via stock, MechJeb or Kerbal Engineering Redux. If are using USI-LS or USI-MKS and your base/station loses communication, their status and the status of the kerbals that are there will stop updating and become black in the USI GUI. Ø Line of sight and antenna direction: The antenna must be physically point towards the target to establish a communication link and without any obstruction between them (including parts of the ship). If an antenna is on a gimbal unit part (studying possibility) it will auto rotate to keep looking at target, similar to solar panels. Otherwise, it will try to reconnect (see above). Note that for surface operations, keeping line of sight (LoS) is more of challenge than range due to terrain relief and body curvature. Ø Gain: HGAs have a narrower beam width, but are able to transmit and receive more information, MGAs have a wider beam width, but transmit and receive less information and LGAs are omnidirectional, but transmit and receive only basic information. This means that the communication with the spacecraft gets more limited the lower the gain of your antenna. So any inputs made via a lower gain antenna will be less precise, burns will start or end slightly delayed or anticipated, throttle will be a little off and positioning the spacecraft will be inaccurate. For science transmission the lower gain the less data you can transmit, the game will still see that experiment as done, so the its value will be lower next time you do it, but the amount science you’ll receive will be smaller. The spacecraft status via MJ or KER as well as base/station/kerbal status via USI will have lower refresh rates the lower the antenna gain. The overall gain only takes into account the spacecraft and the first relay antennas, this is to avoid excessive complications with CommSat constellations . Ø Parts: Ø Thanks: o Fábio Cury (a frined): Naming the mod and it’s parts (soon TM). o cxg2827: Showing how to import models from SolidWorks to Blender and tips on modeling; o blu3wolf: Questioning and helping with the mechanics; o sarbian: Creating MechJeb; o RoverDude: Creating all USI mods and giving tips during his streams; o CaptRobau: Creating Outer Planets Mod; o cybutek: Creating Kerbal Engineering Redux. OBS: Not sure if it is possible to do all of that and how hard is will be (probably a LOT), but I will keep making adjustments here and there as I go along. It is a very crude idea, let’s see where it leads to. Also, it will be a while until the release, it is my first mod and I learning everything (C#, Blender, Gimp and Unity). I have some models done (without textures) but they are too high poly, but I will release the parts (as a part pack) as soon as the get finished.

The optimal condition is when the pressure at the nozzle exaust is equal to the ambient pressure. Liftoff engine have a short nozzle with a high exit pressure (less than 1 atm but higher the vaccum). Vaccum nozzles are longer with the lowest possible exit pressure. When you use a vaccum engine ASL you are lossing performance . Take a look here for more details: http://www.braeunig.us/space/propuls.htm

Yeah, I've heard that the thrust of an ion engine is comparable to the weight of an A4 paper sheet. To make things even 'worse' this was a HUGE satellite, the ion engine was probably for station keeping only, meking it's TWR absurdly low.

Ok, first I know that IRL burns take are a lot longer than in KSP, Juno with its 35min burn is an exemple. BUT, today I read this: 500 maneuvers and 14 months!!!! It was due to a problem and was an emergencial solution and all, but still... that's a long long time and a lot of maneuvers. It was to raise the sat to GEO btw. OBS: not sure if this is should be posted here or on the lounge, it's about spaceflight but it's just an informal talk... anyway...

Red Spider Nebula (NGC 6537)

Potato chips

Yep! I misunderstood this image. I saw the H2/O2 pumps and a IC engine powering them and assumed that it was feeding the combustion chamber.

@Bill Phil I know, but we are talking about the final product, up and running, and a TPU is way simpler than a IC engine. (obs: I talking about the part itself, not the whole system).

@SuperFastJellyfish Happy Friday! Cheers!!

@Snoopy20111 Kottabos review:

@kunok There are additive methods where the material gets 90-95% of it's strength, and I think I read somewhere about one method that improves the strength, but don't quote me on that. The most "conventional" way of making an impeller is machining it in two parts and "welding" them together (don't recall the execly name in english, sorry). This produces tensions in the material that one has to get rid off and can cause some deformations. A more 'modern' way to do is by electric discharge machining (EDM). Any way, there are studies about the possibility to use additive manufacturing on the impeller. For what I read it's viable. The biggest problem here is the rotational speed, 8k rpm is to low, normally it goes up from a minimum of 30k. Sorry for my english as well, not native and drinking some beer =P

Not quite, I mean, the turbine wheel and the impeller are quite a pain to manufacture, but with additive manufacturing the impellers could be done kind off easily.

@Bill Phil They are more complex and expensive to design, but as a component they are a lot more simpler. Less moving parts it's the big difference in the complexity, it's basic an axle spinning, seals and bearings. An IC engine, at least cars' IC engine, have a lot more moving parts. A think it will also be heavier. Ratation speed is another problem, is harder to achieve hight pressure/flow rate at lower speeds, to not say impossible

Failure analysis

Mine would be Ariane 5, and looks like I'm alone here But it's kind of hard to choose only one, my favorites would be: -Proton; -Atlas V; -SLS; -H-2B.

Great idea!! Simple and very usefull Also: "Enter the Gecko"

http://www.spaceflightinsider.com/missions/iss/nasa-glenn-researchers-study-results-of-saffire-i-experiment/

Victory at last!!!!

86(+)

82(+)

80(+)

78(+)

74(+)

72(+)