Amloris

This is a simple two stage lander that I have used extensively in my campaign missions. It is a bit overdesigned since it was used to land on nearly any planetary body and perform multiple landings in some missions. However, it is more than capable of performing a landing on Duna and subsequent trip to Ike.

Greetings! I have picked up coding with KOS once again. I had stopped using it about a year ago to wait for further development as I felt that some essential features were lacking. Now that lists are available and the coding documentation has been updated it has unlocked many possibilities that were previously impossible. Furthermore, I'm glad to see this mod has continued and that the developers are active on the forums. However, I have some questions that need to be answered and some suggestions that I would like to make. Most of my coding experience comes from using C++ for engineering iterative methods, or VBA and MatLab for control system analysis, so I may use inconsistent code oriented language as I talk about examples. Question #1 Is there a way to retrieve/store data from lists other than using FOR loops? In most coding languages, lists come in the form of matrices that are used to store data in various forms. Users generally must define an array size (unless the are using scale-able vector arrays). To store and retrieve data, the program uses row and column integers to interact with the data matrix (if it is a 2-D array). Does KOS have any of this functionality? I know lists exist and can be stepped through with the use of FOR loops, but is there a more straightforward way to pull a specific point of data from matrix through the use of requesting rows and columns? Below is an example of some of my C++ code that performs RREF calculations on a data matrix and accurately portrays the functionality that I am talking about. double normalization(double A[NROW][NCOL], int mark) { int col; double temp; temp=A[mark][mark]; for (col=mark; col<NCOL; col++) { A[mark][col]=((A[mark][col])/temp); } return (0); } In this situation, A is a 2 dimensional array with "m" rows and "n" columns. So if I say X=A[row][column] where "row" and "column" are represented by integers, then X will equal the value pulled from the matrix at that point. Using lists and matrices in this way is very intuitive and straight forward. FOR loops can still be used to store and retrieve data, but this structure also allows users to request a singular data point easily without FOR loops. The reason why I am asking about this feature is because I am attempting to program an inertial guidance system in C++ that will take the initial conditions of the craft and information about the type of orbit you would like to achieve with said craft. This program will then use an iterative Runge-Kutta procedure, coupled with a Monte-Carlo method to find an optimal ascent profile and store the final trajectory data in the form of a txt file that can be read by KOS. At the end of the day, I want to be able to say "At mission time 53, look at matrix row 53 and pull pitch, yaw, and throttle info from the matrix and implement it with the rocket". Is this currently possible with KOS, or is it a potential feature in the future? Due to the long-winded nature of my first question I will abstain from asking the rest of my questions in this post to prevent information overload. Thanks in advance for any information that anyone can provide! Regards, Amloris

After months of delays the Atlantis 2 is ready to be released to the public! If anyone has any problems downloading the file or following the main post please let me know! Have a good day!

I uploaded a video of Atlantis 2 for those who may be interested. I apologize for the quality (it turned out a bit dark); however, it is only the second time I have made a video, so I'm still learning. I tried uploading the video using an .mp4 format in 1920x1080p. If anyone who is more experienced in video production has any suggestions as to what I'm doing wrong it would be greatly appreciated! Have a good day!

Thanks! I tried to find that thank you message that you sent me on Youtube, but I was unable to find it because I don't know where my inbox is anymore (That just comes to show how long I haven't used youtube either).

My apologies for the delay. I have finally returned from a long period of inactivity. I notice that the forums have gone through a shuttle craze recently; I have also noticed that my shuttle on the front page is extremely outdated. Atlantis 1 was made in 0.18 and is still operational today (no one has told me otherwise at least). I made Atlantis 2 about 5 months ago to replace it but I haven't gotten around to posting it yet. Atlantis 2 has been modified with a superior (and more realistic) wing geometry, requires no stabilization rockets, has a much shorter launch preparation time, uses only 1 action key, and features a much higher power to weight ratio on takeoff. Perhaps I will upload it later today if I have the time. Atlantis 2 Once again, sorry for the delay. Have a good day!

I built this a couple of months ago but haven't gotten around to posting it. Project Auburn is a modular interplanetary vessel that was designed to land and return from nearly any planet in the Kerbol system. The fuel budget was scary on the Project Auburn's first visit to Duna (less than 1% of fuel was left in the propulsion stage, descent stage, and ascent stage).

I tried your code that you provided and I still can't get it to recognize key input. I feel like I'm running into a brick wall here.

Unfortunately, none of those suggestions manage to get the code to work. When the KOS window is unfocused and the game is in camera view the code will not recognize any actionkey input. Even using the coding directly supplied by the KOS Space Computer yields similar results. I suppose I can get my code to respond to external input by using the landing gear, brakes, rcs and sas keys to act as external input during the prelaunch sequence, but I would much rather get it to work by using the action keys. Any suggestions?

Hello, everyone! I have been tinkering with this mod over the last couple weeks in my fleeting free time and I have to say I love it (even though it has its quirks ). However, I have some questions that I need some help with. I have tried everything that I can think of, so I figure it's better to ask the community before I proceed to bang my head against the wall any more than I already have. First Question I am trying to create system responses through the use of action keys for a functional menu system. I saw that the KOS Space Computer thread accomplished this feat, but I am having difficulties replicating their success, and to be honest I doubt whether it is still possible in the most current version. The following simplified code is a portrayal of what I want to work, but have not gotten to function properly yet. Note: The spacecraft that is being tested on is in orbit. CLEARSCREEN. SET X TO 0. UNTIL ALTITUDE < 70000 { IF AG1 == "TRUE" {SET X TO 1.}. IF X = 0 {PRINT "FAILED" AT (0,0).}. IF X = 1 {PRINT "DETECTED" AT (0,0).}. }. I'm sure that I am missing something absolutely trivial (a common case in programming). I would appreciate any input on this matter so that I can sleep better tonight.

My realization that fuel lines and struts are completely massless. I have been playing KSP for over two years now (back when the moon was new) and I never made that realization! I have over 50 pages of delta-v and TWR calculations based on the assumption that fuel lines and struts had a mass of 0.05mT! It has caused me great grief for a very long time now as my theoretical calculations were always a little off from my actual observations. I have made countless rockets where I have forgone adding struts to a specific stage because I was out of my structural mass allowance that my calculations indicated. I can not believe that I have easily put over 500 hour into this game and never made that realization!!! Please excuse me while I flip a table and binge drink to hide my shame. On a different note: Where can I go to close the poll? I can't seem to find the option.

The External Tank rebuild is going well, though it is not necessarily going according to plan. I have managed to reduce the part count substantially (~50-100 parts after struts are added), but for what ever reason it has picked up a bunch of weight somewhere in the rebuild even though it should weight about the same as the original. For design concerns the External Tank must have a total mass of 127mT, an empty mass (structural weight) of 25mT; this leaves 102mT devoted to fuel alone. I need some help figuring out where I picked up some additional weight in my rebuild (and this will give you guys a chance to get an up close look at the ET and comment about it). Below are some statistics to help me show what is wrong with it. The LRB's were not included in this external tank rebuild. It is important to note that the new tank has no struts or fuel lines right now. External Tank (old) Wet mass: 124.98 Dry mass: 22.98 Part Count: 206 External Tank (new) Wet mass: 125.13 Dry mass: 23.13 Part Count: 98 Things I changed in the design (net weight change) (mdry)old-(mdry)new= 3 inline reaction wheels (small) - 1 inline reaction wheel (big) - 16 small structural panels + 2 small I-beams + 4 small adapter + 1 rover body (mdry)old-(mdry)new= 3(0.3mT) - 0.2mT - 16(0.075mT) + 2(0.1875mT) + 4(0.04mT) + 0.15mT (ÃŽâ€mdry)theoretical= 0.185mT Removing struts and fuel lines (ÃŽâ€mdry)theoretical= 0.185mT - 20 fuel lines - 42 struts (ÃŽâ€mdry)theoretical= 0.185mT - 20(0.05mT) - 42(0.05mT) (ÃŽâ€mdry)theoretical= -2.915mT Comparing this theoretical value to the actual value I measured (mwet(new))actual-(mwet(old))actual=(ÃŽâ€mdry)theoretical ÃŽâ€mactual = ÃŽâ€mtheoretical 125.13mT - 124.98mT = -2.915mT 0.15mT ≠-2.915mT I'm at a loss of how to explain this, the math simply just doesn't add up! The new external tank is suppose to weight almost 3 metric tonnes lighter than the old one accounting for all of the changes I made, yet in practice when I measured it, it weights 0.15 metric tonnes heavier than old one. The amount of fuel is correct in both of them, so the change in mass must be structural. Where did I pick up almost 3 tonnes of weight even though I meticulously kept a list of changes I made between the designs? If someone else could take a look at this I would greatly appreciate it! Craft files: External Tank (old) External Tank (new)

After a few weeks and many hours of work I have managed to fix my FPS issues. The solution was painfully trivial (my desktop was somehow in power saving mode when I rebuilt my system). *facepalm* Now I can actually start working on testing the long awaited Thorium Launch System! One of the projects that I discussed earlier that will be an integral part of testing the shuttle is the Aegis Abort System. This 3 man CSM will be parked in a 70kmx70km orbit in case the Thorium Shuttle lacks the fuel to obtain the target orbit or select the appropriate re-entry location. While top kerbal officials were first leery of the terms "redundancy" and "back-up plan" they quickly warmed up to the idea as it offered an unprecedented excuse to make a simple task as complicated as possible. Thus, the Aegis-1 was born. Hailed as being "too safe" by the general population, SRB's where quickly added to the original design to decrease the safety level, satisfying the public. Aegis-1 Unmanned CSM in Orbit Separation of Service Module before re-entry I have started working on rebuilding the external tank for the Thorium Launch System. So far I have reduced the part count by 75 parts and have added 3 more reaction wheels (21 total). The ludicrous amount of reaction wheels is for payload stabilization; they will also force you to keep the throttle above 50% or else you will run out of power to stabilize yourself as a added benefit. I am really liking how the ET is coming along! I have also reduced the part count in each Gemini-LRB by 8 parts. Questions: How do I get rid of the Poll? (It has overstayed its welcome, we all know which project won ) How do I re-size my images via bb code to make them not as gigantic? More updates coming soon!

This is the update so far: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/49274-FPS-Stuttering After rebuilding my OS I have been experiencing unexplainably horrific lag; flying anything more than 200 parts is painful to watch. This has made it impossible to continue aerodynamic testing since the Thorium Shuttle is about 140 parts and the Antonov-225 Aerial Launch Vehicle is 250 parts. Without an aerodynamically stable shuttle it would be silly to launch the thing since you wouldn't be able to recover it. While I may not be able to test aerodynamics and launch system stability at the moment I have been focusing on other smaller tasks that will make up the bigger picture. Some of the things I have been working on for the Thorium Launch System are as follows: Developing the Azimuth Abort System: This will be a backup system for Kerbalnaut survival if the Shuttle's aerodynamic surfaces are damaged during ascent (rendering the Shuttle aerodynamically unstable and incapable of re-entry) and the Shuttle is on a sub-orbital trajectory. Developing the Aegis Abort System: This will be a backup CSM in a 70km-70km orbit in case the Thorium Shuttle is left in a lower than intended orbit without the necessary fuel to safely reach a specific landing location. In this situation, the Aegis CSM will be remotely operated to rendezvous with the Shuttle to save the crew. Developing the Crew Mobility System: Essentially just rcs jetpacks with seats. I wanted to do EVA's with a proper NAV ball, so this is my solution to that problem. Creating Alternate Landing Areas: I'm working on a couple of separate "landing strips" to give me landing opportunities to land somewhere other than the main airstrip in case something goes wrong on reentry. 1 will be located just west of the main strip (for early re-entries), 1 will be on the eastern continent for a very specific mission I have for the Thorium System (and for early abort possibilites). These sites will have a jet to return landed crew, a refueling station, a hab unit, and landing lights. Reducing Part Count of the ET: Due to complications in the building process (I'll explain the problem later when I get the time) the part count was very high for the Thorium Launch System (ET+LRB's). I learned a lot from making that rediculously complex peice of machinery the first time, so now I know how to reduce the part count substantially. Plus I need to add load bearing rails to it or else the Shuttle's power plant will shred it. The External Tank rebuild will probably take about 3-4 hours, so I'm putting it off as long as possible. This project is by no means dead. I work on it a little bit every day (even with the lag), perfecting it little by little. I will only release it when I am completely satisfied with the final product. Kindest Regards, Amloris