Galane

When some junior engineers at Alan Aerospace Recycling and Packaging were found goofing around with a couple of old command pods, building escape towers and using parachutes of all things, they were re-tasked to a new project request that had recently been found under a baloney sandwich in the engineering department's In tray. (Our Chief Engineer was especially incensed that the junior engineers' escape tower designs *worked*.) The paper, headlined "Armed Camp", requested a design with four 'modules' to be propelled at high speed for transferring kinetic energy from one ship to another. The purpose of the energy transfer was stated to be for "High pressure concentrated on a small area for the purpose of rapidly disassembling spacecraft.". The amount to be paid for the test was enough to fund the build of a kinetic energy transfer module (hereafter KETM) separation test fixture, several sets of four KETMs for testing, one vehicle to receive the energy transfer and one vehicle to deliver the final set of four KETMs to orbit and rendezvous with the receiver vehicle (hereafter RV) - with enough left over for a massive barbecue and luau for the entire staff. The KETM carrier vehicle (hereafter CV) launch to a 75KM orbit was uneventful, AARP having learned from its previous vehicles how to build a rocket that will stay together. The first launch of the RV was not uneventful, during SRB separation the Rockomax 64 tank inexplicably exploded. The upper stage was lit and the vehicle very nearly made it to orbit then was allowed to crash into the ocean. A replacement was quickly assembled, with the addition of Sepratrons to pry the boosters away. The luau had to be canceled but the barbeque was still a go for lunch. Rendezvous was made within 3KM by the RV then closed to 200 meters by the CV. Targeting was aligned, RCS had to be disabled to avoid a constant wobble from the autopilot tracking. The first KETM was separated and successfully transferred energy, causing the RV to drift farther away. The second and third KETMs also made successful energy transfers as the range extended to 300 meters. The CV experienced significant excursion in pitch and/or yaw as each KETM was separated and was slow to realign tracking unless RCS was enabled. This increased the duration between KETM separations. A complete telemetry check of the RV showed zero signs of disassembly or any damage or malfunction. By the time the check was finished, the range had increased to over 400 meters. The fourth KETM made a clean miss. The RV and CV were both deorbited and destroyed per the details of the "Armed Camp" paper. The anonymous contract stated that no photography or video be made of the test and that upon a successful disassembly completion further contact would be made for delivery of the design documents. In the event of a disassembly failure the contract stated AARP did not have to return any of the payment and also directed that the design files be placed on a public server for download and that the company would be free to do further R&D towards a successful completion of a test but no further payments would be forthcoming until or if a successful test is made. All of the staff had a great time at the barbeque. http://partsbyemc.com/pub/Armed-Camp.zip (All stock parts + MechJeb integrated modules. Armed Guard uses ReStock 5-way RCS. Armed Guard II uses KSPX mini_sas AKA Micro inline reaction wheel.) AARP would appreciate any input as to why the KETMs failed to disassemble or damage the RV. AARP will also be happy to sell as many apparently indestructible RVs as you may wish to purchase. Edit: It is important that you do not alter the staging order of the KETMs on the quad mount. The 1-to-4 adapter's stations have a numerical sequence in an X pattern. Move the staging order around and the engines on the KETMs will not activate when decoupled. I assume the 1-to-3 and 1-to-2 adapters work in a similar manner.

PolecatEZ, a merger of DoPToOT, ReStock and UbioZur Welding would be most awesome.

Here's a part from the ReStock set. It's three X200-8 tanks side by side, with some issues. It'll only draw fuel from above via one end and the center nodes (top and bottom) vanish after sticking things to it and pulling them loose in the VAB. Dunno about the nodes to either side. To fix the fuel flow problem I use pipes but I have to check them before every launch using this part because sometimes they disconnect from this when loaded, and sometimes they come loose on the pad, which leads to imbalance and a spinning rocket. Here's an experimental fuel depot launcher using the ReStock pack, and possibly stretchy tanks IIRC. ReStock is an excellent collection of not just welded but rather amazingly usefully modified stock parts. Dunno if the author will mind others debugging one of the parts... PART { name = couplerTriLateral module = Part author = Squad, PolecatEZ MODEL { model = Squad/Parts/FuelTank/fuelTank4-2/model position = 0, 0.0, 0 scale = 1, 1, 1 //width - adjust scale, length, thickness, 1.75, 1.1 is delta wing rotation = 0, 0, 0 // parent = anotherModelTransform <---------Not necessary unless Second or subsequent part. // texture = model000 , Squad/Flags/line // texture = model001 , Squad/Parts/FuelTank/fuelTank2-2/model001 } MODEL { model = Squad/Parts/FuelTank/fuelTank4-2/model position = -2.6, 0.0, 0 scale = 1, 1, 1 //width - adjust scale, length, thickness, 1.75, 1.1 is delta wing rotation = 0, 0, 0 // parent = anotherModelTransform <---------Not necessary unless Second or subsequent part. // texture = model000 , Squad/Flags/line // texture = model001 , Squad/Parts/FuelTank/fuelTank2-2/model001 } MODEL { model = Squad/Parts/FuelTank/fuelTank4-2/model position = 2.6, 0.0, 0 scale = 1, 1, 1 //width - adjust scale, length, thickness, 1.75, 1.1 is delta wing rotation = 0, 0, 0 // parent = anotherModelTransform <---------Not necessary unless Second or subsequent part. // texture = model000 , Squad/Flags/line // texture = model001 , Squad/Parts/FuelTank/fuelTank2-2/model001 } MODEL { model = Squad/Parts/Structural/trussPiece3x/model position = 0, 0.0, -0.8 scale = 1, 2, 1 //width - adjust scale, length, thickness, 1.75, 1.1 is delta wing rotation = 0, 0, 90 // parent = anotherModelTransform <---------Not necessary unless Second or subsequent part. // texture = model000 , Squad/Flags/line // texture = model001 , Squad/Parts/FuelTank/fuelTank2-2/model001 } MODEL { model = Squad/Parts/Structural/trussPiece3x/model position = 0, 0.0, 0.8 scale = 1, 2, 1 //width - adjust scale, length, thickness, 1.75, 1.1 is delta wing rotation = 0, 0, 90 // parent = anotherModelTransform <---------Not necessary unless Second or subsequent part. // texture = model000 , Squad/Flags/line // texture = model001 , Squad/Parts/FuelTank/fuelTank2-2/model001 } scale = 1 rescaleFactor = 1 node_stack_top = 0.0, 0.46875, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2 node_stack_bottom = 0.0, -0.46875, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2 node_stack_top = -2.6, 0.46875, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2 node_stack_bottom = -2.6, -0.46875, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2 node_stack_top = 2.6, 0.46875, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2 node_stack_bottom = 2.6, -0.46875, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2 node_attach = 1.25, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1 stackSymmetry = 1 cost = 1900 category = Structural subcategory = 0 title = Rockomax Lateral Tri-Coupler manufacturer = AeroKerbin Bath and Body Works description = All good things come in threes, especially 14,000hp rocket boosters...so mount some on here today! attachRules = 1,1,1,1,0 mass = 2.0 dragModelType = default maximum_drag = 0.2 minimum_drag = 0.3 angularDrag = 2 crashTolerance = 6 breakingForce = 400 breakingTorque = 400 maxTemp = 2900 fuelCrossFeed = True // keeps fuel from flowing FROM the bottom nodes (prevents stack imbalances and such) NoCrossFeedNodeKey = bottom RESOURCE { name = LiquidFuel amount = 1080 maxAmount = 1080 } RESOURCE { name = Oxidizer amount = 1320 maxAmount = 1320 } }

So I shouldn't try using this mod to construct one of Keith Laumer's BOLO tanks, at least not the later Marks with their multiple track systems.

Last night I dug out the RovaLifter, which I'd put together just to dink around with, getting the stock rover that comes with KSP into orbit and landing it back at KSC a couple of times, and to try out procedural fairings. Getting it back to Kerbin with solar panels intact is simply a matter of leaving the last stage on until reentry heat is done. MJ then does fine with waiting until the atmo slows it down enough for the skycrane rockets to safely land it - on the edge of the pad railway, off which it rolls and trashes half the panels and two wheels, but it still moves. I figured I'd need to do some changes to get it to the Mun, I'd made it before I found out that nosecones increase drag... I didn't recall how high I'd flown it so I aimed for 75KM with MJ on its default path... and it made it. There's still fuel left! Hohmann transfer to Mun, here we go. If it runs out I can always stick on a clampotron jr. and make a mini refueler to send up for the next try. Surely it wouldn't have enough left to get into a circular orbit, and reduce the periapsis to 10KM, and circularize again... Yep, did, with still a little left over. OK, F5 in case of a screwup, jettison the transfer stage and we are go for landingohcrapitusedallthefuelintwoseconds! F9! F9! OK, *don't* jettison the transfer stage, ride it down on empty until an altitude befitting the flyweight mass of the rover and its puny amount of fuel, then cut the final stage loose and touchdown, we are ready to roll on the Mun - after mission ctrl hits left shift then spacebar real quick to toss the skycrane. So now the rover is sort of stuck in a big crater inside that very large and dark crater on the upper half of the Mun. Haven't been able to drive out without it tumbling down the hillside. But it's on the Mun, using a rocket I put together with no intention of it going beyond LKO, before I'd sent anything to the Mun or anywhere else. On the Mun that rover is pretty tough. One tumble broke nothing. Quite funny to see the antenna repeatedly stabbing into the ground but not breaking off. One only broke three of the solar panels, without breaking any off. The last one left it with only the probe body, two batteries, the center wheels and the base plate it's all attached to, and I could still drive it around (dragging one end or the other) until it ran out of power. I tried to break it more but just ended up at the lowest part of the crater. P.S. I renamed the rover "MunRovia". Where have you taken the stock rover?

Sepratrons with built in radial decouplers that trigger at burnout would be a good thing. Would make them highly useful for getting a bit of extra kick off the pad then dumped to shed the weight. Or a full surface area radial decoupler ring. One part that stays with the rocket but cuts loose everything stuck to it. Put it between an engine and tank, squeeze on as many sepratrons as will fit around it, then they all come loose if the ring is in the right place in staging. Could also work to jettison radial mount engines when they're no longer needed - for cutting weight for conserving fuel.

You should get one of these for this mod pack. ;D

This only took about 50 launches to get up to a 70KM orbit with a little fuel left over. I kept adding fuel and it kept finding a way to burn every last drop. I took it as a challenge to do SSTO on the default MechJeb ascent path - while simultaneously developing the new lander. If only there was a lightweight way to keep all of the booster held together after cutting the lander loose. The three bi-couplers are connected to the lander's side engines with stack separators and by struts to everything else. The booster splits into four parts on staging and since I stuck three Okto B's on it the main piece can split again into four chunks. Now that's done, I'll be redoing it with asparagus staging for what should be much better efficiency. Lithobrake landing of an early test version of the Two Step Lander. The can landed upside down and smushed partway into the (fortunately) muddy ground. This one only had two side engines and Jeb decided to see if it could land with the central Poodle engine shut off. Not quite. Successful landing at KSC of the finalized Two Step Lander. One centimeter further over and it probably wouldn't have been! Having built a rocket expressly to loft one full orange tank, plus whatever might be left in another, then leave the full one in orbit. Alan Aerospace Recycling and Packaging needed a way to bring down engineless vehicle parts. Thus - The Deorbitizer! Basically a tiny fuel tank, tiny RCS tank, tiny probe body, tiny engine, some solar panels, three RCS jets and a docking port. (The next to last stage hasn't been staged off, it has its own self-deorbit ability.) Naturally, the port can be changed to adapt to anything that needs kicked downstairs and has a docking port. More pics in my KSP set http://www.flickr.com/photos/27748767@N08/sets/72157635319720861/

A couple of humans with spaceboots on the ground could do everything one of the Mars rovers took years to do, in a week or two. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/44/PIA16934-RoverDistances-20130515.jpg Looks like Opportunity will soon surpass the non-Earth surface travel record of 37 kilometers held by Lunokhod 2 since 1973. Who knows how long Curiosity will last and how far it can go? Compare to how far a couple of guys on a moon buggy traveled in a much shorter time. Even with the much shorter lag at lunar distance, a human behind the wheel on the scene can cover more ground faster and more easily spot things that people operating remote rovers would miss. No bingo on Mars. They'll have to play Jetan. Every Mars proposal since Von Braun's Das Marsprojekt proposed launching thirty-seven-thousand-two-hundred metric tons of stuff into LEO has been a pittance in comparison. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_manned_Mars_mission_plans_in_the_20th_century

How would it be annoying if you never turned it ON?

The small hardpoints and I-beams also work well with the Skipper engine due to these legs being barely long enough to work with that engine. I did refuel at one of my stations orbiting Kerbin before heading out to Minmus. All of Alan Aerospace Recycling & Packaging's rocket designs to date. http://partsbyemc.com/pub/AARP-Kerbal-Space-rockets.zip (Archive updated as new designs are done.) Not everything is particularly great, many aren't even orbit capable. At least one is a flat out failure. Several are stages of progression in design. The stock lander has landed on Kerbin several times from orbits as high as 200 KM and has gone to the Mun and back. Could have been used for Minmus but I wanted to try the MLD-1S (S for Skipper) based on the MLD-1.

And comes back, somehow. First there was the technology demonstration vehicle, the Mainsail Landing Demonstrator 1. Its function being only to develop an extended landing leg support to work with the long Mainsail engine. The design was a success and the vehicle retired. That is, retired until our chief engineer and janitor decided that by substituting a Skipper engine and reconfiguring other parts it could go to Minmus! Undiscovered until after launch was that Jeb and his two best buds had replaced the crew selected for the flight during one of the times the vehicle was wheeled back to the VAB for "technical adjustments". The original crew was found tied up behind a mop stand in the VAB. As punishment for their actions, the Minmus trip was scrubbed and the lander brought down. That proved once again AARP's maxim that "Parachutes are for wimps!". The vehicle was reconfigured without the parachutes and stack separator then prepped for launch, with the right crew. I'll spare you the boring, uneventful details of the to and from. Landed on Minmus. Flag planted. Back home. Sigbrett, Sambles, and Patley Kerman are happy to be back from their flight. They are rather less happy with Jeb's blog postings about how "The Minmus mission was faked!".

I'll be happy if all Squad does is make nosecones and tapered adapters *reduce* overall drag instead of increasing it.

If it's a friendly contest, think of it as industrial espionage. If you're having a battle with intent to damage or destroy each others ships, think of it as spying on the enemy. With the alternate sharing of the entire game space giving each player access to everything, only the honor system of not having a look at the other players stuff will keep it a fair contest or fight instead of a cheat-fest. What I suggest for a first try at this is an all stock KSP setup in a newly started game and a simple goal like being the first to land six Kerbals on another planet using *at least* two ships, without MechJeb. Winner is the first to safely land all six. Kill a Kerbal, run out of fuel, anything else that causes the mission to fail is a loss. Suggested turns. Pregame is building your ships. Once they're built, players contact each other to confirm they're ready to begin. First turn is launching first ship to orbit. Second turn is launching the second ship OR initiating a maneuver of the first ship to start transit to the planet, player's choice. Third turn is launching the second ship - if not launched in the second turn OR initiating a maneuver of the second ship (launched in the second turn) to start transit to the planet OR do something else with the first ship. If both ships were launched in the first two turns, then in turn three a player may make one move with each ship OR if a support ship is required by your mission plan, take a full turn for the launch. Any launch from Kerbin = a full turn since you can't do anything else anyway until the ship reaches orbit. And go on from there. Not hard and fast rules but in general any major action with a relatively quickly achieved beginning and end like launching a ship to orbit = one turn or move. Beginning an action with a somewhat indefinite end or that will take a long time to end, like a Hohmann transfer to a distant planet = one turn or move. A move or turn can also include finishing any actions that are required to leave your ships in a state where they will be safe when left unattended while the other player is running the game. It's similar to a turn based strategy game. In those the typical setup is units may either move OR do some action with some units having the ability to move AND immediately do an action if the player chooses. With 'fog of war' a unit that moves and discovers an enemy unit may be automatically attacked or may be allowed to attack in that move if not normally allowed to (element of surprise). KSP doesn't have 'fog of war' and sharing the quicksave file back and forth won't allow players to immediately respond to challenges or attacks so to start with I figure it's best to keep it a friendly match and not try to sabotage or otherwise interfere with the other player. Save that for when mods and improvised weaponry are added to the mix. I've always preferred real time strategy games over turn based because I can immediately respond to things as they happen. With turn based it's moving units one at a time or initiating actions then ending the turn and sitting there helplessly as the other player or computer pounds my forces, or watching with glee if my actions turn out better for me - yet still being unable to pull back if my units are getting stomped. But since KSP has no built in multiplayer, the only way to compete or cooperate is by sharing the quicksave and/or persistence files.

Someone needs to Just Do It. Figure out the mod set (if any) and rules for what is allowed for a unit move, what constitutes a turn, time limits etc. then post the proposed rules for comment. Once the rules are pinned down, come up with a game goal/scenario to playtest to see if the rules are workable in practice.

The simplest implementation would be to e-mail the quicksave file back and forth between two players after each move, plus a "gentelplayers' agreement" as to what constitutes a turn/move/action and time limits on how long a player has to complete a turn and send the quicksave back. Also, no sneaky switching to the other player's ships to check out their makeup, fuel load etc. If you want to check out the opposition you do it the old fashioned way, close rendezvous and Mark 1 Eyeball. I'd say moving in to rendezvous should constitute the end of a unit's move, giving the other player a chance to respond to the visit/provocation in some way. If you want to get more hardcore about it, someone could gin up a game management server with check in/check out of the quicksave files with player settable time limits and a history of all the save files for game replays. Miss your check in time and you lose your turn, reverting back to the previous save file. All your stuff is on its own while the other player gets another go. It would still rely on the honor system to not peek at or fiddle with the other player's ships since everyone would have to share the same game space and (without a multi launch pad mod) the same launch site at KSC. Any system of play should have a way for players to agree on breaks during which nobody opens the shared game.

Another mod pack with engines. http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/0-21-restock-parts/

Also known as Area 51.

How do I change this to Answered?

Glad it's of use to someone. P.S. AARP's Chief Engineer mentioned something about design royalties but our chief janitor and test pilot is one of those open source hardware geeks, he says since the parts are all stock items from other companies and all the engineer nerd did was bolt them together, there's hardly any "design" to it. Janitors, such a wordy bunch...

Not the point of the vehicle. Its sole reason to exist was to design a simple method to make stock landing legs work with a Mainsail, which it does perfectly. I may take the struts off and see what happens. If there was a way to stick extensions onto the footpads of the legs... It's also not an SSTO. It has two solid booster stages which after the initial kick has MechJeb nearly shut down the Mainsail until they burn out, which saves plenty of fuel. Probably could stretch the fuel by fiddling with the ascent path but I figure if it it can get up there on the default MJ path a rocket should have plenty of room for optimization.

NASA could stretch their budget so much further if they'd first look in the closet of previous inventions to see if some answer to their latest quest has already been done, before they go tossing out RFQ's. A perusal through the back issues of Popular Science, Popular Mechanics and even Mechanix Illustrated would turn up many useful things ivented for possible use in space - but never went anywhere due to lack of funding, lack of interest or "That's neat, but what could it possibly be used for?" only to have a few years later a need for *exactly* that come along and the wheel (more expensively) reinvented instead of going back to the past. One thing I recall was a machine for building triangular girders from rolls of flat metal. It folded strips for the corners then wrapped another round and round at an angle. Don't recall if the article mentioned how the strips were bonded together. It was successfully tested on the ground but since NASA was the only space game in town at the time... The things it could make possible to do for space stations but it's sitting in the closet of 'forgotten' ideas. Should be possible to simulate in KSP by doing a generated triangular beam with a texture and setting the 'extruder' with a variable amount of metal strip, and the ability to push out a specified amount of girder, cut it off and repeat until it runs out of metal. Think of attaching them to the sides of a module and having the extruder push itself out so once it's done it can be moved to another location to attach and push out more girder.

posted pic

Alan Aerospace Recycling & Packaging (AARP) presents pretty much as bare bones as it can get to put a single Mainsail engined rocket into a 70KM orbit then bring it back down and land safely. The small SRBs can be taken off and it'll still make it up and back down but with a very tiny amount of fuel left. Some small hardpoints and I-beams serve to get the landing legs low enough to reach below the exhaust nozzle of the engine. http://partsbyemc.com/pub/MLD-1.craft Flight history. Four failed flights due to not enough fuel to make it to orbit. Two failures due to not enough fuel to land after reaching orbit. Two successful landings of the finalized design to prove the landing gear design. Flight program of this configuration ended and the design retired unless... Our Kerbonauts are talking about how much fun it'd be to set a command pod on top. At least two of them mentioned the possibility of installing a stack separator and parachutes just in case something goes a bit off. Of course one of the others in the break room retorted "Parachutes?! You big wimp!" then another paraphrased our employee handbook "AARP doesn't trust our safety to flimsy pieces of cloth when the supporting thrust of rocket exhaust will do the job.". First successful landing. Note the bare wisp of fuel remaining. This went up without the small SRBs.

How about emulating drivetrain drag or regenerative braking so that when the movement key is released, the rover will gradually come to a stop? I was having some fun with the stock rover the other day and that thing will roll a very long way even with one front and one rear wheel damaged on opposite corners - on the "grass" around KSC.