YANFRET
-
Posts
1,350 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Everything posted by YANFRET
-
Voidryder came up with these instructions which will be included in the product documentation: I set to Abort Key LES - Toggle Engine SM Fairing (both) - Decouple Orion Backshell - Decouple I set to Alpha 10 key LES - Decouple I set to Alpha Key 9 Parachutes - Deploy News! After many test flights, we have an Orion parachute system for you that actually works every time! Also it's pretty smooth. I know a single parachute is kindof simple, but we're gonna keep it simple so that you are not compelled to go Real Chute. ( Be our guest if you want more chute action ) It actually took about 5 days of testing to get this right, so we're quite pleased with the result. More News! Duna Return to Orbit is completley revised. It might look the same outside, but under the hood it's much improved. Now it features a version of ALCOR that has monopropellant for RTO circularization, the decoupler is enlarged so it doesnt snag on the lander when returning to orbit, it has four new micro sep motors on the heatshield to prevent that from blowing back and smacking the lander.
-
Magnificent vehicle!! Honestly we should have created an action group that separates the capsule and activates the solids, but we did not. I'm creating an action ticket on this item Heat Shield Separation Motor Flight Test In the name of product safety, Low Density Hypersonic Decelerators will now separate with the assistance of three solid motors.
-
Yeah, one place we run into trouble in particular is the Duna landers and Monkey Transfer Vehicle. The Duna landers all have high power RCS ports at their top area to give the user the most possible control on entry. If a heatshield tumbles back due to a particular entry angle and rate, and the craft were to become unstable, we want the user to have the best chance of getting to the ground safely. Those high power RCS ports are small, low geometry and have zero texture mass ( single dark grey pixel )... so they are somewhat hard to find in space, and requiring the user to disable and then re enable them individually to do a balanced RCS guided transfer orbit would be a mess. So SAS steps in and makes the process more Kerbal. On the Transfer Vehicle, those giant drop tanks need the high power RCS ports to maneuver for assembly docking, and are pretty handy for certain maneuvers, but having to rely on them alone to guide the transfer orbit adds all those trajectory variances, so it's nice to be able to shut them all off and still orient the ship. In previous versions of KSP all that was more of a struggle, but in the newer versions the SAS is pretty smart so it does a fair job of balancing things as we have it set up now.
-
Yeah great question. Since we last talked about that something else came up related to 1.0.2... The Bobcat core stage for SLS and MLS no longer has working gimbal, as of 1.0.2 it is reversed and there is no way to fix it. Until our next generation core stage model comes online, the only way to fly the part is with gimbal disabled, and huge sums of reaction wheel force to compensate. Another reason we are still using reaction force on a number of parts relates to KSP gameplay vs how real space missions are flown. When you have giant big heavy things that need point a certain way, the RCS force affects orbital trajectory. In real life they sit down and do the math and plan out every single RCS firing according to a plan. This is not fun or convenient in KSP. To make it easier on the user, the option of using SAS force to orient a vehicle while transferring to another planet is available, because many Chaka parts have substantial SAS power.
-
LoL Hey starting at the dotted line, silly time is over so that people don't have to pilfer through our jokes to find answered to their questions. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks! Action Tickets are open on both issues.
-
It is an extremely nice HTV model!
-
Thanks I feel much better now! Same time next week?
-
lol see what I mean?? In real life MeCripp is an actual cybernetic being, like a Meklar from Master of Orion, and Voidryder is Doctor Evil's therapist.
-
â–² I bet a chat log between you and MeCripp would be hilariously difficult to understand
-
Yes that's true... my point was that the heritage of the Delta IV goes back to payloads originally designed for Shuttle, Titan was on the shelf so they maxed it out to lift payloads coming off shuttle as a stop gap, having four launch failures along the way, then started the EELV program leading to Delta IV to finally put that issue to rest. ... and therefor we find Delta IV a more natural vehicle for lifting 5 meter station parts than a Vulcan with a tall and narrow Centaur stage, especially considering we have the Delta IV inspired system on the shelf. It's no coincidence that the NROL birds and Hubble have very similar footprints Also that it was the Air Force who specified the capacity of Shuttle's bay in the first place, and their loss of faith after Challenger led (through Titan IV as you said) ultimately to Delta IV ... and then that brings us full circle to the future second generation Vulcan with its Advanced Cryogenic Evolved Stage ... which we would need to make from scratch... and so I think we need that before Chaka gets Vulcan.
-
First, it doesn't fit neatly into this pack. Even though Delta IV is overpriced and getting shut down in a few years, we have EMLV system and are very invested in it here. Vulcan is a future system proposal and even though we have strong ideas about what it will really look like, it is kind of up in the air. So if we do move forward with it, I feel like it should be a separate pack. Another issue, in it's first generation Vulcan will be a Centaur based system. Chaka focuses on future human spaceflight through the Kerbal analogue. So we shop for high mass, high volume payloads that go relatively short distances. Centaur is better suited to exploration probes and smaller craft looking for higher velocities. We have made a few Centaur mock up models, they look great and the Vulcan prototypes we made look great too, but it doesn't really fit with the human space flight program. Ever notice that the really large Air Force payloads go up on Delta? That upper stage can lift some seriously heavy stuff. It is made to lift things that were designed to go up in Shuttle, that's why they made Delta after Challenger. So the Station components which were also designed for shuttle ( and Orion as it turns out ) are a natural fit with Delta. That's why we use it. We ran into the same paradox when we became interested in modeling the HII-B, which NoOneSpecial actually made a beautiful model of and shipped it to Chaka's Factory in nicely labeled boxes. Were we to finish the product and or include it in Chaka, it would be another chunk of ram with only one or two Chaka related payloads it could support. So that's on the shelf for now as well.
-
You're most welcome! The specific technical reason for the change was that the structural line between the booster and Orion was going through the engine's little node before, which is bad, even if with KJR it's possible to get away with. Previously we were getting a minor oscillation because of that weak point in the structure. The new setup transfers the launch vehicle force directly into the service module. Side note since we're on the subject; Chaka's rockets are all pretty well made in terms of structural rigidity, such that you really could use them without KJR. The reason we switched to including KJR in 1.0.2 is that the latest KSP has a springy force on some parts that you can't overcome with node size. Overcoming that would require struts and raised parts count etc. If the next version of KSP fixes this issue we will be able to drop KJR entirely, because all the craft are perfectly rigid enough without it other than the new spring issue. - - - Updated - - - When I look at that diagram I see the Monkey Transfer Vehicle if you had to break it down into Ariane V - launchable bites ( mass, fairing diameter constraints )
-
â–² In other words handle flight hardware in a clean room and don't push buttons for curiosity's sake hahahaha Neat! I'm gonna check that out. And thanks!
-
We've never encountered that issue EDIT: I wonder if the CFG for that size has start deployed = 1 or something similar, I'll check it out tonight.
-
Oh I get it. Orion stack as per normal and the fairing in cylindrical mode. I cant load the craft right now to look. If you mess around with upper tanks other than TALUS and use only two or for RD-480 engines, you might not need the double tank setup, and then it would be a pretty great craft.
-
These various proposals, alongside the fresher ones depicted for the ARM mission, which they produced when the service module was announced, along with also the "Deep Space Habitat" which they have made a mock up of for ergonomic testing, are all the inspiration for Chaka's "Exploration Habitat" and "Minimus Express" crafts. Looking at that picture I really like the "micro node" with ports all over it and it's transverse alignment in the stack. It's a little sci fi which is neat. - - - Updated - - - So what would happen in an abort scenario? It looks like you're depicting an upper stage with four J2-X engines which is a lot of mass and power, with a common inner bulkhead tank on top of the TALUS separate stack H2/LOX config, which for me is like using a refrigerator taped to the roof of a car and some dryer hose to air condition the vehicle And that is absolutely fine if you had fun! I'm glad you're enjoying the pack and please feel free to continue to share screenshots and other stuff. EDIT: We had always intended EMLV II to support SLS Munar 1x it works out pretty well.
-
I like the NASA one!
-
That's hilarious I just saw the trailer for that like an hour ago and my first thought was, wow, someone went Kerbal with some ISS parts then couldn't leave it alone so they dipped into the Avatar parts bin as well. I hope they installed Kerbal Joint Reinforcement!! Also thank you for gracing this forum page with such a beautiful image! haha I will watch that movie just for the phrase "Science the .... out of this"
-
Agreed thank you for digging up those facts. While we work on 1.0.2D , if there are any suggestions regarding tech tree placement of parts please post them and I'll make any requested changes there as well.
-
The Bouncy Castle III low density hypersonic decelerator is in CMES/Aero/BC-003/ and they do not ablate
-
Also most CMES textures are DDS now and it's memory footprint is 25% of the last beta which makes it quite economical presently.
-
Okay... Well the fact is the chutes dont work anyway so I think we shall drop them and rely on the nested squad chute.
-
I just pulled the whole thing apart and re coded it but so we're on the same page, you guys do not see this?
-
In the VAB when I click on the part I do get the parachutes, although they don't work very well because of how old the models are, that's why we have to nest the new squad parachutes as well.
-
Absolutely not... However we do need to re calibrate the drag settings on the emergency chutes clipped inside the capsule... I'm working that issue now. Also on Altair crew transfer, I'm going to test Sarbian's Crew Manifest to see if that can get the little guys out of there. Of course there is always the old fashioned way, with a quick EVA as well.
