Constellation Mission Packs Discussion Thread!

[Majorjim!]

Just now, PixelatedPig said:

I diceded to remake my Orion

It looks great man! Nice work.

 How are you getting on with the other craft?

[PixelatedPig]

9 minutes ago, Majorjim said:

How are you getting on with the other craft?

Ares V - Almost complete

Ares I - I re-made this one aswell. Almost complete (needs stable stage 1)

Orion - Fully Complete 

Altair - Fully Complete (I might do a re-make but I'm not sure)

SRP (SEV) - Completely goning to remake this one

Thats what I got so far.

I tried to work on the mars missions but its really hard to build and test the crafts.

[pTrevTrevs]

A few more images to share just to prove that my stuff works.

Trans-Kerbin Injection burn. Turns out I had more fuel than I thought and was able to make the entire burn without tapping in to the fuel that I siphoned from Altair's ascent stage

Leaving the Mun after spending four days (I think) in orbit around it or on its surface.

Service Module jettison.

Reentry. (the Service Module can be seen exploding to the left of the CM)

Parachutes deployed (I sure do wish they didn't clip into each other like that).

"What? This isn't the ocean! This looks like Kazakhstan!" 

 

And lastly, the Blooper of the Day.

Spoiler

 "Damn, I bet it scratched the paint!"

Changes to be made

• Add a probe core to Orion (I forgot the first time)
• Increase DeltaV of Ares V second stage
• Fix SPR deployment
• Probably some other stuff that I haven't discovered yet.

 

With luck I can release these craft sometime in the next few days.

[Majorjim!]

On 05/28/2016 at 0:24 AM, PixelatedPig said:

its really hard to build and test the crafts.

If you don't mind using it for testing HyperEdit is a godsend. I used to have to fly a craft all the way to Duna just to test each part.. With such complex vehicles you simply do not know how it will work on Duna until you send it there and with so many different parts that have to work together it would be impossible to test them without HE.

[PixelatedPig]

 

On 5/30/2016 at 0:45 PM, Majorjim said:

If you don't mind using it for testing HyperEdit is a godsend.

I'm using Hyperedit already, works great. My real problem is building the craft. Sometimes they just break up on the lauchpad/runway (lack of struts I guess).  :/

[Majorjim!]

36 minutes ago, PixelatedPig said:

 

I'm using Hyperedit already, works great. My real problem is building the craft. Sometimes they just break up on the lauchpad/runway (lack of struts I guess).  :/

Yup, that will do it. Let it settle on the pad then turn gravity on and off and see where it is flexing and bending. That helps to find the weak spots. 

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

Just some eye candy.

Spoiler

 

[pTrevTrevs]

Has anyone ever tried to make a capsule with a deliberately offset center of mass to perform a targeted/guided reentry? I built a test rig to try and figure out whether this was possible or feasible, but the results were inconclusive. If anyone has done this and has any advice, I would appreciate it very much if you would share it with me. I would like to be able to land the Orion CM within a few kilometers of a target (probably an aircraft carrier) without simply timing the deorbit burn just right or using an autopilot.

[Majorjim!]

Just now, pTrevTrevs said:

Has anyone ever tried to make a capsule with a deliberately offset center of mass to perform a targeted/guided reentry? I built a test rig to try and figure out whether this was possible or feasible, but the results were inconclusive. If anyone has done this and has any advice, I would appreciate it very much if you would share it with me. I would like to be able to land the Orion CM within a few kilometers of a target (probably an aircraft carrier) without simply timing the deorbit burn just right or using an autopilot.

I don't know how much of a difference that would make and as the falling pod has no control authority you will still have to get your entry correct to hit the target as you would with a non offset COM pod.

[pTrevTrevs]

40 minutes ago, Majorjim said:

I don't know how much of a difference that would make and as the falling pod has no control authority you will still have to get your entry correct to hit the target as you would with a non offset COM pod.

Hmm, after reviewing the description of Gemini's guided reentry in a book I own I realize that for this to work the craft's lift/drag ratio must be greater than zero. Since I can't really think of any way to achieve this I guess a guided reentry isn't really going to be feasible unless I cheated by using translation thrusters.

[Servo]

Looks like my major elements are complete*! Now all I need to do is a full-scale test mission to see how everything works. The last part of the Mars mission has just exited final hyperedit testing.

 

*maybe

[Majorjim!]

Just now, Servo said:

*maybe

You are making great progress man, keep it up! And yeah.. wheels are a pain at the moment. She looks glorious during descent, thank you for sharing the pics!

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

Revenge of the angry alligator:

 

[Majorjim!]

Just now, Mad Rocket Scientist said:

Revenge of the angry alligator:

 

YAY! Why no pointy end though man? That heatshield is not needed at all for Duna aerocapture.

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

1 minute ago, Majorjim said:

YAY! Why no pointy end though man? That heatshield is not needed at all for Duna aerocapture.

Because it looks the closest to the shape of the end.  Because it looks the closest to the inaccurate fairing that I based this off of.  I'm going to change that.

[Majorjim!]

Just now, Mad Rocket Scientist said:

Because it looks the closest to the shape of the end.  Because it looks the closest to the inaccurate fairing that I based this off of.  I'm going to change that.

I would make the fairing bigger too, so the engine bells are almost flush with the outside or even recessed a little.

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

5 minutes ago, Majorjim said:

I would make the fairing bigger too, so the engine bells are almost flush with the outside or even recessed a little.

I'm torn about that.  Right now, it's exactly 3.75 m, making the DTV and Ares V design much simpler.  However, if I'm making it larger, I might want to go back to a stock fairing, since that removes the largest problem with those.  I'll do a little testing on both.

[Majorjim!]

9 minutes ago, Mad Rocket Scientist said:

I'm torn about that.  Right now, it's exactly 3.75 m, making the DTV and Ares V design much simpler.  However, if I'm making it larger, I might want to go back to a stock fairing, since that removes the largest problem with those.  I'll do a little testing on both.

Righ that makes sense. My landers are too big for 3.75 meaning my transfer stage for the DTV is a little small for the landers.. It's annoying but I don't want to make the landers smaller or the Copernicus bigger. It's one of many compromises that must be made with this sort of thing sadly. 

 I rebuilt my ares 1 again and improved the orion. I'm super happy with the orion. The shape is perfect now. 

[pTrevTrevs]

All I had to do was walk away... All I had to do was walk away.... All... I had to do... was walk... away...

[Servo]

I'm about halfway through my full-up test (almost done!). I transferred the presupply and assembled the Copernicus on orbit. I screwed up my Orion revamp, so the crew will arrive and transfer tomorrow.

 

[Majorjim!]

6 hours ago, Servo said:

I'm about halfway through my full-up test (almost done!). I transferred the presupply and assembled the Copernicus on orbit. I screwed up my Orion revamp, so the crew will arrive and transfer tomorrow.

 

Great work man! It's so awesome to see everything come together like that.

 You mentioned the wheels broke this is most likely because you time-warped in the atmosphere a little. I have seen the same thing happen.

Well done for keeping the lander within 3.75m parts, it looks really sleek like that flush with the transfer stage. My cargo aeroshells are a bit wider than the transfer stage..

 If I was being super pendantic, and I am, I would say the proposed transfer stages where shown to only have three NTR's. Other than that its looking bang on!

 I look forward to seeing the rest of it man.

 

[Servo]

12 hours ago, Majorjim said:

 If I was being super pendantic, and I am, I would say the proposed transfer stages where shown to only have three NTR's. Other than that its looking bang on!

 

 

Great. Now it's only going to have a .09 TWR. I look forward to some ten-minute burns in the future (the Hab lander capture burn was already 11 minutes)

[Majorjim!]

Just now, Servo said:

Great. Now it's only going to have a .09 TWR. I look forward to some ten-minute burns in the future (the Hab lander capture burn was already 11 minutes)

An 11min burn is nothing man, suck it up!

 You can of course use any number of motors you like but adding an extra 1 makes little difference and looks less authentic.

 

Edited June 4, 2016 by Majorjim

[Servo]

3 hours ago, Majorjim said:

An 11min burn is nothing man, suck it up!

 You can of course use any number of motors you like but adding an extra 1 makes little difference and looks less authentic.

 

TBH, the only reason I had four was because I didn't look too closely at the video, and instead relied on a side view for the Copernicus. I changed the engine configuration to have three. 

In other news, the crew has docked with the Copernicus without incident (unless you consider a grossly inefficient rendezvous an incident) and are awaiting a transfer window to Duna.

[pTrevTrevs]

So what if it's a blatant rip-off of every other lander I've seen here? All the landers are essentially rip-offs of each other already!

Do't bother chastising me about those radiator ramps, they're just an experiment and probably won't be on the final version unless they work well.

Edited June 5, 2016 by pTrevTrevs