[PART] [1.8.0 - 1.12+] ShadowWorks - Stockalike SLS, Delta IV, and More v2.0.5.1 Waterfall Edition [8-11-2021]

[TheShadow1138]

I've got the EUS, Interstage, Orion Adapter, and a fairing plate modeled and textured. I may add a little greeble to the sloped part of the EUS, but I am planning a normal map to add a little extra detail. The interstage will have a normal map to add stringers, which may not be accurate but I think will add a little to the part. Here are a couple of renders:

Stacked:

Full EUS:

The fairing plate is not pictured, but will be fully compatible with stock procedural fairings. I'm going to test the plate with an extra floating top node for attaching the Orion as a few pictures I've seen show an ability to house cargo beneath the Orion in the Block IB configuration as was done with the Apollo Saturn V stack. I'm hoping that this node will not complicate using the plate to encapsulate cargo for Block II configurations so that the one part can be used for both vehicles. If it causes too many problems, then I will simply add a second plate strictly for cargo launches.

@AppleDavidJeans: I tried a MechJeb ascent with the SLS craft provided in the download and was able to get the desired performance. I turned off everything in the ascent guidance module (including Auto-Staging and Auto Warp) and left the ascent path at the default values for the Automatic Altitude turn (turn starts at 3.5 km or velocity of 98.9 m/s and turn end at 60km) with the exception of the Turn shape, which I set at 25%. It flies to a 100km apoapsis with a little propellant remaining in the Core Stage and after it cuts the engines I stage away the core, LAS, and SM fairings and then warp to apoapsis where it performs the circularization burn leaving plenty of propellant in the ICPS for a free-return TMI burn with some propellant left over (not much but there was some).

On the SM ∆v, I figured out what was going on. I updated the config for the SM, but not the craft files, so the provided craft is still using the old fuel load values. I'll post a quick update soon with an updated craft file and a with the data transmission ability added to the Orion CM.

Edited July 14, 2015 by TheShadow1138

[Helmut_AUT]

Just saying thanks for this mod. I found a Stock Parts Shuttle before but at 180 Parts for just the Orbiter it is not really usable. Your build example with just a few extra parts makes for a very reasonable count.

[TheShadow1138]

Update: Version 1.0.3 is now available

Changes 1.0.3:

â€â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€

* Increased Orion CM Electric Charge capacity from 50 to 200

* Added TransmitData module to the Orion CM to allow for experiments to be transmitted

* Updated SLS craft file to include SM ∆v changes

* Updated ShadowWorks Orion SM.craft subassembly to incorporate ∆v changes

* Moved subassembly craft files (3 in total) from their own folder to “Ships/VAB†for CKAN compatibility.

* Subassemblies are: ShadowWorks ET and SRBs.craft, ShadowWorks Orion SM.craft, and ShadowWorks SLS Core.craft

Work continues on new parts. I have modeled the Dark Knight booster and accompanying nose cone, only texturing remains for them at this point. The next part will be the proposed F-1B powered liquid booster. Once these parts are complete and balanced they will be part of the 1.1 update which will provide the EUS, adapters, fairing plates and the boosters necessary to make Block IB and Block II SLS configurations.

[TheShadow1138]

Here's a render of the textured Dark Knight SRB:

Now to Kerbalize the F-1B.

[Kerbal01]

dang! that good son.

[Comatorium420]

I downloaded this one when i learned that Bacon Labs was ''shut down'' because of the Derek Smart syndrome, i thought it was a cool mod and that you did good to try and support Augustus, I guess some people just don't know how to take the heat.

I like the SLS and Orion from your mod better (bigger, less toy-like) with one detail. The MFD have only an image of your flag, not that its not pretty but it doesnt show me the APr and Apt and all the nice stuff IVAs are supposed to be filled with. I'm wondering if it's because you want to make your own MFD and they are work in progress or if it is a bug on my side. Anyhow it would be great to make the MFD screens able to read the standard JSI panel!

Or if you are trying to make your own MFDs, may I suggest something that looks like the Orbiter 2010 MFDs

Thanks for your contributions even tho I wont use them in my career game before I finish all of the Historic mission contracts

Edited July 15, 2015 by Comatorium420

[TheShadow1138]

I downloaded this one when i learned that Bacon Labs was ''shut down'' because of the Derek Smart syndrome, i thought it was a cool mod and that you did good to try and support Augustus, I guess some people just don't know how to take the heat.

I like the SLS and Orion from your mod better (bigger, less toy-like) with one detail. The MFD have only an image of your flag, not that its not pretty but it doesnt show me the APr and Apt and all the nice stuff IVAs are supposed to be filled with. I'm wondering if it's because you want to make your own MFD and they are work in progress or if it is a bug on my side. Anyhow it would be great to make the MFD screens able to read the standard JSI panel!

Or if you are trying to make your own MFDs, may I suggest something that looks like the Orbiter 2010 MFDs

Thanks for your contributions even tho I wont use them in my career game before I finish all of the Historic mission contracts

I saw that Bacon Labs was shut down, which has even led me to consider releasing the parts I made for that mod in this one.

The MFDs were not meant to be functional, so you're seeing them as I intended (at least initially). I didn't want to make a JSI panel as that would add a dependency, but I have considered making a version of the IVA with the stock JSI MFD panel for those with RPM that want functional MFDs. An RPM version of the IVA would have to wait until after the Block II parts are released at the earliest I would say, but I'm not going to promise anything as I don't want to over-promise and under-deliver.

I'm glad you like the parts and hope you enjoy using them.

[AppleDavidJeans]

When is the EUS coming out? I can't wait!

[TheShadow1138]

When is the EUS coming out? I can't wait!

After I complete the F-1B liquid boosters, when the hardware necessary for Block IB and II are complete.

[Comatorium420]

It's ok, I just finished the mercury program with the histoic contracts. Thinking that i have to go through all of the gemini, voskhod, appollo, STS, soyuz, Salyut, Skylab, ISS, Mir, Shenzhou, Tiangong and all of the probe program ever created... before i can realistically start the SLS program!

Jokin' The replica you have made looks very pretty from the outside and the IVA is cool even without MFDs, what I do is put the Kerbal engineer windows where the sceens are.

Then if you are planning to make MFD with no dependecies, you should really consider Orbiter style MFD... just saying! Can't wait to see the Block II tho.

[TheShadow1138]

Here's a progress render of the completed, but untextured, F-1B engine:

Just for fun, here's a comparison render of the F-1B (simplified for Kerbals) and a more detailed model of the F-1 that I made for my Saturn V animation on Youtube:

I'm going to wait to texture this until I've modeled the booster itself to see if they can reasonably share a texture sheet.

Edit: Here's a render of the untextured booster. The nose cone will be a separate part with built-in separation motors, and of course the engines will be separate parts. I also forgot to mention before the F-1B is a 2.5m engine (it does stick out a tiny bit farther in a couple of places) so it should be good for lifting rather heavy 2.5m rockets.

The booster itself is 3.25m in diameter, the reason for this will be apparent shortly. In looking for images of the proposed liquid boosters I found an image:

That image shows the booster topped by an Ares I second stage and the Orion spacecraft. I had already considered making the Ares I upper stage (as I effectively have the Ares I first stage already released) since it would be at most three more parts. I further decided that the Ares I upper stage, should I make it, would have to be 3.25m in diameter because that was the diameter I chose for the widest part of the Orion spacecraft (the Ares I upper stage was to have conformed to the Orion's largest diameter, i.e. no bulges). So, I have decided that the update that includes the Block IB/II SLS components will also include the Ares I upper stage tank, J-2X engine, and a 3.25m interstage decoupler.

Edited July 16, 2015 by TheShadow1138
added Liquid booster render

[TheShadow1138]

Another quick progress render of the untextured J-2X next to the more detailed J-2 engine I made for my Saturn V animation:

The J-2X is made with a 1.25m mounting plate.

[komodo]

Looking Good! I'm looking forward to playing with these when they release. (If I ever get a free moment to sit down with the game!)

[TheShadow1138]

I believe I now have all the parts for the ShadowWorks 1.1 update completely modeled and UV mapped the way I want, with the exception of the F-1B and J-2X (which shouldn't prove too much of a hassle).

Here's a render of the newest parts:

From left to right we have the Dark Knight SRB(which will be called the Black Paladin in the mod), SLS core stage with EUS interstage and EUS visible, the top of the LRB and it's nose cone, a 2.5m to 3.25m solid adapter, and a 3.75m to 3.25m solid adapter for stacking the Orion on 2.5m and 3.75m stacks respectively (these are like the Rockomax brand adapters, just structural parts with no functionality, and the Ares I upper stage with J-2X engine attached and below are the Ares I interstage and the 2.25m to 3.25m adapter for stacking the Ares I.

As I've decided to rename the Dark Knight booster the Black Paladin for the mod I'm planning on renaming the Ares I. I just haven't decided on the name yet. As we tend to use Roman, Greek, and Norse deities often I'm leaning towards using an ancient Egyptian one if only to be different.

[TheShadow1138]

Update: I have completed the diffuse textures for the F-1B, J-2X, the Liquid Booster, and Ares I Upper Stage.

This is the same as the one above just with textures

A comparison between the more detailed models (not in this mod) and the textured F-1B and J-2X engines.

The other texture elements (specular, emissive, normal maps) should be knocked out pretty quick now, so I should be getting the parts into Unity sometime this week.

[TheShadow1138]

Update: I have been silent since my last post, but work continues. I have gotten all of the new parts in-game and am preparing for initial balancing once I get a couple of issues worked out. I'm having an issue with the effects on the F-1B where the "fxOffset" parameter has no apparent affect on the placement of the effect. This could be due to a mistake in where I have copied the effects from another engine. I have looked over the definitions multiple times and cannot find an error, but I'll keep looking.

The other issue is with the Ares I upper stage. If I set it on top of the 5-segemtn SRB, in the Ares I configuration, it will not survive a pitch maneuver at any velocity. I suspect that this has more to do with the current mass of the part, but I'll have to experiment.

If I remember, I'll post some screenshots of the launchers, which I think look pretty good, but I'll let y'all judge for yourselves.

[Mecripp]

Thanks for the update and sure it will all work out.

[TheShadow1138]

As promised, screenshots of four craft built with the new parts:

 

Currently the Block II configuration with the Black Paladin, as I call them in the mod, SRBs flies fairly well in the crew configuration (I have yet to really test it in cargo configuration), but some tweaking is in order. I set the initial numbers for the Black Paladins such that the Isp would yield the same burn time as the 5-segment SRBs, when in fact their burn time is faster so they were giving too much of a push (by Core Stage burnout, pitched well below the horizon, the apoapsis was above 100km).

I haven't tested the liquid booster configuration as of yet, but I have tested the liquid boosters (LRB) in its proposed crew launch vehicle first stage with an Ares I upper stage (called the Anhur I upper stage in-game). With the right application of throttle it will easily place the Orion with little headache into a 100km orbit. The biggest thing surrounding the LRBs is the lack of mass data. I was able to calculate a propellant amount based on the thrust of the F-1Bs, their Isp, and using a burn time equal to the 5-segment SRBs (though I should probably scale it back to the same burn time as the Black Paladins), and then just picked a seemingly reasonable dry mass.

We now come to the biggest issue I've had thus far with these new parts: the Ares I launcher. As I stated before the vehicle would not survive a pitch maneuver, as the SRM gimbaled and pitched the upper stage would not pitch at the same rate and be drug along. Once the pitch maneuver was stopped, the upper stage would continue pitching over until it began to bend almost, or completely, in half. Initially this would cause the vehicle to break up, but after I realized that the breakingForce and breakingTorque numbers were rather small and increased them it would simply bend and force the whole vehicle into a retrograde burn position nose down engine up. In short, all that did was keep the rocket from snapping in half. I have also tried turning down the "angularDrag" parameter, which may have helped some, but not enough to make a difference. Thinking about it right now, when I replace the Orion spacecraft with something else of similar mass, but smaller diameter, this doesn't happen, or at least is controllable enough to made it to first stage burnout.

I'm going to make sure that the Block II SLS is more balanced that it seems to be at the moment, and once I'm at that point I'll release the new parts, even if the Ares I still doesn't fly right. Or, I could release the Ares I upper stage parts so people can test it out for themselves and maybe help me find what's going wrong.

Edited December 1, 2015 by TheShadow1138

[Shadowmage]

I had similar pitch-over stability problems when I was designing my Orion-inspired parts. Would get to 8-12k altitude and 200-350 m/s, the top end would start to wobble/noodle a bit, get caught in the airstream, and rapidly flip or disassemble the rest of the rocket. IIRC I solved them by reducing the drag created by all of the 'extra' parts - LAS/BPC, and all of the adapters - I figured it was an acceptable work-around as the stock drag mechanics did not properly account for the shielding those parts -should- have provided anyway. I left the drag on the CM, SM, and ICPS at stock values, only the adapters and stuff had drag reduced.

To the LAS/BPC I added (any lower and it would overheat and explode during ascent....):

[TABLE="class: highlight tab-size js-file-line-container"]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]MODULE[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]{[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]    name = ModuleDragModifier[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]    dragCubeName = Default[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]    dragModifier = 0.5[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]}[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

and all of the structural adapters got:

[TABLE="class: highlight tab-size js-file-line-container"]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]MODULE[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]{[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]    name = ModuleDragModifier[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]    dragCubeName = Default[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]    dragModifier = 0.1[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]}[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Seemed to solve the initial problem for me. It is still on the edge of instability (and requires staying within a certain flight envelope), but quite usable, and at this point I think it is more mass related than drag.

Hope that info is of use, though no guarantees on anything.

Edit: Wow..not sure what is up with that formatting...

Futher Edit:

FYI - I don't think that the maxDrag/minDrag/angularDrag config values are used anymore; it is all done through drag-cubes as far as I can tell.

Edited July 23, 2015 by Shadowmage

[TheShadow1138]

I had similar pitch-over stability problems when I was designing my Orion-inspired parts. Would get to 8-12k altitude and 200-350 m/s, the top end would start to wobble/noodle a bit, get caught in the airstream, and rapidly flip or disassemble the rest of the rocket. IIRC I solved them by reducing the drag created by all of the 'extra' parts - LAS/BPC, and all of the adapters - I figured it was an acceptable work-around as the stock drag mechanics did not properly account for the shielding those parts -should- have provided anyway. I left the drag on the CM, SM, and ICPS at stock values, only the adapters and stuff had drag reduced.

To the LAS/BPC I added (any lower and it would overheat and explode during ascent....):

[TABLE="class: highlight tab-size js-file-line-container"]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]MODULE[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]{[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]    name = ModuleDragModifier[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]    dragCubeName = Default[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]    dragModifier = 0.5[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]}[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

and all of the structural adapters got:

[TABLE="class: highlight tab-size js-file-line-container"]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]MODULE[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]{[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]    name = ModuleDragModifier[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]    dragCubeName = Default[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]    dragModifier = 0.1[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: blob-code blob-code-inner js-file-line"]}[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Seemed to solve the initial problem for me. It is still on the edge of instability (and requires staying within a certain flight envelope), but quite usable, and at this point I think it is more mass related than drag.

Hope that info is of use, though no guarantees on anything.

Edit: Wow..not sure what is up with that formatting...

Futher Edit:

FYI - I don't think that the maxDrag/minDrag/angularDrag config values are used anymore; it is all done through drag-cubes as far as I can tell.

Thanks for the info, I'll definitely try this and see what happens. I figured it would probably turn out to be either a drag or mass distribution issue, or at least I hope it turns out that way. Yeah, I thought I had read where those parameters (maxDrag/minDrag/angularDrag) had been put into disuse with the updated aerodynamics. It was just something I figured I'd try, that of course yielded no change. I'll report back on the results.

[_Augustus_]

Still no results?

[TheShadow1138]

Still no results?

Well, yes and no. Shadowmage's suggestion does seem to have helped. When the Ares I upper stage is stacked on the SLS liquid boosters there is no longer any perceptible wobble. The Ares I, however, continues to persist in its wobble. With the thrust limited to 45% of full thrust ti develops a nasty wobble when flying straight up when it gets above 500 m/s, and it flips around at any pitch angle early on in the ascent around 100 m/s. I have also added the ModuleDragModifier to the Ares I upper stage tank and it still wobbles. I'm wondering if RCS thrusters on the upper stage may help. I'll try that and report back.

On a much better note the Block IB SLS and Block II SLS with either the Dark Knight SRBs or the liquid boosters flies very well in its crew configuration.

Update: I got rid of the wobble in the Anhur I (Ares I). It seems that the adapter part was causing the problem, and I have no idea why (unless being a larger diameter at the top than at the bottom has an affect on a part's behavior). The realization came when I re-exported the Ares I upper stage from Unity to return it to its unaltered original state (I had changed the diameter of the collider in an attempt to fix the issue) and was testing it with the liquid booster first stage. In this configuration there was no wobble, it pitched as though it was a single rigid vehicle.

Then it occurred to me, "what is different about this launcher than the Ares I?" The thrust is probably about the same (I kept the F-1Bs at 66% throttle for most of the flight), and then I realized: The liquid booster powered launcher didn't have the 2.25m - 3.25m adapter. I then build the Ares I without the adapter, so that the vehicle as arranged, from top to bottom: Orion Spacecraft, Ares I upper stage with J-2X, Aries I 3.25m cylindrical decoupler, 5-segment SRB. In this configuration, with an initial pitch angle of 65º, there was absolutely no wobble (though if I flew with a 45º initial pitch angle the vehicle flipped over, but without doubling over). So I went into the config of the adapter, set "PhysicsSignificance" to "1" (it had not been present before), lo-and-behold no wobble.

Now once I figure out what the problem is with the fxOffset on the F-1B I believe I will be ready to release the parts.

Edited July 25, 2015 by TheShadow1138

[_Augustus_]

Well, yes and no. Shadowmage's suggestion does seem to have helped. When the Ares I upper stage is stacked on the SLS liquid boosters there is no longer any perceptible wobble. The Ares I, however, continues to persist in its wobble. With the thrust limited to 45% of full thrust ti develops a nasty wobble when flying straight up when it gets above 500 m/s, and it flips around at any pitch angle early on in the ascent around 100 m/s. I have also added the ModuleDragModifier to the Ares I upper stage tank and it still wobbles. I'm wondering if RCS thrusters on the upper stage may help. I'll try that and report back.

On a much better note the Block IB SLS and Block II SLS with either the Dark Knight SRBs or the liquid boosters flies very well in its crew configuration.

Update: I got rid of the wobble in the Anhur I (Ares I). It seems that the adapter part was causing the problem, and I have no idea why (unless being a larger diameter at the top than at the bottom has an affect on a part's behavior). The realization came when I re-exported the Ares I upper stage from Unity to return it to its unaltered original state (I had changed the diameter of the collider in an attempt to fix the issue) and was testing it with the liquid booster first stage. In this configuration there was no wobble, it pitched as though it was a single rigid vehicle.

Then it occurred to me, "what is different about this launcher than the Ares I?" The thrust is probably about the same (I kept the F-1Bs at 66% throttle for most of the flight), and then I realized: The liquid booster powered launcher didn't have the 2.25m - 3.25m adapter. I then build the Ares I without the adapter, so that the vehicle as arranged, from top to bottom: Orion Spacecraft, Ares I upper stage with J-2X, Aries I 3.25m cylindrical decoupler, 5-segment SRB. In this configuration, with an initial pitch angle of 65º, there was absolutely no wobble (though if I flew with a 45º initial pitch angle the vehicle flipped over, but without doubling over). So I went into the config of the adapter, set "PhysicsSignificance" to "1" (it had not been present before), lo-and-behold no wobble.

Now once I figure out what the problem is with the fxOffset on the F-1B I believe I will be ready to release the parts.

I'd be happy to beta test. Are you gonna make the old ATK solar panels to go with the Ares I?

I wish I knew about FX for engines. Maybe a Unity bug?

[Comatorium420]

I always put little 0.625 radial SAS that I offset inside at the bottom of my replicas (Because tail fins should stop the wobble but the Ares has no tail fin ), thats something I started doing when I made launchers using the Karbonite SRBs wich are just a wobble fest and it helped a lot, also making the core stage with small segmented tanks on top helps as the top tanks empty before the bottom and it makes your weight center dynamically adjust with your ascent profile, not sure how this could be implemented to SRBs tho...

Edited July 25, 2015 by Comatorium420

[TheShadow1138]

As I have solved the issue with the Anhur I (Ares I) wobble, and fixed the effects on the F-1B I am releasing the new parts.

ShadowWorks v1.1 Update

Changes 1.1:

â€â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€Ã¢â‚¬â€

* Added Exploration Upper Stage (EUS)

* Added RL-10C Engine

* Added 5m - 3.25m adapter

* Added SLS 5m fairing base

* Added EUS 5m stack decoupler

* Added Black Paladin (Dark Knight) Advanced Solid Rocket Booster

* Added SLS Liquid Booster Tank and Nose Cone

* Added F-1B engine

* Added J-2X engine

* Added Anhur I (Ares I) Upper Stage

* Added Anhur I (Ares I) stack decoupler

* Added 2.25m - 3.25m adapter

* Added 3.75m - 3.25m adapter

* Added 2.5m - 3.25m adapter

* Added an SLS Block IB craft file

* Added an SLS Block II with Advanced SRBs craft file

* Added an SLS Block II with Advanced Liquid Booster craft file

* Added an Anhur I (Ares I) craft file

* Added an Anhur II (Ares II) craft file

* Added a craft file for the Orion CM and LAS

* Changed the Orion SM subassembly to include the SM decoupler and 3-petal fairing

As you can see above, I have included craft files for the Block IB and Block II SLS with the advanced SRBs an LRBs. I've also updated the Orion SM subassembly to include the decoupler and fairing walls and subassemblies of the combined EUS and Core Stage with either the advanced SRBs or LRBs.

These launchers are probably a little over-powered, or a lot over-powered depending on your payload or many other factors. As such I welcome feedback on balance issues, and any other issues you find. I don't think this will break any saves as I didn't modify any of the existing parts.

I haven't yet finalized what parts will be in the next update, but when I do I'll let you all know.