Jump to content

[1.12.5] Cormorant Aeronology - Mk3 Space Shuttle

Pak

By Pak
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

MrMeeb

MrMeeb

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, drtedastro said:

Because if you do not do this, it will fall through the sky like a badly balanced brick.

Very uncool...

But it will fly and land quite nicely, but you have to do as MrMeep and Sharpspoonful say, flight rigid flight plan with a light touch..

I am landing almost every time now.

Not on the runway all of the time, but safe landing the same.

Jeb and crew just pop out the snacks and party while waiting for pickup.

Cheers.

I'm so sorry, but it's a pet peeve of mine. It's MrMeeb :wink: 

I use both of those with great success. I've also found NavHud to be useful for landing, trajectories for planning your reentry, and MechJeb's SmartASS has become essential to be for controlled ascents 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
StevieC

StevieC

Posted
Posted (edited)

Watching @TheReadPanda trying to build a shuttle with this mod for his Kerbal International Space Station project on Squad's official KSPTV twitch. He is running into difficulties that would be much easier to overcome with a modular lifting-body segment. He also is of the opinion that the LFO tank-configuration for the lifting-body+engine-mount section is unrealistically small. I'm in agreement with him on that.

Edited by StevieC
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sgt.Shutesie

Sgt.Shutesie

Posted
Posted
On 5/5/2016 at 11:16 PM, StevieC said:

If I may recommend a small tweak to the ShuttleBottomLong.cfg file, change the "stackSymmetry" number from 1 to 2, that way you can fit the space-shuttle main engines in 3x radial symmetry to the attachment nodes that are arranged in a triangle at the rear and have them show in the staging-icons as a unified group of three.

"Science" I have a feeling that I know what you mean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrMeeb

MrMeeb

Posted
Posted

I'm actually gonna bring back this post, and the comments I made in reply to it and say that I was wrong, and @drtedastro was sort of on to something. 

The engine mount on your lifting body part is flat, at a 90 degree angle to the bottom, but the real STS has a slight angle:

spacecenterhouston_shuttle747carrier25-l295952main_ED08-0306-80_full.jpg

Another picture I felt was too big to have out of a spoiler:

Spoiler

shuttle_enterprise_ov_101_by_bagera3005-

This allowed a starting angle, while keeping the SSMEs at '0' in terms of gimbal, allowing the engines to gimbal a little further than they would be able to if they were attached to your flat plate. I know that it's possible to angle the engines to that angle using gizmos, but it's actually less than ideal, as it begins to clip the Vector into the back, and means that the top vector is further forward than the lower pair, which isn't the case on the real one. 

I think that, especially seeing as other people are beginning to say that the fuel tank is too small (which I also agree with, but not by much), it could be a consideration to take in if a small redesign were to take place. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrMeeb

MrMeeb

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, tg626 said:

No angle will be right for everyone

I agree, but I'm coming from the angle (Wehay) that certain parts have been tailor made to allow the construction of a Space Shuttle. The part itself is hardly "Lego" like (in a way that Tantares, for example, is), so I decided it would be a fair comment :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
StevieC

StevieC

Posted
Posted

When I've watched @TheReadPanda attempting to build a shuttle on his stream, one of his issues with the Cormorant parts, besides lacking adequate fuel-capacity, is that the monoprop-powered OMS engines only just BARELY give enough delta-V to perform routine shuttle maneuvers with, and that's when the payload-bay is completely empty, so expecting to have enough delta-V to even circularize your initial orbit with even a modest payload, is utterly out-of-the-question. I'll let him post in this thread if he wishes to, to elaborate on what would make this mod more usable, but for now I'll personally point out that I largely agree with his remarks on this mod, although while he doesn't find the Cormorant MMU to suit his needs, I will say it suits mine perfectly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Avalon304

Avalon304

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, StevieC said:

When I've watched @TheReadPanda attempting to build a shuttle on his stream, one of his issues with the Cormorant parts, besides lacking adequate fuel-capacity, is that the monoprop-powered OMS engines only just BARELY give enough delta-V to perform routine shuttle maneuvers with, and that's when the payload-bay is completely empty, so expecting to have enough delta-V to even circularize your initial orbit with even a modest payload, is utterly out-of-the-question. I'll let him post in this thread if he wishes to, to elaborate on what would make this mod more usable, but for now I'll personally point out that I largely agree with his remarks on this mod, although while he doesn't find the Cormorant MMU to suit his needs, I will say it suits mine perfectly.

The OMS engines dont have enough delta-V to circularize an EMPTY shuttle to what I consider to be a pretty standard LKO of 100kmx100km. They need much more thrust for the amount of fuel on the shuttle. Im not averse to riding the ET to circularize but Id much rather not have to.

 

I also agree with MrMeeb, the engine mount should probably be angled more like the real shuttle is, rather than a flat 90* like it is now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrMeeb

MrMeeb

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, Z3R0_0NL1N3 said:

It would be nice if someone could create a MM config to add a node at the bottom of the shuttle aero piece, where the decoupler for the ET is meant to be mounted.

Why can't you use a radial decoupler? That would be most accurate to the way it is done in terms of looks

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrMeeb

MrMeeb

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Z3R0_0NL1N3 said:

I can, and indeed I do, but for some projects it would be important to have a node, and I don't know how to make one.

Ah, I see. May I ask why you want to strap an octosat to the bottom of your shuttle? :D 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
123nick

123nick

Posted
Posted

hey can u have a mesh switch or variant of the shuttle nose piece that is only the nose piece, not all the integrated shuttle underside body lift thingys, the heatshield i think its called? so that way i can make small shuttles :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrMeeb

MrMeeb

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Z3R0_0NL1N3 said:

That's where you're wrong, sir. I want to attach an A330 to the bottom of it.

Oh! I forgot that mod also had that. You can still use a radial decoupler surely? Worked for me :) 

OEyoCNT.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Z3R0_0NL1N3

Z3R0_0NL1N3

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, MrMeeb said:

Oh! I forgot that mod also had that. You can still use a radial decoupler surely? Worked for me :)

Yeah, but it comes with its own attachment, designed for SOAR, but I was hoping to use it for the shuttle. Ah well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...