hendrack Posted April 25, 2017 Share Posted April 25, 2017 I iam missing the part "minifueltank" when opening the orbiter. Is this a stock part? I've validated the install with steam but still this part is missing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiscoSlelge Posted April 25, 2017 Share Posted April 25, 2017 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pak Posted April 25, 2017 Author Share Posted April 25, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, hendrack said: I iam missing the part "minifueltank" when opening the orbiter. Is this a stock part? I've validated the install with steam but still this part is missing. minifueltank is the stock Oscar B fuel tank (the little silver one). I found one hiding in the airlock and removed it. But yeah it's a stock part so another mod might be removing it or you might want to reinstall your base game @DiscoSlelge Thanks, those are great Edited April 25, 2017 by Pak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Z3R0_0NL1N3 Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 Is the control Shuttle-C nose going to include RCS? I don't know if the original had planned to, and I don't know what the purpose of the Shuttle-C would've been much IRL. I would figure it would be a good counterpart to the Progress, but to dock to a station it'd need forward RCS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimothyC Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 (edited) 35 minutes ago, Z3R0_0NL1N3 said: Is the control Shuttle-C nose going to include RCS? I don't know if the original had planned to, and I don't know what the purpose of the Shuttle-C would've been much IRL. I would figure it would be a good counterpart to the Progress, but to dock to a station it'd need forward RCS. The fundamental idea behind Shuttle-C was to offer the ability to launch longer (82 foot bay vs 60 foot bay) and heavier (75 ton vs 32.5 ton), and more volatile (Centaur G Prime) payloads into orbit without any changes to the shuttle's processing flows or infrastructure. Cheep (less than a billion USD in early 1990s money) and easy heavy lift for the 1990s. Without a major client that was willing to help fund development, the program died. A fun side note is that with three SSMEs, Shuttle-C could have lifted 25 tons on a dog-leg launch out of the cape to Polar orbit. It could have also lifted 50 tons to the same 98 degree, 110nmi orbit from Vandenberg, demonstrating the payload hit you take for dog-leg launches. Edited April 26, 2017 by TimothyC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JediRangerkendor Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 https://m.imgur.com/0laPUg7 I have never actually used your parts for a shuttle.... work great for spaceplanes though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Z3R0_0NL1N3 Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 (edited) Another thing I'd like to see in the "extra stuff" roadmap section is parts to attach the shuttle to the back of another MK3 fuselage to imitate the Shuttle Carrier Aircraft. The current ET attachment part is hard to use for this purpose. Additionally, perhaps an engine fairing? (Though the Shuttle-C nose does work pretty well for ALT tests) Edited April 26, 2017 by Z3R0_0NL1N3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minepagan Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 5 hours ago, Z3R0_0NL1N3 said: Another thing I'd like to see in the "extra stuff" roadmap section is parts to attach the shuttle to the back of another MK3 fuselage to imitate the Shuttle Carrier Aircraft. The current ET attachment part is hard to use for this purpose. Additionally, perhaps an engine fairing? (Though the Shuttle-C nose does work pretty well for ALT tests) Well IRL the SCA was bigger than the Shuttle, so you might be better off using something like SXT's Osaul hull, which should work fine with the ET attachment parts. I definitely second a tail shroud though. (But why don't we wait for him to finish Block 2?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Z3R0_0NL1N3 Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 1 hour ago, minepagan said: Well IRL the SCA was bigger than the Shuttle Unless I'm mistaken, their fuselages looked pretty similar in size. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 Yeah, but, @Pak has cooler stuff to work on then a useless plane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minepagan Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 1 hour ago, CobaltWolf said: Yeah, but, @Pak has cooler stuff to work on then a useless plane As I said, why don't we wait until he's done doing what we've asked for before we start asking for more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pak Posted April 26, 2017 Author Share Posted April 26, 2017 The shuttle transport bits have come up a few times. While they're neat and all, they're really niche and fall deeply into a "part bloat" category for me. I can't see most people using them at all, and those that do would probably use them a couple times and never touch them again. Just not worth the time investment or memory usage of the pack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avalon304 Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 (edited) Just noticed that the Shuttle-C craft only has 2 STMEs on it, was this intended? EDIT: Also, would it be possible to get a flat Shuttle-C style butt (sorta like the Buran butt?) Edited April 26, 2017 by Avalon304 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimothyC Posted April 26, 2017 Share Posted April 26, 2017 (edited) On 4/26/2017 at 6:23 PM, Avalon304 said: Just noticed that the Shuttle-C craft only has 2 STMEs on it, was this intended? EDIT: Also, would it be possible to get a flat Shuttle-C style butt (sorta like the Buran butt?) Basic Shuttle-C designs would have supported either two or three SSMEs, or eventually two STMEs. Edited April 27, 2017 by TimothyC Typo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minepagan Posted April 27, 2017 Share Posted April 27, 2017 17 hours ago, TimothyC said: Basic Shuttle-C designs would have supported either one or two SSMEs, or eventually two STMEs. *Two or 3 SSMEs The US Space and Rocket Center has a Shuttle C engine block hidden behind a building, and it has mounting points for up to 3 engines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cxg2827 Posted April 27, 2017 Share Posted April 27, 2017 On 4/26/2017 at 11:46 AM, Pak said: Just not worth the time investment or memory usage of the Pak. Fixed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimothyC Posted April 27, 2017 Share Posted April 27, 2017 6 hours ago, minepagan said: *Two or 3 SSMEs The US Space and Rocket Center has a Shuttle C engine block hidden behind a building, and it has mounting points for up to 3 engines. Correct. I'll fix that typo. What is on display is the Shuttle Main Propulsion Test Article (MPTA-98), which was used as the engineering mockup of the Shuttle-C from 1988 to 1990. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpaceBadger007 Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 On 4/27/2017 at 2:01 AM, CobaltWolf said: Yeah, but, @Pak has cooler stuff to work on then a useless plane such as what? you want to tell us this cooler stuff? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avalon304 Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 14 minutes ago, SpaceBadger007 said: such as what? you want to tell us this cooler stuff? Well... theres the Buran pack... or the Block II shuttle... or the Block II heavy lift stuff... like lots of things cooler than a 747. (Im really interested to see Pak's take on an Energia). I mean... its all in the roadmap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steedcrugeon Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 7 minutes ago, SpaceBadger007 said: such as what? you want to tell us this cooler stuff? Ssshh! you'll ruin the surprise for the rest of us. Some of us don't like to be told what cool extra free stuff we might get soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpaceBadger007 Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 38 minutes ago, steedcrugeon said: Ssshh! you'll ruin the surprise for the rest of us. Some of us don't like to be told what cool extra free stuff we might get soon. Fair enough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CobaltWolf Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 Yeah i 4 hours ago, SpaceBadger007 said: such as what? you want to tell us this cooler stuff? 4 hours ago, Avalon304 said: Well... theres the Buran pack... or the Block II shuttle... or the Block II heavy lift stuff... like lots of things cooler than a 747. (Im really interested to see Pak's take on an Energia). I mean... its all in the roadmap. Yeah I just meant the block 2 stuff. It's gonna be lit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pak Posted April 28, 2017 Author Share Posted April 28, 2017 (edited) Block who now? Edited April 28, 2017 by Pak Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cxg2827 Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 THICC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaverickSawyer Posted April 28, 2017 Share Posted April 28, 2017 Oh HECK yes. I am SO onboard with this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.