[1.12.5] Cormorant Aeronology - Mk3 Space Shuttle

[notJebKerman]

9 minutes ago, Z3R0_0NL1N3 said:

Do the LRBs have a parachute return system? Were they ever designed to have one, since salt water isn't the greatest thing on engines. It would be nice for balance, I think, either way.

For now, LRB parachute return system isn't included in the mod.

However, they were designed to have one, since reusability was kinda the whole point of the Space Shuttle. While they never went far enough to develop it further, most likely they would fly back and use parachutes & landing gear at each end. But again, thats just what people assume would likely be used, it was never developed by NASA. 

This is, as far as I know the only way it would work, both in real life & KSP (of course there is SpaceX-style landing but with 80s technology, it's nearly impossible). The reason system used by SRBs would not work is, (aside from damage done by salt water, but that's not an issue in KSP) that in order to prevent boosters from tipping over they would have to land at speeds of 20+ m/s (like SRBs do), which would destroy the engines (having engines with that kind of impact tolerance is incredibly unrealistic and not really well balanced with other parts). 

Edited September 3, 2017 by notJebKerman

[Pak]

1 hour ago, Z3R0_0NL1N3 said:

Do the LRBs have a parachute return system?

P.S. Another question: did the shuttle have lights inside the bay?

I have the return stuff planned for Phase 3 and hope to make it usable for both the Buran and B-II boosters. If I remember right It was proposed for the block-II but they decided it was cheaper to just ditch them instead of refurbishing. Makes a lot more sense to recover the Buran boosters since they drop over land.

The white paint is just for fashion

Depending on the mission they had cameras and lights set up in the bay as well as on the Canadarm to help the payload specialists out. They mainly used the light reflecting off of earth though as they orbited 'upsidown' so the direct sunlight mostly hit the thermal tiles.

[Abpilot]

Question why is there a buran spacecraft yet no buran lifter, the buran requires the enagira lifter which actually has A:4 engines on the tank (RD-0120's) B:has 4 boosters which have again has a 4 engine cluster of the RD-170's.

sorry if i am bothering you PAK its just its quite bothering to me i just want some more realism

PS the boosters for the enegria have slanted cones.

PPS i really love your work!!

Edited September 4, 2017 by Abpilot

[Z3R0_0NL1N3]

3 hours ago, Abpilot said:

Question why is there a buran spacecraft yet no buran lifter, the buran requires the enagira lifter which actually has A:4 engines on the tank (RD-0120's) B:has 4 boosters which have again has a 4 engine cluster of the RD-170's.

It's in his roadmap. Additionally, Tantares teased work on one, I think.

But if you really want one to use now, the parts from AB Launchers should still work (but may not be specifically balanced).

Edit: Unrelated: I found a piece of conceptual shuttle hardware I found interesting, the Aft Cargo Carrier, designed to put an additional payload in the back of the ET which would be carried all the way to orbit. 

it's probably easy enough to make with stock parts, but I thought it was worth sharing.

Edit 2: There is no 5m fairing, unfortunately.

Edited September 4, 2017 by Z3R0_0NL1N3

[gc1ceo]

Loving the new LRBs!

[Abpilot]

1 hour ago, Z3R0_0NL1N3 said:

It's in his roadmap. Additionally, Tantares teased work on one, I think.

But if you really want one to use now, the parts from AB Launchers should still work (but may not be specifically balanced).

Edit: Unrelated: I found a piece of conceptual shuttle hardware I found interesting, the Aft Cargo Carrier, designed to put an additional payload in the back of the ET which would be carried all the way to orbit. 

it's probably easy enough to make with stock parts, but I thought it was worth sharing.

AB launches isn't compatible for 1.3...Is it not? Plus i would've liked this to be awnserd by PAK (no offence)

[Z3R0_0NL1N3]

16 minutes ago, Abpilot said:

AB launches isn't compatible for 1.3...Is it not? Plus i would've liked this to be awnserd by PAK (no offence)

 

2 hours ago, Z3R0_0NL1N3 said:

the parts from AB Launchers should still work

 

[TheRedTom]

On 29/08/2017 at 11:59 PM, TheRedTom said:

 

 

16 hours ago, Abpilot said:

AB launches isn't compatible for 1.3...Is it not? Plus i would've liked this to be awnserd by PAK (no offence)

AB still works in 1.3, see my post further up the thread.

As for @Pak , Energia is on his roadmap, and hopefully, soon you will see a CA Energia.

See the roadmap if you want to know more.

Edited September 4, 2017 by TheRedTom

[Pak]

@Abpilot I mentioned it a while back but I'm not making my own Energia. Tantares will be the 'official' Energia for CA and I'm working with Beale to make it as compatible as possible with my Buran.

I'm instead using that dev time to clean up the current Buran parts and make some new Russian inspired payload/utility parts.

 

That reminds me I need to go through and update my roadmap.

 

@Z3R0_0NL1N3 I'm making that and the ET Nosecone fairing. Good picture though I haven't seen it all broken up like that.

[Abpilot]

17 hours ago, Z3R0_0NL1N3 said:

 

 

Thx

 

1 hour ago, TheRedTom said:

AB still works in 1.3, see my post further up the thread.

As for @Pak , Energia is on his roadmap, and hopefully, soon you will see a CA Energia.

See the roadmap if you want to know more.

Thx

 

ok thx PAK over and out. PS love your work i recon ma by adding a launch pad?

i hope I'm not asking for too much or being rude if so sorry

9 minutes ago, Pak said:

@Abpilot I mentioned it a while back but I'm not making my own Energia. Tantares will be the 'official' Energia for CA and I'm working with Beale to make it as compatible as possible with my Buran.

I'm instead using that dev time to clean up the current Buran parts and make some new Russian inspired payload/utility parts.

 

That reminds me I need to go through and update my roadmap.

 

@Z3R0_0NL1N3 I'm making that and the ET Nosecone fairing. Good picture though I haven't seen it all broken up like that.

Lol look up sos

 

[TimothyC]

On 9/3/2017 at 6:11 PM, Z3R0_0NL1N3 said:

Do the LRBs have a parachute return system? Were they ever designed to have one, since salt water isn't the greatest thing on engines. It would be nice for balance, I think, either way.

The final/definitive version of the LRBs modeled here (the late 1990s saw flyback LRBs proposed, but did not receive the serious consideration the earlier ones from the 1988-1991 time period received) called for a production run of 28 LRBs per year (14 flights per year was considered the post-Challenger max), with no reuse as it wasn't cost effective. Economies of production were expected to drive costs down (28 tank sets and 113 STME/RS-68 analogs per year lets you set up a true assembly line).

[Dgraz22]

@Pak is the nosecone fairing going to be a premade fairing, or a customizable one with the shuttle ET texture? Also great work with the LRBs

[Pak]

@Dgraz22 Not sure yet. The nosecone will be an animated cargo bay style for sure. I'd much prefer built pieces for the cargo butt, but I can understand the appeal of procedural fairings.

 

Still working on models but got quite a few prototype parts in game. Enough to do some launch abort testing!

 

[smotheredrun]

54 minutes ago, Pak said:

Still working on models but got quite a few prototype parts in game. Enough to do some launch abort testing!

 

Oooohhhh please don't texture that! Looks like it just needs lasers to be complete!

Just kidding.... sort of.... looks fantastic!

[Drakenex]

3 hours ago, Pak said:

@Dgraz22 Not sure yet. The nosecone will be an animated cargo bay style for sure. I'd much prefer built pieces for the cargo butt, but I can understand the appeal of procedural fairings.

 

Still working on models but got quite a few prototype parts in game. Enough to do some launch abort testing!

 

 

Amazing work! 

[Dgraz22]

Wow that block 2 shuttle abort looks really awesome. Really looking forward to toying around with that!

[drtedastro]

Looking great..

Fantastic stuff Pak,

Cheers.

[notJebKerman]

20 hours ago, Pak said:

Still working on models but got quite a few prototype parts in game. Enough to do some launch abort testing!

Amazing! Will it be possible to return the cabin to the launch site after an abort and land on the runway?

Edited September 8, 2017 by notJebKerman

[Pak]

8 minutes ago, notJebKerman said:

Amazing! Will it be possible to return the cabin to the launch site after an abort and land on the runway?

That's exactly what it's for.

The cockpit LES is to fill the gap in abort options from lift-off to booster sep. Along a normal flight path in stock, my general goal is making it capable of a KSC return from about 15k (SRB sep) and island return from (20-30k LRB sep). Beyond booster sep, RTLS or Abort to Orbit would be better options unless the orbiter is too damaged to land.

 

[Z3R0_0NL1N3]

On 07/09/2017 at 6:00 PM, Pak said:

I'd much prefer built pieces for the cargo butt, but I can understand the appeal of procedural fairings.

First of all, those new models look amazing and I can't wait! But as for the ACC, it was designed to be a standard size. Plus you do need to drop it after SRB sep in one piece, rather than shattering or even clamshelling like the stock fairings do (but this might be configurable to one piece).

Second question: Does the Block II cockpit use the same IVA as the stock Mk3? if so it should be easy enough to support the Middeck mod.

Edited September 10, 2017 by Z3R0_0NL1N3

[S0MBRA]

I love this mod, but I have an issue. The rear dual OMS doesn't thrust at all and that makes controlling the ship in space very difficult. I'm not sure why, but it has only happened since this patch.

[Bottle Rocketeer 500]

@Pak Can you please make the DynaSoar at some point? (compatible with BDB's Titan rocket .

[Pak]

On 9/9/2017 at 2:22 AM, Z3R0_0NL1N3 said:

Second question: Does the Block II cockpit use the same IVA as the stock Mk3? if so it should be easy enough to support the Middeck mod.

It'll have it's own IVA but might end up with the mk3 as a stand-in for a bit. The IVA depends a lot on time and frustration levels. Block-II seats 8 on the flight deck and the mid-deck is used as an airlock and EVA prep room, so the layout is quite a bit different.

3 hours ago, S0MBRA said:

The rear dual OMS doesn't thrust

whoops. Thanks for the heads up. I changed the thrusters a while back and the cfg changes snuck in but not the updated model. They work now in 1.3.0c and they're also a bit more stable, so enjoy.

 

Update v1.3.0c

Changes:

• Fixed Shuttle OMS - Fixed Shuttle OMS pods (broke in 1.3.0b) - Changed the RCS so they're now more stable during translation.

• Fixed some description errors

[notJebKerman]

17 hours ago, Pak said:

It'll have it's own IVA but might end up with the mk3 as a stand-in for a bit. The IVA depends a lot on time and frustration levels. Block-II seats 8 on the flight deck and the mid-deck is used as an airlock and EVA prep room, so the layout is quite a bit different.

Are you planning to add a built-in airlock to the Block-II cockpit, similar to the one flown on most of the shuttle missions?

[Pak]

Some progress.

I'm using the current wing textures for the B-2 stuff, so I plugged in the new delta and rudder. Not too shabby.

 

In new stuff I put together the basics for the landing skids and got them working in game. These will probably change quite a bit as it's just the basic shapes needed to animate them. The rear skids are a radial attach part and the front skid is built into the cockpit.

 

@notJebKerman This one is getting its own cargo bay airlock with some other features.