Coyote Vehicle Control Systems - Low Part Count Control Solutions

[dboi88]

Hi guys,

Just wanted to introduce my second mod that is currently under development, I'm looking for any feedback and additional ideas so I can make something as geared towards what the community would like as possible.

I know we already have a few low part count systems released/under development. However, I'm looking to fill a different niche with my own mod that allows for more flexibility with ship design.

Rather than make complete parts that include everything needed built in (i.e. full landers or full lifters) I'm looking to combine some of the parts that are regularly (or exclusive) used together into one part.

Planned Parts:

- RCS thrusters & mono propellant tank - 1.25m & 2.5m monopropellant tanks with 4 x 5way RCS thruster blocks 

- Drone Core & RCS Thrusters - 1.25m & 2.5m probe cores including, Stabalization wheels, batteries, 4 x 5way RCS thruster blocks, antenna & Mechjeb

- Contruction Drone - 1.25m MonoPropellant tank with 4 x 5way RCS thruster blocks, a decouple node and two SRB thrusters to eject. (to be mounted on loads for easy docking and can be staged and ejected once docking has been completed (think building space stations)

- Radial Detachable Fuel Tanks (for fine tuning deltaV) - this would be a radially attached fuel tank with built in decoupler and sepratrons. Do ever just need a few extra deltaV and can't be bothered re designing your whole lifter? You can just stick a few of these around the outside, add a fuel line and then stage them to release once empty. Each one in it's current form add's between 250 and 650 deltaV depending on the lifter set up.

 

Any other ideas? Are there any other parts that you always use together that could be combined into one part?

Development pics will be uploaded later today.

Ok so some example models i've been throwing around.

From Left To Right - Drone Core - RCS Pod - Construction Drone

The RCS Pod & Drone Core reduce this standard smaller Launcher from 40 parts to only 25.

40 Parts

To 25 Parts

The Construction Drone.

http://gph.is/1TwnzKI (i don't know how to make it show here)

Edited December 7, 2015 by dboi88
Pics

[Stone Blue]

For sats & probes, (0.625-1.25m), i find myself making "service modules", by stacking the smallest RCS tank, the LF toroid tank, the core, sometimes an SAS, 2 or 4 RCS thrusters, a single ANT engine, then attaching an RTG elsewhere on the sat... I would say throw a battery in there also, but even the simplest sat, with say nothing but a probe core and a Comm32, seems to need a LOT of battery to make it thru dark-side passes... So I think it would REALLY be pushing realistic boundaries to try to stuff large battery storage into a "service module" as I've described above...

For example, my basic low-to-mid SOI comm sats are usually 10 parts total... I would weld them with UbioZur, but most of the parts are things that should NOT be welded together with that mod...

[dboi88]

1 hour ago, Stone Blue said:

For sats & probes, (0.625-1.25m), i find myself making "service modules", by stacking the smallest RCS tank, the LF toroid tank, the core, sometimes an SAS, 2 or 4 RCS thrusters, a single ANT engine, then attaching an RTG elsewhere on the sat... I would say throw a battery in there also, but even the simplest sat, with say nothing but a probe core and a Comm32, seems to need a LOT of battery to make it thru dark-side passes... So I think it would REALLY be pushing realistic boundaries to try to stuff large battery storage into a "service module" as I've described above...

For example, my basic low-to-mid SOI comm sats are usually 10 parts total... I would weld them with UbioZur, but most of the parts are things that should NOT be welded together with that mod...

I'll be insisting that all parts have their size, weight and costs, both monetary & resource costs reasonable.

Ok i've got an idea, we'll make a tall toroid core(keep it looking like a satellite should) but that looks like 3 separate units, an RCS tank, an LF tank and a probe core, we'll fit the command core, sas, reaction wheels, battery and RTG in the middle section, and then appropriate amounts of LF and mono in the tanks. We'll put a set of 5 way RCS thrusters top and bottom. I'll put an appropriately sized mount at the bottom for a choice of engines and put in FSfuelswitch module to cover all fuel bases. I'll put a small range antenna in there for people running RemoteTech, Only a few km range to cover releasing the satellite (use the launch vehicle as a relay while you activate the main antennas). I'll have a play around in the VAB first to see how large the core needs to be to fit all that in. Then make a smaller one with appropriate reductions across the board.

Any thoughts/objections? Do you want a docking port on the top?

Edited December 7, 2015 by dboi88

[Stone Blue]

14 minutes ago, dboi88 said:

I'll be insisting that all parts have their size, weight and costs, both monetary & resource costs reasonable.

Yup...Thats why I dont think anything more than a small, "reserve" charge should be included...But then, most cores already include that...

Hmmm... With 5-way RCS thrusters, maybe only 2 thrusters would be needed?... I find on my small sats, I can get by with just two 4-ways... There is only one axis missing, and I usually just rotate the craft 90° to cover that, but with 5-ways, that missing axis would be covered...

I say no on the docking port... I for one, prefer to keep mounting options open... Mostly, i use a Jr. port on the launch vehicle, and attach the bottom of the sat (either a battery or tank), but sometimes the bottom of an ANT stuck there... I dont use a port on the sat, as it becomes useless and baggage unless you plan on future recovery/refueling... (These small sats I'm thinking of, are small enough and single-purpose, so i always figure they are disposable)... I dont use decouplers on the launch vehicle, as even the smallest seem to have too much force for these small sats... Its just as easy to use a docking port on the LV, and just right-click "Disable Node", and let the crafts drift apart...

 

[dboi88]

1 hour ago, Stone Blue said:

Yup...Thats why I dont think anything more than a small, "reserve" charge should be included...But then, most cores already include that... 

Hmmm... With 5-way RCS thrusters, maybe only 2 thrusters would be needed?... I find on my small sats, I can get by with just two 4-ways... There is only one axis missing, and I usually just rotate the craft 90° to cover that, but with 5-ways, that missing axis would be covered...

I say no on the docking port... I for one, prefer to keep mounting options open... Mostly, i use a Jr. port on the launch vehicle, and attach the bottom of the sat (either a battery or tank), but sometimes the bottom of an ANT stuck there... I dont use a port on the sat, as it becomes useless and baggage unless you plan on future recovery/refueling... (These small sats I'm thinking of, are small enough and single-purpose, so i always figure they are disposable)... I dont use decouplers on the launch vehicle, as even the smallest seem to have too much force for these small sats... Its just as easy to use a docking port on the LV, and just right-click "Disable Node", and let the crafts drift apart...

I was just thinking of making it big enough for it to be realistic to have a decent amount of battery built in. If the RCS thrusters are built in I think it  makes sense to put 5 way's on there, it'll make them a dream to control and it's basically nothing extra to have them. 

Do you ever stack multiple satellites to put up a constellation? A docking port on the top would make staking them and then releasing them really easy. I'm thinking i might as well build one in anyway, if someone doesn't want to use it they could just stick what ever they want on top? It could be a universal dock that connects with both the junior and the standard docks.

This is what i've thrown together tonight. I've put the RCS blocks on, 3 external batteries, a stock like RTG, 4 toroid tanks and there is enough space inside the chassis for all the rest to reasonably fit. The model still needs work yet

[drtedastro]

Looking great.  Try to get a 'test set' out for us to play with and then we can come back with lots more ideas and such.

Cheers and looking to get my hands on this asap.