Go For Launch - Cooperative RO/RSS/RP-0 - About to start!

[NathanKell]

 The current Real Space Program thread/project is proving very popular (and fun), so much so that it's time to start another. The idea is simple: together, we plan, design, build, and fly RSS/RO/RP-0 missions. We'll have to design for reliability and redundancy, because there are no reverts when you're doing it live, and you never know when TestFlight (or a fallible human being) might cause something to fail.

The advantage of doing this within the RP-0 framework is that it gives us manageable challenges at each step, it has a natural space-racey progression, and the mod suite is known to work well together. It also gives rather more scope for planning and consideration than just taking each mission and payload alone. Finally it lets us seamlessly weave together rocket and aircraft missions while still sharing a common goal.

 

@Red Iron Crown, @DuoDex, @goldenpeach, and @tetryds have already expressed interest, so I am hereby pinging them.

 

For the current thread, see here!

[Glaran K'erman]

@ZooNamedGames put together a real fun thread to watch. I can't wait to see what you guys do here, I go on the record as fully supporting these endeavors!

[ZooNamedGames]

Please the RSP in your OP?

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

Exciting!  Will you be doing a mission control thing like RSP?

[adsii1970]

Graphics design department standing by...

[Dman979]

Well, this will be interesting. It's good to have some friendly competition!

[adsii1970]

2 minutes ago, Dman979 said:

Well, this will be interesting. It's good to have some friendly competition!

Kersplat Aerospace Industries graphics arts department always enjoys good work...

 

[NathanKell]

We are certainly not competing with RSP. The flavor of what we are doing is somewhat different, both because of the integration of RP-0 (and all that entails) and because our roles will not be hard and fast, but rather mission dependent. For example, for an X-Plane mission someone good at designing aircraft can design the plane, while someone good at flying them flies it, and the others do the other mission control tasks. By contrast for an orbital launch the roles might be rather different.

Besides, even if we were taking the same approach as RSP, it wouldn't be competition, just more people doing a fun thing.

 

ZNG I think you accidentally a word.

[Dman979]

1 minute ago, NathanKell said:

We are certainly not competing with RSP.

You're right, and competition sounds too roleplayey anyway. We can both look to each other for ideas and inspiration, and who knows, even check designs!

[the_pazter]

more like the relationship between NASA and SpaceX then

[DuoDex]

I'm definitely in. I haven't used RO much before, but I do have a Linux install and plenty of spare time.

[adsii1970]

Ok, rough draft of the Kerbaled mission patch:

[Guest]

Just now, adsii1970 said:

Ok, rough draft of the Kerbaled mission patch:

Wrong thread...

[NathanKell]

@adsii1970 thanks! But I don't want to steal you from RSP (or indeed anyone else--part of the impetus for this is that RSP was getting rather big and a second somewhat-similar project would allow for roles to be free again).

[Choctofliatrio2.0]

Interesting. Is there anything I can do that doesn't involve me installing mods? (Mods and I have a bad relationship. They don't like me)

[CommanderSpock]

I could definitely give it a go. What are you thinking of in terms of roles?

[Blue_Eagle7]

Sound interesting! Do you think there will be different teams in the future because i'm interested (already used RSS/RO/RP-0 for a while) but at the moment i'm busy and can't partecipate?

[Red Iron Crown]

Count me in, with the caveat that I may not be able to make some streams due to RL commitments.

[adsii1970]

1 hour ago, CliftonM said:

Wrong thread...

So that's where it went! hehehe...

[DuoDex]

It would certainly be interesting to see how this is done, I have a few proposals:

1. Streaming will be done on the best computer that the entire group has to offer. This way we have reasonable performance at all times and not multiple streams of the same thing.
2. Intercommunication during streams/other events be a priority. I think that one of the reasons RSP is so popular is because it really simulates actual launch and flight condition chatter, which makes one feel as if one is in a real space program.
3. Programs not be restricted to a certain group of people. Anyone who wants to or can participate should be able to in some way, this means that we will not be short of designs to use, or of people to play with
4. Ideas for getting as close as possible to an "actual space program" be considered, especially with a possible secondary stream showing just the control boards of each person involved.

Edited February 24, 2016 by DuoDex

[Choctofliatrio2.0]

Perhaps this one shall be more open than the previous one (I'm not implying the other one is unfair or not willing to let new people in, it's just the roles are mostly permanently established, which isn't necessarily bad). Maybe before each mission or set of missions, new jobs are appointed, so we don't have one permanent mission control staff, and everyone gets to try it. NathanKell touched on this earlier.

[NathanKell]

Yeah, here's my current thoughts, adding on what Duo and others mentioned.

Once we have a general idea of interest, we will move forwards. In the mean time, I suggest that all those interested in participating familiarize yourselves with the early part of the RP-0 career. It is very, very different from stock KSP. Sadly this is not the sort of things that lends itself to just applying existing KSP know-how--indeed, that can be counterproductive. A minimal-resolution RSS/RO/RP-0 install with only the required mods is very doable in 32bit even on Mac, let alone on Windows with -force-direct3d11 or -force-opengl arguments.

It would also be a good idea to do a bit of reading on the rocketry and aviation experiments of 1945-1955 or so. The start of the RP-0 career models that era, before moving on to orbital flight; a history of early probes (the Sputniks and Lunas, Explorer and Pioneer, CORONA, etc) should also prove helpful.

 

As for roles: here are the roles as I see them. I will consider three mission cases: an x-plane mission, an uncrewed rocketry mission, and a crewed rocketry mission.

1. X-planes.

• Flight Director: facilitates interaction and when necessary calls the shots. Emphasis on the former.
• Pilot: flies the aircraft, makes the split-second decisions as necessary.
• Trajectory: tracks the aircraft, computes trajectory and guidance information for use by the others.
• Designer: designs the equipment for use in the mission.
• Public Affairs Officer: collates the information from tracking and other sources and narrates for public consumption (including lowering the volume of mission control chatter when needed--unless people just want the direct feed, but the PAO role is fun too).

2. Uncrewed rocketry:

• Flight Director: as above. Probably also handles range safety.
• Trajectory: a harder and larger role now, since it also involves planning the maneuvers and the orbital mechanics necessary to achieve our goals.
• Guidance: flies the booster and/or payload.
• Designer: as above, though there is a distinction between booster and payload.
• PAO: as above.

3. Human spaceflight:

• As uncrewed rocketry, except also:
• Crew (one each, or combined)
• CAPCOM: handles crew <-> mission control communications so neither side is overloaded by crosstalk
• Life support

The mission cycle would proceed as follows:

1. We decide on a mission, dependent on funding, technology level, and contract availability (mostly milestone contracts, I presume, so they will pretty much always be available).
2. We sketch out a mission plan, and determine our requirements in terms of hardware and delta V capability.
3. (If needed) we research any required technology, and ground-test any new equipment.
4. (If needed) we design any new boosters and/or payloads.
5. We flight-prove any hardware from 4 if not already extensively flight-proven. Failure during an actual mission would be bad to catastrophic.
6. (Concurrently) we make a detailed mission plan, involving:
   1. Launch window(s).
   2. Flight plan(s).
   3. Risk assessment and (if high-risk) what backups should be produced.
   4. Relatedly, failure modes and what to do in case of a mode occurring.
   5. Exactly how the roles shake out.
   6. Scheduling the day of flight.
7. We integrate the hardware.
8. We fly the mission.
9. We conduct an extensive debriefing.
10. We repeat, starting with 1, recalling that we now hopefully have more funding and more science.

Am I missing anything notable here?

 

@DuoDex: 1 is problematic due to the pilot changing. 2 I heartily support and I believe the above demonstrates that. 3. I definitely am open to roles changing between missions, and for there to be room during the non-flying portions of the mission cycle for lots of input. 4. Ah, a very nice idea!

@Blue_Eagle7 @Choctofliatrio2.0 I hope that makes things clearer.

[Choctofliatrio2.0]

Hrm... I'll see what I can do... Given my lack of any modding experience, and the fact that my PC is so fragile (It has multiple viruses that we can't get rid of, plus turning it off and on again starts an error cycle that's very difficult to break) that I can't download anything for fear of being smote by computer viruses so I'd have to use a laptop, I'm not sure is RSS and such is a good first step into the modding world for me.

So I doubt I'd be able to get involved directly with missions, at least not until later in the game. 

*sigh* my bad luck started with trying to download TooManyItems for Minecraft... many years ago...

Edited February 24, 2016 by Choctofliatrio2.0

[goldenpeach]

How will the launches work?
Will all of the participants be in a same skype call(or any other software doing the same thing)?

My english accent is not so good(by that I mean that you will probably understand most of what I say, but you will not understand some of my words/sentences because of that) so is there a way to participate without talking? (in exemple, by chatting)

[NathanKell]

Also, I wonder if @e of pi and @Workable Goblin might be interested / willing to share some of their considerable experience for this endeavor.