Shuttles too easy now?

[Nich]

I was board the other day and put together a shuttle capable of 1 full large ore tank in about 10 minutes. Did vector engines make this too easy? Is my payload a joke?  I also feel like the vectors and kickbacks do not play well with each other. I am thinking vectors should have 1/4 to 1/3 the thrust of kickbacks or kickbacks need to be 3 or 4 times bigger

[Perry Apsis]

Every time I've gained access to a new set of parts--or even, now that I think of it, a technique like asparagus staging--I get very excited by the possibilities it opens up. But sometimes, looking back, I do miss the challenge. NASA parts are great (and remind me to show you my oh-so-perfect Apollo tribute sometime), but I used to need refueling stations, multiple launches, and so on, just to explore the Jool system. It's all so much easier now.

Of course, someone might be tempted to say, "So don't use those parts." Logical answers are logical. But as I am fond of pointing out, if we were truly rational creatures, the game wouldn't exist. As I'm also fond of pointing out, motivation is a subtle and complex thing. I'm fond of pointing out a lot of stuff. I'm kind of a jerk that way, actually. Where was I? Oh, right, Squad is unlikely to produce parts that are less useful than what we have, because, honestly, few people would use them. It can only get easier to get into space, the more parts they produce.

[Superfluous J]

If it's too easy you're not trying to do enough.

A single Orange tank? How about 7 of them? Or 7 14.4s? Or get them to Moho? Or all of the above?

I just recently needed 7 full 14.4 tanks in orbit and decided to do it in one ship. I named it the "Why God Why" and with good reason.

[Kyrt Malthorn]

A full

5 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

A single Orange tank? 

ORE tank or a full ORANGE tank? 

 

OP said ore.  much more compact than an orange tank, and if I'm not overly mistaken*, the ore tank is lighter even when full.

 

*I'm highly likely to be mistaken.

[regex]

I slapped one together in a morning, orange tank to LKO.  Vector owns.  Who cares whether it's too "easy"?

Edited March 25, 2016 by regex

[Renegrade]

Meh, the vector's not bad, but it's not some magical engine.  It's only really outlying data point is the thrust-to-size ratio.

I do agree that the kickbacks feel kinda weak.  If a trio of vectors and a pair of kickbacks are supposed to represent the Space Shuttle, then the ratio is way off.  The KSP version has only 1.34MN from SRBs and 3MN from liquid engines, whereas the old Space Shuttle had 25MN from SRBs and only 5.25MN from liquid engines..

[KerikBalm]

Meh, I had shuttles I was happy with before the vector, I've made shuttles I'm happy with after the vector... doesn't matter much to me.

Not much dV left over, just 56 m/s in the OMS monoprop... but its enough to de-orbit and land.

And earlier version landing, where it relied more on monoprop and had no internal LFO sotrage except for the adpator that the KR-2L attached too:

A negative AoA when on the runway helped stop the craft after landing... it stays down and can generate lots of force with the wheel brakes

[Superfluous J]

5 hours ago, Kyrt Malthorn said:

A full

ORE tank or a full ORANGE tank? 

 

OP said ore.  much more compact than an orange tank, and if I'm not overly mistaken*, the ore tank is lighter even when full.

 

*I'm highly likely to be mistaken.

You are mistaken but no more than I was. I have an excuse though, I've been quite ill for the past 2 days.

A full ore tank is 17 tons, while a full orange tank is 36 tons, or just about twice as heavy. And 4x as long.

The 14.4 is 81 tons, or over 2 orange tanks, or not quite 5 ore tanks.

My point still stands. If what you're doing is easy, you're not doing enough.

[Temeter]

40 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

My point still stands. If what you're doing is easy, you're not doing enough.

Exactly. If you managed to build a shuttle without the vector, then what's the point? Build a larger, more exotic shuttle. Try FAR. Do large scale Spaceplanes.

If you got balls, do it in RO and experience true terror.

Edited March 25, 2016 by Temeter

[Frozen_Heart]

Managed proper shuttles back when we didn't have things like Vectors and large SRBs and NASA parts. I'm glad that they have got easier as it always felt that an important part of spaceflight is missing.

The balance between Vectors and SRBs is another subject entirely, and one that isn't easily solved as it would require a large parts rebalance. Not to mention that proper shuttle bossters in KSP would be about 1.875m which is a purely mod part range atm.

 

[regex]

3 hours ago, Temeter said:

If you got balls, do it in RO and experience true terror.

LOL, terror...  Getting them to launch in RO is actually pretty easy since nearly every gimballing engine has 8+ degrees of range.  It's reentry that takes the real skill and iteration.

That's what makes shuttles easier now, we finally have an engine with some decent control authority.

[Matuchkin]

3 hours ago, Temeter said:

If you got balls, do it in RO and experience true terror.

Challenge accepted.

[Empress Neptune]

I don't think the Vector engine changed much. The Mammoth is slightly better if your ship is large enough. Earlier versions of Rhino were good at everything, and Skipper has always had potential as a SSTO engine.

 

If you feel using the better parts makes things less fun you can avoid using them. I don't think that's unreasonable at all. I restrict myself to using parts that I think are appropriate all the time in sandbox. For people who don't want to spend time making up rules, there is career and science mode where better parts have higher costs. There isn't really any such thing as overpowered parts if those parts take more effort to get.

 

You can also look at this as something parallel to real life, as technology gets better old problems become easier. At the same time we tend to move on to new problems and there isn't a lack of challenge at all.

[Temeter]

14 minutes ago, regex said:

LOL, terror...  Getting them to launch in RO is actually pretty easy since nearly every gimballing engine has 8+ degrees of range.  It's reentry that takes the real skill and iteration.

That's what makes shuttles easier now, we finally have an engine with some decent control authority.

Of course I'm talking about the reentry. At launch a Space Shuttle is little more than an assymetric rocket.

Getting back takes dedication. Lots of dedication.

3 minutes ago, Empress Neptune said:

I don't think the Vector engine changed much. The Mammoth is slightly better if your ship is large enough. Earlier versions of Rhino were good at everything, and Skipper has always had potential as a SSTO engine.

Well, the Mammoth is basically 4 vectors with less control authority.

5 minutes ago, Matuchkin said:

Challenge accepted.

Nice! :D

Edited March 25, 2016 by Temeter

[regex]

10 minutes ago, Temeter said:

Of course I'm talking about the reentry.

Ah, right.  Well.

Let that be a lesson to future shuttle designers, then!

[Temeter]

5 minutes ago, regex said:

Ah, right.  Well.

Let that be a lesson to future shuttle designers, then!

You ever done a sucesfull RO/RSS shuttle?

Don't think I've ever read from someone on the forums that he did an RO shuttle. Kinda weird, considering I'm following the realism side for quite a while.

Edited March 25, 2016 by Temeter

[regex]

3 minutes ago, Temeter said:

You ever done a sucesfull RO/RSS shuttle?

My last attempt at a shuttle in RO was a hybrid Buran/STS kind of thing with a payload of less than five tons.  RD-171 on the main tank, NK-33 on the orbiter (plus a pair of hypergolics for on-orbit), and some four procedural SRBs.  Took about four launches to get all the angles right; after that I could make orbit every time.  Never managed to successfully reenter it (combination of heat tolerance and instability, IIRC) and never got around to refining it because an update ate it.

You don't see many people trying them in RO nowadays because everyone is playing "1950's Space Program"/RP-0.

[Nich]

Problem with getting an orange tank to orbit is the craft no longer looks like a shuttle. I am already playing lose and fast with the word shuttle using 2 orange tanks. Perhaps I should install tweak scale and get it more to my liking 

[Temeter]

2 minutes ago, regex said:

My last attempt at a shuttle in RO was a hybrid Buran/STS kind of thing with a payload of less than five tons.  RD-171 on the main tank, NK-33 on the orbiter (plus a pair of hypergolics for on-orbit), and some four procedural SRBs.  Took about four launches to get all the angles right; after that I could make orbit every time.  Never managed to successfully reenter it (combination of heat tolerance and instability, IIRC) and never got around to refining it because an update ate it.

You don't see many people trying them in RO nowadays because everyone is playing "1950's Space Program"/RP-0.

Nice you got it at least into orbit! Reentry is just to scary to me.

And RP-0 is pretty awesome, tho.

[luizopiloto]

It's more easy to create shuttles now. But a more sophisticated one still somewhat complex to design, like any other craft...
Like this one with advanced booster, that shutdown engines gradually to maintain balance during ascent...

 

[Enorats]

Another thing to keep in mind.. even stock parts are very easily altered. Go into the game data folder and open up the file for the part in the squad parts folder with notepad. Change the mass, isp, thrust.. anything you want. Make it balanced to your tastes.

 

I've done this myself on several occasions to make the command pods more in line with masses I feel are appropriate and mesh well with various mods I was using at the time.

[qromodynmc]

Yeah it's easier but still not easier than designing a rocket.

[surge]

Quote

Not to mention that proper shuttle bossters in KSP would be about 1.875m which is a purely mod part range atm.

I agree with Frozen_Heart and many others here, but how did you come up with that scaling? I'm aware that KSP is 'distorted', but the real NASA shuttle SRBs are about 4-5 times the size of Kickbacks. ~1.9m diameter seems a bit... low.

Anyway, one thing becomes clear - the orange tank in the centre of the shuttle is NOT a payload. I've yet to see anyone successfully carry anything other than the base system into orbit. All the images in this thread show an empty cargo bay?! Yet the shuttle, and particularly the Energia rockets were capable of launching payloads much, much heavier than the Saturn V and N1s, even though they are both asymetric.

I would like to see a rescaling of the parts - it's nearly impossible to recreate real rockets in the stock game, not because one part or another is over or under powered, but they are all just completely the wrong sizes. Assuming the LV-T45 is a NK33, you can put 4 cubic struts on the back of a tank and stack LV-T45s below them to make an RD-110, but it's weak, very weak. Want an RD-170? The closest thing is a Mammoth which is too powerful, and looks really dorky. Want an RD-180 for an Atlas V? You're SOL, even if you part clip 2 mainsails together, it wont give you enough thrust. And forget about a RD-0120 for the Energia, no chance. Really the only part that plays nice with reality is the Vulcan, and its too efficient (or not efficient enough, depending on how you scale things)