[WIP] Ж-20 "Moroz" Spaceplane

[IronCretin]

Image by @DiscoSlelge

Edited January 6, 2018 by IronCretin

[DiscoSlelge]

first attacc, I memed

Edited December 23, 2017 by DiscoSlelge

[TheRedTom]

Looks fantastic @IronCretin, can't wait to play with it ingame!

[Hay]

A surprise to be sure, but a welcome one.

[Wahgineer]

So... anything new? Looks fantastic by the way.

[CobaltWolf]

4 hours ago, awsumindyman said:

So... anything new? Looks fantastic by the way.

No, we made the mistake of getting him to buy Stellaris...

[Angelo Kerman]

3 hours ago, CobaltWolf said:

No, we made the mistake of getting him to buy Stellaris...

I bought Stellaris...

[IronCretin]

Edited January 6, 2018 by IronCretin

[Wahgineer]

YEEEEEEEEEEEEEE(tiny desk engineer explodes)

Look'n noice. Its good to see that someone is finally making a Cobalt-a-like Dynasoar.

 

[Wahgineer]

@IronCretingreat job so far. My only gripe is the placement of some of the parts in the tech tree: namely the wing, flap/aileron, and the cargo bay. Currently, they reside in the Supersonic Flight and Advancded Stability ((?) The node right below Supersonic). This presents 3 problems:

1. It costs 320 science to get 3 of the most crucial parts.

2. Not to mention, you have to pay almost half a million funds to upgrade the R&D center to unlock the nodes.

3. When you unlock these nodes, you also unlock the mk2 parts, which means you can now build the x-20 RIGHT as it becomes obsolete.

To fix this, I would recommend moving the 3 parts (wing, flap, and cargo bay) back to the Aerodynamics node. This reflects the X-20s low tech nature, allowing the player to get some use out of it before moving on to the next stage, so to speak, rather than having to pay an exorbitant amount of Science and Funds only to not need it anyways.

[notJebKerman]

13 hours ago, awsumindyman said:

@IronCretingreat job so far. My only gripe is the placement of some of the parts in the tech tree: namely the wing, flap/aileron, and the cargo bay. Currently, they reside in the Supersonic Flight and Advancded Stability ((?) The node right below Supersonic). This presents 3 problems:

1. It costs 320 science to get 3 of the most crucial parts.

2. Not to mention, you have to pay almost half a million funds to upgrade the R&D center to unlock the nodes.

3. When you unlock these nodes, you also unlock the mk2 parts, which means you can now build the x-20 RIGHT as it becomes obsolete.

To fix this, I would recommend moving the 3 parts (wing, flap, and cargo bay) back to the Aerodynamics node. This reflects the X-20s low tech nature, allowing the player to get some use out of it before moving on to the next stage, so to speak, rather than having to pay an exorbitant amount of Science and Funds only to not need it anyways.

Wait... Is there some preview/early release I'm missing?

[Wahgineer]

4 hours ago, notJebKerman said:

Wait... Is there some preview/early release I'm missing?

Click the image

 

Edited January 9, 2018 by awsumindyman

[Wahgineer]

@IronCretinok more feed back

1: you should probably buff the max temp on the parts, since the X-20 was designed to be an orbiter AND antipodal/skip bomber. Otherwise, Moroz will have the same heat management problems as the mk1 parts.

2: the flaps don't mirror each other properly when using symmetry mode. Their orientation remains the same regardless of symmetry. 

3: Why does the butt have a slot for a crew memeber?

Edited January 10, 2018 by awsumindyman

[plausse]

On 09/01/2018 at 1:00 AM, awsumindyman said:

Click the image

 

Can't believe I missed that trick. 

[Kerbal01]

Looks great, flys not so well. Made the mistake of having the control surfaces active on ascent that ended poorly. Looking forward to the next update.

[Pappystein]

On 1/9/2018 at 11:45 PM, awsumindyman said:

@IronCretinok more feed back

1: you should probably buff the max temp on the parts, since the X-20 was designed to be an orbiter AND antipodal/skip bomber. Otherwise, Moroz will have the same heat management problems as the mk1 parts.

2: the flaps don't mirror each other properly when using symmetry mode. Their orientation remains the same regardless of symmetry. 

3: Why does the butt have a slot for a crew memeber?

I will add that the art level is pretty darn good @IronCretin And agree with the control surfaces not attaching correctly.  I even tried to make a single wing and then remove the ENTIRE wing and Mirror it and the Control surface still was wrong on the opposite side.   

I assume some sort of X-20 tail to BDB 1.875m Titan (or 1.5m Titan...) will be available Soon(TM)?  

I didn't experience @Kerbal01s issue with controls but I did follow all the original USAF X-20 promotional literature and put HUGE all moving stabilizers on my Titan's 1st stage (should that also be a part you address?)   IDK if you did that Kerbal01.  I used the Stock all moving tail plane and then with Tweakscale made it 150% base size.

 

RE landing skid, are you using stock or KSPWheel to make it survive impacting the runway?

 

Oh and if a good XB-70 Valkyrie could be made, The X-20 was one of the proposed "2 stage to Orbit" lifters proposed for a re-purposed Valk.   I have seen ONE graphic and a brief description of the vehicle but it would be a "New USAF space plane powered into Orbit from the back of the Valkyrie by the Hustler Rocket motor [AKA Agena... the final use of the Hustler Rocket Motor.]

Edited January 15, 2018 by Pappystein
Valk Comments

[IronCretin]

On 1/8/2018 at 2:03 AM, awsumindyman said:

@IronCretingreat job so far. My only gripe is the placement of some of the parts in the tech tree: namely the wing, flap/aileron, and the cargo bay. Currently, they reside in the Supersonic Flight and Advancded Stability ((?) The node right below Supersonic). This presents 3 problems:

1. It costs 320 science to get 3 of the most crucial parts.

2. Not to mention, you have to pay almost half a million funds to upgrade the R&D center to unlock the nodes.

3. When you unlock these nodes, you also unlock the mk2 parts, which means you can now build the x-20 RIGHT as it becomes obsolete.

To fix this, I would recommend moving the 3 parts (wing, flap, and cargo bay) back to the Aerodynamics node. This reflects the X-20s low tech nature, allowing the player to get some use out of it before moving on to the next stage, so to speak, rather than having to pay an exorbitant amount of Science and Funds only to not need it anyways.

 

On 1/9/2018 at 11:45 PM, awsumindyman said:

@IronCretinok more feed back

1: you should probably buff the max temp on the parts, since the X-20 was designed to be an orbiter AND antipodal/skip bomber. Otherwise, Moroz will have the same heat management problems as the mk1 parts.

The part placement/cost isn't balanced at all, I just copied the configs from stock parts. Once I have the landing gear in game, I'll go through all those and fix them up for a proper beta release.

On 1/9/2018 at 11:45 PM, awsumindyman said:

@IronCretin

3: Why does the butt have a slot for a crew memeber?

So it can hold two people in cargo mode.

@Pappystein@awsumindyman I'll take a look at the flap issue, what specifically do you mean?

On 1/15/2018 at 11:42 AM, Pappystein said:

I assume some sort of X-20 tail to BDB 1.875m Titan (or 1.5m Titan...) will be available Soon(TM)?  

Yes. Probable a few more sizes too

[Wahgineer]

@IronCretin, will get pics later

[Pappystein]

5 hours ago, IronCretin said:

 

 

@Pappystein@awsumindyman I'll take a look at the flap issue, what specifically do you mean?

 

No matter what side you put the flap on or how you rotate it both flaps are pointing the same way (long side is to the LEFT and short side is to the RIGHT.)   As I even stated, I made a single wing and then mirrored the entire wing trying to fix this... everything was mirrored except the flaps...  They maintained the same orientation no matter what I tried.

[Wahgineer]

18 hours ago, IronCretin said:

So it can hold two people in cargo mode.

The X-20 was only meant to carry 1 pilot in cargo mode, the X-20X had the "Passenger" cabin.

[Wahgineer]

@IronCretin, Pics, as promised

 

 

 

 

Edited January 17, 2018 by awsumindyman

[Wahgineer]

On 1/12/2018 at 11:28 AM, Kerbal01 said:

Looks great, flys not so well. Made the mistake of having the control surfaces active on ascent that ended poorly. Looking forward to the next update.

Pro-tip: when launching a spaceplane on top of a rocket, make sure to put ENORMOUS fins on the first stage to counteract the wings on the orbiter.

[Kerbal01]

17 hours ago, awsumindyman said:

Pro-tip: when launching a spaceplane on top of a rocket, make sure to put ENORMOUS fins on the first stage to counteract the wings on the orbiter.

I did. Launched it on a Titan I with S-IC fins. Should i have gone bigger?

[CobaltWolf]

3 minutes ago, Kerbal01 said:

I did. Launched it on a Titan I with S-IC fins. Should i have gone bigger?

Yes. Especially because those fins don't have any control surfaces.

[Wahgineer]

Just now, CobaltWolf said:

Yes. Especially because those fins don't have any control surfaces.

Control surfaces aren't necessary, just use the stock Delta Wing around the base of the first stage.