Shuttle Challenge v6 - The STS thread [Stock and Mod Friendly] - ANNOUNCEMENT: v7 IS LIVE!

[sturmhauke]

Much better, thank you! And of course that means you are also eligible for STS-1a. Here you go, Commander.

[Fulgora]

My take at STS 7-8 with a stock shuttle:

It turned out that I already assembled the science labs in the past so I un-docked and deleted them off-camera as I didn't have any footage and even if it would have been on 1.2.2 which pre-dates the current challenge versions.

Had quite some fun in the making of this new video and realized my MMU sub-assembly needs a COM update - I didn't recall it being this difficult to maneuver. My best guess is that Kerbal masses used to be calculated differently in command seats in the past(?). I know things changed with 1.11 but i am still on 1.10

Apart from the MMU I also had to update the launch system as neither the craft itself nor the KOS script wanted to cooperate in 1.10.1. The new and much more powerful SRBs resulted in a switch to the more traditional NASA shuttle design (away from the Buran/Energia approach). This updated design is even more capable than the old one with ~900m/s left in the external tank  after reaching orbit (with max payload). Compared to the old design this is an increase of 100-200 m/s without sacrificing payload capacity .

The STS v4 system is also now capable of a simple Mechjeb ascent due to a better COT / COM balance but can also be flown manually of course. So no more KOS needed for autopiloting

I did use Mechjeb for the ascent and pretty much all maneuvers for cinematic reasons. If you don't believe that this can be flown manually feel free to download the craft file or wait for my next submission

Mod-list:

Spoiler

xScienceContinued 5.26
Astrogator v0.10.2
B9PartSwitch v2.17.0
BetterBurnTime 1.10
BetterCrewAssignment 1.4
BreakingGround-DLC 1.5.1
CameraTools v1.14.0
CapCom 2.11
Chatterer 0.9.99
ChattererExtended 0.6.2
ClickThroughBlocker 1:0.1.10.14
CommNetAntennasInfo 3.0.2
CommunityResourcePack 1.4.1.0[]
ContractConfigurator 1.30.5
ContractConfigurator-KerbinSpaceStation 2:3.7.2.2
ContractConfigurator-CleverSats 1.4
ContractConfigurator-ExplorationPlus 2.0.1
ContractConfigurator-FieldResearch 1.2.2
ContractConfigurator-KerbalAcademy 1.1.10
ContractConfigurator-Tourism 1.5.2
ContractParser 9.0
DockingPortAlignmentIndicator 6.9.1
DynamicBatteryStorage 2:2.1.10.0
EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements 3:1.10.1-3
EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements-HR 2:EVE-1.2.2-1
KerbalAlarmClock v3.13.0.0
KerbalChangelog v1.3.0
KerbalEngineerRedux 1.1.7.2
KerbalJointReinforcementContinued v3.5.1
KSTS 2.0.1.6
WindTunnel 1.2.4
KerbalXMod 1.1.0
Kopernicus 2:release-1.9.1-13
KXAPI 1.2.0
MakingHistory-DLC 1.10.1
MechJeb2 2.11.0.0
ModularFlightIntegrator 1.2.7.0
ModuleManager 4.1.4
NearFutureElectrical 1.1.3
NearFutureElectrical-Core 1.1.3
NearFutureSolar 1.2.3
NearFutureSolar-Core 1.2.3
Parallax 1.1.1b
PlanetShine 0.2.6.3
PlanetShine-Config-Default 0.2.6.3
ProgressParser 11.0
ProjectManager v2.4
RealPlume 2:v13.3.2
RealPlume-StockConfigs v4.0.3
ReentryParticleEffect 1.9.1.1
SCANsat v20.4
Scatterer 3:v0.0632
Scatterer-config 3:v0.0632
Scatterer-sunflare 3:v0.0632
ShipManifest 6.0.2.0
SmartParts 1.9.16
SmokeScreen 2.8.14.0
SpaceTuxLibrary 0.0.4.1
StationScienceContinued v2.6.0
Toolbar 1:1.8.0.5
ToolbarController 1:0.1.9.4
TrackingStationEvolved 6.0
TriggerAu-Flags v2.10.0.0
WaypointManager 2.8.2.6
ZeroMiniAVC 1:1.1.0.1

STS 5-6 have been done in my old STS 4/4R video here.

Edited December 31, 2020 by Fulgora

[Entropian]

After a brief hiatus from KSP, I wanted to try my hand at a shuttle-themed interplanetary mission in RSS and I figured you shuttle-people might want to see it.

 

[cyberKerb]

I've been thinking about joining this challenge for a long while and during these holidays, decided to have a go.

After a few iterations in the design, I've settled on something that allows a bit of flexibility with moving fuel to the front or back of the craft. I also tested expanding the cargo bay and it seems OK enough to work out the details in later missions. Last two requirements were that it looked good to me (check) and if I crash it Jeb stuffs a landing, the debris would be interesting (hence the side pods).

My entire testing routine was to launch from the runway with minimum fuel and climb to 1K when flame-out occurs. Then I'd do a split-S and line up for an attempt at landing on the runway. This let me test both the balance of the design in the climb (can it take off and not flip), what it does in a stall (was it tail or nose heavy), and finally if the side pods were attached strong enough to handle a hard-ish landing (do I need more struts). When that worked, I repeating the test again, this time with the 40T fuel pod in the cargo bay to ensure I could take off and land with a heavy load.

During testing, I found that I needed to clip two additional TX440 ballast tanks (with the the fuel locked off) into the front fuel tank. (This is the unused fuel you'll see in the resource panel) This was to ensure I had enough weight for the craft to be nose heavy. Both ballast tanks have to be filled and a pair of winglets need to be added to the nose when landing heavy cargo. With an empty cargo bay, testing showed that removing the nose winglets and only one filled ballast tank is enough to keep the craft balanced when dead-stick. 

Here's my submission for STS-1T: Approach and landing test
Album Here: https://imgur.com/a/IsdD6zm

Craft is mostly stock with the exception of 2x MK2 nosecones on the side pods and a SSPX "PXL-PPD Flat Adaptor" on the rear for mounting the Senior docking port.
Is 'Commander' difficulty just landing on the runway for most missions?

 

Edited December 31, 2020 by cyberKerb

[Fulgora]

I am already starting to think about the future missions...

There is no rule allowing or forbidding the usage of mined fuel - e.g. on the Mun but more importantly on Duna and Laythe - is it still okay to mine fuel for the return trip? Possibly instead of sending a supply package?

It used to be in the past ( source ) but I really want to be sure so I don't edit a video together that ends up being an invalid entry. as this cannot be rectified after the mission is done (obviously)..

 

Also for STS Mun-2 to Mun-4 do you want to see all orbital maneuvers for all three launches? I am thinking about cutting that video a bit shorter as it would likely be over 30 minutes otherwise. The video-script would be sth like this:

• One launch / mun landing (launch 2+3 just in very short clips to have a coherent story, e.g. KSC-takeoff and Mun-touchdown)
• All deployments and base assembly of course
• One Shuttle return to KSC (return 2+3 again in very short clips, e.g. Mun-takeoff and KSC-touchdown)
• Escape launch and landing back at the KSC

As I am recording all maneuvers anyways I could provide screenshots (or clips!) for the "missing" maneuvers in the video instead if you like - even 'post-mortem' as I don't delete the recordings immediately .

Unfortunately the STS Mun-2 payload is the lightest of the bunch - however even STS Mun-4 (which has roughly twice the mass) is only using half of the payload capabilities of my STS stack...

 

The alternative would be 3 separate videos (some 10 minutes each) but things would really get repetitive there nonetheless...

[sturmhauke]

Hey everyone! Hope you all had a nice break! I took some time off work and even from KSP; I've been playing Factorio again. But, you know, there are shuttles to judge. The factory must grow, but it can wait a bit.

On 12/29/2020 at 10:45 PM, Fulgora said:

My take at STS 7-8 with a stock shuttle:

 

Everything looks to be in order. You don't need to submit craft files; I have flown enough shuttles to tell more or less how well a given design will handle by looking at it, barring any hidden trickery. Congrats, Commander!

 

6 hours ago, Fulgora said:

I am already starting to think about the future missions...

There is no rule allowing or forbidding the usage of mined fuel - e.g. on the Mun but more importantly on Duna and Laythe - is it still okay to mine fuel for the return trip? Possibly instead of sending a supply package?

It used to be in the past ( source ) but I really want to be sure so I don't edit a video together that ends up being an invalid entry. as this cannot be rectified after the mission is done (obviously)..

Mining fuel is fine. The mining equipment can be part of your main mission or the (always optional) supply package.

Quote

Also for STS Mun-2 to Mun-4 do you want to see all orbital maneuvers for all three launches? I am thinking about cutting that video a bit shorter as it would likely be over 30 minutes otherwise.

If you have multiple maneuvers that are largely the same over the course of a mission involving multiple launches, and you haven't made any substantial changes to your orbiter or launch vehicle (not counting payload mass here), you can edit your submission down for length. Please make sure you include any important maneuvers at least once.

[sturmhauke]

On 12/30/2020 at 7:46 AM, Entropian said:

After a brief hiatus from KSP, I wanted to try my hand at a shuttle-themed interplanetary mission in RSS and I figured you shuttle-people might want to see it.

 

That is pretty cool stuff! Out of scope for this series, but impressive nonetheless.

[sturmhauke]

On 12/30/2020 at 10:13 PM, cyberKerb said:

Here's my submission for STS-1T: Approach and landing test
Album Here: https://imgur.com/a/IsdD6zm

...Is 'Commander' difficulty just landing on the runway for most missions?

Welcome! Looks like a solid design you have there; can't wait to see how it does in space!

Commander level is not just landing on the runway, although that is a requirement in most cases. If you look at the mission descriptions, Commander level typically includes things like more difficult orbits (higher, more inclined, etc.), additional payload requirements, specific maneuvers, that sort of thing. Note that the Test Pilot Series only has one difficulty level - it's essentially Commander already.

On that note, here is your badge. Congratulations!

[cyberKerb]

1 hour ago, sturmhauke said:

Welcome! Looks like a solid design you have there; can't wait to see how it does in space!

Commander level is not just landing on the runway, although that is a requirement in most cases. If you look at the mission descriptions, Commander level typically includes things like more difficult orbits (higher, more inclined, etc.), additional payload requirements, specific maneuvers, that sort of thing. Note that the Test Pilot Series only has one difficulty level - it's essentially Commander already.

On that note, here is your badge. Congratulations!

Thanks! The plan is to run a career campaign until I can get the funds to build this Shuttle and continue from there. I'm looking forward to working this challenge goals into my career save.  

[Fulgora]

9 hours ago, sturmhauke said:

Everything looks to be in order. You don't need to submit craft files; I have flown enough shuttles to tell more or less how well a given design will handle by looking at it, barring any hidden trickery. Congrats, Commander!

 

Mining fuel is fine. The mining equipment can be part of your main mission or the (always optional) supply package.

Quote

• The color of the laurels indicates what type of parts were used for mission crafts - silver for mod parts, gold for stock only (including DLC).

Thanks for judging my submission!

My shuttle is pure stock (not even DLC) - does any of the other mods make this a modded entry - if so which? I was just going for visuals with them

The only difference of this launch stack to my old (stock-rated) entries was replacing the LRBs with the new larger stock SRBs and the Mammoth engine with a fairing (plus some minor tweaks to the fuel balance in the ET)...

I do have more mods installed now but none that should affect gameplay...

 

On the same topic.. the STS-9 badge confused me a bit - shouldn't this be a badge with gold piping around it or is a bonus mission something that isn't even part of the official challenge, like a self-designed mission?

* scratches head *

Quote

The color of the outer piping indicates the type of mission - silver for standard missions, other colors for bonus missions.

On 4/2/2020 at 10:43 AM, sturmhauke said:

Kerbin Bonus Series (STS-9)

Edited January 6, 2021 by Fulgora

[sturmhauke]

55 minutes ago, Fulgora said:

My shuttle is pure stock (not even DLC) - does any of the other mods make this a modded entry - if so which? I was just going for visuals with them

...On the same topic.. the STS-9 badge confused me a bit - shouldn't this be a badge with gold piping around it or is a bonus mission something that isn't even part of the official challenge, like a self-designed mission?

* scratches head *

Sorry about that, I saw the modlist and assumed you used mod parts on the orbiter and/or launch vehicle. But I see now from your KerbalX link that it is pure stock. Here is the correct badge:

Regarding STS-9, that's a bit of an odd duck. It's a bonus mission, but the badge has the same design scheme as the mainline Kerbin missions. When I redesigned the badges, I kept mostly the same design philosophy as the previous set, I just redid the art to make it a bit clearer and also make it easier for me to create new badges as needed. So perhaps the STS-9 badge should logically have gold piping, but the old one didn't. I'll think about it.

[Fulgora]

13 minutes ago, sturmhauke said:

Sorry about that, I saw the modlist and assumed you used mod parts on the orbiter and/or launch vehicle. But I see now from your KerbalX link that it is pure stock. Here is the correct badge:

Regarding STS-9, that's a bit of an odd duck. It's a bonus mission, but the badge has the same design scheme as the mainline Kerbin missions. When I redesigned the badges, I kept mostly the same design philosophy as the previous set, I just redid the art to make it a bit clearer and also make it easier for me to create new badges as needed. So perhaps the STS-9 badge should logically have gold piping, but the old one didn't. I'll think about it.

No problem, thanks for clarifying! I provided the mod-list for full-disclosure reasons and if anyone wants to recreate the mission or (more likely) visuals.

You scared me a bit because I already recorded STS-9 with the same config and just need to do the editing / uploading part...

 

Then I can proceed with STS Mun-1 now as planned

Edited January 6, 2021 by Fulgora

[Fulgora]

STS-9 editing is making progress... In the meantime here is a little teaser / educational trailer

Landing space potatoes is hard...

 

[sturmhauke]

Don't worry, it took most of us several tries. 

[camacju]

STS 1a and 1b:

This craft is inspired by the Reaction Engines Skylon. It can go SSTO with a sizeable payload by itself but that's not this challenge. So I added two side boosters, each with three Rapier engines and one Vector engine.

The flight profile is pretty simple. As soon as the craft gets off the runway, I toggle the rockets just long enough to get to a speed where I can maintain level flight (~220 m/s or so). Then I keep the nose at 5 degrees until I reach about 750 m/s, at which point I pitch up to 15 degrees. (750 m/s is approximately where the Rapier engines reach maximum thrust).

At 16 km I turn on the nuclear engines and the Vectors. The Vectors run out when I'm going about 1900 m/s.

From here it's just the four nuclear engines pushing the rest of the way to orbit.

In orbit! Difference of 42m between Ap and Pe. Note that I actually did this all on a single stage - I underestimated the amount of fuel held in the side boosters.

Flight engineer Bill Kerman deploys the fuel pod

This craft has quite an excessive amount of fuel remaining in orbit. I need to burn most of it off before I land. In hindsight I should have used drain valves.

After some very responsible use of liquid hydrogen, the two kerbals return to Kerbin.

Landed

Edited January 11, 2021 by camacju

[OutInSpace]

I'm baaaack! I didn't touch KSP for a whole month because I was expecting a new SSD and didn't want to hassle with save backups, but that's all wrapped up and now I've managed to complete MUN STS 2-4, stock Commander!

Preview shots:

Spoiler

Mun One Base.

Scenic ridge.

Oh, and by the way, if there's anything I'm including regularly in these albums that you think is redundant/repetitive filler, let me know - I don't want you to have to slog through unnecessarily long albums.

[camacju]

Here's my STS-2a mission (I didn't do STS-2b since this shuttle already has a bit of difficulty landing - an extra 40t fuel pod would make it really hard)

Launch. I have two smaller boosters. This will probably be the configuration for almost all of the STS missions from here.

Nuclear engines are lit right before the boosters are detached.

The shuttle continues to orbit.

At 48km I reach orbital velocity and continue burning all the way to GTO.

Three comsats, each with an orbital maneuvering package, two antennas, and solar panels

Shuttle inserts into an orbit with a period of four hours, and will release each satellite at apoapsis

First satellite

Second satellite

Third satellite

Shuttle descends

Landed and parked at SPH

[Fulgora]

15 hours ago, OutInSpace said:

I'm baaaack! I didn't touch KSP for a whole month because I was expecting a new SSD and didn't want to hassle with save backups, but that's all wrapped up and now I've managed to complete MUN STS 2-4, stock Commander!

Preview shots:

  Reveal hidden contents

Mun One Base.

Scenic ridge.

Oh, and by the way, if there's anything I'm including regularly in these albums that you think is redundant/repetitive filler, let me know - I don't want you to have to slog through unnecessarily long albums.

That is a very Kerbal launch system and actually a pretty interesting design! But I think the Shuttles are supposed to land on the Mun....

Quote

Land your shuttle anywhere on the Mun...

But I am not the admin of the challenge

Your shuttle design definitely meets the deltaV requirements and from the looks also TWR (you might need to dump some monoprop first?) to land with the payload in the bay - and your payload also clearly has the ability to transfer itself from the cargo bay to the surface. So it should be very much doable with your design.

I don't understand why you are landing on chutes though - you are clearly able to manage a good runway approach and have some decent cross-range with your shuttle. I am certain you can do it!

Edited January 13, 2021 by Fulgora

[OutInSpace]

5 hours ago, Fulgora said:

That is a very Kerbal launch system and actually a pretty interesting design!

Thank you! I considered it to be an overengineered nuclear brick with boosters strapped to the sides, so it's nice to hear that someone thinks it's cool. If you want to tear it down, I actually just put the latest version up on KerbalX.

5 hours ago, Fulgora said:

But I think the Shuttles are supposed to land on the Mun....

If you look in the rules there's actually an exception that Sturmhauke added: "If a mission states that you should land and then deploy a payload from the orbiter cargo hold, you may instead perform a low altitude paradrop (or suborbital drop on a vacuum world). This isn't necessarily easier, since now you have to keep two separate craft from experiencing energetic lithobraking events. "

Since any orbit with a negative periapsis is considered suborbital by the game, I can use a very cheap, shallow drop and still qualify. This isn't viable for the later stuff though - Duna-2 explicitly requires a shuttle landing, for example, and I feel like doing Laythe this way would be super lame.

As you deduced, Providence can land and return from the Mun's surface. Originally I was going to design a dumpable chemical engine landing system, but I realized that my cargo bay ejection rockets had crazy d-v and decide to retool everything for suborbital dropping instead.

5 hours ago, Fulgora said:

I don't understand why you are landing on chutes though - you are clearly able to manage a good runway approach and have some decent cross-range with your shuttle. I am certain you can do it!

I can manage it but not very consistently lol, and sometimes reloading quicksaves made on final subsonic approach will cause the wings to shear off when the aero forces kick in, so I default to the chutes. I'm practicing in the background for now, hopefully I'll be ditching the chute landing for the final Mun missions!

Edited January 14, 2021 by OutInSpace

[Fulgora]

17 hours ago, OutInSpace said:

If you look in the rules there's actually an exception that Sturmhauke added: "If a mission states that you should land and then deploy a payload from the orbiter cargo hold, you may instead perform a low altitude paradrop (or suborbital drop on a vacuum world). This isn't necessarily easier, since now you have to keep two separate craft from experiencing energetic lithobraking events. "

Ah... please excuse my inability to read the fine-print. You are absolutely correct!

17 hours ago, OutInSpace said:

I can manage it but not very consistently lol, and sometimes reloading quicksaves made on final subsonic approach will cause the wings to shear off when the aero forces kick in, so I default to the chutes. I'm practicing in the background for now, hopefully I'll be ditching the chute landing for the final Mun missions!

Looking forward to it! I always quicksave too of course but the feeling of a smooth runway touchdown is worth a few reloads to me Since I also use a Shuttle style craft for most of my career missions (but with a much lower cross-range) I got reasonably good with that over time. It's the same with everything: if you do it often it eventually becomes routine

The only truly challenging landing was the one with a 15t asteroid on top of a 32t dry-mass orbiter... No career mission had prepared me for that

Edited January 14, 2021 by Fulgora

[Fulgora]

I (somewhat proudly) present:

My take at STS-9.

The asteroid has not been mined and is landed in absolutely mint condition (minor ablative erosion may or may not have taken place during reentry... )

With the orbiter design I am reasonably confident to be able land 20t but I will gladly leave it up to someone else to find out where the limit actually is. It took ages to land this and i got reeeeally close to regretting my decision not to mine the potato.

While the Vector is obviously a requirement to make the STS stack work I always considered the Thuds just to be cosmetic and only had them to mimic the OMS engines of the real shuttle (with minimal part count addition). This mission is the first one in which I used the Thuds and Vector engine after detaching the external tank so this cosmetic decision during the STS design phase turned out to be a really helpful one now.

Again the STS stack is my standard design so compared to the other missions only the cargo bay content (plus brake and aileron settings) have been adapted. My only regret in this mission-design the the external chair for Valentina which doesn't have the chair at the very top - so when looking straight from the back at the shuttle Valentina is not visible. I did not notice that until the final reentry as my usual viewing angle is either from the side or the top - in both cases Valentina was well visible. Correcting the mistake and flying the entire mission again was too much effort for little value so I decided to accept this as lesson learned for future reentry-chair designs (Laythe maybe? anyone?)...

This was my first ever runway landing with an asteroid attached - so the learning curve was real but that is very much what a challenge is supposed to be about. So thank you for the inspiration - not only for this mission but the entire challenge in general.

 

KerbalX Craft file (pure stock!) can be downloaded here.

Screenshot album if someone is looking for wallpaper candidates is here.

Complete Modlist (as per usual for compliance reasons and for anyone who is interested):

Spoiler

xScienceContinued 5.26
Astrogator v0.10.2
B9PartSwitch v2.17.0
BetterBurnTime 1.10
BetterCrewAssignment 1.4
BreakingGround-DLC 1.5.1
CameraTools v1.14.0
CapCom 2.11
Chatterer 0.9.99
ChattererExtended 0.6.2
ClickThroughBlocker 1:0.1.10.14
CommNetAntennasInfo 3.0.2
CommunityResourcePack 1.4.1.0[]
ContractConfigurator 1.30.5
ContractConfigurator-KerbinSpaceStation 2:3.7.2.2
ContractConfigurator-CleverSats 1.4
ContractConfigurator-ExplorationPlus 2.0.1
ContractConfigurator-FieldResearch 1.2.2
ContractConfigurator-KerbalAcademy 1.1.10
ContractConfigurator-Tourism 1.5.2
ContractParser 9.0
DockingPortAlignmentIndicator 6.9.1
DynamicBatteryStorage 2:2.1.10.0
EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements 3:1.10.1-3
EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements-HR 2:EVE-1.2.2-1
KerbalAlarmClock v3.13.0.0
KerbalChangelog v1.3.0
KerbalEngineerRedux 1.1.7.2
KerbalJointReinforcementContinued v3.5.1
KSTS 2.0.1.6
WindTunnel 1.2.4
KerbalXMod 1.1.0
Kopernicus 2:release-1.9.1-13
KXAPI 1.2.0
MakingHistory-DLC 1.10.1
MechJeb2 2.11.0.0
ModularFlightIntegrator 1.2.7.0
ModuleManager 4.1.4
NearFutureElectrical 1.1.3
NearFutureElectrical-Core 1.1.3
NearFutureSolar 1.2.3
NearFutureSolar-Core 1.2.3
Parallax 1.1.1b
PlanetShine 0.2.6.3
PlanetShine-Config-Default 0.2.6.3
ProgressParser 11.0
ProjectManager v2.4
RealPlume 2:v13.3.2
RealPlume-StockConfigs v4.0.3
ReentryParticleEffect 1.9.1.1
SCANsat v20.4
Scatterer 3:v0.0632
Scatterer-config 3:v0.0632
Scatterer-sunflare 3:v0.0632
ShipManifest 6.0.2.0
SmartParts 1.9.16
SmokeScreen 2.8.14.0
SpaceTuxLibrary 0.0.4.1
StationScienceContinued v2.6.0
Toolbar 1:1.8.0.5
ToolbarController 1:0.1.9.4
TrackingStationEvolved 6.0
TriggerAu-Flags v2.10.0.0
WaypointManager 2.8.2.6
ZeroMiniAVC 1:1.1.0.1

To be continued... stay tuned. Also please subscribe to my channel since you got that far with reading my post.

Have i begged for a like on my video yet...? Yes - in the video itself...! Oh really. Well here we go again: Like. The. Damn. Video. Please!

Edited January 17, 2021 by Fulgora

[sturmhauke]

Hello shuttle crews! Sorry for the delay.

On 1/11/2021 at 1:22 PM, camacju said:

STS 1a and 1b:

...

Flight engineer Bill Kerman deploys the fuel pod

Your mission looks good overall, but I'm not sure about that fuel pod. If you're not using the official one it needs to be at least 40 t in mass and have roughly the same proportions of LF (1440 units), O (1760 units), monopropellant (750 units), and ore (1500 units). If it meets the minimum mass but not the materials composition, I'll let it slide. But if it's under mass I'll have to ask you do do it over for the 1b badge. If you can't handle 40 t to orbit, you may have trouble with later missions. Still, you did meet the 1a requirements, so nice job there.

[sturmhauke]

On 1/13/2021 at 12:11 PM, camacju said:

Here's my STS-2a mission (I didn't do STS-2b since this shuttle already has a bit of difficulty landing - an extra 40t fuel pod would make it really hard)

...

...

 

I see you jettisoned some of the wings.  Reminds me of some early spaceplanes I built. I like it.

Quote

Now that is what I like to see in a comsat constellation. Solid!

[sturmhauke]

On 1/12/2021 at 10:56 PM, OutInSpace said:

I'm baaaack! I didn't touch KSP for a whole month because I was expecting a new SSD and didn't want to hassle with save backups, but that's all wrapped up and now I've managed to complete MUN STS 2-4, stock Commander!

Preview shots:

  Hide contents

Mun One Base.

Scenic ridge.

Oh, and by the way, if there's anything I'm including regularly in these albums that you think is redundant/repetitive filler, let me know - I don't want you to have to slog through unnecessarily long albums.

That is a nice looking skybox. I've tried installing one on mine, but there's some kind of mod conflict (I use Spectra) and it doesn't load right. Anyway, everything seems to be in order. I know the long albums can get a bit tedious, but I think it's important to have a good flight record. It's good for keeping everyone sharp and honest, and will also help you fly more ambitious missions I think.

And for the record, the suborbital payload drops are fine. Nice work!

 

[sturmhauke]

On 1/15/2021 at 10:00 AM, Fulgora said:

I (somewhat proudly) present:

My take at STS-9.

 

There's something weird happening with your video link. The embedded video won't play, and clicking on it doesn't go to the video, just the YouTube front page. I had to find it on your channel. Might want to check your links.

Technical issues aside, looks like a well-executed mission, and you got a decently large spud. Good work!