your mom Posted September 5, 2011 Share Posted September 5, 2011 Looks REALLY COOL. So original and classy looking. Why can't there be a quick way to switch out command pods? Can't they just make it so you can delete the command pod, and just place the new one in? Of course you HAVE to start with a command pod though. ya i think later on in development we will be able to do that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bperry Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 totally still looking forward to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarolRawley Posted September 6, 2011 Share Posted September 6, 2011 UPLOAD AN ALPHA SHUTTLE VERSION ALREADY!SO WE CAN HELP YOU WITH BUGTESTING. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
your mom Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 oh my gosh, this thing looks amazing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bperry Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 So, hows progress on this coming? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venku122 Posted September 11, 2011 Share Posted September 11, 2011 I want this naow!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarolRawley Posted September 11, 2011 Share Posted September 11, 2011 ^^^^^DITTO!^^^^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
your mom Posted September 15, 2011 Share Posted September 15, 2011 hows the project going so far? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venku122 Posted September 16, 2011 Share Posted September 16, 2011 hows the project going so far?I think novasilisko is waiting for the ability to have the shuttle be command pod and lifting wing all in one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroAndrew Posted September 16, 2011 Share Posted September 16, 2011 So is .11 or .12 a good guess of when we might see it for d/l? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
millsw Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Payload Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 I\'m not sure if it was intentional or not, but the design (the shuttle atop a booster) is very reminiscent of the 1954 von Braun prototype/concept. I like that. I like that alot.Too bad VB didn\'t find out until after that picture was taken that T-tail aircraft+Supersonic Speeds=Death. Still a ton better than just sticking it on the side of a giant fuel tank with two super long burning unstable SRBs. I can guarantee you there wouldn\'t have been any foam incident with it being on the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epsilon Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 super long burning unstable SRBsIncorrect.The SRB\'s have been proven very safe. Their failure rate is something like less than 1%. They failed only once on STS-51L, and in fact, they were designed to fail like that. It was the fault of NASA\'s bureaucracy at the time that engineers words of the cracked o rings never reached authorities. The SRB\'s continued to work and burn ever after the explosion. They\'re used on so many rockets today anyway.And for your information, the Saturn V first stage burned just as long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feanor Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Incorrect.The SRB\'s have been proven very safe. Their failure rate is something like less than 1%. They failed only once on STS-51L, and in fact, they were designed to fail like that. It was the fault of NASA\'s bureaucracy at the time that engineers words of the cracked o rings never reached authorities. The SRB\'s continued to work and burn ever after the explosion. They\'re used on so many rockets today anyway.And for your information, the Saturn V first stage burned just as long.Agreed. Slow burning is really not an argument. I still don\'t think you EVER want a solid on a people carrier. Ever. The simple fact that you can\'t shut it off safely is reason enough. On sat carriers, sure. if it fails, it\'ll get destroyed either way. Not so much with people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epsilon Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Agreed. Slow burning is really not an argument. I still don\'t think you EVER want a solid on a people carrier. Ever. The simple fact that you can\'t shut it off safely is reason enough. On sat carriers, sure. if it fails, it\'ll get destroyed either way. Not so much with people.Yeah. I understood were you were going with how dangerous SRB\'s CAN get. Just as much as they are safe, they are also dangerous. With a parallel staging system such as the space shuttle\'s, it\'s a terrible idea to use SRB\'s. With the Ares 1-x, a simple abort system is all that\'s needed against a failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feanor Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Yeah. I understood were you were going with how dangerous SRB\'s CAN get. Just as much as they are safe, they are also dangerous. With a parallel staging system such as the space shuttle\'s, it\'s a terrible idea to use SRB\'s. With the Ares 1-x, a simple abort system is all that\'s needed against a failure.Well...... no, not really. The abort system had to seriously beefed up, and there where a lot of issues that where not completely resolved with Flaming chunks of SRB fuel hitting the parachutes. No solids on people rockets is a good rule to abide by. And it wasn\'t a terrible idea - it was based on a diffirent paradigm. ( ares 1 was actually a terrible idea, though - i\'m glad it\'s dead - and I hope ATK\'s 'liberty' launcher never gets past the drawing board )As I said, no solids on people carriers pretty please, whatsoever. ( pyro bolts / possible LAS excluded ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted November 10, 2011 Author Share Posted November 10, 2011 *cough* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarolRawley Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I\'m sorry TopHatDuck, but I\'m using the Component Space Shuttle now. You took too long. Sorry again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venku122 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 bout time! Still not released though Will the wings be aerodynamic control surfaces also. KSP silisko edition has nice movable rudders merged with the stock winglet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted November 10, 2011 Author Share Posted November 10, 2011 I\'m sorry TopHatDuck, but I\'m using the Component Space Shuttle now. You took too long. Sorry again.I\'ll show you! My space shuttle will actually be landable! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McLuv Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 What a teaser... I went looking for the DL link only to be dissapointed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venku122 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Make it land like the shuttle\'s from Armageddon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarolRawley Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 I\'ll show you! My space shuttle will actually be landable!Hey, the Component shuttle can land, and on the Mun! And I like a landing challenge. I\'ll still download your shuttle, but I\'ll put it in my 'aviation' install. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mnemon Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 Landable yes or no, so far Nova delivers some of the finest equipment around, so I hope there\'ll be a DL soon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GroundHOG2010 Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 ^ and is garenteed his own models Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts