Rune's Slightly Used Vehicles

[SingABrightSong]

Good to see the Orca is still going strong. Got the radiators, fuel cells, any everything there. Hold on a second while I reverse-engineer it from your screenshot

 

Oh, and Rune? Something I've discovered with your Cupola Tug. If you clip the shielded docking port one half-notch into the cupola, you can see out the front if the shield is open. Good to be able to not defeat the entire purpose of a cupola.

[Rune]

1 hour ago, SingABrightSong said:

Good to see the Orca is still going strong. Got the radiators, fuel cells, any everything there. Hold on a second while I reverse-engineer it from your screenshot

 

Oh, and Rune? Something I've discovered with your Cupola Tug. If you clip the shielded docking port one half-notch into the cupola, you can see out the front if the shield is open. Good to be able to not defeat the entire purpose of a cupola.

Sure, go on right ahead, it's a simple build. I just fiddled a lot with the translation gizmo to create the gap for the drill, make it the same length as the cargo bay, and get it balanced so it doesn't upset the Orca's perfect VTOL balance. The part list is self-evident, just notice that there are three fuel cells and two 200kW radiators, all attached to the battery so the radiators cool both the ISRU and the drill (it doesn't look like it, but the drill is attached to the battery, not the ore tank). The Orca itself just got really minor tweaks, mostly getting the ladder to work correctly (I swear it used to) and fiddling with fuel priorities so the wing tanks empty first.

 

Rune. And yeah, parts really close to a 'window' won't obstruct the view. It's also better looking that way, IMO, I almost always sink that port a bit.

[SingABrightSong]

Well, seems to work well enough. After limping into a 100x70 orbit, I converted the ore into LFO and pulled off an immediate transfer to Minmus. Landed perilously on Minmus, with absolutely no fuel left upon touchdown, and set to work mining it. Pulled off a gravity assist from Minmus to a solar orbit, and burned to Duna. Aerocapture at Duna, landed with VTOL, took off with the RAPIERS(closed cycle, obviously), and landed on Ike. Next stop, Dres!

[SingABrightSong]

By the way, I've still been working on that 50-size Lackluster mod. It occurs to me that, with the new fuel flow, the Lackluster doesn't need such elaborate part ordering. In any case, I finally tested my version, deploying a Base ISRU module to the surface of Tylo. It being the heaviest of the base modules, this ensures that, if it can be delivered, any other module can be as well. Moreover, delivering the ISRU first allows the Lackluster to be refueled for subsequent deployments..

How does one refuel it, you might ask?

Very carefully.

 

SingABrightSong. The deploy limit tweakable turns the cargo bay into a kickstand.

[Rune]

15 hours ago, SingABrightSong said:

By the way, I've still been working on that 50-size Lackluster mod. It occurs to me that, with the new fuel flow, the Lackluster doesn't need such elaborate part ordering. In any case, I finally tested my version, deploying a Base ISRU module to the surface of Tylo. It being the heaviest of the base modules, this ensures that, if it can be delivered, any other module can be as well. Moreover, delivering the ISRU first allows the Lackluster to be refueled for subsequent deployments..

 

How does one refuel it, you might ask?

Very carefully.

 

SingABrightSong. The deploy limit tweakable turns the cargo bay into a kickstand.

Whoa. Cool stuff! My only concern is how you plan to upright that sexy rocket once it's full of fuel... Tylo's gravity is harsh. Can you seriously upright that using just the bay's tweakable and RCS? You might be interested in the small refinery rover I built for the LackLuster, that would allow you to fill the tanks much easier... albeit slower.

Oh, and you are absolutely right about the LackLuster needing a fuel flow revision. And the Heinlein too! They will both notice the change for good, and I need to check their antenna situation. Thanks!

 

Rune. I'll upload the rover some time this weekend if you want it.

Edited November 4, 2016 by Rune

[SingABrightSong]

The cargo bay doors slam shut with an absurd amount of force, so yes, I was able to knock it upright. I would be interested in that rover, though, and I'm sure others would be as well. Some other payloads of interest might be the SSTA module for the Orca, and the fixed-ISRU Lackluster. No pressure, though; I've learned how tedious it can be to come up with descriptions and screenshots for KerbalX.

 

Speaking of payloads, though, I've managed to reverse-engineer your short-range relay, and improve it.

The improvement is that it now fits in a Mk2 cargo bay.

While you can, technically, fit two in at once, the clipping is a little untidy.

Edited November 5, 2016 by SingABrightSong
Addendum

[Rune]

10 hours ago, SingABrightSong said:

The cargo bay doors slam shut with an absurd amount of force, so yes, I was able to knock it upright. I would be interested in that rover, though, and I'm sure others would be as well. Some other payloads of interest might be the SSTA module for the Orca, and the fixed-ISRU Lackluster. No pressure, though; I've learned how tedious it can be to come up with descriptions and screenshots for KerbalX.

 

Speaking of payloads, though, I've managed to reverse-engineer your short-range relay, and improve it.

The improvement is that it now fits in a Mk2 cargo bay.

 

While you can, technically, fit two in at once, the clipping is a little untidy.

Well then, that is totally a trick that I am amazed by, in that case. Nice find!

As to the rover, it's up. I tried to re-upload the Orca with the SSTA package, but it was throwing errors at me, so I'll get back to it at some point (my internet is very crappy ATM, but that may change in a week or two).

And while you bring the subject of relays... I have a question that I might have to test for myself, but let's see if some of you guys had the same idea and save me the sciencing:

Imagine you have one of those short-range relays, but you also put a 88-88 antenna where the docking port is right now. The probe itself should then be able to pick up KSC's signal all the way to the ass end of nowhere... but would it be able to relay it to a short range using the other relay-capable antenna? Is that what 'combinable' means? My gut tells me it should, but that it is also equally likely to be implemented in a way that doesn't work like this.

 

Rune. Also, if you turn one of them 45º, the antennae won't clip the solar panels.

Edited November 5, 2016 by Rune

[SingABrightSong]

There's a whole thread on that in the pre-release branch, I recall. Let me see if I can dig it up... Got it. 

Unfortunately, it appears to not be the case. "Combinable" simply means that having multiple combinable antennae increases the signal range logarithmically.

[Rune]

51 minutes ago, SingABrightSong said:

There's a whole thread on that in the pre-release branch, I recall. Let me see if I can dig it up... Got it.

Unfortunately, it appears to not be the case. "Combinable" simply means that having multiple combinable antennae increases the signal range logarithmically.

That clears it, thanks. In other, sadder news, it seems as if something has gone very wrong with the Orca's KerbalX page. I can't update it, can't re-upload it, in fact I can't even see its page. I wonder what's going on with that... I was screwing with the new KerbalX mod, I hope It wasn't that!

 

Rune. I wonder how long it's been broken.

[SingABrightSong]

Not having good flying with the Espada. While it's tricky to fly at the best of times, I can't seem to get it to go supersonic properly. I reach Mach One just fine, but get stuck in the transsonic region at about 400m. I eventually punch through at 3500m if I fire the nuke, but even then I find that I have to pitch down to remain in the lower atmosphere, which of course causes the cockpit to overheat. The Espada needs to reach Mach 5 while still airbreathing in order to make orbit on its paltry 500 m/s of oxidizer. Pretty much the only way I can make it to orbit is to have the nuke burning for the entirety of the ascent. This is less than ideal.

 

In other news, I noticed that you were working on a "Longshot" SSTO in the SSTOs thread. Would you care to tell us a bit about that? The payload was rather interesting too, I might add.

 

And on a lighter note...

 

"Why did Rune put shielded ports on the Klaw Pod" I thought. "There's no point!", I thought.

 

 

  I THOUGHT WRONG.

[Rune]

2 hours ago, SingABrightSong said:

Not having good flying with the Espada. While it's tricky to fly at the best of times, I can't seem to get it to go supersonic properly. I reach Mach One just fine, but get stuck in the transsonic region at about 400m. I eventually punch through at 3500m if I fire the nuke, but even then I find that I have to pitch down to remain in the lower atmosphere, which of course causes the cockpit to overheat. The Espada needs to reach Mach 5 while still airbreathing in order to make orbit on its paltry 500 m/s of oxidizer. Pretty much the only way I can make it to orbit is to have the nuke burning for the entirety of the ascent. This is less than ideal.

 

In other news, I noticed that you were working on a "Longshot" SSTO in the SSTOs thread. Would you care to tell us a bit about that? The payload was rather interesting too, I might add.

 

And on a lighter note...

 

"Why did Rune put shielded ports on the Klaw Pod" I thought. "There's no point!", I thought.

 

 

 

  I THOUGHT WRONG.

LOL! Great screenie. And a big rock you have there! Congrats on the potato wrangling. As to the shielded docking port, it has nothing to do with thermal resistance (the RTG powering the Klaw would blow up much sooner anyway), and everything to do with aesthetics (I love the shielded port), and performance (active docking ports keep on checking for nearby ports to magnetize).

As to the Espada, a quick test makes me think that the 1.1-1.2 drag changes actually affected it just enough to kill it. It should get to 400m/s at sea level to really wake up the RAPIERs, but instead it hangs tantalizingly close, not wanting to go over 250kN which is where RAPIERs really 'wake up' (get increased thrust with altitude, instead of decreasing). I'll see if I can do somethign about it, but the whole design was close to the edge, TWR-wise, so I might have to revise it a lot. OTOH, maybe taking out a few draggy parts, like the radiators, will do.... hang on a second, I still have KSP open.

[15 mins later] Yup, I've got it back. Change the intakes for shock cones, and maybe take out the radiators, and it'll go back to being able to go over 400m/s at sea level. Also, autostrutting the main wing takes care of the bothersome elevon oscillations it likes to get when the dynamic pressure gets high enough.

 

Rune. The bad part about high-performance designs is that they are finicky.

Edited November 8, 2016 by Rune

[SHiftER2O]

The Spatha still works in 1.2.1 !!

[Rune]

19 hours ago, SHiftER2O said:

The Spatha still works in 1.2.1 !!

Sure, why wouldn't it? ...wait, you mean this one?

Or this one?

If either is the case (and I don't see why both shouldn't still work just fine), there is a new and shiny one in KerbalX, which does the same thing the others did (lift whatever you can fit in the bay plus 4 kerbonauts with plenty of margin), but better, mostly because it looks much more like a cute shuttle orbiter.

 

Rune. One of my long-standing names.

[SHiftER2O]

3 hours ago, Rune said:

Sure, why wouldn't it? ...wait, you mean this one?

Or this one?

If either is the case (and I don't see why both shouldn't still work just fine), there is a new and shiny one in KerbalX, which does the same thing the others did (lift whatever you can fit in the bay plus 4 kerbonauts with plenty of margin), but better, mostly because it looks much more like a cute shuttle orbiter.

Rune. One of my long-standing names.

I've actually tested all of them, and yes I went back through this thread and discovered that they were never broken in the first place, silly me. I got that thought from the front of your page, and what with the new ascent profile of the rapiers, I thought "Would a shuttle come close to breaking the sound barrier at sea-level?" Turns out this is Kerbal Space Program, and it doesn't matter 

That shiny new one is definitely a favorite! It seems so stock-alike enough to be included in the catalog, it just works like a charm. 

I do however, want to ask if ALL those other SSTOs in your Kerbal X still works in 1.2+? I could test it out myself, but maybe you have an answer ready prior  

[Rune]

2 minutes ago, SHiftER2O said:

I've actually tested all of them, and yes I went back through this thread and discovered that they were never broken in the first place, silly me. I got that thought from the front of your page, and what with the new ascent profile of the rapiers, I thought "Would a shuttle come close to breaking the sound barrier at sea-level?" Turns out this is Kerbal Space Program, and it doesn't matter 

That shiny new one is definitely a favorite! It seems so stock-alike enough to be included in the catalog, it just works like a charm. 

I do however, want to ask if ALL those other SSTOs in your Kerbal X still works in 1.2+? I could test it out myself, but maybe you have an answer ready prior  

Yup, the stuff in KerbalX all should work without issues. But of course, if you find anything fishy, please tell me! One can never be sure that all the files are up to date... mostly, because I'm always changing minor stuff.

 

Rune. In fact, I kinda should update the Claymore, I think, I redid the whole fuel balance recently.

[Rune]

Long time no post, right? Anyhow, I uploaded the newest version of my modular base just now. Now with a single-launch deployment method for the laziest among you! No docking or multiple launches required, but if you know how to navigate, you can still get to many interesting places. Get yours from KerbalX and start building them yourself!

How, you ask? Well, I uprated the CRADLE (Container Rated for Atmospheric Descent And Landing on Eve) to fit the whole base in one go, then built a rocket under it with enough oomph to go to Mun. Turns out this was also enough to go to Duna, but pushing it to the max (using the ore it can contain as extra fuel for the transfer, for example). Of course the CRADLE is fully equipped with docking equipment to refuel it and/or tug it further. Here you can see a CRADLE on testing over the desert, so you can get an idea of how the thing gets deployed:

Once landed, you get rid of the thing (more details in the craft description) to find it full of presents:

If you have questions as to how all the things fit, check this thread to find more about how to assemble this kind of base. And if you are good at landing relatively close to other things, maybe using my Orca (since it was mostly designed for that), you can of course expand it to you heart's delight, like always, rearranging modules at will and conducting all manner of surface ops, including 100% stock Klaw-less refuels:

 

Rune. Happy building!

Edited February 19, 2017 by Rune

[Spaceception]

@Rune I don't know how I haven't seen this thread, but these ships are amazing, and Lackluster ls my favorite

[Rune]

On 8/2/2017 at 6:42 PM, Spaceception said:

@Rune I don't know how I haven't seen this thread, but these ships are amazing, and Lackluster ls my favorite

Thanks for the compliments! It's easy to miss my thread these days, not so much activity as it once had (as this late reply shows ). Still, I do keep an eye on it, and even tough I don't post as much stuff as I used to, that's mostly because I am very happy with the vehicles I am using now. There is the occasional thing that I still haven't got around to update, of course... just yesterday, I launched the latest flotilla to Dres. And it did include a Lackluster to serve as general purpose lander, of course, because that rocket is just too cute and versatile not to use. I found yet another way to cram enough stuff into it to actually use it as a sort of SSTA, thanks to KIS! And I also took the opportunity to update the reusable boost stage for >2.5mT payloads, so it didn't blow up the ramp, and instead got auto-recovered as it used to (because it soft-lands on the pad before the Lackluster is outside physics range).

All of that stuff fits into one of the small 2.5m containers and is pretty easy to set up. I was much happier with how I got the Orca to follow the flotilla, tough. The Lackluster is easy, with the huge dV in the tanks it's only a matter of having a LKO refueling depot. But the Orca, with its poor Isp engines and run-of-the-mill mass ratio... it was a tough job, I thought at first. But! Rearrange the cargo, bring some Drive Pods up and... presto! This particular configuration gives about 5km/s with enough fuel left over for at least one landing, and is surprisingly well balanced and easy to put together:

The Drive Pods are still one of the most amazing ideas I have ever come up with, they turned the problem of 'how to move an Orca through a 4km/s transfer' into an opportunity to transport a refinery module and some additional cargo. Talk about killing two birds with one stone! And the rest of the expedition is also very neat, a single Magdalena class transport pulls the rest of the stuff: a cool-looking station, a Base-in-a-Box, the crew with their Dwagon escape capsule, and enough relays to set up a local planet-spanning (and scanning!) network:

Oh, and you guys might have missed the stuff that I uploaded to KerbalX the other day. I didn't bother to write the post at the same time, and obviously I completely forgot about it and went on vacation and everything. Not much to talk about, really, just the stupidly-efficient four-RAPIER SSTO that I previewed on the SSTO thread a while back, and what I'm using as commsats these days. Still, you might wat to take a look at it, so here it is:

 

Rune. So that is what I'm launching these days, plus doing lots of asteroid wrangling.

Edited February 19, 2017 by Rune

[Rune]

Hey guys! A very interesting conversation in @Raptor9's thread got me thinking about rockets and well, one thing led to another... anyhow, now I've got this:

From left to right, you have 25mT, 50mT, and 100mT-to-LKO boosters. All using 1.5 SRB staging, with very similarly nice thrust curves, and all under 26 parts. Pretty neat, right? The thing is that I'm still undecided how you guys would prefer them... simple subassemblies with minimal part count so you can slap them under your payload easily? Should they have probe cores, electrics and attitude control and stuff so that they can be used to lift inert payloads and still comply with the Clean Space Act™? Maybe even add complex reusability subsystems to the expensive cores so they become cheap-ish* reusable boosters?

*:(Nothing is cheaper than a reusable airbreathing SSTO)

 

Rune. Cast your vote now! Or even better, your opinion!

Edited March 1, 2017 by Rune

[SingABrightSong]

I'd forego the recoverability on these ones. "Cheap" means "a long time", and these ones don't look like "A long time" is in their mission profile. I'd probably be using them in case something needs to get to space NOW.

[Rune]

5 hours ago, SingABrightSong said:

I'd forego the recoverability on these ones. "Cheap" means "a long time", and these ones don't look like "A long time" is in their mission profile. I'd probably be using them in case something needs to get to space NOW.

Yeah, quick and dirty sounds like the thing for them. Once you have painstakingly designed you amazing-looking mothership, just chuck one of these underneath in about five seconds and be sure it'll make space. I'm debating whether to put deorbit systems now, or trust in the customer to keep orbits clean...

 

Rune. How much weight can a solid-based deorbit system be? I'm betting just enough to upset the payload numbers.

Edited March 3, 2017 by Rune

[septemberWaves]

4 hours ago, Rune said:

How much weight can a solid-based deorbit system be? I'm betting just enough to upset the payload numbers.

Generally, unless you're trying to de-orbit something without its own propulsion system, it's best to use the liquid fuel engines that it already has and just add a bit more liquid fuel if necessary. The avionics systems required for basic control don't add too much mass if you don't already have them as part of the design, but solid de-orbit motors tend to be more costly. This is mainly because of their low I_sp, which means that hauling that sort of mass anywhere is generally not worth it. They're good for lifting engines, but that's about it.

 

Personally I like to design upper stages with de-orbit mechanisms in mind (unless they're too small to make it worthwhile). This removes the difficulty of having to augment the design with those systems later and risk losing payload capacity in the process.

[Rune]

34 minutes ago, eloquentJane said:

Generally, unless you're trying to de-orbit something without its own propulsion system, it's best to use the liquid fuel engines that it already has and just add a bit more liquid fuel if necessary. The avionics systems required for basic control don't add too much mass if you don't already have them as part of the design, but solid de-orbit motors tend to be more costly. This is mainly because of their low I_sp, which means that hauling that sort of mass anywhere is generally not worth it. They're good for lifting engines, but that's about it.

 

Personally I like to design upper stages with de-orbit mechanisms in mind (unless they're too small to make it worthwhile). This removes the difficulty of having to augment the design with those systems later and risk losing payload capacity in the process.

 

I'm trying to be as cheap as possible here. Throwing four separatrons in there means 300√, and the whole thing is automated... if the guy launching it can manage a circular orbit without switching off the main engine, and without getting the apoapsis above 75kms. Might take a rather good pilot/Mechjeb. I just did, but it takes a lot of fiddling with the throttle, at the very least.

 

The alternative would be a Vernor-based system with a probe core, to use the residuals for the job, and while we are at it, provide rotation authority with the main engine off to allow coasting periods. Much more convenient, as you say, but... the lightest system I can think of is at least 6,000√, more like 10, and heavier. A monoprop-based system could be a nice compromise, tough, with the linear ports at 280√ a pop. 6xRCS, probe, fuel tank plus a couple batteries... (fires up KSP, intrigued) ...Yup, about ten parts and 3,560√. Then again, the thrust is so anemic deorbiting is going to take its sweet time, and it has the same amount of propellant mass as the separatron one... which can barely cope with lowering the orbit of the big core a few kms. Compromises, compromises...

 

 

Rune. The good part is they are sleek and beefy enough that the 3,5km/s dV budget is quite excessive, and they have some margin to screw up ascent/bolt stuff on top.

Edited March 3, 2017 by Rune

[septemberWaves]

Those are some very good points. Solid motors do have the benefit of being cheap.

Edited March 3, 2017 by eloquentJane

[Rune]

Well, here they are, the new booster family in KerbalX. In the end I went with RCS subsytems, and I encourage you to read the file's description, because I packed the three rockets in the same 110 part file. Next up to upload, with its own booster that cold actually fit in this family except for the fact that it is has a reusable core, a new Von Braun, the Mark XI. Now several times more difficult to put together!

 

Rune. But very neat and tidy, both in part count and aesthetics, the two of them.

Edited March 9, 2017 by Rune