Space Shuttle Atlantis

[Amloris]

I guess it's the hot key as I'm not so much worried about the actual angle (yet) as the fact that when I place engines on mine they point straight down (although having tried flying yours I may leave them that way )

Simply use left shift key while rotating a part like normal (using the W,A,S,D,Q,E keys) to rotate your selected parts in increments instead of a full 90 degrees.

Now, finding the correct angle to place them is an entire physics lecture in its own right.

[Amloris]

Due to the success of Space Shuttle Atlantis, a board meeting was called to discuss how to improve upon the original design. During the brainstorming process an intern interjected the idea of making a Payload capable Shuttle. Thrilled by the possibility of being able to destroy the Shuttle and the payload in a single launch the gathered committee accepted the idea by an overwhelming majority. After the press announcement, three top Kerbal officials were hospitalized due to an overdose of awesomeness.

A new, more complex Shuttle would be necessary to fulfill this role. It was also theorized that a re-purposed commercial airliner would be required for testing the aerodynamics of the new Shuttle. The creation of the aerial launch platform would significantly reduce the need to launch dozens of rockets to test the new shuttle and minimize casualties during testing. Top Kerbal officials also approved of the ability to crash unintentionally dissasemble both the plane and the Shuttle if an anomaly were to occur.

Aerodynamic testing of Atlantis as a test vehicle

Surprisingly there were no casualties during testing, although there were some very close calls. (Failed Successful landing)

To be clear, the Boeing is a modified version of one produced by forum member Mareczex333. Aerodynamic, landing gear, and structural changes were made to the original version. I would like to thank Mareczex333 for allowing me to use his plane! I strongly recommend checking out his Youtube because he makes some very impressive things.

[Exsmelliarmus]

Really impressed, shamelessly ripped off your design for my own payload capable (mod) shuttle. It would be nice if the 3 main engines were more powerful though, so that the shuttle didn't need to use its OMS engines for ascent, both for realism and because the radial engines are so inefficient.

[Exsmelliarmus]

BTW, really digging the new (more realistic) wing design. That's some brilliant usage of those swept wings! Although for the 747 flights, you should add an aerodynamic cover over the engines. Now, we just need cargo bays in the stock game!

[Amloris]

@Exsmelliarmus

I have, in fact, found a way to make the 3 main engines more powerful through the use of clipping and careful fuel line placement. Now the new version of Atlantis should feel significantly more powerful! This technique will also be used in the payload capable shuttle that I am currently working on.

I'm glad you liked the new wing structure; it is not only aerodynamically stable, but it is also much more realistic. I love how the swept wings imitate the Reinforced Carbon-Carbon leading edge of its real life counterpart!

Sadly, I could not find a visually appealing way to make a cover for the engines during 747 testing.

However, I do believe the landing gear setup more than makes up for it.

[Exsmelliarmus]

That truly is a thing of beauty!

How well does it glide? And where did you put the fuel tanks in the orbiter itself? Ingenious use of clipping, or just witchcraft?

Also, on an unrelated note, it would be nice if the devs added a north-south runway, to make those polar landings a little easier.

Edited August 13, 2013 by Exsmelliarmus

[ashrid]

Simply use left shift key while rotating a part like normal (using the W,A,S,D,Q,E keys) to rotate your selected parts in increments instead of a full 90 degrees.

Now, finding the correct angle to place them is an entire physics lecture in its own right.

Thanks,

Did you set the angle to match the real shuttle (which I believe is 10.5 degrees) or did you set it to pass through your shuttles CoG? (eye balling it the engines appear to be aligned with the CoG of the whole stack)

Edited August 13, 2013 by ashrid

[Amloris]

That truly is a thing of beauty!

How well does it glide? And where did you put the fuel tanks in the orbiter itself? Ingenious use of clipping, or just witchcraft?

Also, on an unrelated note, it would be nice if the devs added a north-south runway, to make those polar landings a little easier.

Empty, Atlantis can glide for 30km from an altitude of 10km. I'm sure you can extend its glide path with the right amount of patience. With the new wing structure though it has the tendency to want to stall at very low speeds.

Fuel is located inside the orbiter; clipping was used to preserve aesthetics and functionality.

A polar runway would be nice in certain situations, but unfortunately the Atlantis now does not have the DeltaV to establish a polar orbit.

Thanks,

Did you set the angle to match the real shuttle (which I believe is 10.5 degrees) or did you set it to pass through your shuttles CoG? (eye balling it the engines appear to be aligned with the CoG of the whole stack)

First off, I started with the fully fueled orbiter alone (No external tank or boosters). I then turned on the thrust vector and center of mass to do the alignment. Line up the OEM's thrust vector with the center of mass of the Shuttle. Then, add the external tank; you will then add the main engines to align the resultant thrust vector with the new center of mass (The COM will move during flight, so try to guess where it will be a majority of the time). This relies on the assumption that the OEM's will be firing during the ascent. That is how I did it!

Imagine how much fun it is lining up the OEM's and SME's when you are dealing with a payload capable shuttle with varying payload weights and placements.

[Amloris]

The production of the Thorium Launch System is complete. It is specially designed for the Payload Capable Shuttle (Still thinking of a name for it) that will weigh in at about 50 tonnes fully loaded. It has an 125 tonne asymmetrical external fuel tank so that the shuttle can be embedded into it, allowing for greater control and payload balance. The two Liquid Rocket Boosters burn for 2.5 times as long as a large SRB and are nearly 3 times as powerful!

Thorium Launch System

The fuel routing for this thing was diabolical...

So, what are your thoughts about this launch system? I would also like to know what you plan on launching with a payload capable shuttle!

Feedback is appreciated as always.

[xub313]

The Thorium Launch System looks great!

One tip I can give is to run some fuel lines from LRBs to the ET, then run some more from the ET to the LRB's engines (the engines themselves, not the fuel tanks). This allows the LRBs to continue firing even when its tanks are empty and allows the shuttle to eject them at almost any point in the flight.

It'll give the shuttle some redundancy when launching payloads of different masses.

[Amloris]

Construction and testing of the new Cargo Shuttles propulsion system has been complete. It develops a maximum thrust of 2010kN to help propel the Thorium Launch System and the attached shuttle. Fitted with reaction wheels, it should theoretically be able to handle unbalanced payloads (If my math is true). Even though the combined mass of the Shuttle and payload will weigh in at around 50 tonnes it only uses 3 tonnes of fuel for orbital operations due to the use of nuclear engines.

Testing of the Cargo Shuttle Propulsion Pack

16.5 tonnes of engines at work

Now all it needs is wings and aerodynamics tests before it is bolted onto the Thorium Launch System!

[Exsmelliarmus]

Loving that testing rig - also, a little surprised but glad that you switched out the (mostly useless) radial engines for a good old ... Well, something pretty anyway- I wish the radial engines weren't so inefficient, and powerless, but as it stands, their only real benefit seems to be aesthetics.

Also, seeing the beginnings of a cargo bay, perhaps? I tried to build one with I beams and plates, but the spontaneous explosions and beauty (or lack thereof) drove me away. Can't wait to see how you solve the problems!

Funnily enough, that RCS/Battery setup is almost identical to my own! Great minds think alike, perhaps? BTW, how are you planning on testing the aerodynamics? Just a few glides with a test aircraft, or perhaps a rover body with an intricate arrangement of trusses so that as it speeds up, the shuttle lifts up?

Edited August 15, 2013 by Exsmelliarmus

[Amloris]

Aerodynamic testing of the Thorium Shuttle has been complete. The old Boeing 747 used to test Atlantis would have been 100% over its weight capacity limit if it had been used to test the 30 tonne Thorium Shuttle. To combat this issue, an Antonov-225 was created which is capable of lifting 40 tonnes of dead weight. The split tail design offered superior yaw control during testing an required far less seperation motors to be used to clear the Shuttle from the Antonov during aerodynamic tests.

Antonov-225 (Used as an aerial launch vehicle)

Aerodynamic testing of the Thorium Shuttle

The Thorium Shuttle is separated in a similar fashion

The Thorium Shuttle glides quite well during testing; following a 10 degree descent path with ease. It's flight characteristics were only tested without any payload, though it may be able to return 5-10 tonne payloads from orbit if properly balanced. However, I'm not overly satisfied with the aesthetics yet, and there are some peculiar issues with it. It currently loves to go into uncontrollable stalls which are unrecoverable, and the kraken attacks when you deploy the landing gear (which always induces catastrophic stall).

Unfortunately, the Thorium Shuttle is composed of 165 parts and I have no idea how I'm going to reduce that number. Perhaps I will post the craft file of the Shuttle if anyone is interested in modifying it to be more part efficient.

Have a good day!

[Bothersome]

Amloris, Magnificent work. The difficulties that you had to overcome to get this thing to orbit are amazing. A true testament to your engineering skills. You make the rest of us look like amateurs.

[Exsmelliarmus]

Any news? I'd hate to see this brilliant shuttle become the next Buran!

[128MB]

Awesome! can't wait to see a fully functional payload shuttle!

I tried it and failed horribly

[L3GO]

Any Updates so far? Hows the testing and problems that are solved?

[Nephf]

Well, I actually have a Payload Capable mix-up of the Space Shuttle and the Energija-Buran. So the Orbiter is the Space Shuttle, but the Launch Vehicle is an Energija.

[Amloris]

This is the update so far: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/49274-FPS-Stuttering

After rebuilding my OS I have been experiencing unexplainably horrific lag; flying anything more than 200 parts is painful to watch. This has made it impossible to continue aerodynamic testing since the Thorium Shuttle is about 140 parts and the Antonov-225 Aerial Launch Vehicle is 250 parts. Without an aerodynamically stable shuttle it would be silly to launch the thing since you wouldn't be able to recover it. While I may not be able to test aerodynamics and launch system stability at the moment I have been focusing on other smaller tasks that will make up the bigger picture.

Some of the things I have been working on for the Thorium Launch System are as follows:

• Developing the Azimuth Abort System: This will be a backup system for Kerbalnaut survival if the Shuttle's aerodynamic surfaces are damaged during ascent (rendering the Shuttle aerodynamically unstable and incapable of re-entry) and the Shuttle is on a sub-orbital trajectory.
  
• Developing the Aegis Abort System: This will be a backup CSM in a 70km-70km orbit in case the Thorium Shuttle is left in a lower than intended orbit without the necessary fuel to safely reach a specific landing location. In this situation, the Aegis CSM will be remotely operated to rendezvous with the Shuttle to save the crew.
  
• Developing the Crew Mobility System: Essentially just rcs jetpacks with seats. I wanted to do EVA's with a proper NAV ball, so this is my solution to that problem.
  
• Creating Alternate Landing Areas: I'm working on a couple of separate "landing strips" to give me landing opportunities to land somewhere other than the main airstrip in case something goes wrong on reentry. 1 will be located just west of the main strip (for early re-entries), 1 will be on the eastern continent for a very specific mission I have for the Thorium System (and for early abort possibilites). These sites will have a jet to return landed crew, a refueling station, a hab unit, and landing lights.
  
• Reducing Part Count of the ET: Due to complications in the building process (I'll explain the problem later when I get the time) the part count was very high for the Thorium Launch System (ET+LRB's). I learned a lot from making that rediculously complex peice of machinery the first time, so now I know how to reduce the part count substantially. Plus I need to add load bearing rails to it or else the Shuttle's power plant will shred it. The External Tank rebuild will probably take about 3-4 hours, so I'm putting it off as long as possible.
  

This project is by no means dead. I work on it a little bit every day (even with the lag), perfecting it little by little. I will only release it when I am completely satisfied with the final product.

Kindest Regards,

Amloris

Edited September 27, 2013 by Amloris

[128MB]

the shuttle looks awesome! sorry about your lag ...

[Amloris]

After a few weeks and many hours of work I have managed to fix my FPS issues. The solution was painfully trivial (my desktop was somehow in power saving mode when I rebuilt my system). *facepalm*

Now I can actually start working on testing the long awaited Thorium Launch System!

One of the projects that I discussed earlier that will be an integral part of testing the shuttle is the Aegis Abort System. This 3 man CSM will be parked in a 70kmx70km orbit in case the Thorium Shuttle lacks the fuel to obtain the target orbit or select the appropriate re-entry location. While top kerbal officials were first leery of the terms "redundancy" and "back-up plan" they quickly warmed up to the idea as it offered an unprecedented excuse to make a simple task as complicated as possible. Thus, the Aegis-1 was born. Hailed as being "too safe" by the general population, SRB's where quickly added to the original design to decrease the safety level, satisfying the public.

Aegis-1

Unmanned CSM in Orbit

Separation of Service Module before re-entry

I have started working on rebuilding the external tank for the Thorium Launch System. So far I have reduced the part count by 75 parts and have added 3 more reaction wheels (21 total). The ludicrous amount of reaction wheels is for payload stabilization; they will also force you to keep the throttle above 50% or else you will run out of power to stabilize yourself as a added benefit. I am really liking how the ET is coming along!

I have also reduced the part count in each Gemini-LRB by 8 parts.

Questions:

• How do I get rid of the Poll? (It has overstayed its welcome, we all know which project won )
  
• How do I re-size my images via bb code to make them not as gigantic?
  

More updates coming soon!

[Giggleplex777]

You'll have to start a new thread.

[Supernovy]

When you choose the link you're using on imgur, it should give you the option to use smaller pictures ("Large thumbnail" or "Small square" or something).

I'll see if I can do something about the poll.

[Amloris]

The External Tank rebuild is going well, though it is not necessarily going according to plan. I have managed to reduce the part count substantially (~50-100 parts after struts are added), but for what ever reason it has picked up a bunch of weight somewhere in the rebuild even though it should weight about the same as the original. For design concerns the External Tank must have a total mass of 127mT, an empty mass (structural weight) of 25mT; this leaves 102mT devoted to fuel alone.

I need some help figuring out where I picked up some additional weight in my rebuild (and this will give you guys a chance to get an up close look at the ET and comment about it). Below are some statistics to help me show what is wrong with it. The LRB's were not included in this external tank rebuild.

It is important to note that the new tank has no struts or fuel lines right now.

External Tank (old)

Wet mass: 124.98

Dry mass: 22.98

Part Count: 206

External Tank (new)

Wet mass: 125.13

Dry mass: 23.13

Part Count: 98

Things I changed in the design (net weight change)

(m_dry)_old-(m_dry)_new= 3 inline reaction wheels (small) - 1 inline reaction wheel (big) - 16 small structural panels + 2 small I-beams + 4 small adapter + 1 rover body

(m_dry)_old-(m_dry)_new= 3(0.3mT) - 0.2mT - 16(0.075mT) + 2(0.1875mT) + 4(0.04mT) + 0.15mT

(ÃŽâ€m_dry)_theoretical= 0.185mT

Removing struts and fuel lines

(ÃŽâ€m_dry)_theoretical= 0.185mT - 20 fuel lines - 42 struts

(ÃŽâ€m_dry)_theoretical= 0.185mT - 20(0.05mT) - 42(0.05mT)

(ÃŽâ€m_dry)_theoretical= -2.915mT

Comparing this theoretical value to the actual value I measured

(m_wet(new))_actual-(m_wet(old))_actual=(ÃŽâ€m_dry)_theoretical

ÃŽâ€m_actual = ÃŽâ€m_theoretical

125.13mT - 124.98mT = -2.915mT

0.15mT ≠ -2.915mT

I'm at a loss of how to explain this, the math simply just doesn't add up! The new external tank is suppose to weight almost 3 metric tonnes lighter than the old one accounting for all of the changes I made, yet in practice when I measured it, it weights 0.15 metric tonnes heavier than old one. The amount of fuel is correct in both of them, so the change in mass must be structural. Where did I pick up almost 3 tonnes of weight even though I meticulously kept a list of changes I made between the designs? If someone else could take a look at this I would greatly appreciate it!

Craft files:

External Tank (old)

External Tank (new)

Edited September 28, 2013 by Amloris

[Supernovy]

Struts and fuel lines are completely massless, so the change in mass resulting from removing them is zero.

Also, couldn't do anything about your poll, sorry. Something you can try is closing it / removing all options.