[1.2] Procedural Fairings 3.20 (November 8)

[rdfox]

In the real world, you usually put the ullage motors on... whatever the lowest point of the rocket will be at the planned ignition. So one on the fairing and two on the main craft would be probably the most realistic, if you're trying to squeeze out that last 1-2 m/s of delta-V, assuming you have ignition before fairing jettison. However, that said... it might be, in the real world, *heavier* to put in the extra support structure for ullage motors on the fairing, rather than just mount them directly on the upper stage's thrust structure, so you have to consider that--IIRC, the Saturn V used ullage motors mounted directly on the S-II instead of on the S-IC's forward skirt/interstage structure, despite not jettisoning the forward skirt until after S-II ignition. (The dual-plane separation was used there to ensure that the skirt would separate cleanly from the S-II and not strike the S-II's engines, for the record.)

So basically, the most "realistic" would be to put them wherever feels right for you, because, as model railroaders say, There Is A Prototype For Everything. (Example: Some boosters with retrograde separation motors on their lower stages place them at the top of the stage. Others place them in the middle, and still others put them at the bottom. It all depends on the contractor's preference, and what provides the best CG balance for that particular rocket...)

Also note that you don't necessarily need ullage motors for restart capability--the Saturn V's S-IVB stage only used ullage motors for its initial start after S-II jettison. Ullage for the TLI restart was provided by propulsive venting of LH2 out the engine bell, at a tiny trickle from the initial cutoff to TLI that provided just enough thrust to keep the LOX and LH2 mostly settled at the bottom of the tanks. (This was the same method used to guide the spent S-IVB onto a "safe" trajectory after CSM separation and LM extraction, guaranteeing that there wouldn't be a collision between the spent stage and the spacecraft--they used propulsive venting of the residual propellants to guide it onto a trajectory that would either put it into solar orbit (Apollos 8, 10, 11, and 12) or on course to crash into the Moon (13-17).) There's also the option, on spacecraft with a full RCS system, of simply having the RCS thrust forward just before the scheduled ignition, providing ullage acceleration, with the RCS thrust ending just after ignition. Again, it depends on what technique the contractor and the customer consider to be the most efficient for the mission profile.

[Commissar]

ummm... i just had a catastrophic failure caused by a fairing separation malfunction.... the fairing halves disconnected, but didn't separate with any force, despite setting the separation force to high in the VAB......

i'll put a highlight on twitch of it, if I didn't turn off recording...

edit: looks like it MIGHT be a structural failure between truss segments, of all places...

edit again: got the failure for a third time... sep force is set to high, and there was no structural failures, aside from those caused by the fairing striking the craft....

Edited February 6, 2014 by Commissar

[Guest]

Nope, Saturn V did, in fact, have ullage motors on the interstage skirt. Also, the S-IVB did use ullage motors for TLI start, too. It's just that it used pressure-fed, liquid-fuel ones. The same motors later put it into a safe trajectory. In fact, when the motors failed to shut down, one S-IVB wasn't sent to solar orbit, but ended up in an unstable orbit that takes it around the Earth once in a while. S-IVB also had an RCS system, powered by the same fuel tanks as the liquid ullage motors. Propulsive venting was proposed for Ares V, but never used, IIRC.

[blackheart612]

I tried adding KW stuff on ProcFairings. Was not disappointed

[DasBananenbrot]

I tried adding KW stuff on ProcFairings. Was not disappointed

http://i.imgur.com/cXlazf6.png

OMG You never seize to amaze do you?

[blackheart612]

They actually look cool with some stretchy tanks texture (And some handy filters) + CoolRockets

[DasBananenbrot]

They actually look cool with some stretchy tanks texture (And some handy filters) + CoolRockets

~picture snip~

[blackheart612]

But am I allowed to distribute a direct rip-off of KW parts by editing its config for PFairings?

[DasBananenbrot]

But am I allowed to distribute a direct rip-off of KW parts by editing its config for PFairings?

Well just write a PM to either Winston or Kickasskyle, I can wait

But the license for KW Rocketry is THIS ONE So it should be ok if you follow the terms of the license

~snip~

License:

http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120726062918/minecraftmodcustomstuff/images/9/9a/CC-BY-NC-SA.png

[blackheart612]

Cool. I will upload if I got time (I got something to do irl at this minute)

[Mecripp]

That looks Great Blackheart612 can't wait to try it.

[blackheart612]

Alright. Here goes the KWR Stuff for PFairings.

I didn't make any of these models. They are KW originals (even stated on its cfg)

All credits for dem awesome designs go to Kickasskyle and Winston.

I'm planning to add fairing textures and also asymmetric designs such as this one

In time...

Edited February 6, 2014 by blackheart612
Grammar

[DasBananenbrot]

Alright. Here goes the KWR Stuff for PFairings.

I didn't make any of these models. They are KW originals (even stated on its cfg)

All credits for dem awesome designs go to Kickasskyle and Winston.

I'm planning to add fairing textures and also asymmetric designs such as this one

http://i.imgur.com/7MmaRh6.png

In time...

Yay Thanks

[blackheart612]

My pleasure

[Mecripp]

Yes TY TY blackheart612 this is awesome !!

EDIT got a bug blackheart612 that top part is not decoupling.

Edited February 6, 2014 by Mecripp2

[blackheart612]

What top part? The flat decoupler?

[Mecripp]

What top part? The flat decoupler?

Funny don't know the name of it and don't see what it would be in your folder but it's the part after you put on the FairingBase the piece that makes the Fairing over the part it's not making a decoupler

to separate the flairing so my sat or parts or trapped inside.

EDIT I can't still use the default one's so no big deal still hoping for the new fairing textures is there a easy way for use to change how it looks and thanks.

Edited February 7, 2014 by Mecripp2

[blackheart612]

You mean this?

Case A:

Case B:

It works like a charm for me. Is it case A or case B that isn't happening?

[a__gun]

So sorry what actually is this - the KW models and textures made to use the procedural fairings functionality? Or is it just textures that fit with KW or what..?

[Mecripp]

@blackheart612 Yes the top picture mine is stay whole.

EDIT Do, I have to have the KW fairings installed to get the texture too ?

[ANWRocketMan]

Is there any way to make the fairing bases procedural?(i.e. To resize them to any width as you can with the inter-stage adapter). I've been playing with RSS and stretchy tanks and find it's very limiting to have to create a new part out-of-game every time I have a rocket that is wider than the standard measurements.

[blackheart612]

I think you used the fuselage fairing try a decoupling fairing.

The textures are still on the making. I'll release them once I add them all together Was that fine?

[Mecripp]

LOL You was right, I was use wrong 1's all good my bad hehe.

EDIT And love what your doing with Squad Re-texture Project please keep up the great work.

[blackheart612]

So you saw that. Thank you. Glad to help

[AbeS]

you should post links in your signature about your creations