totm june 2018 Work-in-Progress [WIP] Design Thread

[Giggleplex777]

That would be awesome Giggle. Any pics or info? I'm not 100% sure of the DV of the shuttle yet.

Here's the first prototype with a placeholder shuttle:

I used retracted landing to act as slid pads (they're lighter than rover wheels). They work pretty well and allow higher landing speeds, although they may be too big for your shuttle.

The TWR of the shuttle is very low after booster separation if you are using three ant engines, so the boosters will have to provide most of the delta-v. My shuttle was too heavy and it ran dry at 2000m/s orbital.

I'm also proposing a more aesthetically pleasing version with the fuel for the boosters clipped inside the ET and have the boosters made up of those white antennas. The downside to this would be the increased mass of the ET and thus a lower TWR after booster separation.

Edited December 15, 2014 by Giggleplex777

[Majorjim!]

Here's the first prototype with a placeholder shuttle:

http://i.imgur.com/xoPMM8a.png

http://i.imgur.com/nIqh8aN.png

I used retracted landing to act as slid pads (they're lighter than rover wheels). They work pretty well and allow higher landing speeds, although they may be too big for your shuttle.

The TWR of the shuttle is very low after booster separation if you are using three ant engines, so the boosters will have to provide most of the delta-v. My shuttle was too heavy and it ran dry at 2000m/s orbital.

I'm also proposing a more aesthetically pleasing version with the fuel for the boosters clipped inside the ET and have the boosters made up of those white antennas. The downside to this would be the increased mass of the ET and thus a lower TWR after booster separation.

Wow the launcher is tiny! I'm using the 0-10 monoprop engines for the shuttle and rcs ports for orbital engines. It will also need most of the dv from the launcher.

As long as its going over 350 m/s when the boosters separate I think it will be ok with the 0-10s.

*EDIT

man these new cargo bays are big!

[Giggleplex777]

Wow the launcher is tiny! I'm using the 0-10 monoprop engines for the shuttle and rcs ports for orbital engines. It will also need most of the dv from the launcher.

As long as its going over 350 m/s when the boosters separate I think it will be ok with the 0-10s.

*EDIT

man these new cargo bays are big!

Well, in that case, we could use Monoprop tanks in the ET as well as some liquid fuel channeled through fuel lines to the boosters. The booster are still required to last longer than a minute, though, which would require a sizable amount of liquid fuel in the ET.

And I'm just sitting trying to get 0.90 to download.

Edited December 16, 2014 by Giggleplex777

[RocketPilot573]

I will redo my space shuttle at some point. Unfortunately I have started a new save and I don't have any of these new parts unlocked yet... (sandbox mode is boring).

[Majorjim!]

Well, in that case, we could use Monoprop tanks in the ET as well as some liquid fuel channeled through fuel lines to the boosters. The booster are still required to last longer than a minute, though, which would require a sizable amount of liquid fuel in the ET.

And I'm just sitting trying to get 0.90 to download.

Building is so hard now.. I need my editor tools back.

That sounds good Gus, you have more experience with shuttle lifters so I will send you the shuttle.

Let me know if you need to make a change to the shuttle. I would prefer not.

[andrew123]

Building is so hard now.. I need my editor tools back.

That sounds good Gus, you have more experience with shuttle lifters so I will send you the shuttle.

Let me know if you need to make a change to the shuttle. I would prefer not.

Editing is easier for planes.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

I finally made a good Dassault Mirage III replica.

[zekes]

Wow the launcher is tiny! I'm using the 0-10 monoprop engines for the shuttle and rcs ports for orbital engines. It will also need most of the dv from the launcher.

As long as its going over 350 m/s when the boosters separate I think it will be ok with the 0-10s.

*EDIT

man these new cargo bays are big!

*cackles*

(i aplologize for quality, i don't have closeups of the bay yet, i'm going to, as well as revamp it a bit for .90)

[Giggleplex777]

Building is so hard now.. I need my editor tools back.

That sounds good Gus, you have more experience with shuttle lifters so I will send you the shuttle.

Let me know if you need to make a change to the shuttle. I would prefer not.

Hehe

Anyways, I'll see what I can do. Probably won't need to change the shuttle, but the rover wheels may get in the way of the tank. We'll see.

[Majorjim!]

the rover wheels may get in the way of the tank. We'll see.

NOOOOOOOOOOOO.

I've tested it with a ET and clearance is not an issue. The suspension just gives a little. The wheels are part of the charm and make landing really fun!

No changes! *Stamps foot*

[Giggleplex777]

NOOOOOOOOOOOO.

I've tested it with a ET and clearance is not an issue. The suspension just gives a little. The wheels are part of the charm and make landing really fun!

No changes! *Stamps foot*

I'll try my best when I have the time.

[Majorjim!]

I'll try my best when I have the time.

Yeah no rush. Will send the shuttle tomorrow, must sleep.

[andrew123]

Yeah no rush. Will send the shuttle tomorrow, must sleep.

Must cram for english final...

[Rune]

Building is so hard now.. I need my editor tools back.

That sounds good Gus, you have more experience with shuttle lifters so I will send you the shuttle.

Let me know if you need to make a change to the shuttle. I would prefer not.

The only thing I miss is the surface attachment feature. I had to put two cubic struts in there! And sleep, that too. This will have to wait...

Rune. Tomorrow!

Edited December 16, 2014 by Rune

[zekes]

The only thing I miss is the surface attachment feature. And sleep, that too. This will have to wait...

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

Rune. Tomorrow!

that looks really good! Although those engines are 1/4 of what my shuttle puts out

[Majorjim!]

The only thing I miss is the surface attachment feature.[

Yeah that and super symmetry,

night night.

p.s I chose skippers too! Seems the best size. I'm excited to build one! eeep!

[Rune]

that looks really good! Although those engines are 1/4 of what my shuttle puts out

Part of the charm. In my Saturn replica, Skippers take the place of F-1's, so they also fit for SSMEs (kind of). I know, LVT-30s would be an even better scale (1/3rd thrust). Already did that (plus it wouldn't lift MkIII parts because the ET would look stupid) Besides, I think I can nail 20mT to orbit this way. Also, sitting at 74 parts right now. It won't go over 100 with boosters, I think.

Rune. Which will make it usable.

[Majorjim!]

Part of the charm. In my Saturn replica, Skippers take the place of F-1's, so they also fit for SSMEs (kind of). I know, LVT-30s would be an even better scale (1/3rd thrust). Already did that (plus it wouldn't lift MkIII parts because the ET would look stupid) Besides, I think I can nail 20mT to orbit this way. Also, sitting at 74 parts right now. It won't go over 100 with boosters, I think.

Rune. Which will make it usable.

Sorry to keep you up Rune, but why RCS at the rear?

p.s you're in Spain right? your an hour ahead, go to bed man!

[LABHOUSE]

Yeah that and super symmetry,

night night.

p.s I chose skippers too! Seems the best size. I'm excited to build one! eeep!

No kerbodyne engines with skippers or nukes as secondary engines, and make a custom command pod, like zeke did for his shuttle or like my Soyuz/orion capsules.

And he may have put rcs at the rear because real spaceplanes including the shuttle have rcs in the front and back.

Edited December 16, 2014 by LABHOUSE

[zekes]

Part of the charm. In my Saturn replica, Skippers take the place of F-1's, so they also fit for SSMEs (kind of). I know, LVT-30s would be an even better scale (1/3rd thrust). Already did that (plus it wouldn't lift MkIII parts because the ET would look stupid) Besides, I think I can nail 20mT to orbit this way. Also, sitting at 74 parts right now. It won't go over 100 with boosters, I think.

Rune. Which will make it usable.

definitely far more efficient than mine but i built mine with the sole purpose of being the biggest....

anyway I'm going to play some .90 today if i can ever finish with finals/homework

[Giggleplex777]

The only thing I miss is the surface attachment feature. I had to put two cubic struts in there! And sleep, that too. This will have to wait...

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

Rune. Tomorrow!

I'm at as similar stage with my own shuttle. It doesn't take long to build the basic shape now that we have new parts, doesn't it?

[RocketPilot573]

The only unfortunate thing here is that space shuttles can be made with basically cookie cutter parts now. They will all look 95% the same, as the only difficulty is balancing it (so they will not be special anymore).

Edited December 16, 2014 by RocketPilot573

[Rune]

Sorry to keep you up Rune, but why RCS at the rear?

p.s you're in Spain right? your an hour ahead, go to bed man!

Yup, it was late. Anyhow, the RCS thing is because the RL shuttle used bipropellant for the OMS engines just like in the RCS system, and fundamentally different from the main engine fuel. So I have hidden tiny monoprop engines inside the visible, more properly sized OMS-looking engines (which are disabled themselves). You know, realism. Just like I won't put any solar panels or power generating things, and my SRBs will be solid if I can make them so.

I'm at as similar stage with my own shuttle. It doesn't take long to build the basic shape now that we have new parts, doesn't it?

The basic shape is surely easy, I had the fuselage defined with just three parts. The balancing issues are slightly better to handle just because you don't curse at the UI every time you realize you just placed something 5º off after fighting the camera for five minutes. I call that progress! Besides, the basic problem of balancing a very weird stack of things that change TWR in different ways, is still there.

The only unfortunate thing here is that space shuttles can be made with basically cookie cutter parts now. They will all look 95% the same, as the only difficulty is balancing it (so they will not be special anymore).

I refuse to feel bad about more possibilities! Spaceplanes also were going to look all the same with SP+ parts, and look at the SSTO thread this past months, it's been awesome what we have come up with. Besides, I already have something in the works that will end up in the OSCTCA thread I think, not shuttle-realted.

Rune. Sleep is overrated.

[Cranium]

I'm just at a loss for words. I've been at this altitude for several kilometers now, and I'm not gaining any altitude or speed...

Stubbinz may not be able to fly yet. I don't know if it needs more wing, or thrust. Probably thrust, but I can't figure out how to do that without losing the aesthetic quality of this short little craft.

[Rune]

http://puu.sh/dwHpt/5bfa8279cb.png

I'm just at a loss for words. I've been at this altitude for several kilometers now, and I'm not gaining any altitude or speed...

Stubbinz may not be able to fly yet. I don't know if it needs more wing, or thrust. Probably thrust, but I can't figure out how to do that without losing the aesthetic quality of this short little craft.

That fuselage reminds me of a great idea I had yesterday as I was closing KSP all hyped out: New fuselage section for the Eagle shuttle! Same cargo bay dimensions, and it looks a gazillion times better. Plus, it's a fraction of the parts to do it, and it holds more fuel than it used to.

Rune. I still miss some of Ed Tools extensions, though. Plus a decent vertical velocity indicator from KER.

[VR_Dev]

Anyone having trouble loading .25 crafts into .9? Game running slower or bugs maybe. I've had problems in the past and had to rebuild, but I think this ones ok.