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

[qzgy]

6 hours ago, Frozen_Heart said:

Really need to learn how to build good bearings.

If you haven't already, I'd recommend getting the mod Collide-o-scope. Might help with getting your bearings in better order.

Dunno if it works in or is compatible with past 1.3 versions though......

https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/149706-13-collide-o-scope-v116/&

 

Looking good though.

[Frozen_Heart]

8 hours ago, qzgy said:

If you haven't already, I'd recommend getting the mod Collide-o-scope. Might help with getting your bearings in better order.

Dunno if it works in or is compatible with past 1.3 versions though......

https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/149706-13-collide-o-scope-v116/&

 

Looking good though.

How does that mod work? Does it simply show the parts colliders?

 

If so that could be very useful.

[linuxgurugamer]

13 minutes ago, Frozen_Heart said:

How does that mod work? Does it simply show the parts colliders?

 

If so that could be very useful.

Download it from here, it IS a 1.5 version:  https://github.com/DefiantZombie/Collide-o-Scope/releases/tag/1.2.1

[qzgy]

1 hour ago, Frozen_Heart said:

How does that mod work? Does it simply show the parts colliders?

 

If so that could be very useful.

Yup, does exactly that. 

[Frozen_Heart]

Armed with a newfound knowledge of colliders i'm progressing my research further:

 

 

[sturmhauke]

I'm not sure, but I think that big spinny bit wasn't supposed to spin away from the main not-spinny bit.

[Klapaucius]

On 10/27/2018 at 5:50 AM, Frozen_Heart said:

I've realised I've never seen an autogyro in KSP, so decided to see if it's possible.

I was wondering that myself (though I don't understand bearings at all). Glad to see it is being done!  Very cool.

Edited October 28, 2018 by Klapaucius

[sturmhauke]

28 minutes ago, Klapaucius said:

I don't understand bearings at all

You have to do some voodoo with round(ish) collision boxes and make sacrifices to the Kraken.

[prgmTrouble]

36 minutes ago, sturmhauke said:

You have to do some voodoo with round(ish) collision boxes and make sacrifices to the Kraken.

I'm almost certain there's also a limit to how fast you can spin the blade, which is due to how (I think) frame-by frame physics works. Essentially, if an object is going too fast (e.g. the spinning object bounces off a thermometer and gets a lot of linear speed) , the object may "teleport" through another object because the collision would happen between two frames. I usually add a second layer outside the first which would bounce the bearing back in, which seems to increase the reliability of my rotors significantly. That's my two cents, anyway.

[HB Stratos]

@prgmTrouble Theres a limit to the rotational velocety in ksp. I think its at 36 rad/s

[prgmTrouble]

36 minutes ago, HB Stratos said:

@prgmTrouble Theres a limit to the rotational velocety in ksp. I think its at 36 rad/s

In my experience, the parts will generally behave like kraken bait at these speeds, so I'd emphasize torque and blade angle over speed when high lift is necessary. 

[Frozen_Heart]

2 hours ago, sturmhauke said:

You have to do some voodoo with round(ish) collision boxes and make sacrifices to the Kraken.

Nah I tamed the Kraken a while ago. Rode it to Eeloo and back as a mount.

[Frozen_Heart]

I think it's approaching release ready. It's controllable, it looks good, AND it doesn't explode randomly.

 

[HB Stratos]

What changed from the earlier version to this one?

 

[Frozen_Heart]

29 minutes ago, HB Stratos said:

What changed from the earlier version to this one?

 

Went through working out which parts behaved best in a bearing. Cubic struts worked well for the top part, but annoyingly the flat plates from MH were the only bit that could deal with the stress on the lower end of the rotor. Want to find a non dlc part for it.

[prgmTrouble]

9 hours ago, Frozen_Heart said:

Went through working out which parts behaved best in a bearing. Cubic struts worked well for the top part, but annoyingly the flat plates from MH were the only bit that could deal with the stress on the lower end of the rotor. Want to find a non dlc part for it.

Try adding another layer vertically. Adding more parts could split the stress between each layer. I usually use thermometers instead of cubic struts, which can easily be stacked without taking up too much space.

[Frozen_Heart]

1 hour ago, prgmTrouble said:

Try adding another layer vertically. Adding more parts could split the stress between each layer. I usually use thermometers instead of cubic struts, which can easily be stacked without taking up too much space.

I found the thermometers just weren't working. The cubic struts were what i found worked best after that.

[Columbia]

On 9/17/2018 at 3:37 PM, Gman_builder said:

@Columbia May I borrow(steal) your engines and put them on my 777?

 

 

I'll see, I'm still trying to iron it out and the engines are one of the more troublesome components of the craft. Yours looks good!

And on the topic of airliners, i've been trying to redo a replica of the famous Aerospatiale-BAC Concorde. Unfortunately though, it's not going so well..

 

 

Here it is. And before you ask, unfortunately the nose can't change positions like the real Concorde does.. or frankly do anything good that the real Concorde does.

The maximum speed i've been able to reach with it is 306 m/s so far and anything faster than that makes the plane break apart. Somehow, it's fragile despite the relatively simple structure. I would have gone for a fairing-based structure initially but that was even more prone to breaking apart than the usual Mk3 fuselage's layout.

Picture dump!

Only thing it has going for it, really, is its maneuverability and ease of control. I'm still gonna try to find ways to make it more structurally stable, and then I can focus on making it fly faster..

[Kronus_Aerospace]

WOO BOI, do I have something to report on today, for the past month or so I have been working on my first non-replica large scale project in the past year. This magnificent monstrosity is a full stock flying VTOL Aircraft Carrier!

The craft is much less complete than it might seem, as the entire ventral section is unfinished. For scale , the two fairings underneath of the carrier are max-sized (12 meter) 3.75 meter fairings

This craft sets many personal and all-time records. Once complete it will be the largest craft I have ever built, likely the highest part count, the largest stock VTOL craft, and the Largest stock carrier (that I know of)

The craft measures 185 meters in length, 35 meters high, 52 meters wide, and coming in at more than 4300 tonnes, absolutely dwarfing my Boeing Pelican replica.

The craft currently includes 2 runways, a hanger bay, a helipad, and forward engines. The features yet to be added are finished cargo bay fairings + mechanisms, an elevated cockpit, a ventral micro-fighter bay, VTOL engines and sub-sequentially the Mother Of All Bearings (MOAB).

Despite the presence of the forward engines I intend for the craft to have rotating VTOL engines to give it additional speed.

All of the jets that this carrier will utilize have already been built (most of which not by me) with the exception of a VTOL craft (hence the Helipad).

As a final note the craft (somehow) only contains about 2200 parts currently, which means I'll definitely be able to keep the final part count under 4000, which I realize sounds absurd.

 

On less serious matters I have been working on my latest attempt at a large scale fighter, this time going for a more Su-57 vibe, as despite my love for Sukhois I'm still not very good at them.

While certainly smaller than my other project, it's still quite a beast at 43 meters in length and already 200 parts.

Despite being a side project this thing is turning out to be very difficult to build, as the geometry involved is a nightmare to resolve with the limitations of stock parts.

It's definitely worth it though, as what IS currently complete looks pretty dang sexy!

Edited October 31, 2018 by Kronus_Aerospace

[sturmhauke]

That's not an aircraft carrier, that's a prototype Battlestar.

[Kronus_Aerospace]

1 hour ago, sturmhauke said:

That's not an aircraft carrier, that's a prototype Battlestar.

Haha, well considering the concept OF COURSE I had to make it look like a scif-fi space ship.

Edited October 31, 2018 by Kronus_Aerospace

[Frozen_Heart]

Just looking at those screenshots kills my framerate.

 

They look great though!

[qzgy]

On 10/31/2018 at 12:30 AM, Kronus_Aerospace said:

This magnificent monstronsity is a full stock flying VTOL Aircraft Carrier!

Can't wait to see it actually fly. That's gonna be impressive seeing it actually VTOL. What's the part count like? I imagine quite high....

[Kronus_Aerospace]

11 hours ago, qzgy said:

Can't wait to see it actually fly. That's gonna be impressive seeing it actually VTOL. What's the part count like? I imagine quite high....

Currently 2200, which is less than the Pelican even though this thing is nearly twice the Pelican's size. Final part count will almost certainly be over 3000 though.

I'm honestly not concerned with the VTOL aspect, the Pelican's engines set to maximum stationary thrust would actually have given it over 1 TWR, granted this thing is over twice the mass, but this time I'll be using jet's instead of Turboprops, so it shouldn't be too much of a challenge.

Edited November 1, 2018 by Kronus_Aerospace

[Servo]

This Lockheed Electra Model 10 is the product of a spur-of-the-moment collaboration between KerbalX's PhantomAerospace (https://kerbalx.com/PhantomAerospace) and myself. He built a fine prop for this craft, plus helped with the finer details/tuning. It's not 100% done, as a lot of tuning has to be done (especially to keep the engines from failing). Props are a new experience for me, so I'll admit that seeing this thing take off at a blistering 22m/s was really something else. Props (hehe) to those of you who do this stuff regularly.

Gardner Island, Southwest Pacific Ocean, 1937 (Colorized)

And naturally, since the release of the MS-10 video, I've been wanting to try and make a proper Korolev cross myself - and that means proper. No sepatrons or ejection force for me. Still in construction, but I'm pretty sure the theory behind it is sound. 

What's required to make this work:

Step 1: Lock prograde hold on the booster, shortly before booster cutoff. There are probe cores in each of the boosters to enable the rest of this, angled outward (away from true vertical). 

Step 2: Fire AG 1 shortly after booster burnout / as it is about to burnout. This enables crossfeed to give the booster engines a half-second more thrust. This also decouples the boosters and enables the "oxygen dump valve" (Puff) engine, but doesn't activate it. The boosters will begin to hinge upwards on the joints.

Step 3: As the boosters rotate upward, use AG 2 to decouple to hinges from the core stage itself. The SAS/RCS on the boosters should kick in to cancel the rotation, and form the Korolev Cross for realsies.

 

Forseeable issues: I may have to resort to simply activating the Oxygen dump valve with AG 1 after all, as the prograde hold/ RCS activation likely won't hold across staging.