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

[Fellow314]

7 hours ago, Spartwo said:

Working on logistics craft again.Liking the mid-range transport. Need to work on a launcher and that nose a bit.

 

I particularly like the engine shroud arrangement

[Spartwo]

Performing well on descent tests. Fuel flow makes it want to go in butt first so airbrakes on the rear are needed.

Still got it down though.

[panzer1b]

Well i just made something (or at least the prototype) that im actually happy with unlike my 3 previous attempts (from back before 1.0).  Its my almost replica level Venator Class Destroyer (not perfectly replicated but close enough it should be ultra obvious what it is supposed to be).

Aside from the fact its bloody huge and super detailed both externally and internally (or as best as i can get at ~1000 parts), i even created a fully decked out custom built interior to the ship using the external command chairs.

Spoiler

From front to back there is the forward cannon battery with control system, then two separate decks, upper and lower (mess hall, rec center, crew quarters, briefing room, stairs up top and 4 observation posts, forward cryo storage, small secondary rec room, and hangar connection down below). 

Spoiler

Then the middle section has a massive fighter hangar which has a walkway above it with overlooking stations and emergency ship control station. 

Spoiler

The rear has engineering, reactor chamber, rear observation deck, and the fuel storage room.  The ship is powered by 8 engines in as close a configuration i could get without making it impossible to control.  Aside from that the hangars are lines with cryo chambers for long term voyages (which double up as exterior lights and places to get a nice external view), 2 more near teh back of the ship accessed externally.

Spoiler

Ontop of the ship are the 4 primary double barreled cannon turrets (that actually shoot but for now dont actually turn since part count would make real turrets just unpractical), and in on top of the hull is the two bridges (which are connected in the back and actually have a ladder connecting the hangar overlook walkway to the upper level on the bridge).  The bridge is actually heavily armored (almost all structural parts) and features my makeshift "cannon-proof" glass which is made by using girders since they block enemy fire and happen to be somewhat transparent.

Its not perfect, its way too high on parts, and it has extremely bad dV, but hey, it looks amazing!

[Talos]

This monster is what's been occupying most of my time in KSP at the moment. It can fly and land perfectly fine, though some minor bugs with flight controls need to be fixed.

Edited August 28, 2016 by Talos
added new image

[EpicSpaceTroll139]

6 hours ago, Talos said:

This monster is what's been occupying most of my time in KSP at the moment. It can fly and land perfectly fine, though some minor bugs with flight controls need to be fixed.

 

What iz that?

It has an... Interesting design

[Seraph]

This ship has 10 docking ports, can transport 24 kerbals, has a science lab, almost 10.4k delta v, aerobrakes for save fuel in interplanetary travels, and is made only with stock parts.

Any feedback is welcome.

[Talos]

12 hours ago, EpicSpaceTroll139 said:

 

What iz that?

It has an... Interesting design

It was going to be a clone of the C-130, then I just kept adding more wings and engines to it. Right now it has no purpose other than to look cool, but it can technically carry cargo.

[Rune]

12 hours ago, Seraph said:

This ship has 10 docking ports, can transport 24 kerbals, has a science lab, almost 10.4k delta v, aerobrakes for save fuel in interplanetary travels, and is made only with stock parts.

Any feedback is welcome.

It is a nice ship, but with that low TWR, be prepared for long burns. That's not a bd thing, but it takes time and planning. Oh, and once you add payload... suffice it to say after a lot of fiddling about with ultra-efficient designs, I've set up a house rule of having at least 0.1 G's at my disposal if I can help it.

 

Rune. Also, pulling things behind you usually works better than pushing them.

[Seraph]

 

16 minutes ago, Rune said:

It is a nice ship, but with that low TWR, be prepared for long burns. That's not a bd thing, but it takes time and planning. Oh, and once you add payload... suffice it to say after a lot of fiddling about with ultra-efficient designs, I've set up a house rule of having at least 0.1 G's at my disposal if I can help it.

 

Rune. Also, pulling things behind you usually works better than pushing them.

Thanks! I`ll try some designs with the engines in the front and test if i can improve the TWR without losing much DV.

[Rune]

30 minutes ago, Seraph said:

 

Thanks! I`ll try some designs with the engines in the front and test if i can improve the TWR without losing much DV.

You're welcome. And, you know, for sciency and math reasons, the "sweet spot" of the rocket equation is a mass ratio of E, or 2.7 something (1.7something kgs of fuel per kg of empty ship). For a 800s Isp, that works out to 7,848m/s (Isp*9.81), so anything beyond that and you are in "diminishing returns" territory.

 

Rune. Then again, there's very few mission plans that require more than 5km/s in the kerbol system.

[Araym]

On 26/8/2016 at 6:53 AM, Mycroft said:

I need help. I’m designing this stock ultra heavily armored personnel carrier, and for some reason, the front wheels refuse to work.

Can somebody please download this and help me figure out the problem with the wheels? https://kerbalx.com/Mycroft_33/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Mk2-TEST Please change only what’s necessary to fix it.

Thank you,

Mycroft, CEO of CMAU

P.S. Whoever solves the problem will get credit in the final product.

KSP 1.1.3 "issue" with wheels, pending (probably) the solution with the upcoming KSP 1.2:
to avoid wheels/craft parts explosion when moving, in previous versions (after KSP turned to Unity 5), if a wheel collider intersect another part's collider, it blocked itself.
(Not a bug, but a "lock" implemented by Squad, in meanwhile the solution will come out with 1.2)

Workaround?
Offset-move the wheels until it cannot cross any part and sometime "other parts" have invisible, bigger colliders than the real models shown visible, so you could find still weird behaviours/locks, even if during building the craft nothing touches any wheel. You need a lot of testing sometime even with simpler crafts untill you find the sweet spot...

[Mycroft]

3 hours ago, Araym said:

KSP 1.1.3 "issue" with wheels, pending (probably) the solution with the upcoming KSP 1.2:
to avoid wheels/craft parts explosion when moving, in previous versions (after KSP turned to Unity 5), if a wheel collider intersect another part's collider, it blocked itself.
(Not a bug, but a "lock" implemented by Squad, in meanwhile the solution will come out with 1.2)

Workaround?
Offset-move the wheels until it cannot cross any part and sometime "other parts" have invisible, bigger colliders than the real models shown visible, so you could find still weird behaviours/locks, even if during building the craft nothing touches any wheel. You need a lot of testing sometime even with simpler crafts untill you find the sweet spot...

Thanks for the help! I have actually found the sweet spot though, and the wheels work fine.

[Fellow314]

I'm not really sure how I ended up here.

It'll make orbit but it's not the prettiest ascent.

 

[Araym]

9 hours ago, Mycroft said:

Thanks for the help! I have actually found the sweet spot though, and the wheels work fine.

My pleasure...

[steedcrugeon]

So having dabbled at stations I'm now trying my hand at a longer range Science vessel the BALDUR-Ex3 (Ex1 is and interstation crew transport vessel currently docked at MIDGARD-1 awaiting modifications as presently it can only just get to Minmus and back, Ex2 is an interstation cargo transport originally planned for shipping Mulch and Supplies between MIDGARD-2 which has no argoponics and MIDGARD-1)

This vessel is planned to take a test mission out to Minmus in the coming months, it's intended pilot is on his way back from Mun presently. It will sport a crew of three, One pilot (command) and Two scientists to man the MPL.

I Was pleased that I managed to get this >100 tonne beast into kerbin orbit wet, it has a drone core so the ship can operate in an unmanned capacity if required. However I was relatively lucky in that I had to keep juggling the fuel around from the USI central storage tanks into the Engine nacelles. Admittedly this will get tedious but its a minor glitch which can be sorted should there be another configuration of the Ex3. With my current limited science I have opted to propel the BALDUR-Ex3 using 4 LV909's I have two skycrane engines (configured upside-down in fore-and aft positions) to provide me with retrograde thrust so that I don't have to re-orientate the vessel.

My question is was it a good choice to use the LV909's ideally I was thinking the aerospike would have been better but I have yet to unlock it. Thoughts and feedback greatly encouraged.

[Araym]

Rougly, after the nuclear engine (the best ISP for vacuum), for "capital ships" not meant to return on Kerbin, if not after "a long stay" in space, the "second best" engine ISP wise is just the LV-909 (in proportion of fuel load/dV).

Mainly difference is "the style" about your ship: if you plan to need less than 5-6000 m/s Dv, a group of LV909s have a better TWR (it means very shorter burn by an evident margin) in comparison to the LV-N, even with a slight loss of Dv (without the heavy mass that a nuclear LV-N comes, in balance, so for lower Dv it a detrimental factor: 2-2.5 tons more of dead weight) ...

For any above 5-6000 m/s Dv, it comes the great use of LV-N or an "Hybrid", with main nuclear propulsion, but some LV909 to use sometime, to shorten "critical burns" (example: you could wait 10-20-30 minutes burn, outbound from a planet SOI in an interplanetary travel to another planet, on LV-N only; but maybe you cannot wait that time in a capture burn, arriving, so you add some raw power from the LV-909)
A nuclear ship need also different fuel: only "liquid fuel", so you can just add a specific quantity of "oxidizer" for critical moments, shaving off it for the most time when you do not needed it (on a ship programmed to have to store a lot of Dv, where the mass of an LV-N vanish in the more fuel mass carrier, you can have more "actively used mass x second" - rougly doubled than a tipical LF+Ox ship-)

With LV-N you should also add more dead weight: thermal panels, to lower nuclear engine's temperature when used, so they are generally viable only to really big ships.

Yours is not "very small" considering the effort to take off from Kerbin like a rocket, but once in space, judging it a ~100 tons, it falls still under the "medium-small" of interplanetary vessel. I saw things that were build in space, by docking, that had modules on the 100 tons range but DRY, that needed then, after assembly, multiple (x10 or more times) of the same mass as "fuel", sent to them by "tanker" rockets.

LV-909 should be still in its good spot, for your creation.

[steedcrugeon]

@Araym Thanks for your response, its clear and concise and puts me at rest tat BALDUR-Ex3 is capable of undertaking its first mission 

[Araym]

9 hours ago, steedcrugeon said:

@Araym Thanks for your response, its clear and concise and puts me at rest tat BALDUR-Ex3 is capable of undertaking its first mission 

For better figures, more thecnical, a couple of posts before yours, there is Rune's ones, discussing the same matter for another design based only on LV-N, with far more detailed numbers.

Mix in both considerations.
There is not an "ideal configuration", aside from those specific for "a specific mission":

• where are you going?
• how many Dv i need?
• how much time I have to do the most critical burn? (Example: if you go to Moho, you should add, aside the raw Dv number, the need of a fast capture burn - the most critical one - because the small SOI of the planet and generally an higher differential of speed to compensate... if you go to Duna, Jool or Eve, you are more worried about total Dv to reach them and return, rather than a fast capture one, as you can use aerobraking...)
• how much dead weight i need to bring with me? (Monolithic ship, or tankage that could be left -jettisoned- once spent? How much fuel needed? Additional equipment needed - thermal panel for LV-N, or the same weight in simple LF+Ox for chemical rocket -? Any Life Support mod or simply stock behaviour?)
• Specific related scenario (take off from Eve? Aerospike shines... landing-taking off from Tylo? High TWR for powered descent and take off...)

Until you have not some problem related to "game physics" (... a far too big ship for your pc to handle, or structural problems to keep ot together during launch from Kerbin) as soon you fulfill the Dv needed, any engine that bring your kerbals where you like to go is good.

Sometime, after all the thecnical numbers, we make also some choices based on pure, simple, designs: a Skoda is a "car"... a Ferrari is a "car"... both have the same, basic, priciples on their functions: an engine, 4 wheels, brakes, gears, etc etc... you can drive both with the same license... obviously, design-wise, and in prestations-costs, they are "a lot" different, and gives to any driver very, distinctive, different "sensations"

Edited September 1, 2016 by Araym

[Dreadthrone]

So many awesome designs in this thread  I particularly love ScriptKitt3h's shuttle, that thing looks epic!

 

Anywatys, I am nearly finished building a large and heavily modded interplanetary spacecraft after the failure of my last one (Darn Mechjeb apparently has no idea how to use Orion engines ), just need to give it landers, a bit more fuel and pick a destination at this point. If all goes as planned it should be capable of constructing smaller ships with the Extra planetary launchpad mod.

Edited September 1, 2016 by Dreadthrone

[Castille7]

SSTO Energy Source Update

Mission Complete

Energy Source is probably my greatest achievement in KSP, It is also the most difficult craft for reentry that I have designed. The wings were overheating and were fixed with Radiators, the Vector Engines were giving lots of trouble on reentry because of their weight. I reduced the Engines from 12 to 8 and the Rapiers were swapped with them going from 8 to 12. I also added FL-R1 RCS Fuel Tanks in the Cargo Bays to act as a counterbalance for the weight of the Vectors. During reentry the craft was twisting, this twisting was caused by the remaining fuel in the rear of the craft, this was fixed by a fuel transfer during reentry to the forward fuel tank nearest the cockpit. With all these changes, many flight test and design tweaks I have made a successful landing with minor damage.

 

Edited September 2, 2016 by Castille7

[Talos]

Making a hypersonic unmanned flyer. I solved the stability issue during reentry by separating the nose and probe core from the main body and have it glide down to the water before deploying drag chutes.

[Majorjim!]

I finished my Atlas V - Centaur upper - MSL - Curiosity rover.

 Alas I have to wait for the 1.2 wheel fixes as the rover wheels explode when the payload fairing releases.. So I have been looking at some older craft to update. I need to fix the door hinge on my Duna Direct craft and a few other bits and bobs. Also, after 1.2 I can finally finish off my Kod damn constellation craft...

 All the time with the Atlas V however has allowed me to add a lot of awesome detail to it, right down the to cages around the high pressure helium tanks below the centaurs aft bulkhead. The rocket also has ZERO SAS torque, offset boosters and is controlled by gimbaling motors only, just like the real one!

Edited September 2, 2016 by Majorjim!

[ScriptKitt3h]

Think I might have another fighter jet pack on my hands soon...

All are fairly simple in terms of overall design complexity, but still feature good agility, decent speed (without engine clipping, as some in the past have disliked it when I've done that), and custom cockpits for style and ejector seat capability.

[Castille7]

Suspension Bridge With Mobile Lift Project

The video has some behind the scenes footage. I am still working on the Mobile Lift, steering is not working well at the moment along with a few other fixes needed.

 

Edited September 3, 2016 by Castille7

[Columbia]

Made a V-1 with the rail. A test flight got it to 12,000m. Pff, it's a Silbervogel.