Why are shuttles hard for people?

[El wonso]

Does it have cargo capabilities?

plus post screenshots pls

[fastbikkel]

I mean I built a fully working shuttle in like two days!! And it was easy!!

1rst. Build replica, use thrust limiter on the booster engine to make it have balanced thrust

2 slowly add necessary parts like RCS docking port, etc.

Test it and land it at the runway each time, congrats, you have a working shuttle.

And landing at the runway was easy even the first time for me, even though I was nervous.

I had the same thing with docking after the first two times, now I can dock easily too!

Don't know wether this is a showoff, or a real attempt at making a decent chat.

[Brapness]

I mean I built a fully working shuttle in like two days!! And it was easy!!

1rst. Build replica, use thrust limiter on the booster engine to make it have balanced thrust

2 slowly add necessary parts like RCS docking port, etc.

Test it and land it at the runway each time, congrats, you have a working shuttle.

And landing at the runway was easy even the first time for me, even though I was nervous.

I had the same thing with docking after the first two times, now I can dock easily too!

Exactly how much time is 'two days'? Designing my shuttle probably took 6 or 7 hours from initial design to completion, spread out over a week or two (I was busy in the real world). In those two days how long did you actually spend designing, because if it's 1 hour I'm impressed, if it's 48 congratulations but it's not really something to brag about.

[xzxvrx]

Why are shuttles hard?

[panzerknoef]

Why are shuttles hard?

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

http://i.imgur.com/Lc90f8w.png

This looks A LOT like the famous EJ kerbalkon crash, you don't happen to be him perhaps???

[Xetalim]

Back in .22, there were no tweakables, you had to change the direction of the engines for it to work.

[Deadpangod3]

Why do you have to complain and be condescending about how good other people are compared to you?

You could have been much more constructive by saying "What is the hardest part about building a shuttle?", instead of "Why are people so bad at this game?"

Shuttle's aren't that practical either, considering there aren't any stock storage bays or crazy gimballing engines. Not to mention that adjusting for the constantly shifting mass isn't as easy as you make it out to be.

I did not mean that, I am not that good at ksp either, I wasn't complaining, and my rockets not stock either,

[Wahgineer]

every vehicle has its advantages and disadvantages:

Rockets: simple, yet expensive (when money is implemented)

Shuttles: more complicated than rockets, but more reusable (therefore cheaper to an extent) and use similar ascent patterns.

SSTO space planes: While the most reusable, they are the most expensive, hardest to design, have the smallest payload capacity, and require a totally different kind of ascent path.

Also, in ksp at least, the shuttle design is the safest: Since the shuttle is on the side, the boosters have a harder time of hitting it if they break off, and the shuttle's engines (if "wired" correctly) can shut off the instant it breaks free of the tank. The shuttle can then glide to back down to land.

[I_Killed_Jeb]

I did not mean that, I am not that good at ksp either, I wasn't complaining, and my rockets not stock either,

sure didn't seem like this was your opinion of yourself... are you going to show us what your shuttle looks like?

[Deadpangod3]

sure didn't seem like this was your opinion of yourself... are you going to show us what your shuttle looks like?

Sure, as soon as I get home from school

[Dedjal]

compensate for the asymetrical thrust by adding a shuttle on the other side aswell, tada.

Haha.

But yes. Designing a shuttle in .22 was a bit more difficult than .23.

And OP said that it wasn't stock, so...

Tada! I "made" a shuttle in less than 5 minutes!

All I had to do was to download the soviet pack

[SkyHook]

every vehicle has its advantages and disadvantages:

Rockets: simple, yet expensive (when money is implemented)

Shuttles: more complicated than rockets, but more reusable (therefore cheaper to an extent) and use similar ascent patterns.

SSTO space planes: While the most reusable, they are the most expensive, hardest to design, have the smallest payload capacity, and require a totally different kind of ascent path.

Also, in ksp at least, the shuttle design is the safest: Since the shuttle is on the side, the boosters have a harder time of hitting it if they break off, and the shuttle's engines (if "wired" correctly) can shut off the instant it breaks free of the tank. The shuttle can then glide to back down to land.

Well a shuttle design is BY FAR NOT the safest. The safest lift system is a normal rocket. It has an escape system that can be aborted at any time, and the occupants don't have to worry about damage to the vehicle itself if the rocket decides to self destruct. Downmassing cargo is a good advantage though.

[Deadpangod3]

compensate for the asymetrical thrust by adding a shuttle on the other side aswell, tada.

Haha.

But yes. Designing a shuttle in .22 was a bit more difficult than .23.

And OP said that it wasn't stock, so...

Tada! I "made" a shuttle in less than 5 minutes!

All I had to do was to download the soviet pack

I don't have the soviet pack,

The only mods it has are the orange tanks from a shuttle mod I can't remember the name of (it only gives the orange thing and some angled engines, I only used the tank) the Thor boosters I think from kw, an engine also from kw, decouplers, nose cone, a fuel tank from aeis for the plane, and a radial mechjeb that does do the auto land right.

[Jouni]

every vehicle has its advantages and disadvantages:

Rockets: simple, yet expensive (when money is implemented)

Shuttles: more complicated than rockets, but more reusable (therefore cheaper to an extent) and use similar ascent patterns.

SSTO space planes: While the most reusable, they are the most expensive, hardest to design, have the smallest payload capacity, and require a totally different kind of ascent path.

You forgot vertical SSTOs, which tend to be simple, efficient, and scalable. They take off vertically, but otherwise they ascend just like spaceplanes. Because they have no wings, they are as easy to balance as rockets. And because jet engines use almost no fuel, they can have quite high payload fractions.

This is my crew shuttle that I have been using for a while. It can carry three kerbals to LKO, and after refueling also to the orbit of Mun or Minmus.

Today I built an experimental SSTO lifter by changing a few parts. In the first flight test, it got 4.6 tonnes to a 123x120 km orbit (payload fraction almost 29%), with about 200 m/s of delta-v remaining. It can probably exceed payload fraction 30% as it currently is, and reach even higher numbers, if you are willing to use more intakes.

The basic design should scale up just by adding more engines and more fuel.

[I_Killed_Jeb]

FYI Jouni if you flip those cubic struts 180 degrees you can mount your engines flush to the tank, unless you're in to the stand-off aesthetics of your current design

[thereaverofdarkness]

I was unable to make a shuttle. But that was back before tweakables.

[The Destroyer]

I did it with infernal robotics. A mix of Energia and NASA style. It worked. Barley.

With tweakables, I'm sure it's easy. You can just monitor the way the ASAS is responding, then use thrust limiter to change "Gimbal"

[Torham234]

I mean I built a fully working shuttle in like two days!! And it was easy!!

Pray tell, which part from stock did you use for the cargo bay?

Edit: Oh and I agree, SSTO's are very doable. Even before the era of SABRE engines.

Here is one I made earlier (version 0.18). That thing in the front is the payload satellite, ready to be decoupled...

Edited February 11, 2014 by Torham234

[Deadpangod3]

Pray tell, which part from stock did you use for the cargo bay?

i havnt tried cargo bays yet, so far its more of a launch, dock with station, do whatever, and return

also, pics:

during launch, decoupling the boosters, after which you need to quickly adjust the thrust limmiter on the orange tank engine to balance it again, and slowly lower it as it gets higher and fuel is pumped into the plane

docking to the station

during reentry by mechjeb :/

a side picture

gliding to the runway

landed

[theend3r]

snip

Strap a jet engine on that and you won't even need those boosters.

[Torham234]

That's.... a lot of fuel...

This gets the probe all the way to the Eve surface...

As theend3r said, use some air breathers and you can easily ditch both the boosters and the orange tank.

[Wahgineer]

Well a shuttle design is BY FAR NOT the safest. The safest lift system is a normal rocket. It has an escape system that can be aborted at any time, and the occupants don't have to worry about damage to the vehicle itself if the rocket decides to self destruct. Downmassing cargo is a good advantage though.

I meant by KSP standards. Since a we don't have to worry about part damage, knocking the tank slightly on separation isn't a problem. Also, since the shuttle is on the side, it doesn't have to worry about the stack rising up and hitting it.

It can then use the OMS to boost away and glide down to safety.

[I_Killed_Jeb]

Didn't really build a shuttle there pal...

[xenomorph555]

I have made a few shuttles before, however they were all on the top of the rocket, every time I tried to strap them to the side they just tips over

[boxman]

Try building a complete stock shuttle with a bay and working bay doors. Then tell me it is easy and quick ;P