Why are shuttles hard for people?

[Hodo]

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!

Wow, and I thought I was a bit full of myself. Thank you for making me feel like a saint.

Honestly I tried shuttles when I first started, and then I realized they were pointless. So I made SSTO space planes and never looked back.

And to repeat what Maccollo said, "Not everyone is good at this game."

[Vanamonde]

Okay, okay. Everybody's expressed him/herself on the subject of other's attitudes. Before this gets nasty, let's turn the discussion to the shuttles themselves, please.

[antiquark]

Actually the imbalance problem is easy to "solve"... just use two symmetrical tanks, on the top and bottom of the shuttle.

That being said, I've never got a really good shuttle working, for a variety of different reasons, in no particular order:

- If you want your shuttle to have any decent cargo capacity (say one X200-32 fuel tank), you need huge engines and huge tanks. In fact, maybe "immense" would be a better word. Because you also need all that extra stuff like landing gear, cockpits, OMS engines, which adds weight.

- On a related note, the stock tanks and solids are puny for a full-blown shuttle. You end up trying to piece together six orange tanks, and twelve solids, with like 200 struts to keep the thing from wobbling into oblivion on takeoff.

- Cargo is still a work in progress in KSP. You can mount cargo axially if you only want to get into orbit, but if you want to bring something from orbit back to the ground, you need a docking port at the top of your cargo bay, so the cargo hangs down from it. Otherwise, your cargo will be flopping around below the vehicle (through the fuselage) and smash into the runway when you try to land.

- There is no wind-tunnel at KSC! Due to the various characteristics of the shuttle, aerodynamics are a pain to get right. But you can't really go through test runs, you have to get the vehicle on the runway, get it into the air (either with some jet powered contraption, or hacking gravity) then try to land the thing. It takes a lot of time and crashes a lot of vehicles!

- Maybe I'm imagining things, but the default aerodynamics with KSP aren't kind to huge heavy vehicles. You can't really build up enough speed on your initial glideslope to have a good "flare" at the end to land softly on the runway. Sort of rules out stock shuttles, you have to use Ferram Aerospace for usable shuttles.

So in short, people don't build shuttles, because it ain't easy!

[xzxvrx]

Remember: just about anything is possible in KSP

[Torham234]

- There is no wind-tunnel at KSC! Due to the various characteristics of the shuttle, aerodynamics are a pain to get right. But you can't really go through test runs, you have to get the vehicle on the runway, get it into the air (either with some jet powered contraption, or hacking gravity) then try to land the thing. It takes a lot of time and crashes a lot of vehicles!

- Maybe I'm imagining things, but the default aerodynamics with KSP aren't kind to huge heavy vehicles. You can't really build up enough speed on your initial glideslope to have a good "flare" at the end to land softly on the runway. Sort of rules out stock shuttles, you have to use Ferram Aerospace for usable shuttles.

So in short, people don't build shuttles, because it ain't easy!

Yes, if you are into space planes and planes in general , FAR is by far the best mod for you. More accurately calculated aerodynamics mean you can use fewer wing surfaces, making for more efficient, sleeker design. Also, you can run simulations directly in the hangar while building the plane. This is usually enough (at least for me) to nail down your aerodynamics on the first try, and than just iron out any quirks in just a few test flights.

I personally have resigned to using the B9 cargo bays for now. I have only installed those parts (as installing the whole B9 makes KSP unplayably slow). Here is one of my newest designs. Using the smallest cargo bay, it is capable of placing a full 1 ton of payload into 100 km orbit. You can see I was testing it on two 0.5 ton RCS tanks.

Happy building!

[The Destroyer]

Shuttles people talk about aren't the ones you built. That's a plane strapped to a rocket capable of lifting large space station modules!

[katateochi]

Actually the imbalance problem is easy to "solve"... just use two symmetrical tanks, on the top and bottom of the shuttle.

That being said, I've never got a really good shuttle working, for a variety of different reasons, in no particular order:

- If you want your shuttle to have any decent cargo capacity (say one X200-32 fuel tank), you need huge engines and huge tanks. In fact, maybe "immense" would be a better word. Because you also need all that extra stuff like landing gear, cockpits, OMS engines, which adds weight.

- On a related note, the stock tanks and solids are puny for a full-blown shuttle. You end up trying to piece together six orange tanks, and twelve solids, with like 200 struts to keep the thing from wobbling into oblivion on takeoff.

I agree, the stock SRB's are really not up to task if you start with a 3 man pod and try to build a shuttle that looks about the right size. I used KW boosters on my smaller shuttle and the larger NovaP ones on my larger one.

- Cargo is still a work in progress in KSP. You can mount cargo axially if you only want to get into orbit, but if you want to bring something from orbit back to the ground, you need a docking port at the top of your cargo bay, so the cargo hangs down from it. Otherwise, your cargo will be flopping around below the vehicle (through the fuselage) and smash into the runway when you try to land.

I consider that to just be a flaw in the game that needs patching with mods. I used to use quantum struts to get round this kinda issue, I still do, but now I favour the EVA attached KAS struts as they are a bit more realistic and way less prone to quantum anomalies! It does at least enable you to secure cargo you collect in orbit for landing.

- There is no wind-tunnel at KSC! Due to the various characteristics of the shuttle, aerodynamics are a pain to get right. But you can't really go through test runs, you have to get the vehicle on the runway, get it into the air (either with some jet powered contraption, or hacking gravity) then try to land the thing. It takes a lot of time and crashes a lot of vehicles!

I wish there was some kind of simulation system at KSC, a wind tunnel or "computer simulation" would be epic. I used hyper-edit as my "simulation environment" when building my shuttles. I first got them looking like I wanted, then used HE to put them in orbit with almost no fuel and tested that they could de-orbit and land. Then I set about working on the launch system.

- Maybe I'm imagining things, but the default aerodynamics with KSP aren't kind to huge heavy vehicles. You can't really build up enough speed on your initial glideslope to have a good "flare" at the end to land softly on the runway. Sort of rules out stock shuttles, you have to use Ferram Aerospace for usable shuttles.

I was kinda disappointed in the approach speeds of my shuttles. I'd been using SSTO's a lot previously and always approached the runway with the jet engines powered up. With the shuttle I wanted to be realistic and glide in, I made it, but only just. I touched down at about 30m/s which was horribly slow! Certainly no need to perform banking maneuvers to bleed off excess speed like the real shuttles do!

So in short, people don't build shuttles, because it ain't easy!

the krazy ones do

Remember: just about anything is possible in KSP

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

That cargo bay looks awesome! Can you post a few pics showing it going from open to closed (or the otherway round!)

Edited February 12, 2014 by katateochi

[xzxvrx]

That cargo bay looks awesome! Can you post a few pics showing it going from open to closed (or the otherway round!)

I have my thread dedicated to the construction of it here: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/62909-Kerbal-Transportation-System-%28Space-shuttle%29-Construction

Building is going quite slow though, I can only work on it during the weekends.

[Kerbart]

There's a lot of discussion on what constitutes a "shuttle." Thanks to the Nasa program everyone seems to think it's a vehicle that has wings, but really, Jouni nailed it: any craft made to "shuttle" back an forth between orbit and surface, or between two celestial bodies, or satellites is technically speaking a shuttle.

Especially since you don't really need wings in KSP to facilitate re-entry for large craft. Don't let that stop you from making one just for the challenge of it, of course!

[panzerknoef]

Even if it has wing, people think a shuttle should have the assymetrical NASA build, while a waaaaaay simpler symetric build removes 85% of problems that people have trying to build a shuttle.

[Torham234]

There's a lot of discussion on what constitutes a "shuttle." Thanks to the Nasa program everyone seems to think it's a vehicle that has wings, but really, Jouni nailed it: any craft made to "shuttle" back an forth between orbit and surface, or between two celestial bodies, or satellites is technically speaking a shuttle.

Especially since you don't really need wings in KSP to facilitate re-entry for large craft. Don't let that stop you from making one just for the challenge of it, of course!

You learn something new every day.

[mellojoe]

Also? We didn't have thrust limiting until just recently. Try building your craft without thrust limiting and you'll see the challenges people had with it.

And the real shuttle didn't use engines on the orange tank. Which, if you try to add that bit of realism in, makes building shuttles even more difficult. Give it a shot, and then report your results. You'll see why us old-timers think building shuttles was very hard.

[Wahgineer]

Building a NASA style shuttle is only hard for stock purists.

For those of us who use mods like Ditobi's shuttle engine mod, B9, and P-wing, shuttles get much easier and much more practical.

[vetrox]

I was almost impressed upto the point u used all the mods. Dont get me wrong a shuttle is hard. But when u use modded "easy mode" parts its less impressive. Still a great achievment though

Personally I made a cargoless shuttle design with only stock parts. It wasnt a complete nasa copy but it used the mk3 parts for that added shuttle-ness. Didnt use srbs. Just an orange tank and 2 skippers, (might have been mainsails).

I find the hardest part is actually making the shuttle flyable. Its not a case of building in sph then dropping it into vab...unless it is and I'm missing something.

I will make another one when im home to show u its do able but its less than practical and its a pain to fly. But it was still fun to deaign

[Cakeofruit]

this is one of my 3 shuttles for cargo (2,55t // 5,73t // 7t)

http://imgur.com/a/5vUm2#5

I only used kw rocketry and B9 parts, that was hard to built at first but there is a lot of thing u can change to balance the trust.

I use multiple booster on a metal part that you can tweak to have the good speed during the ascent and avoid a hard end of the booster that make you pich.

You also can move the booster along the fiel tank.

I'm a little bad at building plane so they are not very good gliders.

Edited February 13, 2014 by Cakeofruit

[xrayfishx]

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

also, pics:

http://i.imgur.com/l8fxIFU.png

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

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

docking to the station

http://i.imgur.com/0mch9dR.png

during reentry by mechjeb :/

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

a side picture

http://i.imgur.com/33736ke.png

gliding to the runway

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

landed

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

Except, as someone pointed out, this isn't a proper shuttle. If you look REALLY carefully, you will notice that the real shuttles don't have an engine under the big orange fuel tank. With that engine it is easy to balance, but it also loses its point.

Also, that's not how you re-enter with a shuttle. The real shuttles enter the atmosphere at a 40 degree angle.

What you built is not a shuttle, it's an asymmetrical rocket with wings.

Edited February 13, 2014 by xrayfishx

[Deadpangod3]

Except, as someone pointed out, this isn't a proper shuttle. If you look REALLY carefully, you will notice that the real shuttles don't have an engine under the big orange fuel tank. With that engine it is easy to balance, but it also loses its point.

Also, that's not how you re-enter with a shuttle. The real shuttles enter the atmosphere at a 40 degree angle.

What you built is not a shuttle, it's an asymmetrical rocket with wings.

Ah, I never noticed the space shuttle didn't have engines there, but I said it was a REPLICA! It doesn't have to be perfect to qualify as a replica, and the reentry was Courtesy of mechjebs spaceplane guidance, and its auto land does that, so I've gone to doing it all my self, if you want, I'll get you a bigger shuttle with less mod parts

[TimePeriod]

I still haven't built a shuttle, with +500 hours on the steam KSP version. I just don't deem the trouble of putting it together and operating it to outwieght the benefits.

[Torham234]

I still haven't built a shuttle, with +500 hours on the steam KSP version. I just don't deem the trouble of putting it together and operating it to outwieght the benefits.

Maybe not yet. But from the very start, I am expecting that KSP will in the end feature funds and budgets. Reusable delivery vehicles (be it spaceplanes, shuttles or reusable rocket stages) will be more efficient than fire and forget 1 use lifters. Of course its mostly just an individual gameplay preference.

[kaphraxus]

Yes, if you are into space planes and planes in general , FAR is by far the best mod for you. More accurately calculated aerodynamics mean you can use fewer wing surfaces, making for more efficient, sleeker design. Also, you can run simulations directly in the hangar while building the plane. This is usually enough (at least for me) to nail down your aerodynamics on the first try, and than just iron out any quirks in just a few test flights.

I personally have resigned to using the B9 cargo bays for now. I have only installed those parts (as installing the whole B9 makes KSP unplayably slow). Here is one of my newest designs. Using the smallest cargo bay, it is capable of placing a full 1 ton of payload into 100 km orbit. You can see I was testing it on two 0.5 ton RCS tanks.

Snipped images

Those B9 cargo bays are solid style, is there a download link for only the cargo bay related parts or should I just download the whole pack then trim out everything but the cargo bays and related scripts?

Except, as someone pointed out, this isn't a proper shuttle. If you look REALLY carefully, you will notice that the real shuttles don't have an engine under the big orange fuel tank. With that engine it is easy to balance, but it also loses its point.

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the Buran Energia booster have engines on the EFT?

EDIT: changed like to link :|

[Torham234]

Ah, I never noticed the space shuttle didn't have engines there, but I said it was a REPLICA! It doesn't have to be perfect to qualify as a replica, and the reentry was Courtesy of mechjebs spaceplane guidance, and its auto land does that, so I've gone to doing it all my self, if you want, I'll get you a bigger shuttle with less mod parts

The reason for the lack of engines on the big fuel tank is costs. Engines are pretty much the single most expensive thing on the rocket (that or the fuel). The orange fuel tank is non reusable, and always burns up on reentry. That's why the main tank is kept as simple as it could possibly be to keep the cost of manufacturing one for each shuttle mission down. The boosters can be reused, and should have parachutes to slow their descend.

This is one of the primary reasons people would find shuttle design tricky. See, ideally you would have all the main engines on the shuttle so that they can be reused over and over again. This creates off centre thrust and the shuttle has tendency to spin.

If you want to see some very interesting videos, TheWinterowl made a whole

about his shuttle program. You will see most of the most common hurdles in the development as he himself encounters and subsequently solves them.

I think his shuttle is one of the best engineered I have seen around.

[Torham234]

Those B9 cargo bays are solid style, is there a download link for only the cargo bay related parts or should I just download the whole pack then trim out everything but the cargo bays and related scripts?

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the Buran Energia booster have engines on the EFT?

EDIT: changed like to link :|

I had to manually strip down the B9 pack. I can give you the names of the needed parts however

cargo bays + 2 small cockpits

Cockpit_MK2\

Cockpit_MK2_Adapter\

Cockpit_MK2_Adapter_M125\

Cockpit_MK2_Bicoupler\

Cockpit_MK2_Body_05m\

Cockpit_MK2_Body_2-5m\

Cockpit_MK5\

Cockpit_S2\

Cockpit_S2_Adapter\

Cockpit_S2_Body\

Cockpit_S2_Body_Cargo\

Cockpit_S2_Body_Crew\

Cockpit_S2_Control\

Cockpit_S3\

If you take the cockpiks as well, you should also keep the [props], [resources], and [spaces] subdirectories. If you do not want the cockpits, than you can just keep the parts subdirectory. Hope that helps

[kaphraxus]

Indeed it does, thanks!

[Uncle Mort]

I have a shuttle that can take four kerbals to LKO, a shuttle to take them to Munar Orbit, and a final shuttle to take them down to the surface of the Mun. All reusuable and not a wing in sight.

Define shuttle.

[Ikiryu]

I don't know if they are hard but they sure are useless. Want to take a huge cargo up? Rocket is your only rational (*cough*Whackjob*cough*) option. Want to be cost effective? Build a SSTO. Mine can land on Mun and back at KSP without refuelling. With refuelling it can get to Laythe and back.

Dude, your Signature is PURE Genius!