Jump to content

[1.2.1] Taurus HCV - 3.75 m CSM System [v1.5.3 - July 1, 2014]

bsquiklehausen

By bsquiklehausen
in KSP1 Mod Releases

 Share

Recommended Posts

Neutrinovore

Neutrinovore

Posted
Posted

Hello. :)

I finally decided to download this pod because of the changes in v1.1, specifically the built-in thrusters being balanced so as not to create torque. But, there's a bit of a problem, because they aren't. Using RCSBuildAid clearly shows a large imbalance of thrust, and there's an additional thrust vector arrow INSIDE the pod, in the nose up by the top attachment node, but offset to the 6 o'clock position. The red torque arrow indicates several kn/m's of negative pitch torque, and this is confirmed in actual use, the pod pitches down uncontrollably no matter what MechJeb or I manually tries to do to correct it. Oddly, if I place a counterweight to null out the indicated torque in the VAB, with RCSBuildAid showing absolutely no torque at all, the ship STILL pitches nose down under thrust.

And before I get spammed with a lot of suggestions for simple solutions, this ain't my first rodeo, friends. :) I've tried everything it's possible to do regarding checking for mod conflicts, config editing and/or errors, etc. I can only conclude that there's something hidden in the model itself, either an out-of-place thrust transform, or a COM offset that isn't in the config, something. Could there be more drag on one side of the pod than the other? I don't use FAR, but having unbalanced lift or drag on a vessel will still throw a ship caddy-whompus, believe me. :)

Anyway, just thought I'd mention this, see if anyone else was having the same issue.

Later! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spartan-S63

Spartan-S63

Posted
Posted
Hello. :)

I finally decided to download this pod because of the changes in v1.1, specifically the built-in thrusters being balanced so as not to create torque. But, there's a bit of a problem, because they aren't. Using RCSBuildAid clearly shows a large imbalance of thrust, and there's an additional thrust vector arrow INSIDE the pod, in the nose up by the top attachment node, but offset to the 6 o'clock position. The red torque arrow indicates several kn/m's of negative pitch torque, and this is confirmed in actual use, the pod pitches down uncontrollably no matter what MechJeb or I manually tries to do to correct it. Oddly, if I place a counterweight to null out the indicated torque in the VAB, with RCSBuildAid showing absolutely no torque at all, the ship STILL pitches nose down under thrust.

And before I get spammed with a lot of suggestions for simple solutions, this ain't my first rodeo, friends. :) I've tried everything it's possible to do regarding checking for mod conflicts, config editing and/or errors, etc. I can only conclude that there's something hidden in the model itself, either an out-of-place thrust transform, or a COM offset that isn't in the config, something. Could there be more drag on one side of the pod than the other? I don't use FAR, but having unbalanced lift or drag on a vessel will still throw a ship caddy-whompus, believe me. :)

Anyway, just thought I'd mention this, see if anyone else was having the same issue.

Later! :D

Not sure if you know this (because I couldn't tell from your post) but the built in LES trusters are for abort procedures. Previously, the LES thrusters were off-center to thrust the capsule away from the rest of the launch stack, but since then, it doesn't. You shouldn't use the thrusters for any other purpose than for aborting because they're solid engines.

But then again, maybe I'm mistaken too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jnrobinson

jnrobinson

Posted
Posted
Hello. :)

I finally decided to download this pod because of the changes in v1.1, specifically the built-in thrusters being balanced so as not to create torque. But, there's a bit of a problem, because they aren't. Using RCSBuildAid clearly shows a large imbalance of thrust, and there's an additional thrust vector arrow INSIDE the pod, in the nose up by the top attachment node, but offset to the 6 o'clock position. The red torque arrow indicates several kn/m's of negative pitch torque, and this is confirmed in actual use, the pod pitches down uncontrollably no matter what MechJeb or I manually tries to do to correct it. Oddly, if I place a counterweight to null out the indicated torque in the VAB, with RCSBuildAid showing absolutely no torque at all, the ship STILL pitches nose down under thrust.

And before I get spammed with a lot of suggestions for simple solutions, this ain't my first rodeo, friends. :) I've tried everything it's possible to do regarding checking for mod conflicts, config editing and/or errors, etc. I can only conclude that there's something hidden in the model itself, either an out-of-place thrust transform, or a COM offset that isn't in the config, something. Could there be more drag on one side of the pod than the other? I don't use FAR, but having unbalanced lift or drag on a vessel will still throw a ship caddy-whompus, believe me. :)

Anyway, just thought I'd mention this, see if anyone else was having the same issue.

Later! :D

The secret thrust inside the capsule was to counteract some mystery phantom torque we were getting on abort. It was a stopgap solution and we are working on a fix.

I will keep you updated as I investigate the problem more.

And although you theoretically should be able to land using the LES, in reality it will send you from 80 m/s down to 100 m/s straight up. Since the LES is only intended to get the capsule far away from high speed explosions, fixing the mystery torque is not our highest priority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LameLefty

LameLefty

Posted
Posted
Not sure if you know this (because I couldn't tell from your post) but the built in LES trusters are for abort procedures. Previously, the LES thrusters were off-center to thrust the capsule away from the rest of the launch stack, but since then, it doesn't. You shouldn't use the thrusters for any other purpose than for aborting because they're solid engines.

But then again, maybe I'm mistaken too.

His post says he downloaded the 1.1 update specifically because the trust is now supposed to be balanced. However, in his experience, it is NOT balanced despite what the description says.

Now, having said that, I haven't checked myself. I will say that I once accidentally ran out of fuel in LKO on a test mission with this pod. I dumped my service module, oriented retrograde at apoapsis and used the abort motors to de-orbit. Worked a treat. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neutrinovore

Neutrinovore

Posted
Posted (edited)

@Spartan-S63 and jnrobinson:

DRE USERS REJOICE!

R&S Capsuldyne has finally recovered from the post-launch party and scraped together a heatshield and some more small updates!

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

Changelog:


v 1.1 (6/9/14)
-Added heatshield, fully DRE and FAR compatible, with fairing
-LES thrust is now centered, will no longer create sideways torque
-Removed useless/ugly structural members from interior
-Added specular effects to windows in exterior view
-Slightly modified interior textures
-Slightly modified exterior textures
-Laid foundation for light-up windows (coming soon)
-Updated to latest version of the AnimationModules plugin

We also redid the main forum page for easier (and prettier) navigation. Enjoy!

NOTE: Curseforge version may still be under review - we recommend the Mega version if you're an early updater!

It says clearly "Balanced LES Boosters - Usable as Powered Landing System". Not much ambiguity there. So, in my experience, the LES system is NOT balanced, and is therefore NOT usable as a 'Powered Landing System'. False advertising, or an honest (if pretty significant) mistake?

Anyway, a solid fuel rocket setup doesn't really work as a landing system at all, which is why I converted the LES to MonoProp engines via config edits. IMO, this is something that should have been done by the developers if they were truly interested in creating an all-in-one powered landing pod. I mean, as an alternate config in the archive, much like the config that removes the engines altogether. So there would (ideally) be 3 config files in the download: one for the original asymmetric solid rocket LES, one for (ACTUALLY!) balanced-thrust LFO or monoprop powered landing engines, and one that removes the engines completely for those that want that.

Finally, as I've reviewed the thread looking for this post to quote, I see that I'm not the only one having the mysterious nose-pitching-down-uncontrollably issue. :) I told you, it's not me, it's something in the part itself.

So, anyhow, for what it's worth. Later, all. :)

Edited by Neutrinovore
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jnrobinson

jnrobinson

Posted
Posted
@Spartan-S63 and jnrobinson:

It says clearly "Balanced LES Boosters - Usable as Powered Landing System". Not much ambiguity there. So, in my experience, the LES system is NOT balanced, and is therefore NOT usable as a 'Powered Landing System'. False advertising, or an honest (if pretty significant) mistake?

Anyway, a solid fuel rocket setup doesn't really work as a landing system at all, which is why I converted the LES to MonoProp engines via config edits. IMO, this is something that should have been done by the developers if they were truly interested in creating an all-in-one powered landing pod. I mean, as an alternate config in the archive, much like the config that removes the engines altogether. So there would (ideally) be 3 config files in the download: one for the original asymmetric solid rocket LES, one for (ACTUALLY!) balanced-thrust LFO or monoprop powered landing engines, and one that removes the engines completely for those that want that.

Finally, as I've reviewed the thread looking for this post to quote, I see that I'm not the only one having the mysterious nose-pitching-down-uncontrollably issue. :) I told you, it's not me, it's something in the part itself.

So, anyhow, for what it's worth. Later, all. :)

Actually the LES boosters are not intended for use as a landing system, because they're far too powerful. We threw that line in their as sort of a joke. We're also not trying to make some overpowered all in one capsule system. If you want that, use another mod.

We'll get it fixed if we have the chance and can figure out how, but we're not actual game developers or anything, just two people who like making stuff in their spare time. That's why we focus on content a little more than bugfixing sometimes.

If you're really that angry at the imbalanced thrust you're welcome to research the issue yourself and let us know how to solve it, but for now we're going to get back to making new things that everyone likes rather than fixing a minor issue that one person had a problem with.

Also, just for the record, the CoL offset with FAR was a problem that was out of our control that has now been fixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neutrinovore

Neutrinovore

Posted
Posted
Actually the LES boosters are not intended for use as a landing system, because they're far too powerful. We threw that line in their as sort of a joke. We're also not trying to make some overpowered all in one capsule system. If you want that, use another mod.

We'll get it fixed if we have the chance and can figure out how, but we're not actual game developers or anything, just two people who like making stuff in their spare time. That's why we focus on content a little more than bugfixing sometimes.

If you're really that angry at the imbalanced thrust you're welcome to research the issue yourself and let us know how to solve it, but for now we're going to get back to making new things that everyone likes rather than fixing a minor issue that one person had a problem with.

Also, just for the record, the CoL offset with FAR was a problem that was out of our control that has now been fixed.

Ah. Well, I guess I didn't get the joke. I'll not inflict myself upon this thread any further then. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Creideiki

Creideiki

Posted
Posted
Actually the LES boosters are not intended for use as a landing system, because they're far too powerful. We threw that line in their as sort of a joke. We're also not trying to make some overpowered all in one capsule system. If you want that, use another mod.

As an idea, perhaps, would be to make use of the XT Landertron plugin to turn the LES rockets into landing rockets. From my brief experiments and a quick little module manager patch, the LES rockets seem to work well using the Landertron plugin.


MODULE {
name = Landertron

heightmultiplier = 1.25
offset = 1.0
endheight = 0.1
endspeed = 0.5
boom = false
mode = 0
electricrate = 0.1
}
}
@PART[TaurusHCV] {

Of course, the asymmetric thrust does result in the pod torquing over (and then thrusting sideways and eventually into the ground) if you are coming down way too fast (which tends to result in copious amounts of exploding). At less intense speeds, if you have the Landertron fire too high you will torque slightly, and depending on how badly the torquing is, you might end up with an upside-down (but intact) pod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zilfondel

zilfondel

Posted
Posted (edited)

This is amazing! Awesome work! I am so incredibly happy now that I have a capsule that can seat more than 3 kerbals, you have no idea. And the textures are great; it looks like a stock part. 110% my friend!

Keep up the good work.

I whipped up some cool modifications to the capsule for emergency landings:

http://gfycat.com/BruisedSnappyIcelandicsheepdog

Edited by zilfondel
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bsquiklehausen

bsquiklehausen

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Any plans to have the lower deck screens hooked up to RPM or something? I wonder if there's a way to disable or toggle the greed HUD, or maybe that could be a future thing.

That's the plan eventually - though we just got a message warning about big changes to RPM soon so that may have to be on hold for a while. I personally don't use RPM myself, but I am pretty sure you can disable the green HUD somehow...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RedAV8R

RedAV8R

Posted
Posted (edited)
Is there an RSS/RO Rescale aside from RedAV8R's, which turns it into the Orion?

What don't you like about mine? That whole project is very much a WIP due to lack of solid, reliable, information. I'm open to suggestions.

Ah, never mind, you probably just don't like me...

Edited by RedAV8R
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RedAV8R

RedAV8R

Posted
Posted
lol wat - I just like the formfactor of the original, as a sort of near-future post-Orion vehicle :)

Ah, fair enough:) Yeah, it's a big wonky because of the scaling, but then again, it wasn't Orion to begin with, so the 'eye-candy' isn't quite there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bsquiklehausen

bsquiklehausen

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Good news, everyone! Progress is being made on the next addition to the HCV's 3.75m launch stack - a science lab! This isn't the final model yet - though the R&S Capsuldyne Science Division tells us they are getting close.

bxOLCH0.png?1

Also - the HCV mod is now also up on Kerbal Stuff - a new community site for KSP mods! It's a great site and an awesome alternative to Curse and Mega for those of you who are never happy.

http://beta.kerbalstuff.com/mod/13/Taurus_HCV_-_3.75_m_Stock-ish_Crew_Pod

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Z3R0_0NL1N3

Z3R0_0NL1N3

Posted
Posted
I guess you mean a SM= Service Module because CM= Command Module , what the Taurus actually is

[sigh] Yes, yes I did. My mind went "Service starts with C, right? Right?"

I mean, it could be a Cervice Module...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...