Harry Rhodan Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 Best TMK Render I've seen yet.I really love that but I was just hitting a quick google search with the term "âÑÂöõûыù Ãœõöÿûðýõтýыù Úþрðñûь" I got from Wikipedia and some of the russian sites offer a different design (the later and bigger version i suppose):http://w1972.livejournal.com/13400.html?page=1 (also with an alternative version of the smaller TMK)http://nnm.me/blogs/crash37331/samye-ambicioznye-proekty-sssr/And that design is apperently not forgotten or dead yet:http://m.rg.ru/2014/12/11/kosmos.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tjsnh Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 Best TMK Render I've seen yet.I can't even begin to tell you how much time I wasted about a month ago trying to make a TMK mission. I just could NOT get the center of gravity right, with the asymmetry in a few places, and it was almost impossible to control. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted November 9, 2015 Author Share Posted November 9, 2015 (edited) I see quite a few problems with the MAPC-VA to be honest. (Sorry.)1. Docking Service Module: For it to be feasible, the crew capsule would need a docking port as well that retracts into the heats shield, which would theoretically take up a lot of interior volume which the capsule doesn't appear to have. The other issue is, that in real life, it's likely not feasible. The VA capsule had a hatch between the capsule and the core module, but it was single-use. No re-docking possible. 2. Not enough over-all interior volume. From the looks of the design, the only habitable part is the capsule, which just doesn't feel right. I'd need to land additional hardware to make a mission feasible. I would go 5m with the base. Go big. 3.75m just seems to small. It just doesn't look like a Kerbal could stand up in the service module. 3. Cosine Losses. Unless you steepened the over-all angle of the capsule, I'd probably use a retro-pack like the NASA MEM plans instead of the radial engines. 4. Heavy Heat Shield to haul: I like ascent/descent stages personally, because I like leaving behind equipment to be used on future missions. Plus, it's more efficient, and encourages better planning. I don't like SSTOs because they feel a little cheat-ey. 5. Redundant Capsule: I would just stick with the current VA capsule to cut down on part bloat, and change the angle of the entire vehicle slope. Perhaps there are issues with this I haven't considered. What would it look like if all the parts had the same slope as the current VA capsule?I think if you really fleshed out the MEM, took more time with it, and developed TMK, you could get another add-on pack out of this. I think you kinda have to figure out if the vessel you're making is a MEM, or a VA derived theoretical Soviet Lander. Handy References:Astronautix MEM PageFuture Russian Mars ExpeditionsBest TMK Render I've seen yet.http://41.media.tumblr.com/de412b31a5213bb29abdf8b5138decc3/tumblr_nmlx1t5wEW1u0vd4co1_1280.jpgInterior:http://www.astronautix.com/graphics/f/forpost.jpgFuji:Radially attached LFO spheres would be great. Much more versatile and lego-like. Perhaps some struts on them that make them look them look like they're not attached via witchcraft. An idea with the with the Fuji Heat Shield; What if it had a fairing like the concept Fuji does? That way, it could be toggled on an off depending on whether you were using it for Fuji, or something else. Could be neat...Thanks for the feedback!You make some very good points (sadly ).I think the major problem is, the vehicle was designed as a "ferry" service from orbit to surface, no long term habitation, etc. Built around an infrastructure of ISRU. The problem is I have built only the single vehicle, not the other components.So...1. Service module docking port should carry a different texture, it is not meant for crewed habitation. The current texture makes it look so. Same goes for the heat-shield on the Mars-VA capsule, there should not really be re-connection afterwards. Mars-VA capsule could seat two only, which would leave room for a bit more believable equipment etc.2. You are correct that's the current setup, the service module could be modified to accommodate a lab of some kind (with windows!). Sizing up... I would have little choice but to introduce 3.125m part. Would actually be quite straightforward. I need to think about it.3. Tricky yes, if there is some way I can animate the engines to deploy on thrust that would be great.4. I'm pretty set on SSTO now (I'm on a little Sci-Fi streak! ) Although you know, with eliminated cosine losses and a strong booster stage, this could make a viable Eve ascent vehicle, no kidding! 5. Steeper angle means taller vehicle, reason why this capsule is shallower than TKS-VA, to keep the overall height down.Photo of TMK is great, really the best I have seen by far (links are handy too)! So thanks!I am certainly set on VA-theoretical-mumbo-jumbo over any real Nasa design, I like a lot of the Mars lander concepts, but none of the exactly, therefore the need to make things up.This one was close!Now, onto the Fuji!I would add a fairing to the Fuji heatshield in a heartbeat, the problem is they are not tweakable, yet - let us see what 1.0.5 may or may not bring.I really love that but I was just hitting a quick google search with the term "âÑÂöõûыù Ãœõöÿûðýõтýыù Úþрðñûь" I got from Wikipedia and some of the russian sites offer a different design (the later and bigger version i suppose):http://epizodsspace.no-ip.org/bibl/tm/2004/10/32-33.jpghttp://w1972.livejournal.com/13400.html?page=1 (also with an alternative version of the smaller TMK)http://img15.nnm.me/3/3/1/9/a/1ac807b6a9af32f0e6d166855b0_prev.jpghttp://nnm.me/blogs/crash37331/samye-ambicioznye-proekty-sssr/And that design is apperently not forgotten or dead yet:http://cdnimg.rg.ru/pril/article/105/96/07/kosm600.jpghttp://m.rg.ru/2014/12/11/kosmos.htmlGreat stuff! Into the inspiration folder it goes! And a modern Mars concept, that feels rare!I can't even begin to tell you how much time I wasted about a month ago trying to make a TMK mission. I just could NOT get the center of gravity right, with the asymmetry in a few places, and it was almost impossible to control.It looks difficult, unless the deployable probe is equally weighted to the "out-jutting cylinder section" (?). Edited November 9, 2015 by Beale Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curtquarquesso Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 Thanks for the feedback!1. Service module docking port should carry a different texture, it is not meant for crewed habitation. The current texture makes it look so. Same goes for the heat-shield on the Mars-VA capsule, there should not really be re-connection afterwards. Mars-VA capsule could seat two only, which would leave room for a bit more believable equipment etc.2. You are correct that's the current setup, the service module could be modified to accommodate a lab of some kind (with windows!). Sizing up... I would have little choice but to introduce 3.125m part. Would actually be quite straightforward. I need to think about it.3. Tricky yes, if there is some way I can animate the engines to deploy on thrust that would be great.4. I'm pretty set on SSTO now (I'm on a little Sci-Fi streak! ) Although you know, with eliminated cosine losses and a strong booster stage, this could make a viable Eve ascent vehicle, no kidding! 5. Steeper angle means taller vehicle, reason why this capsule is shallower than TKS-VA, to keep the overall height down.Photo of TMK is great, really the best I have seen by far (links are handy too)! So thanks!I am certainly set on VA-theoretical-mumbo-jumbo over any real Nasa design, I like a lot of the Mars lander concepts, but none of the exactly, therefore the need to make things up.This one was close!https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/aa/51/ef/aa51ef1269282ef5397f2c56f9476cca.jpgNow, onto the Fuji!I would add a fairing to the Fuji heatshield in a heartbeat, the problem is they are not tweakable, yet - let us see what 1.0.5 may or may not bring.Great stuff! Into the inspiration folder it goes! And a modern Mars concept, that feels rare!1. Not sure I totally understand. Once ascent is completed, and the vessel is docked to an earth return habitat, the service compartment and landing stage is left in orbit for later use with another capsule, right? Wouldn't the next capsule need a docking port that could dock to the service compartment? I guess you could do something like the ATV engine has, 2. Where does 3.125m come from? 3.0m would be nice as 3.0 would be the size of the Ariane 5 among other things. 3. Could be nice to just have engines built into the fuel tank behind a deployable heat shield. Perhaps as an alternate setup, though part-bloat is a concern. 5. Approximately how steep would it be?On Fuji, a lot of people use TweakableEverything. I would consider it. Don't know why SQUAD has any reservations about making all things Tweakable. It's so darn easy to implement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted November 9, 2015 Author Share Posted November 9, 2015 1. Not sure I totally understand. Once ascent is completed, and the vessel is docked to an earth return habitat, the service compartment and landing stage is left in orbit for later use with another capsule, right? Wouldn't the next capsule need a docking port that could dock to the service compartment? I guess you could do something like the ATV engine has, 2. Where does 3.125m come from? 3.0m would be nice as 3.0 would be the size of the Ariane 5 among other things. 3. Could be nice to just have engines built into the fuel tank behind a deployable heat shield. Perhaps as an alternate setup, though part-bloat is a concern. 5. Approximately how steep would it be?On Fuji, a lot of people use TweakableEverything. I would consider it. Don't know why SQUAD has any reservations about making all things Tweakable. It's so darn easy to implement.1. Not another capsule no, that is a one-time use thing. But with the docking port, the remaining lander can dock with any generic payload (cargo for example).2. 3.125, half way inside 2.5 and 3.75, analogous to 1.8753. I think deploy-able heat-shield is another very scary beast entirely 5.Quite significant height difference. Though I'm sure it would still be completely stable.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curtquarquesso Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 1. Not another capsule no, that is a one-time use thing. But with the docking port, the remaining lander can dock with any generic payload (cargo for example).2. 3.125, half way inside 2.5 and 3.75, analogous to 1.8753. I think deploy-able heat-shield is another very scary beast entirely 5.Quite significant height difference. Though I'm sure it would still be completely stable..http://puu.sh/lfHD9/2d945f1dc2.jpgOoh. Typo on #3. I meant discard-able/jettison-able heat shield, like most. Deployable is indeed a scary thing. I don't really mind the height. It might give you a lot more room and Delta-V to work with. I don't think it looks completely crazy. I would strongly consider it, and just use the TKS capsule. Happy 1.0.5 everyone! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redhornet919 Posted November 9, 2015 Share Posted November 9, 2015 I agree with Curt that the is a small price for that extra Dv... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted November 9, 2015 Author Share Posted November 9, 2015 Ooh. Typo on #3. I meant discard-able/jettison-able heat shield, like most. Deployable is indeed a scary thing. I don't really mind the height. It might give you a lot more room and Delta-V to work with. I don't think it looks completely crazy. I would strongly consider it, and just use the TKS capsule. Happy 1.0.5 everyone!I agree with Curt that the is a small price for that extra Dv...It would require a complete re-make keep in mind I will check 1.0.5 has not broken anything! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redhornet919 Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 The vostok capsule keeps blowing up.... Idk if that helps in your bug fixing but yeah... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curtquarquesso Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 The vostok capsule keeps blowing up.... Idk if that helps in your bug fixing but yeah...Just tested it and it works just fine for me. What are the circumstances it explodes under, and what other add-ons do you have installed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redhornet919 Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 deorbiting from a 150x175 orbit.. As far as add-ons I dont think i have any that affect heat unless there is something is StockBugFixMods. the others are mostly part packs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redhornet919 Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Oh and i forgot that it sunk with the new buoyancy system so i would check all capsules... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tjsnh Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 deorbiting from a 150x175 orbit.. As far as add-ons I dont think i have any that affect heat unless there is something is StockBugFixMods. the others are mostly part packsTry different re-entry angles and speeds, I had a little trouble initially finding the "sweet spot" to de-orbit the vostok capsules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redhornet919 Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Try different re-entry angles and speeds, I had a little trouble initially finding the "sweet spot" to de-orbit the vostok capsules.Ok i will. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptKordite Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 My Vostok experience was similar to Redhornet's, but worse. When the nesting jets activated for my Korolev's Cross, the core stage instantly overheated and exploded. When I decoupled what remained of the core tank, the activation of the second stage caused that to overheat and explode. On reentry, the Vostok capsule was heating up and the ablative was ablating, seemingly as normal. Suddenly, all the remaining ablation burned away and the capsule exploded in the matter of a second. So, yea. Something is up with 1.0.5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlikeAlpineFresh Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Hi Beale, i would just like to say. You mod is amazingly useful! I would like to thank you for you work.BTW, love the Soyuz. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted November 10, 2015 Author Share Posted November 10, 2015 It sounds like all the parts need new thermal definitions. Will not be a small job.I will experiment around a little. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axl'Wolf'Lipid Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 For what i've seen by right-clicking on the Vostok capsule,the Ablator "Resource" got chewed really fast during re-entry.I've reentered from 125x125 orbit by lowering my Pe to 50(It's my usual standardized reentry protocol).I haven't tested the other Tantares capsule.The stock ablative shields seems more durable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted November 10, 2015 Author Share Posted November 10, 2015 (edited) For what i've seen by right-clicking on the Vostok capsule' date='the Ablator "Resource" got chewed really fast during re-entry.I've reentered from 125x125 orbit by lowering my Pe to 50(It's my usual standardized reentry protocol).I haven't tested the other Tantares capsule.The stock ablative shields seems more durable.[/quote']Try changing:thermalMassModifier = 0.001TothermalMassModifier = 1Inside the _Almach_Crew_A.cfgI think this has been causing Ablator weird occurances.The same applies for any other part that depletes Ablator too fast. Edited November 10, 2015 by Beale Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hraban Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 (edited) Try changing:thermalMassModifier = 0.001TothermalMassModifier = 1Inside the _Almach_Crew_A.cfgI think this has been causing Ablator weird occurances.The same applies for any other part that depletes Ablator too fast.This change looks goodthermalMassModifier = 0.01 Edited November 11, 2015 by hraban Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted November 11, 2015 Author Share Posted November 11, 2015 This change looks goodthermalMassModifier = 0.01The stock parts have a value of 1.0 for this. As far as I understand, the lower the number, the more 'drastic' heating will occur. There was a good reference thread about this a while ago, where NathanKell or possibly RoverDude explained all this very well, sadly I cannot find it again. I will keep looking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hraban Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 The stock parts have a value of 1.0 for this. As far as I understand, the lower the number, the more 'drastic' heating will occur. There was a good reference thread about this a while ago, where NathanKell or possibly RoverDude explained all this very well, sadly I cannot find it again. I will keep looking.http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/118057-1-0-heat-dissipationfrom NathanKellythermalMassModifier is a modifier applied to the standard specific heat capacity (as defined in Physics.cfg, default = 800kJ/tonne-K). Part thermal mass = part.mass * standardSpecHeat * thermalMassModifier * sum[for each resource](resource amount * resource density * resource hsp). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kopapaka Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hraban Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/118057-1-0-heat-dissipationfrom NathanKellyWith the build 1.0.5.1028 the oversized heat shields should (KHLEB has 600) disappear. After some tests with the thermalMassModifier which gave unsatisfactory results, I would recommend to reduce the heatshield to 200 and set the thermalMassModifier to 1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beale Posted November 13, 2015 Author Share Posted November 13, 2015 (edited) http://img18.rajce.idnes.cz/d1803/11/11509/11509823_4a07bec57533c466448cb56354add4bc/images/screenshot148.jpg?ver=0Steep landing, like it! With the build 1.0.5.1028 the oversized heat shields should (KHLEB has 600) disappear. After some tests with the thermalMassModifier which gave unsatisfactory results, I would recommend to reduce the heatshield to 200 and set the thermalMassModifier to 1.Thanks, I'll try this!Tantares 31Small holdover release with a lot of finished parts that were on the back-log.The Fuji is still un-finished, but the capsule and heat-shield are included.If you find any bugs, let me know. I've included Curtquarquesso's docking ports as a little extra, but they have bugs with retract-extend causing physics errors.Feedback for them is greatly appreciated.13/11/2015Soyuz Revamp.Fuji partial revamp (Craft Breaking).Luna 9 Landing Probe.Various heat fixes.New MIR docking node (Craft Breaking). Edited November 13, 2015 by Beale Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.