Component Space Shuttle V 5.0.1 (July 14, 2013)

[Cepheus]

Two from inside the payload bay. God, this thing is pretty. Also, for the sake of realism, the real shuttle\'s doors open one at a time. Don\'t think that\'s possible with sarkun\'s plugin, but hey, a guy can hope.

[Guest]

This is amazing! Bring on the bay doors. When will a release be available?

[BlueFalcon77]

I hate to be the wet blanket here, but I found a bit of a bug. Whenever I proceed to the launchpad, the vertical stabilizer likes to glitch into the pad, then either break off, or make the shuttle jump about 50 feet, and also break off. I don\'t know if it\'s a problem w/ KSP in general, or this specific part. I have v.14.4, so I really can\'t say which it is.

[Cepheus]

Hey folks. As you may know, 0.15 is going to bring lots of new stuff for spaceplanes. Since this IS a space shuttle, after all, the update\'s going to wait until after I can get a good amount of testing in.

Regard.

Cepheus.

Today I fixed the Control Surface code here, to make them work better with spaceplanes and mirror symmetry. That means we can include the dedicated aileron/elevon surface part, which is really cool and wasn\'t working right until now, and I had already decided to let it be...

This fix also affects the way control surfaces work as ailerons. Previously, the criteria for whether a surface would work as an aileron was simply whether or not it had any symmetrical counterparts. We assumed that counterparts would logically be on the other side of the ship, facing outwards, and for rockets, that was mostly the case.

Now with spaceplanes it\'s another story. You can have symmetrical winglets that really shouldn\'t be ailerons at all (think wingtip rudders, for instance), and to fix this issue I changed the aileron criteria to a much more correct system, where the amount of aileron action is proportional to how much the control surface pivot axis is aligned with the CoG\'s longitudinal axis. That means ailerons will work proportionally to how much the control surfaces are facing \'away\' from the centerline of the ship.

I took some screenshots of a few aircraft I created:

I just love this one here, if you\'ve ever played a game called Total Annihilation, this may look familiar.

It flies pretty well too. Very minimal input required, and it can do Mach 1 around 10km altitude.

Now this guy was a little more radical an experiment. The mothership has three low altitude engines, which are enough to get the little guy up to about 10km up, then, it engages the high-altitude engine and separates. My record with it is 1800m/s at 20,000m. A little more and it would have propelled itself into orbit. As it was, it crossed the ocean west of KSC in about 5 minutes.

That\'s about it for now. We should be starting experimentals soon now I think, but I think it\'s far too early to be talking about release dates. It all depends on how well experimentals go, and there\'s no way to predict that.

Cheers

[Technical Ben]

My version of the shuttle engine is done. Feel free to use the part. Just keep me named in it\'s credits.

The texture is nothing special, but it is rather a plain engine to model.

Adjust the stats as needed. It has a slightly better stats than gimbal engine currently.

[Cepheus]

Here\'s a comparison for you folks. Which do you like best?

Personally, I really like the detail and color on Ben\'s (the one with red), but I like how Epsigma\'s is pretty close to real scale. Hmm, now that I think about it, if Ben\'s was shorter, and a little more \'plump\' (for lack of a better word) it would be perfect. I\'ll put more angles up soon. Also, hat tip to CBBP for the reference photos.

And here\'s the second set.

Order is the same as last time: real, Eps\'s, then Ben\'s. Note: the image of ben\'s engines shows the gimbal: and how I would prefer it to stay.

[Tiberion]

Middle image looks more like the SSMEs, but wow that is some extreme gimballing. I don\'t think the SSMEs ever gimballed enough to go below the horizontal mark.

[Cepheus]

It was my understanding that they could gimble ±10.5º.

http://youtu.be/7Wtg_3Y4lFc

Also, the ssmes did have red parts, for the record.

Hmm. I think that the attachment nodes on the engine mount would have to be changed a bit. This would, however, mess things up on the pad, so I\'m going to need that MLP for this one.

[Technical Ben]

Hey! Wish I had those images for reference when I was modelling!

I\'ll work on V2 this week if you want and I get time. I did not even add gimbling.

[Cepheus]

I can\'t believe that someone\'s landed on the moon with this.

http://youtu.be/A92utiABNFw

And now I have. HA HA!

[Technical Ben]

I have shortened the rocket engine a bit. The extra length was really just coming from my giant mounting base. I was keeping it too close to Kerbal style, and not enough to the shuttles style. But a close look at the shuttle has allowed me to get a closer match.

I\'ve made the texture a bit more subtle, but the colour is still there. I can shrink the length a bit more if needed. The Nozzels might need to be a bit wider. I will add a gimbal point next.

[sgtblazing]

While I think the cosmetic changes look great, I am excited for the realistic masses/values more than the looks themselves. Having the external tank as it is just kills my enjoyment of it... as... well.. all it currently does is keeps the bottom of the shuttle warm until reentry.

[Technical Ben]

It should be workable now, right? With the inclusion of fuel pipes? What is holding the project back?

[zombiphylax]

He\'s waiting until 0.15 to test it in the games new SPH instead of releasing it now and realizing the 0.15 flight mechanics breaks the CSS\' flight dynamics.

[Technical Ben]

Got you.

[Technical Ben]

Here it is. Test to your hearts content. I\'ve no idea what stats it needs, so feel free to change the config. If you can think of any way to improve the textures, I\'ll give it a go. Perhaps some more wear and tear on the edges?

It animates too now.

[Epsilon]

Here it is. Test to your hearts content. I\'ve no idea what stats it needs, so feel free to change the config. If you can think of any way to improve the textures, I\'ll give it a go. Perhaps some more wear and tear on the edges?

It animates too now.

Put little yellow numbers and words in a stencil-like font on the main engines. I\'ve seen them on the engine bells.

Looks pretty good though, but I still really don\'t like the red. Every shuttle launch I\'ve seen has the engines without any red at all. That of course might be my own mistake, but I think in general the red is unneeded.

[Technical Ben]

The 'new' engines have red on them out of the factory. No idea if this washes off, or burns off on the test runs? I can kill the colour easy.

[edit]

Ooops! I failed, they were the saftey blankets! (Artist see, artist do?)

At least I get to keep the one red pipe. I\'ll change it to plain old black ASAP!!!

[edit]

Any photos of the stencils? I\'ll have to scale up some texture points to get a nice resolution to display such small detail, but should be able to pull it off (stencil, pull it off, get it!? ).

This one has some colour on the pipes, and a stencil on the outside. I can replace the red paint with a stencil.

http://www.rv-103.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/Space-Shuttle-Main-Engine-web-pic.jpg

This one shows some stencils half way up too. I\'ll make note of all these...

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2012/04/16/597193main_2084_full.jpg

[Cepheus]

Everything looks great. I may need to dial back the gimbal a bit.

[Epsilon]

I guess since the engine is well underway here, would you like to hear about my progress on the OMS system? I\'ve been working on it for awhile now.

[deadshot462]

Are the RCS thrusters functional on the front and back of the shuttle like the real one, or will you have to add extra RCS parts that need to be attached at those locations? Looks awesome either way

[Cepheus]

I guess since the engine is well underway here, would you like to hear about my progress on the OMS system? I\'ve been working on it for awhile now.

Yes, please.

[Technical Ben]

If multiple part types is supported in 0.15 (or close to it) then we could add the manoeuvring + RCS thrusters into a single pod that goes on the back of the shuttle. Would be easier to put together then, instead of having 2 pods (one for RCS and one for return rockets).

[Epsilon]

If multiple part types is supported in 0.15 (or close to it) then we could add the manoeuvring + RCS thrusters into a single pod that goes on the back of the shuttle. Would be easier to put together then, instead of having 2 pods (one for RCS and one for return rockets).

Correct. I\'ve split the parts for now, so I can merge what can be simplified later. Being able to cram the OMS fuel, RCS fuel, and maybe even the RCS units themselves would help a lot.

This is my progress on the OMS system for now.

I\'ll explain what this all is. The engine block I simply cut the engines from and filled in the faces. Then I UV mapped those to black, as shown. The OMS pods also had the RCS units removed from them, and the faces filled. I made the OMS engines from scratch (and existing textures!). I should go back and make them more accurate. I think almost all the faces are filled and textured now.

[Cepheus]

Hot damn. That\'s left me speechless. Thank you, Epsigma.