RichieD76 Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 It\'s beautiful! And it works perfect! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeCi Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 It works absolutely brilliantly.The time to Orbit seems good now aswell.Now get me sum cargo-doors and sum space to put a sat in working RCS system would be pretty neat.Shuttle orbital engines plox. some custom main engines aswell while ur at it! job well done! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayvenQ Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 For some reason, the loading bar stops at CSS5SegmentSRB after freshly installing it., left it for ages and its stuck there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cepheus Posted April 21, 2012 Author Share Posted April 21, 2012 Small-ish update here.I\'ve done some testing with a functional ET, and it does work very well. Now, I\'ve just got to figure out how to decouple the damn thing. I\'d like to have some sort of invisible decoupler 'node.' I\'m considering using C7\'s old 'Hard Points' kit, (which I\'ve never used before.)For some reason, the loading bar stops at CSS5SegmentSRB after freshly installing it., left it for ages and its stuck there.I haven\'t encountered a problem like this before. What does it say in the debug window (or whatever it is that the window is called.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cepheus Posted April 28, 2012 Author Share Posted April 28, 2012 Bumpdate here.I\'m working on a rebalance here, and trying to bring weights and thrusts to about that of the real life shuttle. Unsurprisingly, it ISN\'T working, and I don\'t now why. It likes to tip over, and all the linkages seem to be made of string cheese. It\'s been three hours, and I\'m considering not even rebalancing it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberion Posted April 28, 2012 Share Posted April 28, 2012 Are you speaking in ratios, or actually trying to replicate the power output of the shuttle? Kerbin, and this Kerbal inventions are vastly smaller than our real life counterparts.There are also limitations on how the Unity physics simulation of rigid-body parts behaves; you have to adapt to it, rather than trying to make it conform to your expectations.It took months of tweaking and re-working and hair-pulling to make my TiberDyne stack fly as well as it does, and even now just a small change and it comes tumbling down. The modularity of KSP is sometimes a curse Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cepheus Posted April 28, 2012 Author Share Posted April 28, 2012 I am talking about ratios: 1/1000th of real output, and mass. I think I\'ll play with it some more, and instead of having a ratio between ingame weight, and real weight, I\'ll have realistic ratios ingame (I\'ll explain this confusing jibberish later, if I see if it works) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombiphylax Posted April 28, 2012 Share Posted April 28, 2012 This thing looks beautiful, can\'t wait to see what you do with it in the future.It\'s incredibly difficult to land at the KSC though. It likes to slowly pitch up and down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epsilon Posted April 29, 2012 Share Posted April 29, 2012 This shuttle is a lot of fun.I\'d like to contribute in some fashion, like making proper RS-25\'s (unless that\'s already being done) or modeling an OMS system, or the payload bay.The space shuttle is a personal favorite of mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cepheus Posted April 30, 2012 Author Share Posted April 30, 2012 Alright, I\'ve got one last update for the weekend. I\'ve done some rebalancing on th shuttle, mostly with weights and drag values. I did, however, run into some unexpected difficulties, mostly with thrust. Hmm. It seems that I\'ve balanced the mass and drag values of the shuttle, but not the rest of the stack. That may be the problem here.Secondary update here:I\'ve finally managed to loft the damn thing into orbit (far harder than it needs to be for release). I\'m happy to say that the shuttle has a good amount of stability after leaving the atmosphere (again, I blame my wonky drag values.) The Shuttle also has a significantly improved glide ratio during supersonic (above 340 m/s) and during subsonic (under 340 m/s) flight, and is extremely stable. However, the aircraft has a tendency to pitch down during sonic flight. I\'d suggest just not trying to fly at that speed. It\'s a bad idea. Tertiary update.It seems that .15 is going to bring some new mechanics with it, courtesy of C7. I\'ll see what I can implement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tncm Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Awesome, looks amazing, going to make a video about it right now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epsilon Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Hi,I made some new SSMEs. I really have been wanting to make some in general, so I did.I\'ll gladly provide the file for the engine. It\'s in tune with the one that comes with CSS, just so you know.I personally think the engine is a tad too long right now, as the whole stack now is tilted forwards on the launch pad (although launch goes fine). The nozzles extend just beyond where the SRBs do. However, a launch platform in the future might help any problems like this. The fact that the orbiter is attached too low on the tank by default also exaggerates this issue (but I bet it\'s because the engines are all level on the launch pad when you do this). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberion Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Those look cool, but they do seem a touch too large overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elven_sword Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 When I zoomed in too far today, I found out that the inside of the cargo bay is textured. This bodes well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epsilon Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 When I zoomed in too far today, I found out that the inside of the cargo bay is textured. This bodes well.It should be relatively easy to make then. I might give a go soon at that. I\'ve also been messing with removing the OMS pods and RCS thruster blocks to see if I can get them all working separate. So far, the RCS blocks are fine, and I\'ve removed the OMS pods, but I need to figure out how to neaten up the edges so when I add in the missing faces, it doesn\'t look ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cepheus Posted May 2, 2012 Author Share Posted May 2, 2012 Looks good, Epsigma. One thought, Do you think it\'s possible for them to start with a nonzero gimbal? Here\'s what I mean. If you look closely at the exhaust from the main engines, you can see that they\'re thrusting the shuttle toward the tank / booster assembly. Also, I have considered the aunch platform (imagine if it had the caterpillar wheels too). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epsilon Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 Hmm that is a good question. I don\'t know if it is possible. I don\'t even know if engines can be attached at an angle either.I wonder if there could be an advanced gimbal control plugin or something that could define a new gimbal angle like that as zero, so the shuttle defaults with it.I say it could happen. I\'ll try messing around with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberion Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 My Tiberdyne engines have a permanent vector of 12 degrees I think, just as pictured. Without it, the shuttle tries to push up, but since the Center of Gravity with the tank and boosters included is out of line of the shuttle, it adds rotation (pitch down)If the CoG was in the shuttle, then the shown gimbal would cause pitch up, but with the added External weight, they balance out.You still need vectoring (permanent and static) AND gimballing to deal with the weight shifting as you use fuel and drop boosters.That is why I made a separate engine piece for the shuttle rather than using 3 of the normal \'bearcat\' engines, because I didnt want the standalone engines permanently gimballed.A plugin that allows you to set a vector pre-launch or let it auto-adjust during flight would be AWESOME and something I\'d use on Tiberdyne as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tadeass Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 Hi, I made this cargo module two weeks ago, but you can see these wrong cargo doors. (Exactly, you can\'t see them, when are they opened. )In 0.15, I want to separate the docking module from and made that as an extra part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technical Ben Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 I was just about to finish up my engines... then I saw the latest posts. Doh! If you want the mesh/parts/textures just say. [Gah! I remember why I quit this forum again! It fails to post my images!!!] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 A plugin that allows you to set a vector pre-launch or let it auto-adjust during flight would be AWESOME and something I\'d use on Tiberdyne as well.C7 talked about control trimming in his thread, so it might be possible in 0.15 even without plugins, provided this will work on gimbals, not only on control surfaces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cepheus Posted May 2, 2012 Author Share Posted May 2, 2012 Looking pretty spiffy. Needs to be balanced, but hell, this thing looks pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epsilon Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 Sorry Ben.I have to admit your engines are quite nice though.I wonder if for the time being, until I can get gimbal control just how I want it, if I could simply rotate the nozzles in blender a bit so when they attach in KSP they are already angled upwards. Of course thrust would still show downwards, and this really doesn\'t fix anything else.Just an idea.I love the cargo bay. I would also like to see the ability to deploy the radiators on the cargo bay doors once they are proper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberion Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 I wonder if for the time being, until I can get gimbal control just how I want it, if I could simply rotate the nozzles in blender a bit so when they attach in KSP they are already angled upwards. Of course thrust would still show downwards, and this really doesn\'t fix anything else.Just an idea.I don\'t understand what you mean? You can model them to any angle you want and them use the thrustvector cfg parameter to make them thrust at that angle; its totally separate from KSP\'s gimbal, gimballing doesn\'t have to be enabled or anything.And the FX trails will match any custom vector you set automatically, it actually over-rides the FX vector parameters completely, making them 'static' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technical Ben Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 Sorry Ben.I have to admit your engines are quite nice though.I wonder if for the time being, until I can get gimbal control just how I want it, if I could simply rotate the nozzles in blender a bit so when they attach in KSP they are already angled upwards. Of course thrust would still show downwards, and this really doesn\'t fix anything else.Just an idea.I love the cargo bay. I would also like to see the ability to deploy the radiators on the cargo bay doors once they are proper.Meh, mine have pipes! ;P(PS, the model is basically done. The textures are just colour right now. Details and shading to be added.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts