Rover lander ramps

[madlemur]

Just for fun, I went ahead and installed Blender and Unity. Ow. What I did do, before rage-quitting, was to remove the airlock and ladder from a hitchhiker module, and slice out half of a door. I know what I think would work, but I really don't have the skills to actually do it. I'm hoping someone with the skills and interest sees this...

Take a re-scaled Hitchhiker module (probably needs to be 3.75m rather than 2.5m), and remove the ladders and airlock. Where the airlock was, make a door that crosses about a 40 degree arc (this would allow 4-way radial mounting of stuff). Animate the door opening (my personal thought would be an accordion door that folds up flat against the hull). Beef up the interior to have a docking node in the back and/or top of the bay (can that be tweakable?) to secure the rover, and some bulk along the sides to accept supplies of some sort (modular tanks?). As an alternate (and understandably more difficult), hack off the sides of the hitchhiker and replace with stacks of 1/4 Universal Storage cores. Then the builder could customize the loadout on the part. This may make it impossible to tweak the size of the part, since the requisite US cores don't really scale. And it would probably only work with a larger part that could support maybe 2 bays of an octo-core. Hmmm... Maybe that won't work. But I like the idea.

Now that the bay is done, let's talk egress/ingress... I think it would be possible to take the stock ladders, change the angle of deployment (tweakable?) and replace the steps with ramp panels. Then the builder can place the ramp(s) in the precise location needed for their particular rover design, and they will retract and fold away just like the ladders (bonus points for having the ramp storage cover used as the transition piece from the bay to the ramp).

Further ideas: 4 doors on a mostly empty shell with a round-table in it, allowing the rover to exit from any side. IR horizontal sliders with winches to raise/lower the rover/parking platform.

Notes: While crossfeed may be allowed, I would think that CLS would find this to be a blocking part. Not enough room for passenger traversal.

Seems easy enough, until I force myself to remember my experiences with Blender...

Edited November 21, 2014 by madlemur

[endl]

honestly the US integration wouldn't work since the parts are angled to meet at the center, also your over complicating what the bay needs. the problem with the recon model is that it sections off the center into a rectangle leaving no space on the side for radial parts to be mounted this is just a waste of of space

the size should be 2.5 by default with tweak scale support for larger sizes for different payloads

the inner horizontal mount point should have tweakable alignment height so that you dont have to drop the rover otherwise there should be a vertical inner node so that the rover can be lowered gently via KAS (this is only as a workaround if the moder doesnt have the required coding skills/if KSP doesn't support node manipulation like this)

the door should be wider then 40* thats less then 1/8 the surface its pretty narrow should be 85 or 90 degrees, it should also swing up so that the sides are free for landing gear/ radial thrusters (which is only an issue if the mod doesnt come with its own custom legs/thruster

i think i get what you mean about the stock ladder, what your trying to say is "telescoping" ramp this is fine from a design point so long as its one single surface and not the two track gap which will create issues depending on how wide/narrow the wheel contact is, so to avoid it just have 1 surface rather then 2

[Mecripp]

I have to ask what does your rover do and why can't you shrink your rover ?

[madlemur]

D'oh! I meant 80-85 degrees. You're right that 40 degrees is way too small. That's what I get for doing maths geometries trigonometries without enough of the caffeines...

[endl]

I have to ask what does your rover do and why can't you shrink your rover ?

its a fuel hauler its meant to be paired with my karbonite miner which acts as a fuel hub for my other designs like UAV/lander/colony base

Javascript is disabled. View full album

it has 2 flt400 tanks which is only 360 fuel per trip anything smaller isnt practical

[Buzzou]

why is it essential that you use lander ramps? just use a skycrane set up

[zekes]

i actually once had a lander so light i could drive it down extendable solar panel ramps. I'll try it out for you, see if it still works.

[endl]

why is it essential that you use lander ramps? just use a skycrane set up

is there some law that says that every rover has to weigh less then a stapler and be smaller then a phone book. if i wanted to drive my car from the roof of a parking garage i could just drop it off the roof it would be faster and easier because i wouldnt need a ramp but the car would be broken wouldnt it?

@zekes i dont need a lighter rover i need a proper hangar solar panels will not support the weight of my rover for its intended design.

Edited November 22, 2014 by endl

[Buzzou]

is there some law that says that every rover has to weigh less then a stapler and be smaller then a phone book

Small rovers like spirit and opportunity used airbags and ramps to land. Curiosity had a mass of almost one tonne and could only land by using a skycrane.

the car would be broken wouldnt it?

not if you used a skycrane to kill it's velocity.

since we have provided you with several lander ramp mods and you've rejected them all, i guess you have the following options left:

1. Try the WT-51 Kerban transport, cheyenne dropship or the sulaco if they still work, and reject them too

2. the bigTrak discussed here has a ramp with built-in solar panels, not sure if it still works. reject it anyway.

3. Wait until the KONQUEST mod is finally released, whenever that is.

4. make your own lander ramp craft using infernal robotics and the B9 HX parts or hollow structures & hulls.

5. make your own special snowflake lander ramp mod.

Edited November 22, 2014 by Buzzou

[endl]

a skycrane kills landing velocity not drop velocity, dropping a heavy rover even with a skycrane is dependent on the wheels ability to take the impact

a skycrane design offers no shielding from aero forces or deadly reenty, its not the default answer as an alternative to a none ramp system.

i did not reject all of them. even the ones that were useable are broken. most of the ones offered have not been updated for .25 or have proper tweakscale integration. as i mentioned several times the home recon part would work if it wasnt buggy, its not ideal but its very close.

1. the WT-51 is horizontal i need a vertical ramp configuration if its not clear at this point. also the cheyenne is not listed on the devs website and i couldnt find any mention of a sulaco. considering how the 2nd one is another part specific to a ship it wont properly fit a rocket and it will probably be oriented the wrong way.

2. not suitable its a nosecone i need a stackable ramp system like recon

3. horizontal orientation again how is this a different option from the first

4. i tried this before making the thread, its impossible to make the ramp parts line up properly with infernals hinge orientation

thats only one section you would need several and it would take up alot of space not to mention the gaps between each section

5. if i had the knowledge to do so i would, what i am asking for is very simple. a vertically stackable enclosed rover bay with a none track type ramp

Edited November 22, 2014 by endl

[Buzzou]

a skycrane kills landing velocity not drop velocity, dropping a heavy rover even with a skycrane is dependent on the wheels ability to take the impact

it depends on how you want to use it, you don't have drop the lander from a height or use a winch to lower the rover down to the surface. Fly down to the surface and make a soft landing, just like you would have to with a ramp, then detach and fly the skycrane away once you have safely touched down. There shouldn't be any excessive impact damage on your wheels.

a skycrane design offers no shielding from aero forces or deadly reenty

copy the Curiosity design, which had a heatshield and aeroshield that get jettisoned after entering the atmosphere.

besides, skycranes are really fun to use, you should at least try it once.

its impossible to make the ramp parts line up properly with infernals hinge orientation

yeah infernal is a pain to use, but it can be done. where there's a will, there's a way.

[endl]

copy the Curiosity design, which had a heatshield and aeroshield that get jettisoned after entering the atmosphere.

did you notice in the video how the curiosity had housing protecting it not just from heat but aero forces, there's no such convenient way to create that in kerbal you would need a dome part that fits the rover and has extra nodes for interior attachment

also skycranes are a pain to operate and i dont want to go through that, a lander system with a ramp is much easier to use. if skycranes were an option which they are not i would not continue to keep testing these alternative mod suggestions.

if i do play with a skycrane it will be for a different rover where i can cut the weight down drastically. for this rover because its heavier then usual ill continue to look for/ask for a stackable ramp system.

[Buzzou]

did you notice in the video how the curiosity had housing protecting it not just from heat but aero forces, there's no such convenient way to create that in kerbal you would need a dome part that fits the rover and has extra nodes for interior attachment

all you need is procedural fairings for the dome and procedural parts for the heatshield, you can build one as big as you want - customised to your rover. you can see a good example here

also skycranes are a pain to operate and i dont want to go through that, a lander system with a ramp is much easier to use.

the only difference is that the rockets are on the top, rather than on the bottom, and that skycranes have less mass as they are not transporting the ramps, landing structure and landing legs.

Skycranes are far easier to use in KSP because all you need to do is land, fly the rockets away and start driving.

Another option is to have the lander positioned above and to the sides of the rover and use landing legs, so that once you land, you just detach and drive off. Like how the Anvil lander works.

landers with ramps are more difficult in KSP because you have to drive off of another vessel, and that unstable contact between the two craft allows glitches to happen where wheels and parts clip with each other - as you have already discovered.

There's no harm in testing various methods on kerbin first, that's half the fun, and can give you landing practice.

but hey, do whatever you want.

[endl]

i think ive mentioned my issues with a skycrane approach not being viable for my needs like four times in this thread now, its getting rather tiresome. i also dont need to be repeatedly told how i can duct tape my lander to the side of a rocket and have it "work out" this isnt a gameplay thread its an addon request thread.

so unless theres some addon i have yet to try or someone wishes to step up and update/create a better version of home recon please refrain from throwing design suggestions at me such as make a smaller rover, skycrane, mount to ____ surface,or installing flying pink elephant mod #2501. since at no point during these "insightful" suggestions was the mission parameters/target parameters/install configuration or play style preference even remotely considered and rather then being helpful it comes off as condescending since this isnt a thread about how i should build a rover.

so if it wasnt clear by now

i am not changing my rover design (this design is compact for its intended purpose)

i am not going to use a skycrane (i do not wish to increase my part count among other issues with this approach)

i am not looking for other ways of mounting my rover to a rocket (it needs to be enclosed and inline to achieve its mission goal with my install configuration)

Edited November 24, 2014 by endl

[kerbiloid]

Wayland has great set of ramps and other descent details (WT-51, Pegasus, etc), but I have no idea whether they still working in 0.25.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/24677-%280-23%29-Wayland-Corp-Development-and-released-download-Thread-%28new-parts%29

[endl]

this was suggested already .

i had a thought about the interior mount point that could be moveable to adjust for rover height and thought of a simpler alternative that wouldn't require that at all. instead of going that far to fix the issue it can be done in the model work where the back wall on the interior has some flat space for mounting the in game attachment point. this would let the player tweak the height of the rover in the bay without any additional work beyond modeling. seeing as how theres a pretty good asset already in home recon im considering learning unity/blender and trying to fix it up myself. i have like 0 experience doing model work but its really silly that one one has done a inline rover bay for general use up to this point.