Update Deepstar development

[Axel]

@Urwumpe
The Ammonia-Etylen mixture sounds very intresting, but it has to be proven.
Methane-LOX seems to be the easiest way. But a NTR has a nice lifetime cycle of 35 hours (!) at 2600K core temperature. This would enable many missions to various targets with same lander. Chemical engines have lifetime cycle under 1 hour, after 2-3 missions the lander's engine would need intensiv servicing, ofcourse thats cheaper at all than an expensive reactor, but if the mothership is very far and long away from home maybe a better point for the NTR. The reactor weight is lesser than the extra fuel for the pure ch4-lox chemical lander:
empty mass ch4-lox: 19mT
fuel mass: 75mT
total mass 94mT

CH4-NTR:
empty mass 25.5mT
fuel mass 37 mT
total mass 62.5 mT

We need 6,5mT mass for a NTR@250kN thrust, [email protected], 5.5t@182kN, 9t@350kN, 18.5t@1000kN.
So 31.5mT more for the chemical variant. But you are right, i dont' know about its possible to throttle down a NTR savely and fast enough. All studys about NTR's are only speaking about interplanetary vessels.

 

[Urwumpe]

Well, if you could refuel the lander, you could easily reuse it as well. if you need a higher thrust and chamber pressure than possible by simple pressure fed, you could use full-flow staged combustion there. This would also have no inherent throttle limits (since you are combusting two hot gases in the main combustion chamber). Has a minimal performance loss to classic staged combustion (lower effectivity of the turbines, but lower demands on the turbines as well), but the technology permits extremely long engine lifetimes for chemical engines (multiple hours of burn time is already established). The engine cycle also means very agile engine reactions to throttle changes.

And it is proven - the Russians have already build a few engines with this cycle in the 1970s, NASA is investigating a LH2-LOX engine. *

Also, the reactor weight is effectively dry mass (Please leave the room Einstein), which costs you performance in many places. For example also for the RCS. While you will be more sluggish with 30 tons of fuel more during the early braking phase, you will be agile during ascend and docking.

* And FFSC is my favorite engine cycle.

 

[Pioneer]

This might be off-topic, but when are the atmospheric landers coming?

 

[80mileshigh]

This might be off-topic, but when are the atmospheric landers coming?

They're mostly done, but the changes to Deepstar are my priority. I devote most of my free time to cycling these days, and the small amount of time left over to do 3D is currently being taken up with some paid work.

I'll get to them eventually, probably during the southern hemispheric winter (mid year), though I may have the Deepstar work completed sooner.

 

[Axel]

@80mileshigh
I have 3 things
1)Ok then when no other objections, after discusion with Urwumpe we should use the CH4-LOX version, simple, proven and long time stable. Please could you add these new values to the non-atmospheric landers and even the adjusted exhaust look? I increased the fuel mass a little bit, from the calculated 75.37 to 80 mT, to have a reserve we need for transport payload to/from a moon/planet without refuelling. We can now transport 5mT both ways or 10mT one way. Thats a good value and the lander is able to lift from earth surface full loaded with its higher engine thrust now .

EMPTY_MASS=19000
FUEL_MASS=80000 ;75.37mT calculated for LCH4-LOX
MAIN_THRUST=4450
RETRO_THRUST=4450
HOVER_THRUST=1200000
ATTITUDE_THRUST=4450
ISP=3700

[EX_HOVER_0]
OFF=(0,-7,0)
DIR=(0,-1,0)
LENGTH=60
WIDTH=1.6

2)Is it possible to make the inside/wall behind the cockpit of the lander/Deepstar visible? Because when i walk with "first person" tool behind the wall of the cockpit, there is nothing. When i set VISIBLE from "0" to "1" then it works fine but the cockpit is alltime visible, allthough in MFD-mode (F8), thats a little disturbing. When i scroll via mouse in external view it works, but the walls from cargo room to the cockpit and airlock keeping transparent. Maybe there is only a texture missing?

3)Here was the request of an atmospheric lander. But what should be the job of this vessel exactly? We have alot of winged shuttles on the orbiter "market" but a big lack of non-atmospheric landers. And when it should be able to do more than a simple reentry at earth you have to consider its tank size and propulsion system. The next problem is with 2 docked different vessel masses, that the center of mass of Deepstar will change and we get a course deviation when main engine is running, except we using the front docking port for the new atmospheric lander. Another possibility is fuel crossfeeding, but the empty masses between the landers may not to be to different.

 

[Izack]

Hey all, I have a couple of questions about the vessels:

• How large is the crew, and how many people do the landers carry?
• What is the power source on both the main ship and landers?
• Is there any need for UCGO support? The landers and main vehicle don't really have anywhere to attach cargo.

Secondly, I have a status report. So far I have replicated the capabilities of the current Deepstar and landers, and improved some areas. For instance, the rotation of the centrifuge is a bit more realistic, spinning up and down smoothly instead of jerking on and off. Its spin rate can also be set to different values, based on desired pseudo-gravity acceleration (defaults to Martian gravity). The main thrust and Isp can be overridden in the configuration file if the user desires more power (defaults to 2e7 N and 1e5 m/s based on Axel's recommendation). A generalised life-support system exists, consuming oxygen and other consumables based on a crew of 12. UMMU support is in progress. Work has been excruciatingly slow, and I have no real excuse for it but limited time and lack of motivation.

The main problem I'm facing right now is the nontrivial task of making the user interface. Right now it's all on the HUD. It doesn't look half bad for a HUD display, as it's divided into several screens, which can be cycled through and mirrored on both sides, but it's still an ungraceful solution, and I'd like to replace it with a proper 2D panel or virtual cockpit once the rest is done. If there are any programmers who would like to help with this, please feel free to assist. I'll have a repository set up quickly if it's needed.

 

[80mileshigh]

It’s not necroposting … it’s resurrection, and I can prove it:

Coming to a Tuesday in your not-too-distant future, Deepstar 3.0 for Orbiter 2016 will include ...

A new model for Deepstar – while the overall aesthetic is maintained, very little of the original model remains. The engines are completely remodelled following earlier discussions here and the mesh is significantly optimised over the previous version:



A custom station for servicing and refuelling Deepstar in LEO:





Subtle remodelling of the landers with major mesh optimisation:



Lifting bodies for atmospheric landings:





*see this post in the screenshots thread for scale against Deepstar.

Propellant depots at Saturn and Neptune (or wherever you like):





I’ve made a decision to replace the old landscape 'bases' with crewed bases at ...

Mars:



Inspired by the new terrain flattening option in the d3d9 client I’ve thrown in a bonus Mars base with a view:



.... file limit reached - continued in next post ...

 

[80mileshigh]

Vesta:



Ganymede:



Titan (playing with submarines at Kraken Mare):



and Triton:



Bear in mind this is still very much a work in progress, but this isn’t vaporware and I won’t wait another seven years to post an update.

The external models shown here are essentially complete, but the textures will be tweaked and improved and the virtual cockpits are yet to be built.

I keep running into issues with getting it all running smoothly in Orbiter 2016 and I might use this thread as an initial point to cry for help next time I hit a stumbling block in the project.

Hopefully this also gives others in the community some confidence that there is more add-on development going on in the background than might be apparent.

Thanks!

 

[Interceptor]

Looks great 80mileshigh,one suggestion thou,could you please make it so you can move the direction for the dish’s on the antennas like you could with the old spacecraft3 version,I know it’s kind of a stupid request,but,I really liked that feature,thanks and
looking forward to exploring the the universe with the new Deepstar.

 

[Pioneer]

Wow. Absolutely wonderful work you're doing! Cannot wait to go exploring! Though I would like to ask if you're adding anything for the Uranian system. Previously you had terrain for Titania if i remember correctly. Also, I hate to be nitpicky, but it doesn't seem like solar panels would work on Triton.

 

[IronRain]

Amazing! Can’t wait to start exploring again!

 

[n72.75]

Awesome! Good year for resurrection. I went looking for this just last night on OHM, before realizing you hadn't released it yet. I can't wait!

Not a request, but any plans for UMMU? Dan should be releasing an update soon.

 

[4throck]

Looks good! In 2016 there's a big payoff in exploration because of scenery.

I see a rover in one the Mars bases.
Would be good if we had it in other places, or at least some way to land it.
Perhaps putting it on top of the lander's landing stage ?

 

[80mileshigh]

Looks great 80mileshigh,one suggestion thou,could you please make it so you can move the direction for the dish’s on the antennas like you could with the old spacecraft3 version,I know it’s kind of a stupid request,but,I really liked that feature,thanks and
looking forward to exploring the the universe with the new Deepstar.

Will do.

Wow. Absolutely wonderful work you're doing! Cannot wait to go exploring! Though I would like to ask if you're adding anything for the Uranian system. Previously you had terrain for Titania if i remember correctly. Also, I hate to be nitpicky, but it doesn't seem like solar panels would work on Triton.

I don't want to add more bases, but it seems a mistake to exclude a whole system. Also, you waited seven and a half years for me to give you a proper answer on the atmospheric landers so I owe so you one! How's this for a compromise? I've cobbled together a station with rotating modules, from parts used in the LEO station and propellant depots, and placed it in a Uranian orbit - so there's a reason to go there:

Amazing! Can’t wait to start exploring again!

Awesome! Good year for resurrection. I went looking for this just last night on OHM, before realizing you hadn't released it yet. I can't wait!

Not a request, but any plans for UMMU? Dan should be releasing an update soon.

If it's easy to implement, for sure. Let's see what Dan releases.

Looks good! In 2016 there's a big payoff in exploration because of scenery.

I see a rover in one the Mars bases.
Would be good if we had it in other places, or at least some way to land it.
Perhaps putting it on top of the lander's landing stage ?

At the moment that's a static scenery model at the big Mars base (at Gusev Crater) and Ganymede. Landing it might be more than I can accomplish, but if there's interest I could look at converting it to a vessel with Fred's ground vehicle module.

EDIT: That 3.0 announcement was my 300th post. How's that for fate!?

 

[Interceptor]

Thank you 80mileshigh.

 

[4throck]

At the moment that's a static scenery model at the big Mars base (at Gusev Crater) and Ganymede. Landing it might be more than I can accomplish, but if there's interest I could look at converting it to a vessel with Fred's ground vehicle module.

Yes, Fred's ground vehicle would do.
Don't need anything fancy. I don't mind if the rover appears on the ground after landed by magic.
AMSO does that - you teleport in and out of the LM - and that's fine.

 

[Owenmck]

Wow, this looks amazing! Thanks

 

[n72.75]

@80mileshigh, from an aesthetic standpoint, I'm curious about the original conception of Deepstar. It's a darn pretty ship, and I'm interested to know where/how you came up with the idea for the look. The lifting bodies and landers look superb as well, BTW.

RE: UMMU: Watch this thread for updates http://orbiter.dansteph.com/forum/index.php?topic=14499.200

 

[80mileshigh]

I'm interested to know where/how you came up with the idea for the look

I should have gone with the 'easy to assemble' version

 

[Interceptor]

A question 80mileshigh can you have the two landers and,the two shuttle type atmospheric landers all docked to the Deepstar at once?Thanks.