New Release Interplanetary Modular Spacecraft RC9

[BruceJohnJennerLawso]

The easy way: scenario editor. (consumables are actually handled as propellant resources, so you have access to them via ScenEdit).
The realistic way: dock any full cargo module, punch up the transfer MFC and transfer the cargo over to your vessel.

Thanks, I suspected that, but I wasnt sure. Its a better method, but Im used to coding resources internally so that users cant cheat by pumping fuel via an MFD :lol:

Sure, we have the VASIMR

:facepalm:

I actually never use the VASIMIR, since it sounds a lot like the real thing may never arrive. It ultimately looks like Ion & Nuclear Thermal are the only real options for the foreseable future I guess. (I also wouldnt have the patience to fly at milligees either)

That is a wrong assumption. Those projects slid into obscurity because they were, at their very core, an evil hack. Orbiter Galaxy isn't really complex... It's interaction with Orbiter itself minimal, wherein lies one of its major grievances. It's just too clumsy and slow, despite Artlav ramping up the texture export to incredible speeds (provided you have the hardware).
Orulex's problem, and the OGLA client's problem in extension, was that terrain collision detection never worked out. It just couldn't be made to work in an acceptable way, so it wasn't used.
Orbiter Galaxy's problem is that textures have to be exported completely before loading a new system.
Both could be solved by terrain and texture LOD support by the orbiter core. The Doctor is at least working on the first, as far as I'm aware.

I dont know if its fair to call it an evil hack, the final Orulex combination is actually fairly stable. All the same though, projects like this do seem to suffer for the lack of experienced programmers available to work on it. At the moment, youre busy with RL, Im just working my way up in terms of experience, & we have PeterRoss working on the source code. Its tough to do projects like this because its just so much work to accomplish in spare time :shrug:

Speaking of the source, can you post that soon PeterRoss? I would like to set that up on my end soon.

Page 24/144. Working on more logical operators. Hopefully I can get most of them copied down by the end of today.

You keep mentioning terrain in the next Orbiter version, I thought we were actually getting farther away from that, no? Maybe I missed an announcement somewhere.

Uh... In fact, you can't use RCS before you power up the control module. You need your computer running to control all the systems. You can only attach and integrate when command modle is offline.

---------- Post added at 23:26 ---------- Previous post was at 23:17 ----------



As Jedidia said, you have no LOX_LH2 tank to fuel your RCS. Preview pictures contain some vital information needed to use modules. All RCS modules are using LOX_LH2.

Yep, CM is one of your first priorities, and LOX/LH2 is needed for RCS. That being said, I should probably create some more realistic RCS parts using more conventional fuels. I guess you could use LOX/LH2 for attitude control, but Ive never heard of it being done before.

Sorry for bombarding this thread with my questions... ._.

No, not at all :thumbup:. Its good to get some more activity around here.

I'm finding it rather hard to read through the guide (the link on the first thread), as its like a cobbled up wall of text that makes it a bit hard for me to pick out which requirements does my craft need. .-.

Im getting there eventually, but the documentation wont be ready for another week or two at least. Hang in there

Just wanted to leave this here, & pick up my prize for the strangest looking IMS ship so far

 

[jedidia]

but Im used to coding resources internally so that users cant cheat by pumping fuel via an MFD

And I do it so users have the most convienient access to all parameters...

I actually never use the VASIMIR, since it sounds a lot like the real thing may never arrive.

The real thing is here alright, it's just never been flown. Mostly because you can't just drive it with an RTG like ion thrusters (well, you could a small one, but then there's not much advantage to an ion thruster), so the main problem is not the VASIMR itself, its the power source to drive it. If NTRs ever see some use, so will the VASIMR, because it would mean that we overcame the political problem of nukes in space.

I dont know if its fair to call it an evil hack, the final Orulex combination is actually fairly stable.

It's a fairly stable evil hack, yes. So is Orbiter Galaxy. Doesn't make it extremely convienient yet, though.

All the same though, projects like this do seem to suffer for the lack of experienced programmers available to work on it.

ORULEX and OGLA certainly did not suffer from lack of an expierienced programmer working on it... they simply suffered because a real implementation that works in all aspects proved unfeasible.

You keep mentioning terrain in the next Orbiter version, I thought we were actually getting farther away from that, no?

We're certainly not getting farther away. The worst that can happen is that it stays just as unreachable, but the Doctor has several times announced interest to work on the topic.
The DX11 client will have a terrain implementation too (although I don't think a procedural one), but Martin once mentioned a possible terrain client, similar to the graphics client, which would provide an opportunity for having several different terrain engines that you could plug into the core. There has been no definite confirmation that this feature is going to be implemented, but the Idea is on the table.

What we know for a fact is that the Doctor is working on a more involved, physically accurate ground collision model. I would say the chances that he'll provide some hooks for a terrain engine to make use of it aren't too bad.

 

[Athena]

Alright, got the hang of everything (Activation of RCS, assigning engine groups and which radiator has to cool which module, etc), awesome addon, i can now make a interplanetary missile out of this. :lol:

 

[PeterRoss]

Huh? since when?

Uh, what I wanted to say was that if you have your CM offline you can't do many useful things except of constructing the vessel.

Speaking of the source, can you post that soon PeterRoss? I would like to set that up on my end soon.

I can do it later today (it will be tomorrow for you), but we really have to use that code-sharing means Jedidia mentioned.

Yep, CM is one of your first priorities, and LOX/LH2 is needed for RCS. That being said, I should probably create some more realistic RCS parts using more conventional fuels. I guess you could use LOX/LH2 for attitude control, but Ive never heard of it being done before.

Yeah I believe we have no propellants fit for real RCS though. Although we can add some quite easily. Suggestions?

Just wanted to leave this here, & pick up my prize for the strangest looking IMS ship so far

:lol: Your solars doubles as a solar sail. Although it's not implemented in IMS, as I know.

Alright, got the hang of everything (Activation of RCS, assigning engine groups and which radiator has to cool which module, etc), awesome addon, i can now make a interplanetary missile out of this.

And this is what IMS is for :thumbup:

 

[BruceJohnJennerLawso]

I can do it later today (it will be tomorrow for you), but we really have to use that code-sharing means Jedidia mentioned.

Well, lets just get started before we start talking about code-sharing. We can set that up later, although is there a cost involved?

Yeah I believe we have no propellants fit for real RCS though. Although we can add some quite easily. Suggestions?

:lol:, cmon you must know my favourite by now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-test_peroxide

I prefer designs that use this over Hydrazine for the sake of safety. RCS fuel shouldnt take up too much of a spacecrafts mass, but the slight overrun needed for the lower ISP is well worth the extra safety factor. Just look at what happened to the Apollo 16 CM after landing :facepalm:

:lol: Your solars doubles as a solar sail. Although it's not implemented in IMS, as I know.

Ahh yes, it probably would do that to me wouldnt it? Im not sure how we can properly mix suntracking & radiation pressure though. I think Martins designed the current model for static ships.

You should see it when it starts to retract the solar panels :lol:. Not a bad little ship though, packs about 6-7 kps on a reasonably light ship (350 metric tonnes)

Progress Update: Page 29/144. Finally moving on to Basic Input/Output

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Why not use N2O4/Hydrazine? If you're careful, it's great stuff.
That said, I know that there's work being done into an ethanol/NO2 biprop RCS engine. Can't recall who it's eing done by or for, though. I doubt that's a hypergolic mixture, so I think that a storabe, non-hypergolic fuel mixture is reasonable. In that case, why not LOX/CH4?

 

[BruceJohnJennerLawso]

Why not use N2O4/Hydrazine? If you're careful, it's great stuff.

Well, I dont have an issue with using hydrazine, I just think it should be used in small quantities, and only when the fuel in question isnt coming back (escape velocity preferably). I thought N2O4/Hydrazine was defined as an IMS fuel too, but maybe I was wrong.

That said, I know that there's work being done into an ethanol/NO2 biprop RCS engine. Can't recall who it's eing done by or for, though. I doubt that's a hypergolic mixture, so I think that a storabe, non-hypergolic fuel mixture is reasonable. In that case, why not LOX/CH4?

Again, nothing wrong with that, but I think hypergolic fuels are needed for RCS thrusters. Doing an engine start every time the pilot wants to make a correction would probably be quite complex. Hence, high concentration peroxide makes a great deal of sense as its non-toxic, relatively easy to get, and its hypergolic when passed through a silver screen. The downside is the lowish ISP, and weak thrust.

 

[MaverickSawyer]

I understand the issue with the starts.

I did a little digging about those ethanol/NO2 thrusters... Aerojet Sacramento is making them for Sierra Nevada's Dream Chaser. So, apparently the starts aren't an issue. Probably some sort of sparker in the chamber.

 

[BruceJohnJennerLawso]

I understand the issue with the starts.

I did a little digging about those ethanol/NO2 thrusters... Aerojet Sacramento is making them for Sierra Nevada's Dream Chaser. So, apparently the starts aren't an issue. Probably some sort of sparker in the chamber.

Cool, do you have any performance specs on that? I would love to see more. I take it that the Dreamchaser is still a go? I wasnt sure whether that design fell behind in the COTS race for funding.

 

[MaverickSawyer]

No, no specs. Sorry about that.

 

[BruceJohnJennerLawso]

No, no specs. Sorry about that.

Oh well. As soon as we can get more info though, we should add that one to IMS. Should be interesting :thumbup:

 

[PeterRoss]

Why not use N2O4/Hydrazine? If you're careful, it's great stuff.
That said, I know that there's work being done into an ethanol/NO2 biprop RCS engine. Can't recall who it's eing done by or for, though. I doubt that's a hypergolic mixture, so I think that a storabe, non-hypergolic fuel mixture is reasonable. In that case, why not LOX/CH4?

Why not use hydrazine as monopropellant?
As for LOX/CH4,, I'm already using it in my lunar program.
I'll try to find some info on ethanol/NO2.

:lol:, cmon you must know my favourite by now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-test_peroxide

I guess you mean to use it as a monopropellant.

 

[BruceJohnJennerLawso]

Why not use hydrazine as monopropellant?

Not that it cant, just that its a dangerous option. Its more effective than HTP, and it keeps slightly better, but the stuff is unbelievably toxic, requires intensive maintenance (Space Shuttle OMS servicing cleared everybody out of the servicing area until it was done). Its excellent in certain applications, but in the case of an IMS ship, RCS fuel will probably need to be shipped in bulk, and shipping 20 tons of it on a rocket would be unbelievably risky. HTP would probably be easier to produce in space, but Id have to research that in order to verify it.

On a side note, Ive produced moderately high grade H2O2 at home using the freezing method (We have wickedly cold winters here too :lol The stuff gave me a really odd feeling burn when I spilled some a few months ago, but Im still here, so I guess Im okay.

I guess you mean to use it as a monopropellant.

Yep, Shuttle-D, Aquila, Shuttle-B, Phoenix Capsule, anything Ive done with RCS usually has it. :thumbup:

HTP is passed through a silver screen to catalyse into steam & thrust.

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Not that it cant, just that its a dangerous option. Its more effective than HTP, and it keeps slightly better, but the stuff is unbelievably toxic, requires intensive maintenance (Space Shuttle OMS servicing cleared everybody out of the servicing area until it was done). Its excellent in certain applications, but in the case of an IMS ship, RCS fuel will probably need to be shipped in bulk, and shipping 20 tons of it on a rocket would be unbelievably risky. HTP would probably be easier to produce in space, but Id have to research that in order to verify it.

On a side note, Ive produced moderately high grade H2O2 at home using the freezing method (We have wickedly cold winters here too :lol The stuff gave me a really odd feeling burn when I spilled some a few months ago, but Im still here, so I guess Im okay.



Yep, Shuttle-D, Aquila, Shuttle-B, Phoenix Capsule, anything Ive done with RCS usually has it. :thumbup:

HTP is passed through a silver screen to catalyse into steam & thrust.

Yeah, but H2O2 over, say, 30% concentration is unstable over the long run. Chemistry classrooms HAVE to use accordian-style bottles to prevent ruptures :shifty: Do you REALLY want aerospace-grade (concentration>90%) just sitting for extended periods of time? :uhh:

One downside to hypergolics right now is the cost. A recent full duration, altitude-simulated test fire of an AJ-10 in support of the upcoming Delta II launch was done at Aerojet Sacramento. It cost several tens of thousands of dollars... in propellant alone.

 

[Scav]

All this talk about dangerous propellants:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=6aK2CKrdjbE#t=4s

 

[PeterRoss]

All this talk about dangerous propellants:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=6aK2CKrdjbE#t=4s

:lol:

On another note, I remember reading that chapter of "Rockets and People" book by Boris Chertok about hydrazine-fueled rocket ignited by mistake during pre-launch maintenance... I believe there were 160 people died or so. The scary thing that hydrazine is.

OK, I'm gonna add these fuels to IMS core:

N2H4 (Hydrazine monopropellant) - nasty toxic thing, but who said space is safe?
HTP (High-Test Peroxide) - nasty unstable thing, but who said space is safe again?
NO2_C2H5OH (ethanol/NO2) - unknown thing which has many uses apart from being rocket fuel component , but happly IMS doen't give a damn about fuel specs, you can define whatever you want in config file later.

Anything else?

P.S. I'm going to change existing N2O2_N2H4 fuel into N2O4_N2H4 - I believe there were a mistake originally since the later is widely used as rocket fuel and former isn't mentioned in this role at all. If I'm wrong, please correct me before it's too late.

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Sorry, folks. Derped the chemistry on that ethanol fuel: It should be N2O, not NO2, which is essentially N2O4 cut in half. It's the nasty brown part of smog, btw. N2O is laughing gas: Nitrous Oxide.

 

[PeterRoss]

Sorry, folks. Derped the chemistry on that ethanol fuel: It should be N2O, not NO2, which is essentially N2O4 cut in half. It's the nasty brown part of smog, btw. N2O is laughing gas: Nitrous Oxide.

Piece o' cake. Will fix it in a minute.

Wait, do you really propose to fill fuel tanks with alcohol and laughing gas?:lol: It's not going to end well at all...:shifty:


Also, about sources: I'll hold it for some time. I've made fixes Jedidia proposed, but never tested it yet because I have to change secondary loading and saving functions first to be compatible with main loading/saving functions.

 

[BruceJohnJennerLawso]

Piece o' cake. Will fix it in a minute.

Wait, do you really propose to fill fuel tanks with alcohol and laughing gas?:lol: It's not going to end well at all...:shifty:

:rofl:

Houston, we BAHAHAHAHA!!!, have a HEHE, problem!!!

---------- Post added at 21:00 ---------- Previous post was at 20:47 ----------

Also, about sources: I'll hold it for some time. I've made fixes Jedidia proposed, but never tested it yet because I have to change secondary loading and saving functions first to be compatible with main loading/saving functions.

Eh? You lost me there. What are the secondaries, some sort of internal data storage scheme for IMS?

 

[jedidia]

What are the secondaries, some sort of internal data storage scheme for IMS?

Finalised vessels use other loading schemes than vessels in construction. They're loaded from two separate files, after all...