News Space Plane Eridanus, final development steps

[ky]

One thing you guys should add,if it's possible, is the shuttle breaking up if you enter on an incorect re-entry angle.Or ice or foam from the quasar rocket breaking off and hitting the shuttle.Something like universal breakup.

 

[Capt_hensley]

And it has the black "chines" according to NASA,the black area on on the upper surfaces of the Eridanus' wing.

I thought those were shoulders, the chin is under the crew compartment and looks to be correct? Just an observation...

Retraction: I should read more carefully, the chins look great!

 

[Robitaille_Fan]

One thing you guys should add,if it's possible, is the shuttle breaking up if you enter on an incorect re-entry angle.

This feature was implemented (and personally I have seen the effect of a bad atmospheric reentry when I tested Eridanus :beathead: )

Or ice or foam from the quasar rocket breaking off and hitting the shuttle.Something like universal breakup.

This was not implemented because Quasar rocket has a shield for the TPS, so this feature is unnecessary and makes the guidance unstable.

 

[fausto]

RMS mobile camera:

 

[fausto]

Eridanus Boom Sensor System.. we're working on multiple mobile cameras views..

 

[Capt_hensley]

Are the grapple fixtures and Latching End Effectors standard?
Whos standard?

1. US Space Shuttle Canada Arm 1 GF/LEE [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadarm"]Canadarm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
2. ISS Canada Arm 2 (SSRMS)PDGF/PDLEE http://virtualastronaut.tietronix.com/teacherportal/pdfs/Humans.and.Robots.pdf
3. Japans Mini RMS With Fine Attachment http://kibo.jaxa.jp/en/about/kibo/rms/
4. European Arm http://www.esa.int/esaHS/ESAQEI0VMOC_iss_0.html

Also I just want to be sure these are still good:

4.5 M or 14.7 ft Wide/Diameter
10 M or 32.8 ft Long
14210 kg or 31327 lbs weight
14.21 Metric tonnes or 15.6635 Short tons

 

[Cras]

How is the re-entry? Is there any autoflight involved or is it entirely by hand? Any MFDs to help or can we expect to use Aerobrake, Base Sync, or would even Glideslope work with it?

 

[RisingFury]

A little explanation of why we choose the "sidemount" option instead of "in line" option.
After consulting with some experts of www.ForumAstronautico.it (italian astronautic forum), they suggested the "sidemount" option because the turbulence generated by the wings at supersonic speed is much lower.

Experts? You mean McExperts?

I doubt their statement is correct. The Space Shuttle burns it's main engines while it flies to orbit. Your shuttle will not. That means that if you want to prevent the whole stack to tumble, you'll need to deflect the engines to produce thrust that points right through the center of gravity. Having a 15 ton payload + weight of space craft on the side is a bad idea when the space craft does not burn it's engines... the center of gravity will thus be far off the center of stack... because of this, to fly upwards, the stack will have to be angled a few degrees relative to the airspeed. That will cause considerable profile drag and turbulence!

If you put the shuttle on top, you'll be able to fly right into the windspeed, minimizing drag. The problem then becomes instability... wings will start acting like canards. Even a small deflection that cannot get corrected by elevons will topple the space craft over.

 

[fausto]

Experts? You mean McExperts?

I doubt their statement is correct. The Space Shuttle burns it's main engines while it flies to orbit. Your shuttle will not. That means that if you want to prevent the whole stack to tumble, you'll need to deflect the engines to produce thrust that points right through the center of gravity. Having a 15 ton payload + weight of space craft on the side is a bad idea when the space craft does not burn it's engines... the center of gravity will thus be far off the center of stack... because of this, to fly upwards, the stack will have to be angled a few degrees relative to the airspeed. That will cause considerable profile drag and turbulence!

If you put the shuttle on top, you'll be able to fly right into the windspeed, minimizing drag. The problem then becomes instability... wings will start acting like canards. Even a small deflection that cannot get corrected by elevons will topple the space craft over.

What about Buran? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buran_program#Key_differences_from_the_NASA_Space_Shuttle

its maximum liftoff mass was 105 tons (much higher than eridanus' 80 tons) and from this article:

"..The main engines were mounted on the core Energia stage and thus destroyed when it burns up in the atmosphere, unlike the U.S. Space Shuttle which has reusable main engines in the orbiter.."

We have now 3 possibilities:

1) ENERGIA scientists are mistaken and you are right
2) ENERGIA scientists are right and you are mistaken
3) You don't know anything about Buran Program.. (see number 2)

---------- Post added at 11:47 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:32 AM ----------

Are the grapple fixtures and Latching End Effectors standard?
Whos standard?

1. US Space Shuttle Canada Arm 1 GF/LEE Canadarm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
2. ISS Canada Arm 2 (SSRMS)PDGF/PDLEE http://virtualastronaut.tietronix.com/teacherportal/pdfs/Humans.and.Robots.pdf
3. Japans Mini RMS With Fine Attachment http://kibo.jaxa.jp/en/about/kibo/rms/
4. European Arm http://www.esa.int/esaHS/ESAQEI0VMOC_iss_0.html

Also I just want to be sure these are still good:

4.5 M or 14.7 ft Wide/Diameter
10 M or 32.8 ft Long
14210 kg or 31327 lbs weight
14.21 Metric tonnes or 15.6635 Short tons

Same standards as number 1 (Space Shuttle).. Yes they are good!!

How is the re-entry? Is there any autoflight involved or is it entirely by hand? Any MFDs to help or can we expect to use Aerobrake, Base Sync, or would even Glideslope work with it?

The reentry is manual, but we are writing a reentry procedure.. it will be like a sort of tutorial..

 

[K_Jameson]

Experts? You mean McExperts?

Some users of forumastronautico.it are deeply involved in real ASI space programs.

 

[Capt_hensley]

Thanks Fausto,

I know the project is running along fast, and that most things are fixed in cement, but if I might recommend, Option #2 (PDGF/PDLEE) might serve the craft well, as it could handle some science packages that would need the Power, and Data connections. Just looking for the best this add-on can be, but I understand it can be a pain to change things mid-stream.

Keep up the great work, I'm really looking forward to the end result... a great sim experience!

 

[fausto]

From Andrew (K_Jameson on OF):

First, I did a launch, then I took note of the weight of Eridanus when it reaches the sound barrier, at the maximum aerodynamic pressure:

Total weight = 1,273,400 kg

I calculated the weight of all loads:

Eridanus at full load = 79,900 kg
LES = 7200 kg
Protective Shield = 2300 kg
Rocket attachment gantry = 3360 kg
TOTAL = 92,760 kg

Distance between the two centers of gravity: roughly calculated on anim8r, about 7 meters and 10 cm.

Center of gravity of the system = 710 * (92760/1273400) = 52 centimeters.

So the center of gravity, at the moment of Max Q, is about half a meter from the Quasar center line.

A graphic sketch: forget the vertical white line. The two horizontal lines are the Eridanus center of gravity and the Quasar center of gravity, while the red line indicates the axis of the common center of gravity, that I calculated with the above data. Nearly aligned with the rocket.

In the picture below I've marked on the red line a green point, at about the middle of the Quasar, which should be the real center of gravity. This is the point we must align with the thrust of the engines.
By connecting the base of the rocket (the exhausts exit point ) with the center of gravity we get the following green line:

This line theoretically should be the engine gimbal angle required to focus the center of gravity: a 0.9° angle, a very very manageable angle.
Obviously with boosters detachment and the progressive depletion of the core stage, the focus moves to the outside, until it get very close to Eridanus, but at that moment you will be already in space so there will be no more aerodynamic problems.

 

[Capt_hensley]

^Great work, Nicely done.

 

[Cras]

I just need to get my hands on this craft. I need its payload bay to haul up space station modules into LEO! The XR-2s bay is just too darn small.

Will the Eridanus be a bit more UMMU friendly than the Antares?

 

[fausto]

We're improving UMMU capabilities on Eridanus.. we're fixing many issues about crew transfer and EVAs.. So the answer is yes, more friendly! :thumbup:

 

[Spacethingy]

Looks beautiful! I love the Deltaglider-Shuttle hybrid look.

How is its payload capacity compared to the shuttle?

Edit: got it, didn't read enough previous posts.

 

[Jobyh]

It's looking really good. Cant wait to try it!
Just wondering, will damage be simulated during re-entry, destroying the ship if you mess up?
For me that'd mean a lot more ummu fatalities but I think it adds to the realism!

 

[K_Jameson]

will damage be simulated during re-entry, destroying the ship if you mess up?

Yes. :thumbup:

 

[Ark]

Is it going to be dependent on getting "spawned" into existence at the end of the launch sequence, like the Antares? Antares gives you a half hour to deploy the panels before it teleports to ground and kills everyone, so it can't sit on top of a Velcro stack and wait for a launch window. I dislike multistage and prefer to rig everything up with Velcro so the ships all "exist" within the scenario file upon launch. That way I can customize stuff like crew member names and not get stuck with the default settings that multistage spawns it with.

 

[fausto]

:thumbup:

Is it going to be dependent on getting "spawned" into existence at the end of the launch sequence, like the Antares? Antares gives you a half hour to deploy the panels before it teleports to ground and kills everyone, so it can't sit on top of a Velcro stack and wait for a launch window. I dislike multistage and prefer to rig everything up with Velcro so the ships all "exist" within the scenario file upon launch. That way I can customize stuff like crew member names and not get stuck with the default settings that multistage spawns it with.

No, you are not going to be killed with Eridanus, because it uses fuel cells in addition to solar panels.. you have much more time than 30 minutes!

And for Jobyh.. yes, we have a burn up simulation if dynamic pressure rise over a critical limit.. we developed red heat shield to simulate the temperature going up