Project XR4 Nyx (WIP)

[Epsilon]

Figured I'd post this since Loru's posted the XR3 thread. Might as well let people eyeball the model and maybe hopefully get some help with it.

Note: This vessel is being created with the blessing of dbeachy1 - we're modelling them, he's coding for them.

Additional trivia: I named this vessel before talking to dbeachy1. We've talked and hammered out a better name for it. We both kinda really like this one. >_>

Name: XR4 "Nyx"
Role: Suborbital/Orbital Cargo Transport
Cargo Capacity: 12 TEU (For reference the XR5 carries 36 TEU.)

Special Features (Suggested): The Nyx has a new type of landing gear which absorbs shock better than the traditional landing gear of the XR2 and XR5. This allows it to land faster, harder, and heavier, with less damage to cargo and crew. The landing gear can also move to pitch up the nose before takeoff - this allows the Nyx to take off with heavier loads, since the spaceplane doesn't need to rely only on its elevons to rotate.

The Nyx is designed to go faster in atmospheres than most other spaceplanes, and is designed to land "hotter." This gives it an advantage during the normally "slow" phases of flight.

Pictures:

Top View:

Side View:

Bottom View:

Bottom-Side View:

This model is nearly finished, although I may decide to redo the entire thing just because I'm crazy like that.

One thing I need is someone who can texture, though - preferably in Blender since that's what I use to make the models. Any talented takers (since I haven't heard from the person that was going to do it before for a few months?)

From a code standpoint, there's a few new ideas in here. Moving landing gear, obviously, will require another control on the 2D panel.

I'm not sure if it's possible, but it'd be nice to have the gear doors have a "hotter" temperature limit (by probably 80-100C) than say, hover doors or other underside doors.

The radiators will probably have the most complex deployment animation of all the XR vessels. Also, their positioning should let them stay out in higher dynamic pressures (I'm not acutally sure of this <_<.)

The cockpit includes a beer fridge and an open container, which every space traveller needs*.

Three more pictures: Size comparisons with the XR5:

Yet another picture: View of the cargo area:

Each cargo is a "standard" XR5 style cargo unit, which is 2.43m x 2.59m x 6.09m (the same size as a 20-foot cargo container, a.k.a. TEU)

* Really though. Don't drink and orbit without a designated co-pilot.

 

[N_Molson]

A big landing gear at high speeds creates a huge aerodynamic drag, provided we're not looking the structural side of things... :2cents:

 

[Epsilon]

A big landing gear at high speeds creates a huge aerodynamic drag, provided we're not looking the structural side of things... :2cents:

I just posted some comparison shots with the XR5. I'm not sure they're that much bigger, comparatively speaking.

From a structural standpoint, yes - you could theoretically stick these things out as airbrakes once your underside is cool enough. They wouldn't be as effective as actual airbrakes, but they'd help a bit and they wouldn't rip off nearly as easily. The tires would melt before the gear was affected.

 

[PeterRoss]

I'd like to ask a question common for XR vessels but commonly hated by XR constructors: will its payload bay be able to fit a standard Shuttle payload or SBB4 module?

 

[Epsilon]

I'd like to ask a question common for XR vessels but commonly hated by XR constructors: will its payload bay be able to fit a standard Shuttle payload or SBB4 module?

What are the sizes on them?

The payload bay for the XR4 is roughly 12m wide by 15m long by about 3.5m at its highest point and 2.5m high at the sides. If it'd fit in that cube, all you'd need other than that is a .cfg that's compatible with the XR series payload system.

 

[PeterRoss]

Common SBB4 module is a cylinder 10 m long with diameter of 5 meters, so it doesn't fit. Pity, the only vessel useful to me of all the renewed XR fleet is still the good old XR5.

 

[Pipcard]

Common SBB4 module is a cylinder 10 m long with diameter of 5 meters, so it doesn't fit. Pity, the only vessel useful to me of all the renewed XR fleet is still the good old XR5.

And some people complain the XR5 is overkill for station building.

 

[PeterRoss]

And some people complain the XR5 is overkill for station building.

Maybe these people never built a really big stations

 

[Epsilon]

Common SBB4 module is a cylinder 10 m long with diameter of 5 meters, so it doesn't fit. Pity, the only vessel useful to me of all the renewed XR fleet is still the good old XR5.

Well, it'd fit lengthwise, but not height-wise. I just fiddled around in Blender a bit, and it seems the payload bay is 2.75m tall at the edges, 4m tall at the center, 12.6m wide, and 16m long. So if it weren't for the height, you could fit a pair of them side-by-side. For reference, the Atlantis payload bay will fit a payload that's 5m in diameter (I didn't check the length.)

I might look into seeing if I can make the payload bay a bit taller without affecting the overall shape - I wouldn't mind it being able to be used for this purpose in any case.

Edit: Part of the problem is that I don't want it looking like a humpback whale. You know, like the XR5.

Edit 2: Oh dear god that looks ugly. I'll keep this in mind if I decide to redo the model though. >_>

 

[PeterRoss]

I might look into seeing if I can make the payload bay a bit taller without affecting the overall shape - I wouldn't mind it being able to be used for this purpose in any case.

Edit: Part of the problem is that I don't want it looking like a humpback whale. You know, like the XR5.

It would be great if you make it possible. The real diameter of SBB4 modules is somewhat less than 5m, it's rather 4.5 m or something. I can give you exact numbers a bit later if you're interested.

 

[Epsilon]

It would be great if you make it possible. The real diameter of SBB4 modules is somewhat less than 5m, it's rather 4.5 m or something. I can give you exact numbers a bit later if you're interested.

I was going to PM this, but it should be interesting to anyone who wants this info.

In short, to keep the shape of the craft but increase the cargo space (height-wise,) I'm probably going to need to just redo the entire model. This isn't necessarily a terrible thing since I was probably going to do it anyway.

As I said in my edit, I'll definitely keep this in mind if/when I redo the model. It may even end up with a different shape - I still want something that'll carry around 10-12 TEU, but with that height, I'll probably want to double-stack the cargo rather than have it as a single layer.

For the XR5, have you considered laying the cargos out cross-ways? You should theoretically be able to fit 4 SSBB cargos (at the sizes you outlined) in the XR5's bay - the only problem is that I think the cargo slots are too short on the sides (despite being able to handle more height - 4.6m, give or take.) Might be a "feature request" to make if you can't, since it ought to be a relatively simple bit of code-changing. They could even be made 5m tall (slot-size), since you'd only be putting the cargos in the center slots in the first place - perhaps a config option that says "I'm using SSBB."

 

[Zatnikitelman]

If it helps, the maximum negotiable payload envelope for the (real life) Space Shuttle is 4.572 meters. The actual payload bay is a bit bigger and parts of the payload (and for structural attachment, must) can exceed this envelope a little bit.
But I think the XR4 looks great as it is, you've done a great job Epsilon!

 

[Epsilon]

If it helps, the maximum negotiable payload envelope for the (real life) Space Shuttle is 4.572 meters. The actual payload bay is a bit bigger and parts of the payload (and for structural attachment, must) can exceed this envelope a little bit.
But I think the XR4 looks great as it is, you've done a great job Epsilon!

This is indeed helpful. If the SSBB stuff is 4.5m, I can bump the height up by a hair (since I've got about 15cm clearance to the wheelwells on the bottom) and just tell Doug to make the center slot heights 4.5m and say it'll carry 1 payload. If not though, it'll need a redesign.

... actually, with the way the payload bay is laid out, it'd need a redesign no matter what now that I think of it - the payload won't center between the slots like that unless both slots were ~4.5m tall. I'd probably need to rotate the orientation so the cargo is longways in the cargo bay (which would increase the length of the craft or decrease the capacity.)

Damn you, STS, for making payloads a goofy round shape. :rant:

This may not happen for the XR4 (because I don't want the big humpback cargo bay,) although the suggestion to Doug still stands.

 

[Pipcard]

A goofy round shape is what most station modules are, though.

 

[PhantomCruiser]

I quite like it! At first glance it reminds me of the shuttles from Babylon 5. I'll be watching the development of the expanded XR fleet (and probably putting them to good use!).

 

[jedidia]

Common SBB4 module is a cylinder 10 m long with diameter of 5 meters,

The maximum diameter of a shuttle payload is 4.6 m IRL.

I think I see the problem here... The XR series are built with their own payload standard in mind. Making the cargo bay much higher would lead to having a secomd deck to stack 'em. The XR5 is built for this kind of carrying capacity, so no problem there. But if you want a bird with less capacity, you want to avoid making a second deck.

The Nyx has a new type of landing gear which absorbs shock better than the traditional landing gear of the XR2 and XR5. This allows it to land faster, harder, and heavier, with less damage to cargo and crew.

Spells "dropship" to me!

Anyways, two XR vessels in development at the same time? must be christmass, easter, pentecoast and both Bayrams at the same day! :lol: I hope Doug isn't gonna regret the decision! Speaking about christmass, I would guess a release this year is utopian?

 

[orb]

Anyways, two XR vessels in development at the same time?

Three XR vessels, actually. See that post for details.

 

[Epsilon]

The maximum diameter of a shuttle payload is 4.6 m IRL.

I think I see the problem here... The XR series are built with their own payload standard in mind. Making the cargo bay much higher would lead to having a secomd deck to stack 'em. The XR5 is built for this kind of carrying capacity, so no problem there. But if you want a bird with less capacity, you want to avoid making a second deck.

The XR2 is designed for its own payloads, but the XR5 (and because of this, the XR4) is designed with real shipping containers in mind*.

You're right about the capacity thing but incorrect about the reasoning as I see it - you're looking at two different paradigms for shipping. The Space Shuttle seems like it's designed for the round payloads that would normally have gone up attached inside a rocket stack. I submit this quote from IRC:

[22:20:13] <Zatman> and lol at you cursing STS
[22:20:33] <Epsilon> Inertia and being the first to do something is a powerful thing.
[22:21:33] <Epsilon> Totally makes sense since the cylinder is pretty much the best structure:weight:volume ratio you're getting outside of a sphere, but it's still annoying.

To compare, the XR5 seems like it's designed so you can have a container ship pull up to "Port Wideawake," offload, and then stack the containers right back into the XR5 with "optimal fit." Strap the containers down, and you're ready to roll immediately with no repacking or fuss.

Spells "dropship" to me!

Anyways, two XR vessels in development at the same time? must be christmass, easter, pentecoast and both Bayrams at the same day! :lol: I hope Doug isn't gonna regret the decision! Speaking about christmass, I would guess a release this year is utopian?

Loru's likely to be done faster than I am. I'm suck at texturing - that's why it'd be ideal to have someone else do it. If I do it, it'll probably be functional and not much else. I'd obviously rather avoid that if at all possible.

* All this is educated speculation on my part, and I wouldn't mind hearing Doug chime in on his actual reasoning. The container sizes in the XR5's config file and the container size given in the Wikipedia article is way too close to be "just coincidence" in my opinion.

 

[jedidia]

Three XR vessels, actually. See that post for details.

I actually saw that, but I wouldn't have expected to be developed at the same time...

 

[Epsilon]

I actually saw that, but I wouldn't have expected to be developed at the same time...

As far as I know, 80% of the work is already done. Doug should be able to use the pre-existing XR1/XR2/XR5 code with all three of these craft - he'd just need to tweak the 2D panels and assorted extras for each craft.

Again, not speaking for him, but he should be able to directly use the payload management system (with minor tweaks,) the 2D panel (with an additional bit for the gear movement,) the SCRAM engines, the regular engines, etc. etc. I find it hard to believe that his code won't be "reusable." The hardest part will probably be fiddling with the animations.

an XR-4? is that like an XR with a Space Shuttle like cargo bay?

I'm stealing this post from the thread that orb posted.

The more I look at it, the more it seems like this is a gap in the XR series (despite the reasoning I posted above.) If I do a redesign of this, I'm going to see what I can do to get a 4.6m (as per jedida's post) height cargo bay in the thing. It won't be a perfect fit, but I'll try to make it usable as an STS replacement.