Asymmetrical Atlas V Launches - Kerbal Space Program
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 окт 2024
- OSIRIS REX is set to launch from an Atlas V 411 in the next 24 hours, this configuration uses a single Solid rocket booster on the side which is a crazy concept if you're a seasoned KSP player. But there's technical reasons why this works, and design reason for why none of the Atlas V configurations use a symmetrical booster setup.
nasa has great knoledge in unbalanced rockets, considering the shuttle as a mess to balance (huge outside tank, solid booster, wings, off center nozze, off center cargo)
Yep, it's just a thrust vectoring problem that is hard to solve in KSP given the limitations of the build system.
i wish
But it’s built by ula
@@machy8515 so
I looked to see if there is an Atlas 404. Couldn't find it...
This should have more likes; I think it went over most people's heads lol.
There is a 403, but nobody's allowed to see it.
They tried to build a 500 too, but it kept exploding.
+thomastc i think you didn't understand his joke or i didn't understand yours :D
EDIT: I didn't!
I have a 418 in my house.
"[...] you'll see that this rocket is essentially power-sliding like a boss"
That is one of the best quotes I've ever heard!
The septic guy would be proud.
That's basically the same thing i thought of as well :)
Gaalidas Jacksepticeye?
It is
KSP - stock gimballed solids are long overdue....
kw rocketry has some
Mod ≠ stock.
Actually Mod = stock, @Eklykti logic
Isaiah Phillip full stock is boring anyway.
See update 1.8 for details.
Lockheed Martin engineers : so after consulting with an expert, it appears that "adding more boosters" would solve all our problems
Scott : Did I tell them about the symmetry button ? Oh well, they'll figure it out
Really funny
Actually a dual-engined Centaur has flown, just not on an Atlas V. Centaur was originally designed with two RL-10s in the 60's. Performance improvements meant that one could be deleted, though two is still an option.
@Leo Fisher Cassini launched on a Titan IV with Centaur T transfer Stage so yes but not in the Common way you would expect with your comment
Just to put it out there for anyone still watching this :P.. Procedural parts SRBs do now have a setting to adjust the nozzle's tilt. So you can actually build an SRB, and mess with the tilt of the nozzle to counteract it's offset thrust.
Atlas V: Tokyo Drift
Drifting is not power sliding you forza knewb
@@imagineaworld oh yeah, if you know whats drifting is it automaticly makes you a forza player
got it.
and drifting is power sliding
becuase just look at it you literally just slide with power on the wheels and the 'wheel'
The rotational thrust vectoring at 8:50 is so awesome! :D Reminds me of a dance line.
Hi Scott, I've added nozzle deflection on ProceduralSRBs! The plugin should be updated soon.
I was actually adding another feature in the ProceduralPart plugin while listening to your video.
I've added polyhedral (3 to 12 sides), mk2 & mk3 shapes and I've also managed to code an adapter part that support different shapes and sizes (like hexagon to mk2 for example). Theses ares mostly finished and should come soon.
That feel when you've been expecting a brain-damaging flow of math as an explanation and instead...
feeling*
Feel, singular (feels, plural) is internet new-english for regular english: feeling/feelings, emotions
3:32 Scott:"...You're gonna see right away, it' starts going sideways - Whole thing is essentially is power-sliding off the launch pad like a boss."
Best quote ever :D
Scott, could you please do a video on making probes or satellites in KSP look aesthetically better.
And if you do please include the mods you use to make them look better
Well, I'm not Scott, but I can suggest a couple things.
1) Keep them as small as possible. See how tiny you can make the probe and still be able to cram all the necessary bits on in a plausible manner.
2) Look at real probes for inspiration. A personal favorite of mine is Luna 9. There's something amusing about a weird lumpy probe that shoots a big egg into the sky.
3) Try AIES and DMagic Orbital science; they both add nice probe bits and science experiments respectively.
Huh. Well the asymmetry makes sense now. I guess it's easier to just use thrust vectoring than it is to redesign the whole rocket.
at 7:33 there are actually 3 on one side, one is clipping into the other.
Yeah, and there was some clever camera rotation to try and hide that. It failed of course. We're way too quick to be fooled by camera rotations.
I think that was an error when building it
Thank Godfor you posting, I thought I was insane.
Probably forgot symmetry on.
The real one actually has two SRBs clipping into each other. The MAN just doesn't want you to know about it.
Use the SSTU mod, it has what you are looking for in it's SRBs.
I guess now we know why ULA launches are so expensive.
Atlas is an OCD's nightmare
I just watched the ULA launch footage and came here looking for an explaination. Luckily, this was at the top of your channel! This is why the world loves you, Scott.
So, NASA rocket engineers finally went kerbal.
... yeah.
Atlas V is not NASA's rocket. It was made by Untited Launch Alliance (ULA). Just saying.
Project "Peg Leg". Best name for a rocket EVER.
I"m thinking N Korea should consider allowing youtube access to their country.
This reminds me of the shuttle engines looking like they're locked offset to the boosters on launch giving a bit of a side ways drag.
Too bad you did't do this video in RSS/RO :(
RSS/RO doesn't look as pretty.
Scott, what computer system do you use? Specs, please... Thanks!
Rewatched this in my recommendations, and OSIRIS already picked up its sample. Time flies!
the 421 is a person with OCD's nightmare
not really
Crazy to live in a time where the mission this video discusses, Osiris REX, had already been completed.
I just started playing KSP and I absolutely love how you use KSP to show how thing work. we'll done, sub'd for sure
5:44 oh no oh no it's gonna crash oh my GOD
Commence operation pegleg! I lol'd.
sure enough, procedural SRBs now have nozzle deflection.
The ideer is
Who's here after Astra launch?
Scott can you make a video or help me with this problem I'm having with re entering a space plane. when ever I try to re enter it gains speed from gravity and it goes above the part heat which is 1400m/s for alot of stuff and it gets destroyed before I can slow it down. if you could tell me the best angle to re enter or how to slow my self down that would help alot! (can you do it with base game parts only because I have no mods)(I'm asking you because you know sooooo much and your a great guy)(thanks if you respond!!!)
The important thing with aerodynamic reentrys is to use your wings to drop to an altitude where you get the most braking without overheating and then stay at that height. Not every glider can manage it and honestly there's a lot of guesswork involved in finding the reentry trajectory that works for your design.
Break-burning, Airbrakes, Aero breaking. To be fair, the easiest way I found is using tons of airbrakes, which will act like a massive parachute and slow you down rapidly on decent. You could then also have small thrusters in the nose that help slow you down even more.
Easy, just go outside and get a fucking life, nerd. Jk I have no idea.
Thank you Scott for taking the time to explain us these things! And the Kerbal examples certainly helped to illustrate. Science rules!
I wish my life had a meaningful reason. I ponder what would happen if I was on a rocket. flying through space and time. only to explode in the air. and my body would be scattered all over the world. that is how I wanted to die and live at the same time.
How's the job coming along?
what's wrong.
That is all quite profoundly depressive.
Lose the neckbeard. Why tf do people even still have them?!
You look like 8chan's Hotwheels with a fedora.
I can't make orbit with a regular rocket.
CigarBox Guitar congratulations
just keep practicing and learn how to create maneuver nodes
And now, the Osiris-Rex is safely on its way to Bennu after a flawless launch.
"And besides, it works in Kerbal space program"
so youre telling me that the the rocket scientists at NASA were too lazy to think of a proper solution, and said "ah fuck it lets make the rocket asemytrical, its not like people with OCD will care"
NASA didn't build this rocket. ULA makes the Atlas rockets
Rocket science is expensive.
Just don't drop the SRB and put it up on the rocket with the crack facing the rocket.
Excellent video Scott! I'm always impressed by your ability to disseminate technical info.
The one tilted SRB is already found on the KSP stock "Orbiter One".
5:45 That truck flattened that poor little dude!
xD
"Why do they do this?" Obviously, because of budget cuts.
Weird seeing this now that OSIRIS REX has booped its asteroid.
hey scott can you give me a link to your orbital mechanics vid? my science teacher wants to use your vids in her class.
But why make an unbalanced rocket ? I do not get the reason behind it, why not just make it symmetrical ?
Because each SRB adds 10million dollars to the launch cost, and they only needed one for this payload.
Oh, it's easy to forget about money in KSP :P Thanks for the quick response !
+Scott Manley fair point well made lol
But why not make it balanced in the version with more than one SRB?
As Scott said, Atlas V wasn't designed for SRBs originally, so they had to go where ever they would fit. It would have cost too much money to redesign the core properly to have them be placed in symmetrical positions. I believe also doing it like this means all Atlas V rockets can use the same core (there would be space for 4 SRBs to be placed symmetrically I believe), but it's again cheaper to do it like this because every Atlas V can use the same core design.
Hi Scott! I think that you should have rotated the two vector engines and not the solid booster to compensate the slide . The problem is that the vector engines ignite at 0 vectoring and that gives a little side push from the solid booster. If you rotate the vector engines that would compensate the side push from the booster right at the ignition. Regards!
Thanks Scott, Nasa TV mentioned 411 configuration twice already since I started watching the launch coverage - kinda nice to know what they mean. Now if only they would put up altitude in meters and not feet - fingers crossed :)
as long as the taxpayers are funding it in dollars, you will see feet and miles on NASA.
Today's APOD shows the OSIRIS REX liftoff. I noticed the exhaust trails was slanted. Was that because the Atlas is moving laterally or because of the vectored thrust (both?)
Dual Universe MMO, are you in the hype train yet? :P
+Zarniwooper not sure yet.
Bunch of drunk Lockheed engineers going "hey hey, let's put the boosters all asymmetrical-like, see what happens!"
In real life the variants of the atlas V has it's boosters offset because the weight on the inside of the main section is not centered as well as the external engineering. Those fuel tanks aren't just neutrally weighted cans of fuel, they have a lot of internal works as well to handle that fuel and keep it safe when it's flowing.
hi, im from the future, it exploded
jk, its all good
The two are not incompatible
that's what rockets do, controlled directional explosions.
I was thinking the reasoning would be so that they could always build exactly the same core, mounting points and all.
Your 541 was actually a 551... You can't fool us Mr. Manley!
Thanks for the informative video.
However, I think I read there are other versions in the planning with the DEC (dual engine) version of the Centaur upper stage. For the SNC DreamChaser spaceplane I guess, or Boeing CST-100.
That would add more possible versions, the bigger possibly being 552 !
But again, what number would account for the fairing, or lack thereof, when launching a Dreamchaser ?!
I saw the Atlas V 551 in person. My oh my. Space X is really cool, but ULA is also pretty neat.
project pegleg?
There are two mods that will get you something much closer to what the Atlas 411 really looks like. KW Rocketry has an SRB that looks just like the ones used on the Atlas. Its nozzle is angled outward but I'm not sure if it's enough. Ven's Stock Revamp adds an engine that looks a lot like the RD-180. It has two nozzles and a 4 degree vector range.
Love your videos. You know what we need? We need a means of getting stuff up into space that is a cheap as shipping stuff on earth. All these rockets are fun and stuff, but they are a joke. Why? Well, we go move all the dangerous, ,and dirty stuff up into space, and make earth a big park. Houses, trees, and that kind of stuff. With industry in space we could just ship the toxic waste to the sun. Love the work, keep it up. Oh, hey, I know how to do it? Ask me.
Thanks as always for the video Scott. Sorry if it's off topic for the video, but in one of your live streams you mentioned you learned a lot of what you talk about from reading on your own and watching documentaries. Do you have a list of some of your favorite reads somewhere? I'm always looking for great space/physics/astronomy books and shows, and if you have some suggestions I'd love to see. Thanks!
But why the fk would you want vectored single SRB that goes side ways, isn't that wasting precious delta V that could be used to push through atmosphere on horizontal velocity, which gets wasted due to air resistance in low atmosphere. I mean with all the money on R&D trying to get this gimmick to work, they could have just bought another SRB and put it on the other side, like wut
what do the waddling trolls do? Seems like a neat program, but I hate those little people. Makes it into a joke.
"Fueling at the pad and exploding" 😁. SpaceX has gone from the Belle of the Ball to a punchline in no time flat. Probably has something to do with Musk talking about going to Mars, perfecting warp drive, and flying to Alpha Centuari.
If the problem was stuff on the first stage getting in the way, why didn't they space the SRB(s) further out from the core so they wouldn't overlap the stuff sticking off the core, using something like KSP's TT-70?
I was at the ULA Ground Station in Denver for a launch viewing of OSIRIS-rEX. I asked them this very same question about the 441 configuration! It was very interesting to get to talk to the engineers about this.
maybe the first stage shold be tall like the atlas v, i was trying using atlas v in ro with 1 srb aj60, and thats work
Did you say a single engine with two nozzles? Wondering why, knowing the pressure rating of a vessel is inverse to its diameter. Sounds like if you needed two nozzles your combustion chamber would be very big. I am sure there are a lot of other factors to consider.
This doesn't really answer the question of why they'd use asymmetrical booster instead of something inherently stable, like a symmetrical booster configuration... Honestly it looks like something I'd do if I had a lopsided payload in KSP...
another thing you could do is turn down the thrust limiter on the solid rocket so it pushes less and the engine can compensate and it burns longer like you said
KSP FOR ME IS DESTROYED! I:L Everything got deorbited or shot out in to inter-stellar space, or just exploded. I tried buying it again but it wouldn't let me.
It's cool watching this 3 years later when they are currently mapping out where OSIRIS-REx will be making its touchdown on Bennu. Turns out Bennu is basically a giant pile of rubble so it's gonna be tricky
So basically there's no practical smart 'rocket science' reason for doing it, they are just doing the equivalent of 'rag tag' slapping available parts together.
I must say that's a bit disappointing, I was hoping to hear some sort of smart talk about how it helps maneuverability or somehow makes the rocket safer or more agile or something... oh well.
_"A single engine with two nozzles ?"_
You can't just say it and not explain what it is Scott...! That's not like you. In fact it's the inverse of you.
Now I've got to go and look it up for myself.
Hi Scott. I really want to hear about your opinion about the EmDrive and the recent passing of peer review of NASA's version of the engine. Do you have any plans on making a video covering this subject in the foreseeable future?
The other reason for the booster configuration is it allows any number of boosters on the same core, with no specific preparation
I think it would also have been useful to mention that the X2X and X4X versions are asymmetrical because they use positions from the X5X setup, as all setups do.
This means they don't need different mounting points depending on the version, it just means they need some and don't need others.
Wouldn't asymmetrical placement of SRB's like this be more inefficient than an even distribution? Wouldn't you have to burn more fuel to compensate for rotation and torque generated by the placement?
So I've heard some bits about rockets and environmental impact, but given the lack of a reliable alternative, how much longer do you see space fairing nations to use rockets as delivery systems of payloads to orbit? And how concerning is the potential impact on the environment (atmospheric and otherwise)?
...one spacex launch is equivalent of two commercial airliners flights in terms of env impact... there are more than 100 000 (hundred thousand) airliners flights EVERY DAY. Environmental impact of rocket launches is negligible.
It would take a serious increase in rocket launches to compete with other environmental factors like cars, aircraft and cows. We are stuck with chemical rockets until we build a space elevator i suppose
+Brandon Dollar hundreds of tons of fossil fuel get burned in a single rocket launch. Millions of those me of fossil fuel get burned in power stations every day.
+Scott Manley understood. I am not a smart man, but my curiosity was piqued when I overheard talk about environmental impacts of rocket launches during a documentary about the lunar missions. They also mentioned that the local ecosystem could be disrupted by the shockwave of rocket ignitions on launch, but I assumed something like that may be negligible.
-----------
The input is much appreciated, thank you.
+Brandon Dollar i wouldnt worry about being ignorant of these things, its a very narrow field of study and not mentioned much. The only way to learn is to ask every question you want!
Scott you should come visit the Cape sometime, I got the watch the launch from the turn basin I front of THE VAB with my telescope, and it was great.
There I was expecting a good reason for assymetric boosters, turns out its just a bad bodge of an outdated design..
That said, I'd expect nothing less from Boeing..
So the main engine compensate for the unequal thrust ? But couldn't they use the solid booster adequatly to help with the gravity turn like you did in KSP ? "Just" set the thrust to the correct value.
It also makes more sence from a manufacturing perspective all these configurations can be mounted to the same 5 mounting points. If you would try to space them out evenly only the 2 and 4 config could use more than one common mounting point.
The only reason the rocket configuration is unsymmetrical is because of the oxygen pipes on the side? Then how does that explain the single solid rocket, or does having asymmetry provide another benefit?
Scott, will you talk about closed cycle engines? I want to know why it's such a risky design and why it delivers so much more performance.
so youre telling me that the the rocket scientists at NASA were too lazy to think of a proper solution, and said "ah fuck it lets make the rocket asemytrical, its not like people with OCD will care"
dude... you have half a million subscribers. Half a million people worldwide are paying attention to you. that's the size of a small city! congrats!
what about an atlas v 5-5-1 HLV? 3 first stage cores and 15 srb's. might as well since it's all asymmetric awkwardness.
I'm wondering what would happen if you had different style of nose cones? One can assume that it may drift, but I was wondering when and how fast would it have to go and how high would it have to be to do that.
Yes. I was about to ask What's the point of inducing torque if you only have to compensate. And you answered. Keep these coming.
Hunting worse than the LEM ascent stage. Gotta love it!
Now, I wonder if there's a mod for offset SRB nozzles?
Wait, we are getting asteroid samples?!?! Nice!
Nice explanation! Would love if you could do a Soyuz and simulate the Korolev Cross
ruclips.net/video/yQiS1PIpvYg/видео.html
That's actually quite easy
Actually... I would think there really is no advantage to having an asymmetrical rocket except when you are dealing with a main hull that already has asymmetrical bits on the outside of it. Of course there's the monetary advantage if you can pull off the adjustments needed and don't need to get the payload into a really high orbit. If all you need is a little boost at the initial launch stage, then a single booster would offer you exactly what you need without requiring a lot of calculations regarding length of burn and whatnot. You'd waste less resources on the other SRB carrying less than it's optimal fuel source.
The languid april collectively shelter because sword byerly crawl onto a wealthy space. merciful, unkempt driving
I find it ironic that the Atlas V, a decedent of the Atlas ICBM, uses engines from Russia, the reason the Atlas ICBM was built in the first place.
To make it easier to fly you could try using the soft controls (I think it's capslock by default). It helps me, at least.
Scott Manley I LOVE YOUR VIDEOS, PLEASE HELP!! MY COMPUTER IS VERY SLOW TO RUN THIS GAMES PLEASE HELP!!!!!!!!!!!
The back and forth movement is called porpoising. The up and down thrust of the mammals tail cause it’s nose to go up and down in the water.