eddiew

Members
  • Content count

    3023
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2604 Excellent

5 Followers

About eddiew

  • Rank
    the one with the ears
  1. Ok, so, turns out the dual front wheels are basically a kerbal grinder, so a mudflap was necessary for their survival! That aside, this crazy thing handles better than I could reasonably have hoped for... Cruises around 25-30m/s, takes slopes of up to 20 degrees at 1g. Can be flipped, but only if you actively look for the steepest, most horrible terrain and then charge at it. Driving with any degree of sanity results in a very stable ride where everyone comes home. Basically, the anti-roll suspension is godly for making rovers that actually handle like you'd expect a wheeled vehicle to handle and which doesn't flip and roll every time the tyres sideslip over a pebble. It's violating my design principles in many ways, but I might put the safety of the next mission in the hands of technology rather than a raw mass of steel plating.
  2. Yus, I liked the flexibility of colouring Going to look at bubble helmets from Wearable KIS Props though, think it'll be more photogenic ^^
  3. Well this is awkward... ...rough design, I'll refine it. Point is that the wheelbase is narrow enough to get down and up a mk3 cargo ramp, this allowing it to be recovered with the lander. It also simply won't flip over unless I drive sideways at a 45 degree slope. The anti-roll feature is my new favourite thing. Second favourite is the scale button
  4. Archer's Enterprise might be a little easier to balance - it's a lot flatter Later generations clearly had no concept of warp drive (or impulse) having anything to do with a thrust vector or centre of mass... but I guess they're outside of normal physics anyway, so maybe that's ok. I believe @JadeOfMaar uses a fancy modded drive for asymmetric ships? ---- This shouldn't work... but it turns out wheels from Kerbal Foundries are amazing when you turn on anti-roll. It simply will not tip over.
  5. Where... did you get that magnificent helmet? I must have this thing... I hate to say it, but your nacelles are hanging a little low... Tis a glorious ship though
  6. I love the anti-roll feature on these wheels... Rovers that fit in mk3 bays are typically rather taller than they are wide, if you want them to have anything on them, but anti-roll is enabling me to drive around like a hooligan anyway, even with SAS turned off *goes off to totally redesign his stock-wheeled rover into a narrower model that can get back up the cargo ramp and be brought home*
  7. Hey @RealGecko, Am I being massively obtuse, or is something amiss? ^^; Edit; I'm being obtuse. I had an outdated Kerbal Foundries. Working fine with latest. Original post spoilered for posterity. Sorry for the mis report and thanks for the improvements to BV
  8. Think like a dart. Weight at the front, fins at the back, and it'll fly fair. Other than that, a more specific question is really quite important because there are literally thousands of configurations that the stock KSP parts will reach orbit in
  9. Basically, every time I want a crew, there are no crew. Every time I don't want a crew, someone sneaks aboard. I assume the game is reading my thoughts via an internet connection to my microwave. I do this because of the occasions when I screw up the ascent stage and a kerbal has to backpack to orbit, or when I realise there's no RCS on the lander and it somehow has to reverse onto the transfer stage's docking port using only the main engine
  10. This changes everything! Thanks for cluing me in
  11. Some supersize rover wheels in this: Alternatively, if you stick with stock wheels, you can do some autopiloting and reduce the amount of work you have to do with driving stuff around - in which case maybe you don't need to move the biggest containers? (Does not work with Foundries wheels!)
  12. My 3.2x @ 70km design might well manage that... is it going to be an official scaling config? Might be inclined to test it out if so, just for curiosity
  13. Needed a 4-seat rover to fit in a mk3 cargo bay. So I made a 4-seat rover that fits in a mk3 cargo bay... The wheelbase is a little narrower than the Desert Willy III, but this model has double the reaction wheel torque and can pull wheelies and flips even under 1g. As yet, the crew haven't found a way to roll him by accident, but the usual design principles have been followed just in case they somehow manage it; no matter how you roll him, the only parts of Willy that can touch the ground are wheels or steel plates. ...well, with the exception of the headlights. Unfortunately they just can't be recessed enough for protection, but honestly, you have to be performing a series of tumbles to pop one off. On the whole, mission control hopes that nobody ever does this, and quietly removes Lyssa Kerman from the list of permitted drivers. All this does come at a cost however, and Desert Willy IV's price tag is upwards of 350,000 roots. It sounds harsh, but we're talking an extremely durable rover with the best legs around, and a trio of heavy duty RTGs to power him all night long. Also, I thinkTM that I might just have solved the crashing issues when KSP starts eating over 10gb memory... been sitting above that for a good 2 hours now.
  14. Interesting read I bailed on 3.2x because I'm ultimately a spaceplane guy, and I could only get to orbit if I left the atmosphere at 70km. Soon as the official config appeared and made it 90, my best stock-parts plane failed to reach orbit. Quite sure I could make an SSTO for 2.5x though, unless you're taking the atmos up to 2.5x70km? Whether that SSTO is useful is another question though, since the destination is surely going to require more than one nerva per 30 ton spaceplane One day I may look at modding jets and rapiers for a larger scale system, see if I can give them a better top speed and service ceiling so that they still deliver a good portion of orbital velocity and altitude. I reckon if rapiers worked up to 35km in a 90km atmosphere, I could have made it work Honestly, at 10x, any kind of contract that makes you launch a plane is a bad call. Remember you're going to have to travel 10x the distance at conventional speeds... It will be a long, long flight. I was pretty bored of winging it in just 3.2x!
  15. Day 6*... still haven't launched... but now I have a mothership design that can carry a mk3 spaceplane to Augustus, which in turn will carry a 4-seat rover. At some point this mission is going to click together and it will be glorious! No, no it won't be able to land on the vacuum worlds... because it's a plane with a cargo ramp. Which is why I'll also need a lander to stick on the other end of the mothership. And possibly a small satellite to send into a polar orbit and do some mapping, I really can't remember if I've done that task yet! Also if you want to talk about long term design, I've been writing a fantasy fiction story for ~18 years... it's not on a back burner, it's just that I write a chapter, then change it, then change it, then change it... it's become a state of zen where the goal is to be occupied by writing a story, rather than to finish it Also also, I'm still annoyed that I broke a bit off my first-edition Optimus Prime when I was 5... he would be worth so much if he was mint * Really more like day 5. I got distracted for one day by Cities Skylines... and didn't eat for 24 hours because that game is preferable to meeting basic physical comforts. At least KSP slows down after a few hours and the restart takes so long that I might as well go for a cuppa and a snack!