• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

264 Excellent

About something

  • Rank
    Sr. Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

1379 profile views
  1. The rules state that it isn't allowed to clip engines into each other. I plan to use a craft with several parallel Mk3 fuel tanks which are propelled by KR-2L+ Rhino engines. Thing is, the engines have a slightly larger diameter than the distance of the nodes of the Mk3 fuel tanks, thanks to the planar surfaces of the Mk3 tanks. That again causes minor engine clipping. Forbidden, or allowed?
  2. Well then, yesterday, KSP decided that it was about time to wreck my craft file. After editing and saving I continuously got a null reference error and with a 400+ part vessel, it just isn't fun to browse through the craft file in order to find out what reference is causing the problem. So, I started re-engineering the entire vessel from scratch by using two instances of KSP, one to load the craft to look at the details and one to actually rebuild the vessel. Was kind of an experience from the slideshow point of view. I mean, it was about the first time ever, I got my CPU to a 4x75% load for a continuous amount of time.... So yeah, if you really want to know what your computer /can/ do, then simply start playing KSP simultaneously in 3 or 4 instances...
  3. Was already beginning to wonder what was (not) going on here.... Yeah, losing a computer is a pain in the R S. Nice to see, you somehow managed to recover some/most/all of that data.
  4. The rules say that you have to stop "any given set of parts" before reaching the end of the runway. The rules do not state anything about "staging" and there are some entries here which made use of staging, so that's fine with me. Now if your vehicle collides with the runway and consequently explodes, it didn't stop in the sense of coming to a halt in the reference frame of the runway. Merely, the game engine detected that your parts moved into the terrain and decided to delete those parts instead of stopping them. That's what we commonly call an explosion. So, technically, you didn't actually stop your vehicle. Also, we might argue, that a non-existent vehicle has no defined state of movement. That is, you vehicle would be both - moving and not moving - if it completely exploded. Now since you cannot tell me where your vehicle actually is, you can't disprove that it left the runway Arguing from a classical point of view, an explosion somehow is a form of violent diffusion which basically means your parts spread over the space in the proximity which includes the terrain that is not the runway. That would mean you left the runway... So, just stage those parts away
  5. Nice to hear you found the bug. Didn't realize the central node was a winglet in fact..
  6. Do you have any form of yaw control? At least I can't see any yaw control on the image. That might help reducing the 'drift'. Also when coming in with a heading slightly off 090 or 270 you might want to yaw back to the correct heading in the very last moment before touchdown. (Roll usually is not an option in that phase of flight as your wing would strike the runway)
  7. There are only 4 Kerbals, one female, three male. How do you want to hook them up? I would really like to see an effect of the stupidity and courage ratings. I mean why hiring a stupid scientist? Also some more personal traits might be nice.
  8. The controls are right for flight sims. Almost every game I know uses the 'down' key to pitch up and the 'up' key to pitch down as this emulates the real stick movement. That's why it's called to 'pull up' - you pull the stick towards yourself in order to climb.
  9. I guess this game is way too Roland Emmerich in order to develop romance. Most people revert once Jeb or Val are killed but that's about all character depth you get from KSP and to be fair you wouldn't expect your protagonists to die in an Emmerich film as well...
  10. Interesting paintings there. Kind of takes imagination beyond what I expected ... but then again, the game - KSP itself - requires a lot of imagination...
  11. In order to prevent a flame war, let's simply pretend there was no such mod. Also, Dres doesn't exist...
  12. There's a subtle difference between My Little Pony and anime Kerbals. Hmm just waiting for a MLP mod to appear. That's going to be worse than the console vs GPCGMR flame war we did have here...
  13. 618m/s is impressive indeed. Going to add some sort of ranking to the OP once I am back from my Easter vacation. Doing that with a mobile isn't that much fun...
  14. So just a few questions... guess they are answered somewhere and I am just too dumb to find 'em. Providing payloads, do I have sort of a budget, or am I kind of generating money for the launch providers ? If I am limited by a budget, who's paying me? The government? Also, is there a link to the savefile, so that I could have a look at this, or is this challenge sort of a text based browser game at this time? Is there an overview in a google doc or whatever? It's just that I find it difficult to obtain game related data in the OP... Generally, I could think of designing a few satellites and stuff, but before doing so, it'd be nice to have some overview on the intended gameplay.
  15. Speed is the projection of your velocity onto a given plane of reference. The "speed over land" is the projection of your velocity onto the surface of Kerbin, while your "speed" is projected onto a plane which is aligned with your movement. If you start a rocket and fly straight up, press F3. You will realize that your rocket might very well have a velocity of 300m/s, but your "speed over land" might be as low as 0m/s if you fly straight up in the sky. So, the speed we're interested in, is the component of your velocity which is aligned with the runway - the "speed over land". Your idea would require precise time keeping, while KSP offers seconds at best. In order to convert that time to a speed, we had to divide the distance covered by the time needed, since we do not require the vehicle to stop at the end of the runway (if you cope with half a runway that's fine). As a result we would obtain an average speed which - unfortunately - wouldn't tell us the maximum speed of that vehicle since the acceleration phases are still unknown. I like to go with a minimum set of rules since the challenge should be easy to understand - nobody likes reading through three pages of rules, just to understand what he has or has not to do. Also, a minimalistic attempt to rules leaves many options to fulfill the task which again gets you quite some creative solutions. My vehicle used 'chutes mounted behind the rear axle in order to pitch up the vehicle during the slowdown process. As a result, the increased air resistance lead to much shorter slowdown distances (originally I tried to use the canards as a sort of spoiler to get me the additional downforce to make use of the breaks of the wheels...but well, science, you know?) But seeing those reverse engines, I actually should think of carrying the extra weight...