Nao

Members
  • Content count

    561
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

56 Excellent

About Nao

  • Rank
    Junior Rocket Scientist
  1. Idk if i'm more impressed with results or with the ancient program border I use classic shell for my W7's, so it looks exactly the same on my side haha ... Great job on the ascent!
  2. As you can see (the empty space instead of my posts) not so great , made 2 crafts with fun and useful configuration, both ended up having phantom forces, and then life knocked on the door ~~But to answer your previous question, the two tweaks to the 51% craft would be to drop the radial intake (the RAPIERspike actually gives enough air to fly) and to angle the wings up by 5degrees - due to how drag for wings works a bit differently, you get roughly the same drag but a significant increase to lift for most part of the flight increasing efficiency of both early ascent with less drag on rest of the craft for the same lift and for the rocket flight as the additional lift allows for keeping vertical velocity high without excessive attitude tilt over prograde. Nice craft thou! I was using similar configuration but with LV-909 instead of Aerospike. Spike has only a tiny bit more TWR, while 909 is lighter by 0.5t, and provides better ISP. And considering the last "rocket only" push is so short deltaV wise, only 909 was mass effective, in my calculations, when compared to just bringing more fuel for RAPIERs. (Funnily enough i have used the same main wings as you in the same configuration) But in the end during tests payload was only ~52% so idk (with a 2.5m fairing thou)... Now i kind of want to wait for next version and fixes...:/ Anyways congrats again!
  3. Ohhh so thats how this cookie crumbles! I'll show you the tweaks... right with some percentages to boot! soon
  4. Nice Nefrums . Although with two small tweaks to the craft, that configuration can go above 52% hehe...
  5. Payload fraction is "payload mass" divided by "launch mass", and according to MJ you have 562t launch mass, so it's 16% (90/562) not 56% unfortunately If you want to get higher number, take heavier payload and less fuel in the plane itself. From the pictures, with the amount of fuel left in the craft itself i think you will have no troubles going above 30% in that craft Anyways @ Red Iron Crown, i've been thinking in making a true SSTO jet, but to be sure, if i use fairing and don't stage it before payload separation, would it be considered single stage? And could the fairing be counted as payload? At first i tried use open fairings and use undockable cap to get the payload out but undocking destroys fairing and i refuse to pay 3+% payload fraction penalty on using normal cargo bay hahaha.
  6. Nice one Padishar . The consistency is becoming a problem for me too. I've tried doing three identical launches and by comparing video footage, some drag values between same parts at the same points in flight have been different by 10+% (which gave the final altitude error of +/- of 100+m). With this kind of random factor it's hard to guess if a new profile is better or just the drag was lower. At this point i wonder if running the game at different warps, physics delta or framerates (im locked to 30 atm to limit air temperatures in my room haha) could be changing stuff too. Anyways congrats on top spot !
  7. Oh my that was hard... had to modulate throttle up and down several times and make sure to launch at a small angle east to be completely vertical etc... big kudos to MadChris48 for his launch!!! But i don't think 62km would be possible (or is it ?) (ps: i checked the physics file just in case and it's the same as in the link mhoram posted so it should be ok~) The only two mods i have are engineer and hyperedit. (second ofc not used) Edit: As for flight profile i used [X] to cut throttle at 0.9ma and immidiately throttled up with shift... then after ~2-3s there was second throttle reduction, by ~20% for just a second (then full again) From there i did gradual reduction in throttle so that acceleration would go down from 5g to 3g near end of burn. Increased the throttle by shift again at the end so that burnout occurred near 100% power. Most likely overdone it, but "welp" it worked
  8. All the control was from the engine gimbal And the CoM does not move while flying in atmosphere due to fuel being drawn only from the four wing-tanks. I unlocked fuel from the main tank just before going closed cycle on Rapier, and after that CoM shifts to front as the rocket fuel is used so the craft self centers on prograde in atmosphere.Everything can be seen on the crappy video i posted. Although this video was made after i managed to get the thing to orbit properly and in spirit of trying new ascent paths and comparing fuel to orbit to know which one was better i did turn on command pod sas at the end forgetting i should not do that. But it's perfectly possible to turn the craft around only with engine gimbal and minimum throttle which was what i used in several first flights. The ~5l of oxidizer left in the video is ~15s of "rocket sas" which is plenty considering any maneuver before burn needs only to bring the craft in the general direction, as full throttle burn would give precise steering. As for the craft: https://www.dropbox.com/s/uqjq1kj1uqe4gqz/gray%20screen.craft?dl=0 but as i've noted there is probably 51% and more in just tweaking the fuel and maybe adding reversed ram intake instead of nose cone to rapier.
  9. I do use hyperedit, it is so much on the edge it would take too much iterations normally... Right now the best ascent dV was something around 4800m/s (vac) from highest peak on eve. (with temperature issues too).But if there was one rule to atmosphere in FAR it would be "there is no atmosphere" and with 1.0.4 it's the same. Thats why the dV values are so low. Edit: Heh, it might be just barely impossible still, i can get to 100x100km orbit with something like 2t of stuff that isn't engines and fuel from the highest peak, but coming down will be a real problem :/ SSTO ascent is possible thou, so thats one thing down...
  10. Dang it SuicidalInsanity... i've been trying to recreate that craft's performance only to see you are using FAR >_< That said i'm improving my no wings rocket design and from 7500m i'm short 67m/s to 93x91 orbit. So it's most likely doable Wiki, especially with new atmosphere, is definitely not accurate enough. Stating 8000m/s as required minimum dv to orbit, while it's definitely possible with below 5000m/s in patch 1.0.4 (launching from highest peak on the planet)
  11. I'd say guys "go for it" ! Hyperedited a simple one engine-type rocket with a 0.8t capsule and fell short something like 200m/s of orbit from 7600m launch height... so it's probably possible but everything will be on the very edge. Welp "loosing is fun" they say. This will be a really Dwarfy challenge
  12. Gah dang it, i'll try the Youtube automatic song removal thingy... video should be available here shortly: Can't really split the song from KSP sounds so if the above does not work, ill reupload it later with some "crappy" anime music again haha I kind of wonder how does it work thou as the song itself was taken from some random small channel on youtube ... guess that one is blocked in Germany (and maybe more conutries) too. edit: Actually the new video looks like it has the song still (although the audio is half botched lol). Welp, looks like what was "claimed" was the original song while i was using remix so it cut it ~ meh
  13. Sry Laile but i like my spot, it has nice views 73x71km orbit with zero fuel left (was really close lol) 174.9t of rocket fuel on a 617.52t launcher = 28.32% This time video only... @ Red Iron Crown you can check last 30s of it for both mass readouts. EDIT: anybody having troubles loading the video, try using this link: (Audio is half broken, but at least video should work), sorry for inconvenience.Rocket is very similar to the previous design, although heavier and finally symmetrical, (doesn't anything symmetrical look and work 10x better haha) Also a cookie to anybody who knows the connection between craft name and the song played during launch (~kappa)
  14. Started designing this before Jouni's rocket, ended up using the same engines - so there is a chance that it's the theoretical best configuration, although i used more power (1.4 mN compared to Jouni's 1 mN) to lift a touch lighter craft. Anyways here are the photos: craft name: SYNC.ART'SThe new aero definitely has it's good points but i kind of miss the soupospehere, there was room for finesse control and adjustment especially later in the flight, while now everything is settled within first 10s of the launch and you just wait for results At first i was using ore instead of fuel for cargo as it's denser and suffers less drag, but i kind of wanted to have comparison to Jouni's design and ditched it. The launch left me with 3.6t of fuel so adding that to payload i guess +28.2% would be possible but thats for another time Also the drag glitches of many parts like big probe cores and fairings made me use separate stage at the top to hold control elements (smallest core, ASAS and small batery), the big docking port also helps as it has less mas and drag than standard decoupler.
  15. Had a little more time with that, found out that that the bug happens only when the cargo bay part is a root (being a root helps with placing things inside). So i think just making a note about making sure the cargo bay part is not root should be enough. For example, i took selfish_meme's craft, which is without the bug normally, and after making the cargo bay into a root it lost it's drag (after one revert). Fortunately it doesn't matter if the bay part was a root when placing parts, as long as it's not root when going to runway it should be fine. Yes alt+F12 -> Physics tab and it's the first on the list.