JMBuilder

Members
  • Content count

    418
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

63 Excellent

About JMBuilder

  • Rank
    StarSpeaker
  1. I'm talkin' stock.
  2. So I'm working on some replicas of old fighter jets, like the F-84 Thunderjet and the experimental would-have-been-but-never-was Ta-183. My biggest problem is the low amount of thrust from the current 0.625m jet engine. It's a nice little jet and works great on replicas of the Me-262 and MiG-9, but aircraft like the Thunderjet need something with a bit more punch. My thought is to add a new 0.625m jet with more thrust than the current 0.625m jet, but less than its 1.25m big brother. It would have less efficiency than its little-ish brother, but would provide the punch needed to get something like the oddly-shaped Thunderjet up to faster speeds.
  3. Airships... I've literally been waiting years for stock airships...
  4. I know that there has been talk in the past of bringing back the old part models. I believe I have a method of doing so. Basically, some new parts with the old textures (smoothed out, but staying true to the original textures) would be added as cheap, low-tech items for an early space program. TCFF-01 A cheap but heavy fuel tank. Its designers insist that TCFF does not stand for "Tin-Can Full of Fuel." TCFF-02 The half-size little brother of the Tin-Ca-... I mean... TCFF-01. BR-1A One of the first rocket engines ever produced on Kerbin. It was quickly adopted by smaller space programs because of its cheapness and was used as first-stage propulsion and as a heavy-duty grill. BR-1B The gimbal-capable cousin of the BR-1A. It became popular as a cheap upper-stage rocket and carnival ride. X-01 Command Pod The original command pod. Because it was built in 2.5m size while most industries were focusing on 1.25m size, it was phased out. However, some rookie rocketeers have taken a liking to the old surplus pod and have been putting it to good use. APE-LAF The Atmospheric Propulsion Engine for Low Altitude Flight is the first jet engine ever produced for space programs. Its design was highly controversial since the APE series was not a rocket and its target industries focused on space travel. APE-HAF In response to the controversies surrounding the APE-LAF, the High Altitude Flight variant was developed. Its designers claimed that, while it still required oxygen to function, it was technically a rocket since it burned fuel directly as opposed to spinning a turbine. APIS After complaints of the APE series of engines sputtering and not working, the Atmospheric Propulsion Intake System was slapped together. It was fascinating to pilots because of the mysterious blue glow that it would emit at high speeds. ACM Mk1 When space programs began asking for a more permanent and aerodynamic alternative to command pods, the Aerodynamic Command Module was developed. Its designer insists that it is not a nosecone with controls and a window thrown into it. ACM Mk1b After slamming a plane into the side of a hangar and flattening the front of the ACM, it was accepted as a new variant. ACM Mk3 The chunky prototype of the Mk3 Cockpit. While heavier, the ACM Mk3 is cheaper and slightly smaller. C7 SLG C7's own Static Landing Gear. Intended as cheap, heavy-duty landing wheels. Not the most aerodynamic of aircraft equipment, but it gets the job done.
  5. NEIN. ICH BIN MEIN SCHNITZEL.
  6. This is suddenly a creepypasta page... Why did you need to include such a creep story that ate liverwurst besides the planet to the you had flop gut.
  7. Interesting sprout, sauce?
  8. Keep it clean, please. Allow me to begin: The other bread, those jar the brick so that biscuit my hair the scissors and then cheese but forgot he the pickle book and.
  9. Simple suggestion. It would be nice to have a half-size liquid fuel tank for more precise fuselage structures and the like. Using the rocket fuel tanks without oxidizer looks clunky.
  10. So apparently, I can't even make a toilet-ish joke that would be fine for a 3-year-old to hear on these forums. "Mild violation of rule 2.2."

    I am quite PO'd at the moment. I'm glad that these forums are kept clean by the moderators, but this is a bit much. I tend to keep a cool head, but when it comes to being penalized for something so stupid, even just a warning, I lose ALL of my cool and want to devour souls.

  11. Do they take time dilation and its effects on our observation into account? This could get really mathematical really quick.
  12. When a massive star collapses in on itself, the resulting neutron star is spinning extremely fast. Scientists liken this fact to how ice skaters tuck their arms in while spinning to make themselves spin faster. It got me thinking... Is it possible that supermassive stars begin spinning faster than light once they collapse far enough in that brief, cataclysmic formation of a black hole? Could this be one of the reasons that the laws of physics seem to just give up where black holes are concerned?
  13. This has actually been an ongoing debate within the fanbase of the StarFox games. The system in the game, Lylat, provides some very interesting planets with their orbits largely a mystery. The biggest mystery, however, is this: What the heck is Solar? The generally accepted explanation is that Solar is a red dwarf acting as Lylat's binary companion, but many fans argue that it is, in fact, a superheated planet due to the rocks and other solid materials on it. I have my own theory that Solar is a cool white dwarf, and sectors X, Y, and Z are its planetary nebula. The sectors' names come from the same nebula appearing as different letters from different angles. Maybe it's called "Solar" because its our own sun that died, leaving humans extinct and the various animals to rule the system... somehow... Yeah, it never really explains that, does it? I've actually been working on my own new theories of the Lylat System now that StarFox Zero has been released, introducing some new canon. Since Solar doesn't appear in SF Zero, I've taken a bit of creative freedom with it. I've renamed it "Solran" in my Universe Sandbox recreation of the Lylat System that I'm working on to make it sound more like an actual name as opposed to an adjective, and it's a good-sized red dwarf. I'm going as far as making Lylat a triple star system with planets like Sauria and Cerinia orbiting the third star, a yellow main-sequence star called "Mysteria." To keep my white dwarf theory, I even came up with a separate system altogether: the "Solaris" System. It consists of Solaris, the white dwarf, Venomia, the original planet Venom before it was reimagined as a large space station, Ryolen, a lot like Eladard from the unreleased StarFox 2 (I've reimagined Eladard as a habitable planet orbiting Solran), and the Hypermass, a planetary-mass black hole. ---------- I sort of went wild with this. StarFox is my childhood nostalgia. I'm even going as far as reimagining the entire StarFox universe to make it more "feasible" in an odd fan-fiction type thing. It involves changing the characters into more believable species instead of corny anthropomorphic animals. I'm just that nerdy...
  14. Yes, I'm aware that this has been suggested before, but I'm going to expand on it a bit. It's pretty clear that electric propellers would be very useful for small drones and the like, but why just aircraft? I'm thinking that an electric propeller in KSP would be able to work as an aircraft propeller or as a boat propeller, having special properties that allow it to function better in water than any other form of propulsion. This, or just have two separate types of propellers for aircraft and boats. Propellers could also be set to "push" or "pull" depending on where it was placed on the craft or the situation.