Zylark

Members
  • Content Count

    239
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

33 Excellent

1 Follower

About Zylark

  • Rank
    Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Back in the days, I had rather big 'Station-Builders' that would grab modules and put them in place. Here's a snapshot of one of those from an old save This made it possible to have modules without RCS thrusters or any such stuff on them These days though, I tend to go the simpler route by just equipping the module with RCS, and using the final stage - also RCS equipped - to manouver the module in place. When done, deorbit the final stage, and have a resident engineer on the station EVA and remove the modules RCS thrusters.
  2. Win10 on my dual-booting Laptop. Quad Core i7 6700HQ @ 2.6Ghz (3.5Ghz turbo), 8Gb and GTX-950m 2Gb. Now why KSP on the Win10 partition? A few reasons: - DirectX is more efficient than OpenGL and Nvidia drivers more current and easier to update (without something breaking...). - Didn't want to clutter up my Ubuntu 16.04 partition with non-work related things, Steam in particular. - My OS partitions are rather small - well the Win10 partition is was quite roomy until VS2017 with Xamarin and Android emulators got installed - whereas my Data partition (NTFS and shared between the two OSes) is rather big - having games on that made sense, and quite uncomplicated under Win10. I'm not a fanboi of the one over the other. I find Win10 works very well for gaming and some specialist tools, and you can't beat Linux for dev work. Just as long as it isn't Mac or Consoles (same thing really), I'm good
  3. Thanks for clearing that up ExploreKlatt - I was just about to post myself asking what the Life-Support table is supposed to read as. A follow up question - If my Kerbal(s) exceed the Hab time, and is properly fed up with their current environment, will they stop doing as they are told? And to continue, if they exceed the return to Kerbin time, will they go on strike?
  4. Rather than getting the sound out of each cylinder, we're hearing it through the manifold, muffler and finally out the chromed exhaust. Not a big fan, as I like the technical stuff. I want some under the hood news. If you go from Imperial to Metric on the threads and bolts keeping together the engine and gearbox, I want to know about it. All in all though, I am just complaining because you changed stuff, and that entitles me to complain. So there! --- Too much? Not enough? between 0 and 255, lesser being simple, more being with detailed diagrams and schematics... ... I'd like it more detailed and nuts and bolts - a solid 200 at least.
  5. There are some mods that I just won't play without: - Kerbal Alarm Clock - Mechjeb - Kerbal Attachment System - DMagic Orbital Science - SCANsat - AntennaRange (tried RemoteTech, but it got too tedious - AR is a happy medium, all options on) - Some sort of Life-Support mod, right now USI-LS, previously TAC-LS - Some sort of In-Situ Resource extraction mod. Been through Kethane, now run with MKS/Karbonite and the stock offering. Those are the core mods, in addition I run a host of mods that add parts and functionality. In this career, I'm looking forward to putting Cacteye Orbital Telescope through its paces
  6. Oh, I guess I'll be the one to admit to the ultimate in lazyness... I just let MJ do it. Bring up the ascent autopilot, enter desired altitude and engage autopilot. I do my own staging however, that got to be good for something - right? Right? With spaceplanes it's all manual however. Mainly because MJ is a lousy spaceplane pilot. Engage brakes, get SAS going, start jets at 50%, wait a bit for them to spool up and then release brakes. Then go 100% thrust. Get to about 20km pretty fast at 30-40 degree climb, then build speed at 5-10 degrees or less until jets are about to flame out or I reach 30km with plenty of speed. Engage rocket or switch mode on Rapier, nose up and reach orbit altitude and circularize.
  7. Struts are great for keeping cargo in place inside a cargo-bay. Have two struts on either side, going down to the floor or lower part of sidewall in an inverted V, and your cargo should sit tight and not bounce around. As far as tension and compression strength is concerned, I think it is equal in both directions. I don't know how much it is, but I've seen them (ahem, slightly top-heavy payload...) stretch and compress quite significantly, perhaps up to half their length, before snapping.
  8. They behave more or less like a steel rebar that reinforce an existing connection. It will stretch, compress and twist - even snap - depending on what and how strong a force is applied to it. So whilst struts do add rigidity to the connection of two parts, how much rigidity depends on how you strut, and how many struts you apply. For instance if you got two 2.5m tanks connected through two 1.25m docking ports, having 4 struts that just go straight up/down from the one tank to the other won't be very efficient, and still cause considerable flexibility in the connection if under stress. Configure those same four struts into two X'es or V'es, one on either side, and you'll get a very rigid connection. edit: like so: Oh, and the struts will disappear if you decouple or undock the connection the struts support.
  9. Lights hit the GPU pretty hard. Thing is in KSP, since any given vessel is a collection of separate objects, and each light (apart from the sun) is dynamic in a given scene, none of the usual 3D engine 'cheats' are available. There is no pre-cooking of textures, and there is no pre-defined static shadow-map. So rendering lights with how they affect textures on objects and how their shadow falls and so on, becomes an exponentially harder task per light that is added to the scene. The framerate of KSP is determined by primarily two factors. There is the physics, which hit the CPU, and then there is graphics rendering, which obviously hit the GPU. If either of these are overloaded by calculations, your framerate will drop. As far as rendering of lights go, the easy solution is to turn down in settings max number of rendered lights. The expensive solution is to upgrade your graphics card. As for physics, Unity/KSP only runs on one core for the time being - so until it gets proper multithreading and/or ability to offload some physics calculation to newer graphics cards (eg. nVidia with CUDA/PhysX enabled), you'll only see modest improvement by upgrading the CPU. As it is now, it is terribly inefficient.
  10. 0.25 copied over from steam to a separate folder. I will get to Jool in my current career, and do all the other stuff. Unless 0.90 is so full of goodieness that I get all distracted and stuff, but that is not likel... oh look a kittie!
  11. WRAPPING UP DUNA Business there done, for now... The first manned Duna mission is just about done. Mike made good orbit, with just a hair under 1000dV to spare. Much more than the engineers back at KSC estimated. But that is just a bonus. It do mean the lander is more than capable of reaching where-ever on Duna and get back up again. Once in orbit, Mike proceeded to collect all the data from the various instruments and pack the parachutes for later use. Then caught up and docked with the CS Bernhard. Pretty routine stuff, after which he transferred himself and all the goodie science and left the Duna Lander to orbit Duna unmanned. KSC is confident the lander will come in handy at a later date. Whilst in Duna orbit, Mike and Frosen undertook a little side mission to refuel the Duna Surface Return Mission probe so that it could get back to Kerbin post-haste under its' own power. It required some delicate maneuvering getting the thing really close and not drifting in order for Mike to get out there and bolt a pipe end-point to it so as to facilitate a fuel transfer and also repack the chutes on the thing. In the end it all went well, and the Duna SRM probe now got just about 2000dV to burn. Which it turns out will just about do it. Although being far from an optimal transfer window, a small opportunity presented itself in a few days that require about 1700dV for the return trip. The CS Bernhard then visited Ike. At this point both Mike and Frosen was a bit absent minded, as both of them forgot to take any pictures. The short of it is that days earlier the little Karbonite Miner sent out a long time ago landed on Ike. The CS Bernhard then landed next to it, topped off the tanks and did some nice science whilst there. Frosen Kerman even planted a little flag. After returning to Ike orbit and then transfer to a high Duna Orbit, the Bernhard have just shy of 5000dV to burn for the return trip. More than enough for a speedy transfer back to Kerbin. Back at KSC, the various heads of departments have pretty much agreed to a two-pronged road ahead. Windows to Eve and Jool are opening up in about 60 and 160 days respectively. At Eve, plenty of infrastructure need to be set up to go look for and harvest an elusive fuel that if found will greatly enhance our capabilities. For Jool, since transfer windows to the mighty giant are so sparse and far between, it's been decided to go all in. One mighty big manned expedition. It is reported that Jeb is positively giddy with anticipation. This and more, coming up in Interplanetary Quest!
  12. THE FUTURE OF SPACE EXPLORATION SUMMIT To decide the future of the KSC efforts, all principal parties gathered at a lush resort on Kaiti to discuss the matter. In between pool-time and liquid snacks. Though nothing official have been released yet, correspondents from the Kerbal Press Agency have learned that essentially the path forward will take one of three routes. 1: Slow and careful does it. Continue sending out propes to the remaining planetary bodies and their moons, and then follow up with manned missions where practical. The Jool system is one such obvious candidate for immediate attention. 2: There are indications that on Eve some unheard of fuel exist that may revolutionize space-travel as we know it. It would require a major effort to get to it, harvest it and not least get it to where it is needed. Though, assuming the science department isn't entirely on a collective hallucinogenic trip, it may very well be worth the effort. Some speak of engines with well over 10k ISP using the esoteric fuel. Imagine the possibilities. 3: Going further out is all well and good, but making a second home is better. A large colony on Duna would ensure Kerbalkind to survive any disaster. Besides building a foundation for further exploration. Eventually. During after-hours discussions in the pool, the waters got quite agitated, so obviously no conclusion have been met yet. --- What will the KSC decide? Perhaps we will know, in the next letter from a divided front of Interplanetary Quest!
  13. You don't want a sky-crane. You've been looking too much at NASA videos. What you want is a bog standard lander that just happen to have enough space underneath to deliver some payload to the surface of some moon or planet or whatever. How that looks and performs depends entirely upon where you intend to deliver that payload, and how big that payload is. And even then, a separate craft for delivery is not necessarily the best solution.
  14. No need to go big if all you want is to get to Duna and back again. Of course, this use quite a bit of mods. Some stuff that helps on the mass/dV budget like Science Gear stowed in Universal Storage wedges and the bimodal nuclear engines that are slightly more efficient than stock LV-N, yet give considerably more thrust. Nearly double actually at 110kN. Other stuff add to the mass/dV budget, like Life-Support and D-Magic science gear. But either way, if you got some 4500-5000dV with your ship when doing the burn to Duna from LKO, you're good to go. Now, I'll grant I did not launch that in one go, though that is perfectly doable, as I think both lander and mothership together and fully fueled comes in somewhere in the 60-70Ton range. The 'mothership' was already in service - it's one of two identical and very useful multipurpose vessels I got that around Kerbin functions as crew transport, tug, fuel transfer and with a science payload slung underneath have even collected plenty of Science on Mun and Minmus. If I'd made something special purpose for going to Duna and back with a lander attached, it would be quite a bit smaller and efficient. I wanted to save some funds however, as this is from my current career play. Why build something new when I already had something zipping around that was well up to the task? After arriving at Duna, establishing a nice orbit of 100km and detaching the lander, there is some 2500dV left in it for the return trip - which is plenty. The lander at least was purpose built for going to Duna. It got a mass of less than 6 Tons when fully fueled, have some 300 days of life-support should something go wrong and is bursting with science gear. Much of the weight is actually from parachutes, as it got 1 Drogue, 3 XL and 2 Radial if I remember correctly. Fully fueled it got about 2100dV in atmo, 2500dV in vacuum. That will do nicely for going down and getting back up again, with a bit left over to meet up with the mothership and dock there to transfer the Kerbal and all the science. No need to return the lander back to Kerbin, would be a waste of fuel. Besides, it'll probably come in handy where it is a bit later.
  15. Try this approach to getting base modules down without using a dedicated lander: Works really well. Easy to launch, the fuel in those side mounted tanks is enough to get from LKO to Mun orbit and land. You land two modules at once, not just the one. And when all is done, just discard the tanks and engines. Saves a lot of work. No need to refuel a lander, no need for plenty of docking. Nice rigid construction, and the game do not get confused by having the thrust above (or in front of) the CoM.