Jump to content

Captain Vlad

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Captain Vlad

  1. Buying on day one. Been waiting for a stock Gemini-style capsule since I bought the game, and the mission editor looks fun.
  2. I'm a cat owner. You damn near made me cry. Awesome post.
  3. The Wheesley is my go-to engine for any non-giant aircraft I'm planning on landing on non-runway terrain, and I tend to build a lot of those, so I end up using it way more than the Panther.
  4. They're unified. They're peaceful. They're smart enough to realize that they could use violence. They're smart enough to know that's kind of a silly way to do things when there's an entire universe out there to explore. I feel they'd regard us as primitive and naive if they could watch from afar. I don't imagine them as being divided into countries; I imagine they wouldn't see the point in that. I also don't imagine there's as many of them as there are humans on Earth. Cities, yes, companies, yes, but I feel they deliberately leave Kerbin as unspoiled as they possibly can, which includes population controls....with the caveat that the exploration of the stars is worth whatever they have to do. I think they have a long-term survival strategy, long-term enough that their star's lifespan is a worry. They want to be out there in the galaxy long before that even starts to happen. I don't think they're perfect. I think they sometimes err far too much on the side of bravery and have a "MORE POWER!" fixation that rivals Jeremy Clarkson. I think they can confuse pragmatism and timidity. I feel they're stubborn as all hell; they may not go to space today, but they WILL. GO. TO. SPACE. All of them, eventually.
  5. Older guy and don't care about other people's opinions, as others have described. Do get pretty attached to the brave little kerbonauts, though, and my affection has inspired rescue missions better than any sci-fi movie I've ever seen.
  6. Currently I have no abandoned craft. But on my first career, I launched a returnable Mun 'base' (really a very large lander) that I landed at an intersection near multiple biomes. It's accompanying craft, launched with a second rocket, was an overbuilt six-wheeled rover I made in order to drive around, sampling as much science as I could before taking it back to the lander for collection. I spent hours driving the thing around, trying not to crash (it did not flip easily, but I tend to be an enthusiastic driver). And then I sent the big lander back home. I'd known starting out that I would be leaving it behind since my expertise level at the time didn't fill me with confidence so far as a recovery mission goes. But I'd gotten so attached to it during all the samplings runs that I couldn't just delete it, and let it sit there throughout the rest of that career. Actually turned out to be a handy navigational reference point on more than one occasion.
  7. So long, Felipe. Thanks for the passion and energy that allowed us all to waste away the hours in a way that can never actually fit the definition of waste. My imagination owes a debt to you.
  8. Here's the rocket I was talking about. Sufficient to launch, orbit, do up to a 150K rendezvous and return, though at that altitude fuel gets alarmingly tight. Nosecone is the usual, but I don't thing a shielded port would affect drag enough to prevent similar performance.
  9. I've got a three-Kerbal rocket that uses the Mk 1 inline cockpit, the two-kerbal cabin, a Rockomax fuel tank and a pair (or it is three...) of Thuds that doesn't currently have a docking port, but I feel replacing its nosecone with a shielded port wouldn't affect it too badly. It's sufficient to make a 150K rendezvous with my space station and return (great for LKO rescues and tourist hops, too). With four radial chutes it's recoverable without decoupling anything but the SRBs I use to kick it up to decent altitude, so you're only out the cost of fuel and boosters. I'm now curious to see whether or not I could replace the cockpit/cabin setup with the three-man pod (which I also like the aesthetics of) and still have similar performance. I can post pics of my current ship when I get home, if you want, and I can do some experiments with the capsule tonight.
  10. Glad this is back, missed it all weekend.
  11. Once I design a Mun lander, for instance, I usually keep using the basic design but make small improvements to it based on mission performance until I can't think of anything else to make it better. And then I'll keep using it as long as I keep needing a vehicle that does what it was designed to do, or if it can accomplish something different with some small tweaks. I'll also do variants of older craft modified with new stuff I've unlocked. I do build some 'one-off' craft. Some are those that just don't work the way I wanted. Some were meant to accomplish something I then found a better way to do. And some were meant to do a very specific thing that I didn't have to do again (a long-duration Mun lab paired with a rover to sample the last few biomes I hadn't gotten in my previous career is a good example). There is also this great little category of craft that I like so much I will find ways to use them just as an excuse to fly them. I'm the most prone to that with jets, but I currently have a LKO rocket I'm very proud of. Fully recoverable except for the SRBs, and can work as a crew transfer vehicle, an LKO rescue rocket, a tourist hauler, etc. I love that thing.
  12. [quote name='I_Killed_Jeb']I agree with others in this thread who don't believe that redundant parts should be added just for their own sake..[/QUOTE] The problem with this statement is that the parts being suggested aren't redundant. They are aesthetically quite different, and while I know you're speaking from an entirely practical standpoint (ie: what the part can 'do')...such a standpoint is unworkable given that aesthetics play a part in most people's designs. And that this is partially a game based on creating said designs.
  13. [quote name='I_Killed_Jeb']In fairness a lot of the things you want are best left as mods/add-ons IMO.[/QUOTE] Disagree. A greater stock cockpit collection would be most welcome to me, as while I'm not completely mod averse, the base game really should include a variety of aesthetic choices. Especially if some were, as he suggested, capable of holding a two-kerbal team. Mods are good, but for such a basic building block for manned aircraft, the stock game really does need more choice. And it needs them for rockets, too...where's our Gemini or Russian-style capsules?;) Also, the stock nose cone doesn't really fit the overall look of anything else in the game, so that suggestion would be very welcome as well.
  14. [quote name='Pthigrivi']Haha this just makes me want to take a rover to pol and try to make orbit.[/QUOTE] ROFL. I made one that could 'jump' once. The actual intent was to make it's descent onto the Mun self-powered with monoprop engines. I never flew it to the Mun. I mostly just drove over to the VAB and put it up on the roof.
  15. [quote name='Pthigrivi']Haha my priorities are clearly misplaced.[/QUOTE] The theme to the Dukes of Hazzard is in no way involved.
  16. Also keep in mind I'm not advocating a ludicrously wide fairing or launching straight up to 35,000 meters before you flatten out; I'm attempting to show that if you want to get something off the ground, into orbit, to another planet, etc., even weirdly shaped loads, you can usually find a way to do it.
  17. [quote name='Pthigrivi']Aw man you can pack things a lot more efficiently. Here are a couple of Duna missions I ran recently. [/QUOTE] The rover has a very wide wheelbase cuz I tend to hot dog around a lot and don't want it to tip over.....:cool: Seriously, there's reasoning behind most things I do. And sometimes what I do is fly to Duna mostly to cut doughnuts.
  18. [quote name='martinborgen']I mean, the fairing probably did you more harm than good...[/QUOTE] I'm almost certain it did. But if I can get that thing to orbit anything else is easy. Also, was thinking if I could get it UP there, then aerobraking at Duna would be easier due to the massive drag.
  19. [quote name='Enorats']That picture posted earlier seems to have a rather massive fairing on top of a wee little rocket. I'm not certain I'd really launch that with any reasonable expectation of success. Granted, I'm on my phone and can't examine it in any sort of detail (can't even really see the center of lift), but my first impression looking at that is that it would tip over and/or snap in half mid flight.. like it is doing. It's got a lot of drag up front and not a lot on the rear end in comparision.[/quote] Ya' don't say?;) After lots of attempts to be more tricky about it, I just launched straight up until I was inefficiently high without the slightest hint of a gravity turn. In earlier attempts, I'd tried boosters, but that sped me up too fast, too low, and the result was as you predicted. So I ended up sort of easing up to a comfortable altitude before leaning her over. Then I used way too much fuel to get her up to the needed horizontal velocity. I ended up refueling her in orbit to make sure she had enough for transfer AND some braking, too, but she's in orbit and about to be on her way to Duna. The biggest problem was learning NOT to do the launch the "right" way. But in any case the question was: Is this possible. Yes. Yes it is.
  20. Yes, yes they are. I managed to get this thing into orbit where she's waiting with plenty of fuel to get to Duna. Survived an aerobraking test on Kerbin, but I'm kinda leery of Duna's thin atmosphere...hope I gave the launch version enough chutes. [img]https://41.media.tumblr.com/2667d41188c873df4cb26ae38f39c4b9/tumblr_nycj09i91t1u8zapwo1_540.jpg[/img] I about tore my hair out trying to get the thing into orbit. Final launch profile was...gloriously inefficient. [img]https://41.media.tumblr.com/3d227f21d2900576f0fab529127b4e2c/tumblr_nycj09i91t1u8zapwo2_540.jpg[/img]
  21. Congratulations! I bet that felt good: the first time I got one into orbit (and not just space) then took it back down and landed it on the runway after many failed attempts was...an awesome feeling. Serious gamer's rush, there. Edit: What mod is that cockpit from?
  22. [quote name='samstarman5']I do love the new Mk1 Cockpit, but I will miss the old one with its fighter cockpit design. I enjoyed looking straight up to the stars, horizon, ground, water, boom...[/QUOTE] I miss the old one too, and hope they include something very much like it in a future update. It's look was just far more suitable for certain designs. That said, I hope Porkjet gives us an IVA for it of similar awesomeness when/if that happens.
  23. The Mk2 cockpit looks pretty sharp too. [img]https://40.media.tumblr.com/04e67978cf0b10acb960194cd6e4c427/tumblr_nyb7ql09jZ1u8zapwo1_540.jpg[/img]
  • Create New...