Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

11 Good

About Erik3003

  • Rank
    Bottle Rocketeer
  1. I didn't take ISP into account, because I was balancing the methane engines relative to each other, since they all have an almost equal ISP of roughly 330 seconds at sea level. That is just 12% more than the (stock) Vector, though that is a bad point of comparison, so lets look at more reasonable average LF/Ox engine ISP of 280, making it a good 18% more. Now lets look at LH2/Ox launcher engines for a point of comparison. The ISP at sea level is around 370 seconds here, which is roughly 32% more than LF/Ox, so quite significant. Obviously, the fuel types aren't really directly comparab
  2. Gotta say, the engines look really beautiful ingame. Though they may need a little more balancing imo. The Deinonychus, while trust is already high compared to other 1.25m engines, does still loose quite substantially against the Vector when it comes to clustering. The Vector seems like an unfair comparison, since it is fairly high up the tech tree, but it is also 1.25m and doesn't suffer the same problems as methane engines (boiloff, less density). The Iguanodon however competes much better against the Vector, offering slightly higher thrust and ISP, while keeping a very similar albeit slight
  3. Instead of Dromaeosaur, Achillobator would fit better imo, since it is actually bigger than a Deinonychus (unlike the Dromaeosaurus), doesn't have the saurus suffix and is actually in the same subfamily of Dromaeosaur (Dromaeosauridae Dromaeosauridae). Allosaur could also be replaced by Baryonyx or Suchomimus, if wanting to get rid of the suffix. The Tyrannosaur name should probably stay, as the beefiest methalox engine (cluster) deserves to be named after the heaviest and most famous theropod.
  4. This seems like a really cool and logical way to differentiate and balance NFE fission reactors from FFT fusion reactors, if fission reactors can only be refueled manually by kerbals. The amount of radiation the kerbals will need to endure refueling is obviously not great, but not terrible either. Currently I feel like fission reactors are just superior in most cases, since fuel tends to last longer and can be easily reprocessed or mined, while fusion fuel is slightly harder to get and runs out far quicker. Also, I shall greet you from DĂșnedain and Mathijs of the Age of the Ring mod team,
  5. I'm having a very weird issue, the game crashes (or closes down) when I load or create a save. Linux Mint 64-bit using 64 or 32-bit KSP, crashes on both... KSP.log: [url]https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B260Et_3mNQMVUtSSVNORVJBVE0/view?usp=sharing[/url] A KSP-output wasn't generated (Idk why...)
  6. How to configure scatterer of 64k? I'm currently trying 64k and I like it, but scatterer seems to have some issues, hopefully it's easy to fix them
  7. I have a little question about this awesome addon: Is there some kind of RealFuels support, or is it possible to play with Interstellar + Extended + RF without fuel conflicts? If yes, is there something special to remember?
  8. Given that one Redstone engine can't lift one RS tank, I created a workaround I call it "The American Dream"!
  9. Very nice to plugin! How about mod support, is playing with FAR, Deadly Reentry, KJR and RealChute possible in a stable matter? I would absolutely love seeing this fairings in use!
  • Create New...