Hattivat
-
Posts
609 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Hattivat
-
-
I think RVE pretty explicitly instructs you not to use the RSS version of Scaterrer in its readme.
-
You have to go into smokescreen settings and reduce particle count. Details on how to do that should be easily available in the Real Plume thread.
-
BTW. Can someone provide a tutorial for Ferram Aerospace. I mean the calculator when you construct a rocket and the flight utility when you start a rocket. Both makes no sense to me..
Neither is necessary for rockets, close them. They are mostly only useful for designing airplanes. Rockets are fairly straightforward - if it looks like the rockets that fly in real life, it will fly with FAR. In case of problems, add some (rigid) fins or spin-stabilize.
Oh, and a rocket-building tip based on that imgur album: It is generally better to build interstages where the "fairing base" is below the engine (ie. at the top of the stage below), not above it. Also, it would probably help your stability if the bottom stage was not narrower than the second stage, this might let you get away with smaller (and thus lighter) fins.
-
Mechjeb's "limit acceleration" function, most likely.
-
Apologies for assuming you didn't know the basics then. I have checked on my install, and an identical SRB lifts itself off the pad without a problem, even if staged together with the launch clamps, as the thrust is 15 MN almost right away. So something else has to be wrong with your setup.
-
Procedural SRB I have made to mimic the 5 segment SRB has the exact correct burn time and thrust in the VAB (according to mechjeb) it also has a sea level T:W ratio of 1.28 when burning with my 4x Rs-25d. I load it onto the launch pad and all of a sudden the SRB thrust is listed as 150 kn when I activate causing my rocket to fall back into the launch pad.
I've gone over the numbers over and over again but for some reason my procedural generated SRB's aren't carrying their correct thrust values onto the launch pad from the VAB.
SRBs have thrust curves, meaning that their thrust is not constant with time, and RO simulates this pretty well. So your SRBs will only get to their "correct thrust values" about a second after being fired, and after reaching this peak value the thrust will gradually decrease. Liquid-fueled rocket engines also need a little time to get going, which is why you should always fire your engines before releasing the launch clamps, as they do in real life.
Example thrust curves depending on the shape of the channel carved in the solid fuel:
-
edit: The first two pictures look quite good!
old post, I missed the update:
Well, that KSC terrain certainly has a foreboding, alien colour
And as for the Martian sky, this is obviously a conscientious topic, and I am not going to pretend that I am an expert who knows exactly what the "correct" true colour for it is. All I know from looking at hundreds of pictures is that it is definitely less red and generally less vividly coloured than the surface, so that is what I would personally stick to. If "being alien" is the aim, then perhaps this sort of pinkish brown would work? http://mars.nasa.gov/msl/images/Curiosity-Rover-Portrait-Mars-Mojave-Selfie-pia19142-MALHI-full.jpg
-
Are Hubble pics white-balanced?
http://www.redorbit.com/media/uploads/2005/10/4986bbeb5a541b9a59f6d5d09e290340.jpg
Or ground telescopes?
http://www.damianpeach.com/mars1112.htm
Sure, there is variation due to innumerable variables, but I have never seen a non-altered picture of Mars where the atmosphere was redder than the surface.
edit: Great job on making it less shiny though, that is a major improvement.
-
I don't want to spoil the fun, but the Martian atmosphere is not reddish. The pictures I have seen show it range from bluish white to brownish yellow, presumably depending on position relative to the sun and the seasonal variation in dust levels. I any case, I don't think it was that red even on those ridiculous old pictures when NASA was applying a red filter to everything to cater to the popular imagination of "the red planet".
Here's some recent orbital pics from ISRO's Mars Orbiter: http://www.isro.gov.in/sites/default/files/article-files/pslv-c25-mars-orbiter-mission/celebrating-one-year-of-mars-orbiter-mission-orbit-release-of-mars/Mars-atlas-MOM.pdf
Here's pictures of Mars taken by Hubble: http://hubblesite.org/gallery/album/solar_system/mars/
And here's a ton of ground-level images from Curiosity: http://mars.nasa.gov/msl/multimedia/images/
-
Plus, in real life reaction wheels only came into use in space-shuttle-era, and RP-0 for late-stage career is as of yet pretty far from being fully polished.
-
Interesting idea, I'm scrubscribing.
-
Also what's the best way to go about making sure the dry mass is correct or... Realistic I want to say. Because I'm not necessarily going to go for replicas. If that's the case I can just look up how much fuel they used and the dry mass. But for custom builds I'm worried I wont be able to get the dry mass right with the procedural fairing walls and the inner tanks them selves.
For starters what's a good utilization setting for when I'm building the inner tanks? 99%?
You will have to experiment and compare your results with real-world examples. My guess would be: Balloon tanks at ~95% utilization.
-
The x-planes only come in the second node, which is so cheap as to be almost free (1 science IIRC).
-
Felbourn, I think that you should report this to NathanKell in the RSS thread and ask for the normal map of Earth to be corrected. This way the ground will be risen in this one point, instead of the water being lowered all around the globe.
-
In RO there is the Common Berthing Mechanism used to dock ISS segments, this might be big enough for you. There are others too (Russian APAS and the new NASA Docking System). Not sure if they are placed in the RP-0 techtree yet, though.
-
ctrl+alt+E, then click "Apply", then ctrl+alt+E again to close the window.
-
You get it because in weightlessness there is no "down", so fuel no longer drifts towards the engine on its own, and does not stay at the bottom of the tank. It is a major problem and design consideration for real-life rocketry. If you ever wondered why probes often use a solid rockets as the final stage, now you know - SRBs don't suffer from this problem. The solution is either a long RCS burn forward to push the main engine fuel "downwards", or to carry small solid rocket boosters and fire them just before igniting the main engine for the same purpose.
-
I think there is one more piece of information that should be added to Laie's otherwise excellent summary: Omnidirectional antennas stack. That means that if your satellite looks like a hedgehog, it has a vastly greater communication range than with a single antenna.
Oh, and cheers MedievalNerd, glad to see you back!
-
Does anyone know the mod of the double prop motor used in OP's screens?
Most likely the Retro Future pack that can be found in this thread: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/84054-v0-90-v-25-Transparent-Pods-v1-2-2-for-KSP-v0-90
-
I hate to be the killjoy, but the hardest part is keeping it from crashing every 30 minutes or whenever you sneeze at it, so it's far from over.
-
(scrubscribing)
-
Intresting, you got any sources to back this up?
Just use your google powers to find the Isp and density of the Aerozine/Nitrogen Tetroxide and UDMH/NTO combinations, and you will see that they match what you see in-game, no sources necessary.
-
i think im going to do some trawling of the webnets to see if i can find an interactive solar system map and some info on how to calculate transit times etc
You probably want this http://sourceforge.net/projects/gmat/
-
Thanks for the fix!
Convair NEXUS - super heavy Historical Launch Vehicle
in KSP1 Mod Releases
Posted
Perfect, just how I imagined it from these old drawings <3