Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,226 Excellent

About FleshJeb

  • Rank
    Containment Failure

Profile Information

  • Location
    Flying under the radar...

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Orbits are this gorgeous ballet, but you only have to know about 10 things, and you have months to correct errors. Interfaces between mediums are where excrements gets really exciting--The margins are thin, and if your engineering is bad, death is instant. Amazing feeling, isn't it? If you're up for the challenge, you should try building one of these: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-90_Orlyonok Getting it to fly nicely with the takeoff jets turned off was not easy.
  2. I'm going to go out on a limb and say you and your niche have been missed by more than just me. Come say hi once in a while anyway, you flarping weirdo.
  3. I like to use a deployable hydrofoil forward of the CoM. It will reduce the area of skin in contact with the water and give you a higher AoA, leading to higher speeds and an easier liftoff. It's a reasonable approximation of the "stepped" hull on a real-world seaplane. https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/62088/what-is-the-offset-in-a-seaplanes-hull
  4. 1) Good job on the diagnostics. 2) Post a pic with the CoM and CoL indicators turned on in the editor. 3) It could be the reaction wheels (I don't use them on planes), but it's more likely an aerodynamic issue. There's probably something very draggy up front, and when you depart a bit from prograde, it turns into a massive lever arm and flips the plane over. The stock CoL indicator doesn't show this, which is why I use CorrectCoL (link in my sig). 4) You've got SAS turned on to stabilize the plane, right?
  5. The 88 is not a relay antenna; it won't talk to another 88. Listing of antennas: https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Parts#Communication This is an excellent resource for planning comms: Or this, if you prefer an in-game mod:
  6. I'm going to give it a try for a couple of weeks. Last night was the first time in forever that I didn't feel like I was fighting with KSP to get things done.
  7. I do that because it doubles my framerate.
  8. I've spoken to a few old-school players that are just DONE. I've spent a good chunk of the weekend reading patch notes and rolling back versions to test them. 1.7.3 runs brilliantly, but the maneuver node editor is still kicking the crap out of my navball. I think I'm joining the 1.3.1 club so I can get rid of it and the atrocious re-skins.
  9. I believe there was a big change in electrical usage for BG rotors in some version, but I can't find a patch note for it. I think the current model would reward the largest diameter, lowest RPM prop. The addition of Kerbal mass in 1.11 may affect the outcome of the challenge.
  10. Generally speaking this is caused by the landing gear not being aligned straight up and down. (Use the Angle Snap mode when placing them on the craft.) Or it can be a case of them being too small, too large, or having the wrong settings. Pictures of the craft are the best way to get help when asking questions.
  11. I've never played with anything but the default tolerance, but it's located here in your persistent.sfs file. You can edit it in a text editor like Notepad, but make sure you make a backup copy first. (This is from a 1.8.1 save) AdvancedParams { EnableKerbalExperience = False ImmediateLevelUp = False AllowNegativeCurrency = False PressurePartLimits = True GPartLimits = True GKerbalLimits = True KerbalGToleranceMult = 1 ResourceTransferObeyCrossfeed = True ActionGroupsAlways = False BuildingImpactDamageMult = 0.05 PartUpgradesInSandbox = True PartUpgradesInCareer = True Pa
  12. The EVA pack used to work. I think the parachute and other things in inventory add mass now. I’m still on 1.10, about to roll back to 1.8.1 or 1.7.3. All the changes since are a net negative for me.
  13. Congrats! If you post a picture here, we might be able to help with the ground stability. I tend to go with diamond-shaped layouts for the gear in this situation--One each front and back, and one on each wingtip. Electric propeller craft do work on Duna, and they take a lot less electricity than ions. Ions are super fun though, so enjoy yourself.
  14. Yes, although they're about 1/2 as effective on Duna. It's not going to be efficient to bring enough power to keep the engine firing continuously, so bring a lot of batteries--They're very energy dense. This will allow you to timewarp to charge while landed and have enough power to hop between biomes, or return to orbit. You may also want to bring a single RTG for some nighttime charging (although they're heavy). Being a nerd, I'd plug all my options into a spreadsheet to figure out the most mass-efficient package, but if you just want a rough estimate, a single RTG, two big static panels
  • Create New...