DBowman

Members
  • Content Count

    612
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

256 Excellent

About DBowman

  • Rank
    Sr. Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. useful everywhere - batteries and RTG for the outer plannets Eeloo for 4.29 ton? ion vacuum craft under the fairing or larger with TAC-LS
  2. cool thanks @DDE like https://www.quora.com/How-do-astronauts-get-inside-the-Soyuz-spacecraft I guess do closest approach outside! selfie time...
  3. @theJesuit that would be great if you are able to add something! I've only glanced at Kerbalism in the past (I was looking for a van allen belt for RSS)
  4. I just did a quick test in KSP 1.4.5 and 1.5.0. All seems to work fine. Except the "dark" parts that use e not sunlight are borked from KSP model change of big monoprop tanks. I'll figure something out for those...
  5. Thanks @Death Engineering a compelling and good fun challenge. I'd also recommend the Apollo Applications one; start with the actual Apollo missions and then push it into the seventies - Eve flyby, Duna, I stalled out working on a Jool 5 (all with TAC life support). It would have if the HEDO Pe had ended up in the right place. The idea was to boost the light DSSRPs and DEM into the HEDO and then burn directly from there, but finding a KD that approaches at the right angle probably isn't easy. I ended up having to circularize prior to Eve injection, so the savings came from dropping everything from Ap. Hmm, I guess one could just try a few KDs... I was just happy to find the DEK DEK 428 days @ 2290 m/s vs DK 311 days @ 3000 m/s. So it took longer, but lower deltaV - though only about 130 m/s less at the D departure where all the mass is. I think I recall more recent Mars talk being to use Venus to cut time (radiation risk) but maybe they were happy to pay higher deltaV to do it, also in real life there is the time / life support mass factor. 9.599 ton per crew version 1.4.5
  6. @jinnantonix the upside down bothered me also... I just figured out in a quicksave that I could have done this... unock/decouple here will give a "big" kick to DEM cap and tank. Decouple DEM from the tank will give a little kick the other way. If you are quick when you flip the DEM cap over the magnetic docks will catch... ridiculous, but doable. Worst case I guess Jeb gets out and gives it a shove.
  7. I made an entry to @Death Engineering's most excellent Das Dunaprojekt challenge - do Duna "von Braun style". The 1969 von Braun, not the 1948 von Braun - so nukes and powered landers. Here is my DasDunaBoot: The two outer PPMs throw the rest at Duna, and then recapture and circularize themselves. After Duna capture; two surface sample return probes land, half the crew lands. For the return you can dump some cargo, and must pick up the probes and crew. You must do an Eve flyby to Kerbin, dropping two probes on Eve as you pass. All three PPMs must finish in LKO and the KEM (with crew!) be recoverable on Kerbin surface.
  8. I completed* Das Dunaprojekt yesterday. I present Das DunaBoot: I tried to mass minimize without going crazy, there are some tricks but mainly "reduce, reuse". My aesthetic was alt seventies: modular reused elements and no cross feed / ducts / moving propellant around. I aggressively used highly elliptical orbits and Pe kicks. The parts are assemble-able in orbit but I lifted it whole. The album is here it's just the highlights ... * For some values of "competed" I'm a terrible landing pilot so I let MJeb "take the wheel for Duna descents", so no point do the ascents either. I intend to go back to quicksaves and "do it myself" but for now I'm content that everything worked as planned even in the face of a few glitches
  9. Would this work for "burn time" / "start burning seconds before node"?
  10. Hi Death Engineering, I was interested to do this challenge; either just for fun or within your rules if you are still running this. I had a couple of questions though: "MEM can employ aerodynamic deceleration" means I can separate the MEM while in transit to Duna and capture / direct enter it? I was thinking as late as possible while able to get a few hours separation between Main vehicle and MEM maneuvers (for low stress piloting). For the "cargo" mass I thought to just use a combination of ore tanks (with "enough ore") and "otherwise non functional" structural elements. That's fine right? It's supposed to be life support consumables, maybe "tents" and equipment for the landing party? Also I was going to actually bring back 1 ton of "cargo" on the EEV - we are doing that right? I guess that ton would be in addition to the 6 ton "return cargo". Living space: I couldn't see anything re this. I've seen other challenges where for long term one has to provide "double seats", but for this it's okay that they just use the EEV & MEV seats? Often I magic a probe into a "guide" orbit, set a node that the real vehicles can use as a reference. I look at this as just navigation support. Are you okay with me doing that? Realism rationale could be that Das Dunaprojekt Management would probably have a couple things in orbit round Duna anyway... How about flying them in? I guess I could have the Duna probes encounter a few days early and get the same effect there... The rationale for the EMVE missions was shorter return flight time. When I use Pladd's flyby finder most of the DEK flybys are longer (much longer) than a DK direct, the ones that are short are much more dV. So if I wanted to follow the "form" of KDEK I could be lighter/cheaper than following the purpose of KDEK. I don't know if it's a fluke of the Kerbosystem that the rationale doesn't really exist (or maybe they are also so rare and expensive in reality?) One could have a reference flight plan to just make the challenge about engineering and flight or somehow have a metric around travel time. What do you think? Anyway I've had some fun with vehicle design anyway. thanks for the thought etc you have put into this so far. cheers, DBowman
  11. awesome @Vaga thanks very much. Re the tech tree - I'd seat of the pantsed the tech levels looking referring what I thought were 'comparable' parts, also I think closed life support is going to be 'hard to get right'. Given what you say and the 'game nature' of the tech tree I'll review that aspect of things when I do an update. Thanks again.
  12. Oh wow I knew I'd been 'doing other things' but I've missed a few TACLS releases - if @Vaga or anyone else has / gets positive or negative testing info let me know and I'll update spacedoc and/or fix it. thanks !
  13. @theJesuit hey thanks for the inputs. The photon computation sounds good - does it handle planetary occultation? For sure taking Kerbalism green house 'module' section then scaling it and adding to gigantor would get you a big green array that worked with Kerbalism. If you wanted to make it more Solylent-ish you could then get the helfire part consuming some of the resources that feed Kerbalism green house and modify the new Kerbalism Green Gigantor module to remove some inputs and replace with slurry. @Waxing_Kibbous I think you probably want do MODULE:NEEDS[ProfileSimplified]:FOR[Kerbalism] rather than put it on the @PART. I guess you have Soylent installed and are not trying to 'pull out the bits you want'? The SoylentResources.cfg is needed to define the resources - bad things happen if it's not there. The SoylentConfig.cfg holds some ratios that get used by newer parts - look at DarkGreenL.cfg to see how - depending how fully you wanted to Kerbalize Soylent you might want to put Kerbalism ratios on the Config object and reference them from parts. I guess it's possible that Kerbalisms 'Greenhouse' module has some resource hardcodings, maybe insolation just effects some 'rate' multiplier inside it. If I was doing it I'd start by just adding a straight copy of the Greenhouse module to big green and see it works. Then add a Soylent output resource (even starter) and see that the result will produce starter into a starter tank. Then make helfire box consume Kerbalism resouces and produce slurry. Then Modify big green to use slurry. Do it in little steps so you know what went wrong as soon as it goes wrong.