• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

122 Excellent

1 Follower

About MedwedianPresident

  • Rank
    President of Medwedia
  1. Is the following way the correct way to calculate the exact crash site of a spacecraft on an airless, non-rotating, perfectly spherical body? It is assumed that the spacecraft is travelling on an elliptical orbit with periapsis within the periphery of the planetary sphere, e.g. under the surface. I write down the equation of the sphere (x^2+y^2+z^2=r(Planet)) and the equation of the inclined orbital ellipse, combine both into an equation system, solve it, select the solution appropriate for the orbital direction (because there are 2 crash points, depending on whether the spacecraft is orbiting clockwise or anticlockwise) and transfer it into spherical coordinates for latitude and longitude. Alternatively, I do the same but two-dimensionally (circle + ellipse equation) and break down the coordinates to account for inclination after calculating the crash site.
  2. Flyby-only grand tour

    There is an increasing trend of using flyby maneuvers like in real life, but there also is the everlasting tradition of the grand tour in Kerbal Space Program. I have decided to make a little feasibility study/challenge which combines both concepts in an interesting way. Your tasks are: 1. Prove that it is possible to plot a trajectory that passes through the SOI's of all stock (all OPM/Real Solar System/planet pack of your specification) planets without midcourse corrections. Only a single Kerbin ejection burn may be made, it's about gravity assists from then on. You must change the maximum number of patched conics iterations in the settings file in order to plan the flight. I don't care if you use HyperEdit because I want to see if it is possible at all. It is especially interesting if you have Principia installed. It is enough if every planet is approached a single time, e.g. no return to Kerbin is required. However, I think that multiple flyby maneuvers of the same planet may be needed. You do not need to execute the mission, I only need to see the picture of the trajectory. 2. Document the trajectory in full detail - tell me the exact date, phase angle and DV of the ejection burn and the order of the gravity assists as well as the respective flyby periapses if you can. Also tell me the duration of the mission if you can. Good luck!
  3. How to Flyby Multiple Planet

    If I recall correctly, Kerbal Flyby Finder and similar programs let you specify a reasonable amount of planets to be flied by. 2-3 should be okay for plotting a course, but a flyby-only grand tour would be extremely hard.
  4. Post anything that stays on the ground when the rocket is launched here. Be it an intricate launch tower with elevators or a bus for transporting kerbonauts to the launch site, anything goes.
  5. Back in .14 and .15, it was somewhat popular to use jet-powered boosters on normal, expendable vertical launch vehicles. They would be decoupled upon suffocation, at 20 to 25k. Do people still do this now? The main advantage would be their reusability and higher efficiency as well as a longer burn time that varies with the steepness of the launch trajectory, the main disadvantage would be the rapid thrust falloff or asymmetrical burnouts that can lead to loss of control as well as the wasting of fuel.
  6. I have the following problem: as the thrust is uneven due to the system’s natural asymmetry, I had to tilt the SSME’s away from the tank/booster stack. That’s what they do in real life. The shuttle now flies “properly” without becoming unresponsive halfway through ascent like most of my earlier designs. However, at launch the shuttle does not fly directly upwards but rather sideways because the tilted Vectors generate perpendicular thrust. This means that I have to do an ugly correction maneuver in the first seconds of flight and lose a lot of fuel. I have thought of tilting the whole shuttle on the launchpad, but that would be quite unrealistic. I’ll have to see how it behaves when there is a payload in the cargo bay, maybe it could serve as some sort of a counterweight. But how can I negate this perpendicular thrust? I have already tilted the boosters themselves by 2-3 degrees. Maybe I could move them further “downward” on the tank to move the CoT and change the DoT? Or should I add additional, smaller boosters that fire for 20 seconds and keep my shuttle from moving in the wrong direction until it is tilted down enough for the thrust discrepancy to be unimportant? Yes, I already tried limiting the thrust of the main engines, but this would give the whole thing a TWR under 1. FYI: The boosters are 1.25m ones from NovaPunch, scaled to 1.4m by TweakScale.
  7. What's the craziest mission you've ever pulled off?

    I vaguely remember a botched munar takeoff several years ago. The lander ran out of fuel, so Jeb got out and tried to achieve orbit using his EVA pack. As this failed, I decided to use the orbital module for a suicidal maneuver in which it deorbited and tried to catch up with Jeb. Turns out that there was not enough time for a clean rendezvous and/or the thrust of the lander was too small, resulting in Munar regolith-assisted, surface contact rapid self-disassembly.
  8. Mun flyby in interplanetary missions

    A munar flyby can be used to reduce the delta-V requirement of an interplanetary answer and makes Jeb happy, especially if it is very low and. Can anybody share their experiences with flybys during Kerbin departure or arrival?
  9. Sorry if this has already been asked or is an idiotic question, but can this somehow be used with RSS?
  10. My grandfather visited Hollow Earth in 1952. He took a picture.

    XB-70 was a Military airplane. Anybody who flew in it kept their mouths shut.
  11. My grandfather visited Hollow Earth in 1952. He took a picture.

    He was not the first person to visit Agartha. The Germans did so, even before Byrd. They even had a small submarine base, if I recall correctly. However, they left Agartha in 1944. A Kriegsmarine map from 1942 showing the Antarctic entrance. My granddad used a similar one for the North Pole. He got it from a German pilot whom he shot down over England; they became friends after the war. And you did not see the hole because the North Pole is a no-fly area and no plane goes over 82 degrees northern latitude. Anybody who sees one of the holes (military pilots, polar researchers or astronauts) are not allowed to speak about it.
  12. My grandfather visited Hollow Earth in 1952. He took a picture.

    By "85 degrees northern latitude", I mean the latitude OVERGROUND at which the curvature starts. The latitude underground can be calculated using various reference points such as mountain ranges that are on the opposite side of the inner surface. Why are you not taking me seriously? Morlocks are a fictional construct and have nothing to do with the Hollow Earth. What I am telling you is non-fictional.
  13. My grandfather visited Hollow Earth in 1952. He took a picture. Actually, turns out that he is calling the Inner Earth Salim. Never told me for some reason...we only spoke of Agartha, Hollow or Inner Earth. I will ask him why he renamed it. Note that he claims to be in contact with Reptilians while my grandfather even denied their existence.
  14. My grandfather visited Hollow Earth in 1952. He took a picture.

    The site is owned by a friend of mine. I did most of the renders there. And yes, the correct name of Inner Earth is Agartha. Neither I nor my Grandfather ever heard of the term "Salem" for that.
  15. My grandfather visited Hollow Earth in 1952. He took a picture.

    This is a render I based on the photo several years ago. I forgot about it. Thank you for finding it!