automcdonough

Members
  • Content Count

    327
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by automcdonough

  1. Yeah I'm a bit worried about that too, if the jets are only good till 30k then that's a lot of ground to cover on the rockets.. and i'm also concerned that they may need fuel faster than it can convert. Only 1 way to find out, and I haven't gotten there yet! I have not needed the chutes! Or the wheels! Landing this thing is painfully slow.. but it's actually great practice! I've never before landed the same craft so many times in a row successfully. coming in from orbit I had the same issue as you, had to fly it in reverse. It acts better when the tanks aren't empty. Takeoff when full is a bit rough, I had considered adding one more tank in design and I had a gut feel not to. My gut was right. Putting extra landing gear on the wing tips definitely paid off for me, most of the places I've landed were not perfectly level.
  2. GET THIS PARTY STARTED Let the record show that all fuel tanks are empty: Starting position: 35º 34' 37" N 243º 8' 33" E (35N 117W as shown by Kethane map) http://i.imgur.com/0YHAaCu.png Cookin along. I had a mishap where the engines stalled and I lost control, but was able to recover. As you said they kick back on once the speed goes below 80m/s. For me it seems anything over 30k altitude is too dangerous. For the second leg of my trip I'll try to get up over 25k asap and keep it under 30k. This thing tends to require constant babysitting to keep it in that window. I had hoped to walk away from it for a while. 2nd landing shots: flag plane safe and sound map (2ºS 142ºE) As you can see I'm going SE, (hading 250~260º). Seemed like the best arrangement of kethane globs for me. So on the first leg I made it 37ºS and 101ºE. That's a total distance of 119º. I used 6450 Kethane to do it. At this rate, the effective range of my plane is 148º. I've got 241º left to go, so there should only be 1 more stop before I make it back to the start point. edit: 3rd stop 1653 fuel left, used 6347 40S 31E travelled -2 -111, 111 total usd 57K per 1º Took pics but who cares they look the same. high-alt fast cruise not as efficient. lower ISP up there for sure.. gotta find the sweet spot in the middle. edit again: looks like the last leg of the trip is over a huge ocean. I'll have to make an extra stop to fuel up. and this will involve landing on a small island! D:
  3. made it! successful areobrake. currently in polar orbit letting the scanners get all the kethane mapped. I'm not sure if I ended up with more lift or not, but i found a balanced way to only have 1 engine and 1 drill. The section with the nuke tank will remain in orbit, it is a return stage with empty seat, if i can get back to orbit then there's a ride home. i also added brake chutes because i suck at landings. and rover wheels just in case i have a total navigation fail i can limp around to the next pool. I really have no idea how far this can go on the tanks it's got. there's a small rocket engine onboard to SSTO this thing up to the return module, i must have forgotten the part where you said they have to be jettisoned. they won't be used for the challenge, just dead weight. How can I slide this in? What if I post a screen showing that the fuel tank is emptied out before challenge starts? I don't see how they would benefit the challenge anyway with the horrible efficiency. edit again: my bad this variant has 2 k-jets.
  4. Still working on the launcher. I put it aside to do some other challenge.. Will get to try this soon. I found out kerbals add weight when in the chair, this thing was 12k but lost nearly 800d/v in final stage because it was built so minimized. (see big lander leg stuffed in chair to simulate weight) I added a pile of chutes to this but they all eject off before launch.
  5. I like your plane. Mine is turning out quite different but it's about ready to try flying on eve..
  6. i like the legless base, it's too bad you have so much trouble with it. my part count was killing me, had extremely low framerate.
  7. the recoil is nuts! pretty cheaty if you put one on a satellite and use it for propulsion.
  8. side mounted i had issues with the gun just making the craft explode. if i put a strut cube down and used the end mount for the gun it seemed pretty reliable. would really appreciate the overheat warning bar so i know if it's about to pop on me. cool part!
  9. I couldn't imagine trying to build a rocket on a little touchscreen, let alone fly one.
  10. this happens to me usually only during launch, and only when it's 700+ in weight. the physics just gives up, random fails everywhere. those stages independently are perfectly fine.
  11. harsh. that could have been worded in a more constructive way.
  12. seems more like a request than a challenge?
  13. why use seats at all? one of the score multipliers is weight, might as well just spam full command pods?
  14. I think you should clarify the rules a bit, because as we know in racing EVERY rule gets stretched. Opening this up to non-stock when you also have no damage and infinite fuel? Honestly I don't like where this is going. I might as well use a mainsail pointed up at the air for downforce, and tiny probe wheels because i know they won't get crushed/exploded. It's going to go straight from 0 to ridiculous. Avoiding damage is part of racing. And if you can't do two laps without refueling then your craft needs work. I started a similar thread which didn't go anywhere. You have a file with the gates so that's one step ahead of me, but really I think this needs more thought. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/32270-idea-need-help-Interplanetary-Rallycross I have a feeling that the rover actually staying on the ground may have to be in the rules as well.
  15. I don't like using mods for things like engines, they usually feel "cheaty" to me.
  16. I agree this needs clarification. Pending clarification of rules I'll submit my isplore rover. When I get home I'll tally up the costs and such. It's under 2t and handles high speed very well, easily hits 60m/s. Treats hills and mountains like stunt ramps. check link in my sig for craft file if you'd like to check it out.
  17. I'm all for this idea. A solar powered prop craft is perfectly reasonable and realistic. We have solar powered planes now too!
  18. I kinda like it. It's like a heavy ass utility version of my isplore. It seems heavier than it needs to be though.
  19. So once it was on a good path I went to sleep. Woke up to see that it went for over and hour and reached 1234m, traveled nearly 60km. I think I can do better. Looks like it just ran out of fuel! also it took off on rover wheels. so only 101 points.. edit: trying again, took off on ions only (landing gear dropped off w/ decoupler) up to 151 points. plenty of fuel , i feel good about seeing 2 or 3
  20. the one i'm working on is giving me fits. as soon as i turn on SAS it wants to dive! D:
  21. there is a logical progression towards spaceplanes happening in this thread. lol
  22. please tell me you named it the scorpion. or the crab.