• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

164 Excellent

1 Follower

About 1101

  • Rank
    Bottle Rocketeer
  1. I'm not going to claim to be an expert, but if you have sufficient life support and time isn't too much of an issue, then you could drop off the lander/rock a lot further out. If your lander can be captured or slingshotted by a moon toward the needed atmospheric trajectory, the last impulse you need give it could be weeks before it gets close to the target. You would need a lot of processor power to calculate the trajectory, and well mapped out gravity well, but it could work, I think. Alternatively, if the enemy planet knows it is being watched, pretend it's a failure. Have a small lander system (like MOOSE) in among a much bigger decoy craft that disassembles during the entry sequence. Then, your manned bit looks just like a bit of debris and no one is any the wiser.
  2. One thing I've seen as a reason not to use NTRs is potential public issues with putting nuclear reactors at risk of launch failure. How much worse for the environment than Hypergolics (already present in many, if not all, rockets), would it be? How would the effects differ between say, a launch off the Cape and debris falling into the sea, as opposed to Baikonur?
  3. Still, a consideration in Hard Scifi for deflection from shooting, and also as an emergency backup if for some reason, you have no propellant but can still shoot.
  4. Not sure about the exact composition of the plume for Hydrolox, but 'Ignition!' lists basically any combination of Hydrogen and Oxygen you like for the combustion chamber. Presumably once it's cooled down a bit in the plume, you'll just get the normal stuff, but:
  5. What if, there already was a lot of air on the inside of the hollow shell, and our atmosphere (atmotorus?) was just the upper layer of it? Then at least we wouldn't suffocate. Admittedly then the interior wouldn't be overly breathable from overpressure and prone to ignition from huge amounts of oxygen, but we wouldn't suffocate, right?
  6. I thought it was better off with a hydrogen rich mixture, as it gives better specific impulse? As well as not being horrendously oxidising?
  7. Except interesting effects like resonance won't be entirely realistic or relevant unless you do one with the actual vehicle. For example, STS-1 had some interesting acoustic issues and damage that NASA did not design for or expect, up to the point where one of the pilots said he wouldn't have flown it to space if he'd known what the damage was.
  8. Windows 10. Because KSP doesn't have a Linux/ARM version to use on Raspberry Pi. Or Pi doesn't have enough RAM. Or possibly both... Have formally (pre 1.0) used KSP on linux (I think Mint and an Ubuntu release), however due to weird UEFI bugs, not reinstalling again until I get a newer computer. Windows 10 is an upgrade from Win 8, and I really don't want to have to use recovery disks to get Win 8 back, possibly without the upgrade...
  9. I take that to mean 'Send Jeb'..... Duna Moth 2 - Crew Edition! Jeb complains he feels a bit squashed: Ground Control tells him he can stretch in 300 days.... This time, only one correction was used, and a straight up aerocapture to the parachute: Jeb says he won't be flying White Star Line again. Ignoring the fact he's stranded on Duna.
  10. The URL seems to have an extra 'imgur.com/' at the start of it - try this: http://imgur.com/a/98Cpc ETA - the author has posted it as separate images - it's nice! 84 days to Duna, Nice!
  11. Just as well, this might be unmanned but it certainly doesn't use any SRBs.... Launch Mass - just under 6 tons: The Duna Moth heads for the stars... And promptly catches fire. Orbit achieved, 2 tons placed into orbit and burning for Duna: And the probe heads towards Duna, and two correction burns later: Aerobraking didn't look very impressive, so here is the lander separation and deorbit burn: Landing was slightly hard and broke two landing struts, but it worked!
  12. Back in previous versions, when parachutes were near instantaneous, or didn't get destroyed at high airspeed, I would have one or two mounted on the cockpit part of a spaceplane, and if it was nosediving, try everything else (control Authority limiting/removing, RCS, any remaining staging etc) and then pull the chute at about 500m. Now, you can't do that so much, so it's more of a do everything I can to reduce airspeed, then pull the chute, and hope to slow down enough, or at least hit tail first. I have tried ejectable cockpits, but they take more kerbals than they save, because I'll almost certainly need it in a non-standard situation. For example, an upward firing cockpit ejection is unhelpful when in an inverted nose down dive, at about 50m altitude. For rockets, a good old Apollo style abort system does the trick. But you need to do something silly to need one of those.
  13. Probably added a line of: import lack_of_self_preservation into the rockets programming.
  14. I thought the saying was 'Any landing you can walk away from......', not 'Any landing you can swim away from.....'?
  15. I bought this game on 1st Jan, 2014, in the UK. Arguably it was probably 2013 somewhere in the world when I bought it, but I don't want to pay nothing when Making History comes out. Let's face it, KSP has changed a lot since .23, when I bought it. We got a lot of new parts, the 'Souposphere' was mostly made less viscous, Windows 64bit support came out, and so many other things since then. And I've got all those for free, essentially, because I haven't paid for it since 2014. What's more, I paid $27 for it, and at the time it was something like £18 from the exchange rate, given that it would now cost £29, that is great. How many hours I've played, I don't know as I didn't get it on Steam, but it must be a lot. Total cost of operating KSP for me would probably be larger for the Electricity to run my laptop. As far as I'm concerned, I would like Squad to 'hurry up', release Making History and Take my Money!:P