Jump to content

FancyMouse

Members
  • Posts

    1,245
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by FancyMouse

  1. Other names can be completely made up. For example Linus Kerman - there's no well accepted translation of "Linus" for many languages, so you'll lose the name origin anyway, then why bother. But for Jeb/Bill/Bob/Val - it makes sense to translate those instead of making it up. Common names do have commonly accepted translations which could be used here.
  2. This is correct, and this is why I use merge functionality much often than subassembly. (Better organization, can merge ship with no open node on root)
  3. Because these parts are attached in radial symmetry not mirror symmetry. You can see that when you take the wing piece off, it automatically changes to radial symmetry mode. The reason it's in radial symmetry is probably because its parent part is in radial symmetry. When a parent part is in one symmetry mode, you can't attach child parts to it under another symmetry mode or different number of symmetry. To solve the problem, you need to detach the wing pieces, make sure they are in mirror symmetry mode (press R if it's not in the correct mode) before attaching them to the fuselage.
  4. Most likely engine shrouds - most likely an upper stage engine which still has stuff attached below it. They are purely visual as you noted, and should stick to the lower stage if you decouple it.
  5. This is a consequence of KSP being a CPU-heavy program, not "why" it is CPU-heavy.
  6. Read the configuration. It's two linears on top of two 4-ways. If it's not clear, it means a 2x radial symmetry of 4-ways and linears at the same location (you could even offset the linear to stick out so that it looks like a 5-way port). In 4 directions it will be two 4-ways RCS firing, while in 2 directions it will be one linear RCS firing. That's why it's equal in all 6 directions.
  7. No. I mean same situation. You're separating your burns, right? Suppose the first burn is from a circular orbit, you burned, I don't care your TWR and let's assume it's instant, then you orbit back to periapsis and want to finish the second half of your plan - I meant that I'm hoping you're not plotting a 500 prograde+500 normal maneuver node for this second half of the burn.
  8. Previously? I hope you're not assuming that a maneuver node A which has 1km/s prograde+1km/s normal would equal to two maneuver nodes at the same point, each 500m/s prograde+500m/s normal.
  9. It actually does have equal thrusts because a linear port produces exactly twice thrust of a 4-way one, which is why I love to use this combination for many of my designs.
  10. No, unless you're still playing 0.9 or earlier. See here for the 1.x model.
  11. And we have * Gilly under 8km * Jool under 2Mm after aerobrake (is that fixed in the most recent version, btw?)
  12. I don't know why nobody mentioned it, but there's another way of doing it, in career mode, without mods - completing a contract that asks for a geo-(keo-)stationary orbit satellite (where there's visually a target orbit that you can match). It's not terribly accurate, but you could still roughly feel it.
  13. The burn is in fact of a factor sqrt(2)-1 (since escape velocity = sqrt(2) of circulr orbit velocity). But 1/2 is a good approximation that accounts for the actual nonzero plane change. I'm ok with that for simple calculation. But 45 degree isn't quite the breakeven point - I would need a v*sqrt(2-sqrt(2)) budget for a direct plane change (I burn to the target circular orbit, not along initial normal direction), which is just about 3/4 of v, less than 2(sqrt(2)-1)v~0.8v to burn to high elliptical. In fact, if you use v as an approximate for the high elliptical plan, then the breakeven point is exactly 60 degrees (equilateral triangle ftw).
  14. F3 will show that some part is heated by exhaust of some engine, which means not only heating, but losing thrust as well if the part being heated and the engine are both on the same ship.
  15. I believe it was only 1.0 era thing. Now it's reasonable to do 180k and even lower if you're prepared for it. I've rarely done Jool aerocapture because it requires extra ship design work, and I'm still waiting for the bug of "ship under acceleration below 1Mm, can't go back KSC" to be fixed. At least it was still there in early versions of 1.2, haven't got a chance to test this in 1.2.2, though... nope you could still do gravity assist to raise periapsis - that's the fun part playing in Jool system.
  16. Is it possible that greenhouse gases could make surface temperature high enough? A RL example would be Venus at ~700k surface temperature which would radiate maybe 16x the energy it absorbs from the Sun if Venus were a black body. I guess maybe Laythe's atmosphere is not thick enough even if all of it is greenhouse gases, but maybe at least it's theoretically possible?
  17. A small (up to size B) asteroid for fashion. About to try several asteroids.
  18. Are you sure HG-5 and Comm16 can talk to each other at this distance? There's a matrix in KSPedia talking about the max distance between different tiers of antenna. In particular, ground station is really powerful, but not most relays. It's not a good assumption that if Ground->A1 and Ground->A2 can connect (even with both full signal strength), then A1->A2 can connect.
  19. Rating determines what is the maximum distance that two antennae of the same rating can connect (implying the signal strength is at minimum 1%). It's not maximum distance for 100% strength. Red line means they can connect, just with a low signal strength.
  20. I usually hyperedit the reentry vehicle for testing to a high orbit (several Mm), put on infinite fuel, burn until I reach a desired periapsis with KER showing a desired periapsis speed. The desired periapsis speed can be computed from data in TWP where it shows injection delta V into Kerbin. This delta V plus LKO speed (and plus a hundred or so as safety margin) is my desired periapsis speed for reentry testing. Once it can survive that, that reentry vehicle is ready to go. You could very well just try a periapsis speed of something like 3500m/s for Duna in most scenarios, but for me I have different requirements (e.g. I may want to come back in non-optimal trajectory in order to arrive early), so even for the same planet I may need different delta V and I need to consult TWP for the exact value I want for each scenario.
  21. It does. Without the empty maneuver AN/DN shows on purple orbit. With the empty one, they go back to the initial blue one. Unless you mean they calculate the AN/DN on the second orbit and then plot the nodes on the first orbit, then I don't know...
  22. Put an empty maneuver in your future Mun orbit. The AN/DN seems to go back to Kerbin orbit.
  23. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kepler's_laws_of_planetary_motion#Position_as_a_function_of_time Note the step 2 (Kepler's equation) there. That pretty much means there's no general formula and you have to numerically approximate it. It's going to be (very) tedious if you want to do it by hand.
  24. Actually with a couple thousands of hours on it, I'm really glad that I'm still learning things.
  25. Any one knows if this change to pure LF tank is intentional or just accidental regression? It's causing the tank disappearing from VAB part selection completely (from my career save) and searching "pure" would give me no results.
×
×
  • Create New...