Jump to content

Nich

Members
  • Posts

    1,226
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Nich

  1. @DerekL1963 So I checked and in 1.2.1 RSS my advanced transfer only calculates ejection burn and does not consider capture burn unless there is some option some where I can not find.
  2. @Curveball Anders I don't think so. I do have an adaptive clock that is supposed to go up to 3.1 ghz but it always seems to sit at 2.112 ghz. Yes I have 16 cores, 32 if multi threading. And yes multi threading does take up extra overhead. When I run multi threaded my main (highest) core only uses about 35% but without multi threading it uses 45%. I am buried in the yellow with a 10:50 launch taking 22:20 real time. It was more like 30 minutes with multi thread (anecdotal). Increasing the physics time scale to max got it down to 18:42 seconds but the game just doesn't feel smooth like that. I might leave or go back half way or something. I tried setting KSPs priority to "realtime" and "high" but that didn't seem to do anything.
  3. Most of what you said made sense except I thought the reason you cant go faster then the speed of light is because your mass increases to infinity as you approach the speed of light. I was also thinking about traveling near the speed of light. If I am traveling at fast enough that time dilation is 100/1 I would be able to make a 100 light year trip in ~1 year so from my perspective I was traveling at ~100c. Yes I know the reality is it appears the distance shrinks 100/1. So from an accelerating perspective this gets even weirder assume I accelerate at 1 g for ~32 years. as I approach the correct speed my target galaxy would appear to go from 100 light years away to 1 light year away appearing as if I was going 99 light years in a matter of days or ~17,000c. Then I would coast a year and decelerate for 32 years. For the first couple days the Galaxy would appear to get further as the rate of expansion is greater then my velocity, still when they are equal, and finally getting closer again as expansion is less then my velocity.
  4. Pros: KSP is the most cost effective, highest fidelity simulation a college student could afford. If you are using it for pure demonstration purposes you should be fine. Cons: Project will appear unprofessional because it is based off a game. You will need to have lots of other documentation to show the soundness of your design. At the end of the day you need to ask your self what is the purpose of the assignment? Are you using KSP as a short cut? If so you will likely be deducted points. How long do you have to complete the project? If it is a semester long senior project I would not spend more then 5% of my time on KSP. If it is less then a month I would think it would be fine. If you use the derived equations (which in them selves are only approximations) from class to design a craft and test it in KSP. You should be fine for any BS program. I only have a BS in Aerospace engineering so I do not know know about masters or post doc work. At the end of the day you need to make an outline of the work you want to do (including KSP) and run it past your professor to make sure it is within the scope of the project.
  5. I use a cmd file to open my KSP on 1 CPU and it lags a lot less. I also turned off multi threading and I think my PC preforms about 10% better in my RP-0 RSS install but I do not have any hard numbers.
  6. Ha ha well now I am really confused lol. I thought an advanced transfer and a holmen transfer were 2 different kind of transfers Holman has AP/PE at arrival/departure and requires a plain change mid course (unless AP/PE are aligned with AN/DN) Advance transfer will overshoot/undershoot AP/PE so that arrival/departure happens at AN/DN which will be before or after AP/PE I used https://alexmoon.github.io/ksp/ to learn ballistic transfers. To be honest I have not used MJ for transfers I have just watched Nathienkell and TylerRaze (sorry about the miss spellings) I could be mistaken but I am pretty sure I have found cheaper transfers. The tool also doesn't give me the ability to have free inclination change (I typically launch into the inclined orbit I would need to fix the Mercury inclination so my actual burn from LEO is all prograde. I will have to play around with MJ and see for my self.
  7. The event horizon is defined as the sphere where the escape velocity is faster then the speed of light. So if you started at infinity with 0 velocity and fell into a black hole wouldn't you be going at the speed of light as you hit the event horizon to an outside observer? But I thought objects with mass could not go the speed of light? Wouldn't your time relative to the universe accelerate to infinity? As time of the outside universe accelerates to infinity and black holes loose mass via hawking radiation wouldn't you observe the black hole evaporate in front of you before before you could reach the event horizon? Also wouldn't your mass increase to infinity making you more massive then the black hole at some point?
  8. Also doesn't advanced transfer uses only 1 burn with no mid course correction? Also it doesn't fix inclination but changes it so that you fly by the planet at AN/DN. I would have to do the math but I believe the only time it really make sense to fix inclination at departure burn is for Mercury/Moho because 1) oberth at earth/kerbin is much larger making inclination adjustments much cheaper 2) velocity around the sun at earth/kerbin orbit is significantly slower making it much cheaper and 3) hydrolox engines can be used at earth more easily for more DV then hypergolic can be used at mercury. For Earth/Kerbin to Venus/Eve oberith dominates and mid course corrections are less efficient. For Mars/Duna it is more efficient to correct inclination at Mars/Duna but more oberth at Earth/Kerbin so it is kind of a wash. For the rest of the planets it is way more efficient to correct inclinations at the destination and all but pluto have WAY more oberith
  9. @DerekL1963 Yes I could have docked to a port on the other side with probably 10-12 units and no reaction wheel. I would love to know how you got your MJ to behave so nicely as mine blows fuel out the RCS continuously. It would have used 10 times what yours did. MJ has used up an entire mission worth of RCS fuel just trying to do a 180. I was not exaggerating when I plan a lazy mission i pack 100x RCS fuel. My starter RP-0 first orbit rocket packs about 600 hydrogen and I use anywhere from 100-500. If I want MJ to do it I need 40,000-60,000 And yes the video I watched was 2 years old. Not sure if advanced transfer existed. But that is not the point, the point is because MJ does the transfer for him he did not understand the mechanics of the transfer. If he knew how to use advanced transfer that still would not help him if he wanted to do a Kerbin -> Eve -> Eve -> Kerbin -> Jool transfer.
  10. MJ is cheating because it doesn't respect the probe core rules. If your pilot/core is not high level enough to hold a node and you use MJ to do it you are cheating. I saw NathienKell do a transfer to mercury using MJ to set up the cheapest ejection burn then complain that the capture burn was really expensive. 48 km/s with a 7 degree inclination change requires a ton of DV. Fixing that inclination at earth would have been much much cheaper even if it required a 200-300 dv mid course adjustment. This is shows that MJ does things well enough that people slug by but at the same time it can really cripple you. I have always felt MJ also guzzles RCS fuel. Anything MJ can do I can do with 1/100 the fuel. All that a side yes I use MJ because it is my game and I play it how I want. I also use the cheat menu
  11. @MaltYebisu is it released on CKAN? I have been wanting to do a modular play through.
  12. Have not been on the forms in a while. What is the difference between RP-0 and RP-1? I am still trying to progress in my 1.2.2 RP-0 campaign. Does anyone know why my throttle goes to zero when ever i Activate my Gemini lander engine on on my low tech moon lander?
  13. Could the wolfhound be good because of economics of scale? Also if you are using the wolfhound you have an enormous payload. Perhaps you need to be more efficient with your payload. I have always wished I had versions of the terrier and poodle that were 70% smaller.
  14. have not played the dev branch but I will ask the stupid question did you put you build points into the VAB and not SPH or Tech by accident?
  15. whiplashes are dead weight always add more rapiers. If you are having trouble going supersonic you may need to clean up your craft (reduce drag) possibly less wing. you can blip LFO mode but I find this is generally a waist. I have not played stock in forever but generally 20 ton/ raipier is the max.
  16. Problem here is you are only transferring to eve and your turning angle is already reduced to 45 degrees. As you add velocity to go further this angle becomes smaller and your 90 m/s becomes 45 m/s or 15 m/s. Not to mention you have already spent 4153 dv so an extra 90 is only 2.2% How much extra dv is required for correction burns?
  17. Oberth vs free energy Mun slingshots really only make sense for Duna and Eve anything further out and the slingshot becomes very ineffecive and adds lots required accuracy As for transfers from the mum if I remember correctly duna and eve are cheaper directly from the moon, Moho and Joul are cheaper to reduce orbit near kerbin. From Minimus always reduce orbit to 70 km
  18. Hi, I am trying to get my RP-0 recovery rocket working. I have an RD108 core with 2 AJ-10 (MID) engines to decelerate and parachutes for landing and a THOR Avionics for control and 800 electric charge. The AJ-10s have 1550 dv. When I fly the rocket by hand everything works. When staging I set throttle to 0 and activate the AJ-10s Stage recovery says the stage burns up in atmosphere at 3200ish m/s Are the AJ-10s not supported? Is the TWR to low? I know I have to start my burn at about 90k when flying manually. Am I not allow to mix fuel types? Do I need to place the AJ-10's first? How does this work with sub assemblies?
  19. When landing a shuttle at KSC from orbit simply put the orbit line into the ground at the KSC. Then pitch to 30 degrees. If you are over shooting pull back more. If you are undershooting pitch down.
  20. Surprised no one pointed out that any mission to Dres is to much ship for Dres. No one goes to Dres. I have done Duna missions with TAC and the life support is so light that packing on 3-4 years of supplies is easier then doing high energy transfers. However the further out you go the more high energy transfers make sense. Personally when it comes to life support I like 2x supplies as it is generally needed if you want to mount a rescue mission in time if needed. You can also always to a 2 phase mission. Phase 1 Holman transfer station and supplies. Phase 2 high energy transfer crew.
  21. From that section on directions // Initializes a direction to prograde // plus a relative pitch of 90 SET X TO SHIP:PROGRADE + R(90,0,0). so if I take the cross produce of SRFPROGRADE and UP I should get a vector that points out the left side of the ship (assuming I am pointing in the direction of prograde). Then a positive rotation would be up and a negative would be down correct? UG so many operations to do something so simple
  22. How do rotations work? I am trying to lock on to 5 degrees below prograde but the following code seems to lock 3 degrees right yaw and 3 degrees pitch up. lock steering to mysteer. lock mysteer to srfprograde+R(pitchcorrection,0,0). set pictchcorrection to -5.
  23. That is my current workaround but it failed me when My new engines took 4 seconds to spool up. I was lucky it bounced on the engine bell and went up but it was a real black eye for the space program. I would like to avoid wasting 10 seconds of my engines burn time on the pad and I would also like to finish this in a more elegant manor. I am thinking stage. wait until stage:ready. wait until Thrust()/MAXTHRUST > .97 stage.
  24. @scimas I tried that but AVAILABLETHRUST does not appear to take into account the RSS real engines spool time. So my script stages the engines and then drops my rocket on the pad because it thinks it has a TWR of 1.39. Since none of my engines are thrust limited AVAILABLETHRUST = MAXTHRUST.
×
×
  • Create New...