Jump to content

.50calBMG

Members
  • Posts

    241
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by .50calBMG

  1. After trying that fix on 1.3.1, it did fix the horizon glitch on ascent, but once my rocket left the atmosphere all the scatterer effects just disappeared. Do I need to change some configs or is it just not compatible?
  2. Sorry to bring this back up, @Phineas Freak, but will that fix for iGGnitE work for 1.3.1 as well? I'm running GPP at 10.625x scale and getting the same issue.
  3. Which we still haven't gotten our footage that we were promised
  4. Well, better to get the failures out when they are on the ground rather than in flight, I guess.
  5. Now that I've seen what this rocket looks like, I'm gonna hazard a guess at a fin failure on the second stage. Then again, no way I'm right about something twice in a row...
  6. Looks like it's solid fuelled to me. Liquids don't smoke like that.
  7. I would assume your guesses are correct, but I would also add to that the larger surface area also creates more induced drag because of the extra lift provided, as well as some frictional drag from the increased surface area.
  8. @sevenperforce... You are smarter than me.
  9. Can't wait to see if they give us a reentry video like eft-1 had.
  10. Just a guess, but they might have a quick release lock or something set up in case an emergency does happen, so that the dragon is more or less the same every time it has an abort scenario.
  11. You do realize starship v3 is larger than v2, right? One thing I haven't been able to figure out is whether the fins on Themis are retractable or not. The video shows long, high aspect ratio fins, but it seems like that would be the worst setup based on my knowledge of supersonic aerodynamics.
  12. But what I'm saying is that those problems were solved well before the DCSS was ever created. Not trying to say that common bulkheads are easy, but it seems that the extra space wasted by separating the tanks, which cuts fuel fraction due to more structural mass per unit of tank volume is just a bad idea in the first place, because (almost) everything in rocketry is about reducing excess mass.
  13. Centaur G still had a common bulkhead though. Makes me wonder what the thought process was for the separate tanks on the DCSS.
  14. Yeah, but where's the fun in instant gratification? Back to ULA, have we heard anything recently about ACES? Seems like its been a while since we had an update on it.
  15. There ya go And I would agree with that, more usable volume vs stage size. looks like they learned their lesson on that too, ACES has the common bulkhead and same diameter tanks like Centaur does.
  16. ... wanna think about that for a sec?
  17. I guess 9/10 is a fraction, or are they actually going to get the prices down to a comparable level with China and SpaceX? If memory serves, even the Atlas V 401 is a few times more expensive than the F9, even though it's less capable.
  18. IAC is only a few weeks out, did they ever confirm that Elon or Gwynne would have a presentation?
  19. Wings that large would make atmospheric flips sorta difficult, even with the thrusters and gimballing
  20. Hope thats just an artist rendering for the BFS, not another redesign
  21. I dont think the RCS is as strong as you think it is. Plus, you would have to carry more nitrogen in larger tanks if you wanted to use the RCS thrusters for everything, which would, as with almost every other thing suggested for stage 2, cut directly into payload mass.
  22. Why would they need to? That would take months even for SpaceX to do because they reside in the LOx tank, which means they would have to take the second stage apart.
  23. Have we heard anything new on Opportunity yet? Seems like the storm is dying down a bit now.
  24. Looked a bit like a fin failure or something. You can see something come off a few seconds before it brakes up.
×
×
  • Create New...