Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,308 Excellent


About fourfa

  • Rank
    Explodium handler

Recent Profile Visitors

7,806 profile views
  1. All the spherical pods have crazy amounts of drag. This makes them trivial to reenter safely with, but very difficult to launch. You can fit gigantic, unrealistic fins at the back of the rocket (you'll need them on the core stage, not the side boosters) but still the drag is so severe it will really slow down the booster and require a lot more propellant than the other pods. The better solution is to use a fairing to hide the pod from aerodynamic drag until almost in space. If you're in career/science mode and don't have fairings yet - unfortunately the best strategy is just to wait an
  2. NCD in near-Kerbin space does eventually get to be a grind - which I'm going to narrowly define as repetitive tasks that bring no new rewards. Up until the final tier, each new tech opens up a new technique, a new ship design, a new source of science so there is a fairly immediate payoff for all the hard work, and you only need to repeat (say a probe Mun landing, or crewed Minmus landing) 3-4 times before the next unlock. The last 4-5 techs though, the pace slows down. That can turn into a grind, or you can just go interplanetary and come home with a giant science dump to finish the cha
  3. OK, a few issues to point out. You're severely lacking in control authority. No ailerons for roll control, the almost-vertical stabilizers are fine for yaw but very, very limited for the most important pitch control. Rear landing gear are too far forward and front gear too far back, so there's little passive directional stability on the ground. Insufficient intake air means the twin engines provide asymmetric thrust at take-off - and there's little way for the plane to counter it (I think this is where the oversteer comes from). You're carrying oxidizer in the rear-most section, which is
  4. You’re definitely right that the landing gear settings are very tweaky, sensitive to small changes, and defaults seem not to work very well. The settings you’re using seem like they should be OK to me, unless perhaps you’ve got a very large craft and the gear are just overloaded. My default settings are front friction at 2.0, brakes at 50% - rear friction at 4.0, brakes at 95% - and this works for me 99% of the time. Also rear brakes very close behind center of mass for easy rotation at launch, and for that matter a center of mass that barely moves as you burn propellant - together this m
  5. OK, here's a good one https://kerbalx.com/fourfa/Mk3-Speedster-4 Set blade controls to Throttle, launch at full throttle, then when speed levels out, try reducing throttle and watch speed increase
  6. Congrats! Well right away I see with one of my record attempt planes (EM-64s motors and loads of R-12 blades) the controller pushes the blade angle way too far. I always found peak speed with this craft at 62 degrees, but only after a long slow ramp up to that speed with a lot of time spent in the high 50s. In Thrust mode, the controller jumped right to 66 almost right off the ground. Then after a few maneuvers it seemed to get stuck at 53 degrees and never went above it again. Reverting to runway, twice in a row it tried to launch with negative pitch (and tipped over and exploded).
  7. https://kerbalx.com/fourfa/Dunalander This one fits neatly into a 2-unit Mk3 cargo bay for ease of mothership integration
  8. On the topic of prop plane design difficulties- check out this recent challenge: Standard procedure for me: a pair of motors set to counter-rotate. Can be L&R nacelles, front and back facing motors inside a service bay, or axially-inline clipped almost together to simulate a puller or pusher contra-rotating design. Place one motor, place blades, then copy to the other position NOT using symmetry, then switch rotation on motor and blades on motor #2. Re: number of blades - first, forget about IRL. The parts are balanced too weirdly, if you want best speed for fun or gameplay t
  9. In KSP there's a "fine physics bubble" of 2.3km around the active craft. Inside that bubble, physics events like chutes opening, drag effects, solar panel EC charge etc get calculated even for craft other than the one you're flying. As you move away from a probe, some of these stop being calculated. For instance as you fly away from your drop probe, I would not be surprised if KSP stops modeling aero entirely and the probe plummets without deploying chutes at all. Even worse, entire craft that are in flight in atmosphere just get deleted when they're more than 25km (I think?) away. T
  10. Eve gravity is 1.7 times Kerbin's. Try testing the same craft on Kerbin with enough ballast to weigh 1.7 times as much, or use the F12 cheat menu to hack gravity to 1.7 for testing, and see what happens. Just going by gut feel, that rover looks pretty big for just 4 wheels. Eve's gravity is too high to do much EVA construction... Not many options other than send a new craft or revert to before the launch...
  11. Skip the inventory entirely. Click the hook icon on the right side to enter construction mode (or press the ‘i’ key shortcut). That’s the only way to manipulate larger parts
  12. Ladder drives have indeed been around in KSP for a long time. And as for Newton - unfortunately this is a phantom force originating from nowhere, and there is no equal and opposite reaction. Try this - take a craft based on one of the Vostok style pods (so no reaction wheels), send an engineer out on EVA (remaining on the invisible ladder). Now remove a part, observe the continuously increasing pitch rate, and see how long it takes before the ship flies apart
  13. One consequence of the tweak to mass around kerbals and jetpacks and anti-sliding boot glue: kerbals can only just barely fly on Duna now. Best to offload the parachute and get the EVA propellant quantity down first, then jump to defeat the sticky boots. Bring ladders - construction while hovering there is going to be difficult.
  • Create New...