AVaughan

Members
  • Content count

    201
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

104 Excellent

1 Follower

About AVaughan

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Enable
  1. Well the thread for the part switcher is Note that the thread title implies it is updated for 1.4.3 already.
  2. I'm just guessing at the cause of your problem, but one possibility is remotetech deciding you have no comm link and shutting the engines down. Check that you have some sort of antenna. Avionics normally have a built in antenna, but you could try adding another antenna as well. There is also an option in remotetech's settings to disable that behaviour.
  3. So that would mean that an Ammolox engine would have around 320 ISP? According to wikipedia the Methane/Lox vacuum engine SpaceX is developing has a vacuum ISP of 375. So even is Ammolox is easier to make and store, Methane/Lox is a more efficient rocket fuel.
  4. Not quite what the OP had in mind, but the devs could also add some tiny pseudo SOIs at the Lagrange points. They could be considered part of their parent's bodies SOI for most purposes, (sort of like the how launchpad and crawler way are "mini-biomes").
  5. AVaughan

    How do I revert back to 1.3?

    Most mods that are available for 1.3.0 will either have a 1.3.1 version, or the 1.3.0 version will work in 1.3.1. (There are probably some exceptions, but they should be pretty uncommon). Which mod in particular needs 1.3.0?
  6. AVaughan

    why do you play this?

    To me, that is not a new bug. I've seen that happen since at least 1.3 and 1.2. (Modded games. It might have happened in stock as well, but I don't play much stock KSP). To me, it's just a visual glitch, with no gameplay effect.
  7. But she is going to be a Keeper. So maybe the birth of a new class of Scientist-Keeper. Someone who uses Kerman technology to help live a Kermol lifestyle. (Or you could argue that she is the second Scientist-Keeper, since Jonton was arguable conducting an experiment when he planted an extra Kerm cutting).
  8. AVaughan

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    Is there any reason they couldn't just capture the hydrogen boil off, and re-liquify it? (Although it might be easier/more efficient to just use insulated tanks, manage ship orientation to help keep the hydrogen tanks as cool as possible, and bring extra hydrogen to deal with the remaining boil off). This sort of process (hydrogen + carbon dioxide -> methane + water, with the water then split into hydrogen + oxygen) could be run in a plant that was installed in an automated BFR that was sent on a conjunction before a manned mission. That way they could demonstrate that everything the plant was working, and that fuel would be available for the return leg of a manned mission. By not relying on extracting water from Martian soil, there should be less that could go wrong for an automated fuel generation mission. (By my math, 80 tons of hydrogen would make about 960 tons of methane + liquid oxygen. which is close to full tanks for a BFR cargo ship. That would mean such a BFR could still bring about 70 tons of fuel production plant or other cargo. Since a fuel production plant would already need the equipment to liquify oxygen, maybe it's not too much of a stretch to also include the ability to liquify hydrogen). Water extraction from the Martian soil could wait for a manned mission.
  9. AVaughan

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    Which is why I suggested placing the drum inside the hull and spinning the drum one way and the rest of the ship the other. Note that I wasn't arguing that spacex should do this, just that it would be better/easier than adding a 'yyyyyyuge reaction wheel' that could spin up/spin down the entire ship.
  10. AVaughan

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    Would probably be easier to just build the living quarter inside a rotating drum, running on bearings inside the pressure hull, and then spin the drum in one direction and the ship in the other. Then you can just use the drive motor to start/stop the rotation. That only costs electric power + wear and tear on the moving parts. (And a lot of extra mass you have to lift to orbit etc).
  11. AVaughan

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    So you waste quite a bit of fuel spinning up and down every few hours? If you were going to do , you would do it once, and then leave the ship rotating until the time for the next course correction or other maneuver.
  12. AVaughan

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    Functionally the same as shuttering them. Why go to the trouble and expense of adding windows in each cabin if most people can't stand the rotating view?
  13. AVaughan

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    Yeah well 5 rpm gets you about 0.12g, but I don't see that fast a rotation rate working with the windows in each sleeping cabin. (I pretty sure that would make me so dizzy that the only alternative would be to shutter those windows, making them pointless).
  14. AVaughan

    SpaceX Discussion Thread

    From memory Apollo's Thermal control roll was 3 revolutions per hour. For BFS, at 4.5m radius that would be all of 0.12 mm/s of acceleration. Maybe enough to be noticeable, but probably not enough to help with toilet type tasks. (If you really want a useful amount of "artificial gravity", then you are probably better off using a cable to couple two BFSs nose to nose. But course corrections whilst coupled could be challenging).
  15. AVaughan

    How do I establish connection in RO?

    Not sure but you would probably get more eyes from more experienced RO/RP-1 folks if you posted in the RP-0 thread.