• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1214 Excellent


About EpicSpaceTroll139

  • Rank
    Space Toaster programmer

Profile Information

  • Location 'Merica
  • Interests Aerospace Engineering, Science, Insanity

Recent Profile Visitors

2724 profile views
  1. @Azimech the same problems do indeed arise outside of DMP. What are the settings that you use in your "adjusted aero" these days?
  2. Been working on a plane for that turbofighter challenge thing @Azimech proposed. Currently having problems with turbine blades exploding, and the propshaft sometimes snagging and dumping all it's momentum into the airframe.
  3. As mentioned earlier, there are some ways to do this in stock, but they require much juggling, trajectory management, and short time windows. You could probably do this kind of thing using a kOS script, but it would be quite complicated. I can't even get a single booster to target the launchpad with any accuracy from over 1km altitude. @ZooNamedGames What size boosters are you trying to land on what size of how many gear gear? I've landed double orange tank boosters on 4 large legs before, and could probably do more on the same gear considering how light tanks are when near empty.
  4. ... I could have sworn my panels froze their rotation during the night... I guess I'll have to check that in the morning.
  5. My bad. Didn't mean to put words in your mouth. I was indeed referencing the moderator. And don't worry, I don't think your crazy xD. I just think the effect you see is the result of sort of side-effect of the canting, the changing engine gimbals' moment arms like @Dafni Edit: my bad, the auto-sort-by-votes thing threw me off on what you all had been saying. Again...
  6. Messed with really tall things. Tried to go 30% taller, with hilarious results.
  7. Ermm.... but "downward force" doesn't mean anything? Say I have a vtol with 2 engines mounted 3m to the sides canted 10 degrees out. When the VTOL is level, they produce 0 net torque. Now let's say the VTOL tilts over to 10 degrees. The engines are still in the exact same positions on the ship, just on happens to be tilted 0 degrees relative to the surface of Kerbin (or whatever planet), and the other 20 degrees. They are still producing the exact same thrust and in the exact same positions on the ship, therefore they also produce 0 net torque. Your overall thrust vector is now tilted 10 degrees. The only way you would get any stabilization would be with special aerodynamics and/or ground effects, which we do not have. You might want to take a look at this, as it is a fallacy that would have similar stabilization effects: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendulum_rocket_fallacy Try turning off SAS in a vtol with the engines canted out. If such a stabilization effect occurs, it should stay in a hover on its own. But it won't, it will slowly (or quickly) tip over until it crashes into something, in the exact same way as one without canted engines. Given how close the engines are to the horizontal plane of the uh, plane, I'm guessing what might be experienced as a "stabilizing effect" is the engine gimbals having more power over the aircraft's attitude. (It's hard to explain why this works in words, I'll try to make a picture explaining it in a bit, perhaps when I get back from work)
  8. While I like the idea, and might use it every now and then, I can see why it hasn't been a thing (yet). As control surfaces don't require electricity (they really should require electricity or something), control of your aircraft does not require electricity (unless you're a drone, in which case you should probably have good battery and such anyways). Sure, maybe you'll lose your reaction wheels, but I've found that they usually don't make much of a difference even on small planes anyways, except in the edge cases that you spam them or have knife edge stability and extremely wimpy control surfaces. Don't get me wrong, I'd be happy to get a ram turbine (and power-drawing control surfaces), I'm just pointing out why squad probably hasn't added them. Now that I think about it, such a device would need to be carefully balanced to make sure it couldn't just create electricity from nowhere (Eg: reaction wheels spin a giant wheel with ram turbines at the edges, which power the reaction wheels, and so on. Then again we do get unlimited power from rtgs, so...)
  9. Halfway correct. You can make your RCS thrusters fire with/as the main engines, but not the other way around.
  10. Fell from a high place
  11. Went through the arch at 707.7m/s. Guessing some people have done faster, but I forgot about this challenge until it was too late to put in large amounts of setup effort.
  12. Ah yes I saw that. Might take a look at the workings of that. Will have to watch a landing vid or try it myself to be sure, but I think my landing strategy might be different. Mine uses a Vernor RCS system to tilt the rocket and use aerodynamics to move it from side to side as needed, and only turns on the engines at the last second (TWR never dips below 5 or so during landing burn). Though perhaps a combination is best, perhaps arresting the vertical motion 10m or so above the surface, then using another loop to remove any remaining error, as it might actually not be practical to use aerodynamics as precisely as I'm trying to.
  13. More a case of "you will not go to space tomorrow", but... Had that SpaceX landing leg failure moment.
  14. Been working on a script to land a rocket back on the launchpad after its been sent up several kilometers and shifted a bit in some random direction. So far I've got an error range of about 20-30m. I think this is partly, but not due to some bug that results in the place the code thinks the launchpad is (seen by green line) for whatever reason moving east or west of the pad for no obvious reason, despite being locked to the geographic coordinates previously determined to be at the center of the pad. Though most of it is probably due to bad tuning of the PD loop, as it can be seen to land a significant distance away from the green line. A PID loop would be preferable, but I can't figure out how to make that work as horizontal distance from the launchpad is never negative, thus the integral term would never "unwind". Nope Got lucky this time! Leaning rocket of Kerbin. *Insert Cleveland "No no no no no nooooo!" as rocket slowly tips over* Planning to do some work on the skin of my Saturn V replica, to see if I can make it less ugly.
  15. @Azimech that bug with the rotor-turbine assembly colliding with the baseplate on your Apache sounds very similar to a bug I experienced when building my E-24 helicopter. I had the same thing happen except my "baseplate" was one of the I-beams that made up the spine of the helicopter. The only way I found to fix it was to completely rip out the spine (in your case the baseplate) and rebuild the helicopter around a new one. I think it might be the result of the part getting bugged in the craft file.