Dark Lion

Members
  • Content count

    55
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

34 Excellent

1 Follower

About Dark Lion

  • Rank
    R.U.D. Specialist Engineer

Profile Information

  • Location Standing by to launch
  • Interests Stylin'-single-stagin'-sciencey-self-sustainable-to-anywhere kinda things that can make it to Minmus at least.
  1. @eloquentJane That's my it's-basically-all-stock brain making assumptions. Sincerest apologies, but I didn't have much time to look at it when I posted that. With a more intense scrutiny, it clearly isn't stock, so I really don't know what I'm looking at, nor what it's capable.... Oh well.
  2. @Zapo147 I believe you've got the idea about orbital resonance! @eloquentJane As aero-braking maneuvers are meant to conserve fuel for those lenghty missions, I have to wonder how that transpo of yours doesn't flip retro when the tanks are near empty and the CoM shifts back towards the lab module. It may be out-dated and impractical but it's still an interesting design nonetheless!
  3. I had to check and make sure I didn't mis-name it, but yes, orbital resonance is basically the timing in which celestial bodies pass one another by a certain distance, in any case that the two orbits intersect. In this case, for rendezvous/encounters in KSP, we'll consider the craft a celestial body, but one which cannot exert any gravitational force upon the encountered. For a very basic example: an orbital period which lasts twice the length of time to orbit Kerbol as Kerbin, yet still intersects Kerbin's sphere of influence would be considered a 1:2 orbital resonance at Kerbin, the moment that orbit is stable. In order to best utilize every drop of fuel, sometimes it's necessary to use the same celestial body for gravity assists to cancel or add orbital velocity relative to Kerbol. When this is the case, you'll need to understand the appropriate resonance to both plan and time your desired course. And because KSP doesn't have the physics to support multiple bodies' gravitational effects across an entire star system, you won't have to factor in the effects upon anything more than your craft itself (or asteroids, if you're into that) as we should know by now, the "on-rails" system doesn't allow you to move any moon, planet or anything, even a little bit. Laws of Conservation of Energy do not apply to anything other than what you've put there yourself. @Zapo147 @qzgy I hope this helps!
  4. @Zapo147Now to answer much more directly: My most successful solution is: Don't force efficiency before effectiveness. Consider orbital mechanics are actually much easier to calculate without aero-brake maneuver variables. More dependable physics can be calculated from KSP's "on-rails" solar system which only effects your ship one celestial body at a time, and thus, much more simplistic equations are readily available for your use. A tumbling spacecraft appears to be the least of your concerns, however... Some things to study up on: ~Orbital resonance (relevance: timing and precision for encounters) ~Phase angles (relevance: fuel-saving encounters) ~Gravity assist (relevance: economy interplanetary transfer/capture) ~Oberth effect (relevance: maximizing engine effectiveness) I highly advocate the use of infinite fuel to practice some desirable captures and some note-taking to determine the most effective altitudes and such to capture from an interplanetary transfer. This would almost certainly help you retain what you've learned by turning theory into good solid practice and teach you which world offers the most deltaV savings, which worlds help the least and how to make the most of a bad situation when the fuel light does come back into play. Quite literally, get mad and throw your ship around Kerbol from world to world until you're confident you fully understand all you've read up on. By the time you're confident with your understanding of how to use gravity to your advantage, you will also very likely understand what the best work-around is for your craft, specific to its given objective, or if that craft is truly viable on said task. Tylo can be friend or foe. It depends entirely upon relative phase angles at the time of your encounter at Jool. One position of Tylo may send you interstellar, another may suck you right down into Jool's green death. The latter option still allows you an opportunity for that beloved aero-capture-- though it may require a correction burn first to keep you from diving too steeply (which may or may not turn out to be more efficient than brute force captures depending upon many variables like starting altitude and velocity.) The point being, while it is indeed some sound advice, I wouldn't follow @qzgy's advice to the letter, as sometimes an aero-brake at Jool can save you fuel, other times it can save your mission. But yes... if you come in straight for Jool aero-braking, you're hot on the heels of Death, not efficiency. You'd better have brought all your celestial armor (ablator) for that one. Even then, good luck on surviving the G-force if you delve too deeply into those toxic-looking Joolian clouds... Wow, I really went on a ramble there, sorry. Hopefully, at least some of this has been helpful to you. Can you tell I once struggled with this as well? Good luck!
  5. @Zapo147 Your question may need to be a little more specific for best results. Firstly, when exactly is it so important to keep said burj khalifa stable during the aerobrake? Is the issue related to accuracy of trajectories or are you not satisfied with the deltaV equivalent of the aerobraking maneuver because of the tumble through atmo?
  6. It's awfully still and quiet on this thread. Better gather my advanced medical equipment. Could be in shock from Bo wierdness... [Pokes thread with a stick]
  7. Infernal RoboticsProcedural Wings=Freedom(form x function) - trying anything else for lack of necessity
  8. In best Scottie impression: "We just can't do it Cap'n! We don't have the POWER!" In trying to find a more efficient run-up to final approach burn, I realized a huge flaw in my previous design: deltaV shortage. I got to work at once. The results were nothing short (or more) than explosive.
  9. BY THE K R A K E N!!! I've been grossly misusing the quicksave feature this whole time!! Been playing this game since 1.0.5 and only just learned you can quicksave a (spaghettified, krakenized, and in-no-way-any-fault-of-my-own-ignorance) maneuver node! Just give me the badge please, Badie. I'm dying here LOL! @Skystorm, may the Kraken turn a blind eye to your ingenuity! I do humbly thank you for the much-needed intel... even though I'm pretty sure you only did so to encourage me to try it again and go for Plaid Speed for real, you devil! (Which might've worked if I'm swift enough. ) **Rage-quits KSP for an astounding 6 minutes before going back to the game I never closed, grumbling about hating Mun, math and my laurels...**
  10. Yes, yes, I realize I may have redefined the term "over-engineered" with Jeb's sweet swisher rocket, but I'm more interested in knowing how to set up the burn from such an eccentric orbit and still maintaining that pinpoint accuracy of yours. Excellent run by the way! +3.5 Km/s?!?! I don't think I'd have the reaction time to beat that... I can get faster than you (faster still if I launched/transferred from Kerbin more efficiently) before flame-out, but I almost always overshoot the target. How do you time it out and how do you know you're on target so long before you can even see the target indicator? So here's the basic L.I.O.N. 10-steps to Arch-storming guide for beginners: 1. Build an enormous, over-powered, multi-stage rocket to Mun. Check! 2. Send said rocket to Mun and merely "scrape" the sphere of influence for an insertion burn for the extremely high polar orbit at Mun. Check! 3. Forget to quicksave and start all over. Check! 4. Set a course correction burn dangerously close to impacting target at periapsis. Check! 5. Ensure you have on brown pants and no shortage of snacks. Check! 6. Execute course correction burn and wait for sight on target . Check! 7. Shed all excess weight (who needs navigation and life-support equipment?!), point prograde relative to target and open 'er up-- full throttle. CHEEEEEEEEEEECK~! 8. PRAY TO THE KRAKEN. Check. Check. Check. Check. 9a. PUNCH F9 in the face and hold it down for ruining your perfect crash. Return to step 4. (Check! x 10666)/rage-fits 9b. Remember you're not actually Scott Manley, and shamelessly name a Mun arch after yourself when you swish it from orbit at Plaid Speed! Check! 10. Boast to everyone on the forums how you're the best at Arch-storming so you can feel properly one-upped when the pros show up and do it better with what seems to be less than half of your effort. *Sigh* Check... I didn't want to add number ten, but alas, it is an obligatory step of this kind of program. Besides... I want my shiny new forum badge because it's my 1st-ever shiny new forum badge. Hopefully I'll still see my name high on the speed leaderboard anyway, but I think I've had enough fun killing kerbals with this challenge. It's on my laurels I rest, @Skystorm. I really just wanted to see if I could beat 2km/s and escape Kerbin. Maybe when/if a Tylo Cave Speedrun ever happens, we shall meet again! <-- @Badie, also a wink-wink, hint-hint! I had a blast, but I don't even want to look at Mun without atmosphere between us right now! LOL! I haven't reverted this much since I started playing. Edit: @luizopiloto Can I please have your kerbal gun-cannon-shooter-thingy KerbalX link? I solemnly swear I'm up to no good!
  11. Done. Thanks so much @Vanamonde! You guys are awesome
  12. For the sake of consistency... I would love to change my username to "Dark Lion" please.
  13. I did it! AGAIN! And OMG the performance this time almost merits an apology for the last attempt! @StrandedonEarth, take a ride with me and you'll have to call yourself "StrandedNowhere," because that rocket isn't coming back, my friend! Same setup as my first attempt, only from a much more eccentric orbit and equipped with the kind of over-confidence only Jeb himself knows! *Pushes F9 key while here, just once, for spite* ;P Good luck beating 2313 m/s! @Skystorm NICE!!! I see I'm not the only one sending my kerbals interstellar!
  14. I DID IT!!! 851.8 m/s right under a Mun Arch! I basically just launched the mission as if dropping of a polar surveyor, then kept making fine adjustments to my orbit until the timing was just right. MANY MISTAKES WERE MADE! Standby for an even faster run!
  15. Looks like some of us "wacky," but all of us fly! Guess I'll have to get my rove on... ish. How exactly might you classify a flying motorbike? Bo's not a car or truck or plane. Maybe it's wacky to think a bike could fly like a plane? IDK... Judges plz? https://kerbalx.com/DarkLion/Bo