• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,812 Excellent


About Brikoleur

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • Website URL Array

Profile Information

  • Location Array

Recent Profile Visitors

2,127 profile views
  1. Funny, I was just thinking of posting this, after reading up on the Vega missions to Venus...
  2. I tried swapping the home-made rotor blades for the official ones on one of my Evecopters. It did not work well at all. I logged an issue about it: Pending patches, these parts are clearly Kerbin (and maybe Laythe?) only. Until and unless they're patched, I'll stick to home-made rotors on other planets.
  3. The 1.7.3 prop blades aren't big enough. Fortunately props/rotors made from elevons still work fine. More lift, more torque needed.
  4. BAK is back fellow spacekerbals! I swapped out my homemade rotor blades for the 1.7.3 prop blades on the Ikarus. They're wack. On Kerbin, Ikarus now flies like a bat out of Hades, the props produce so much thrust the wings flex and it flies at nearly 200 m/s; it's also way overcontrolled for Kerbin now. On Duna, however, they're much worse. My initial experiments failed to produce enough thrust/lift for flight there; however they required ridiculously low throttle to spin. Adding more blades helped but not enough. I think it ought to be a soluble problem but we'll see how complicated it is. I also discovered a bug. Update: I got the Ikarus to fly on Duna. Barely, but it does it. It's a good deal faster than with the home-made rotors, but has tremendous trouble producing enough lift to get off the ground. Still draws very little power. I would need to add a lot more blades to make it genuinely workable. I'm starting to think the 1.7.3 prop blades just aren't usable in such a thin atmosphere -- it's really nice that there is still a mission for props/rotors crafted from other parts.
  5. You don’t, there’s a bit in the tutorial about it (Rotor Design.)
  6. I think the top speed of mine on Kerbin is somewhere around 60-75 m/s as well. They're a lot faster on Duna. I still haven't used the new prop/rotor blades so I can't comment on that. However I do know that with the elevons you need very steep blade pitch to go fast, on the order of 75 degrees. If the stock blades don't go that far using deploy/authority limiter then that could be the problem right there; the workaround would be to mount them on servos that allow unlimited rotation. I also don't know how the props and rotor blades behave differently, but it might be worth experimenting to see if prop blades work better.
  7. This is terrific. SQUAD has been known to pick up things like this, I hope they do on this one. KSP has grown a lot of hair over the years and it needs a brushing.
  8. With constant pitch, or varying pitch to find maximum thrust? If constant pitch it makes sense as thrust is a function of pitch, radial velocity, and forward velocity.
  9. Yep I made a few, including a tilt-rotor I'm operating there in career mode. It's 1.7.2 though so uses rotors made with elevons rather than the official rotor blades. It works extremely well -- flight on Duna is different than on Kerbin and it took me a while to become properly comfortable with it but once I did it's lovely, easily the most fun craft to operate there I've made. It cruises at over 100 m/s and is remarkably easy to hover, land, and take off. It's 100% solar-powered. Like most Duna craft, she needs rather more wing/rotor than a comparable craft for Kerbin or Eve.
  10. Dynamic autowelding to a reasonable physics part count ceiling would do it. Other possible optimisations would be to treat other than the focused vessel as a single part or remove landed/parked vessels from physics altogether, unless/until something collides with them. The trade-off would be a stutter when the autowelds are recalculated (e.g. on collision or on un/dock), and somewhat less accurate simulation of things coming apart. The garbage collection issue ought to be resolvable -- but it might be buried so deep in Unity that in practice the effort to do so is prohibitive. A genuine fix to KSP's performance problems would likely be a lot of work and involve a major engine upgrade (or switch to a different one altogether). That would be very expensive; I don't think it could be done without massively expanding the player base or somehow getting us to pay for the game again -- and given the unhappiness about paid DLC I doubt that's on the cards either.
  11. You can make all of these (except the inflatable pontoons) already. I don't see the point.
  12. Do you have damping set to zero on the servo? Do you have any reaction wheels on the craft?
  13. Going by what you describe and how your craft looks, it ought to fly just fine with the main servo unlocked. It's probably some fairly trivial thing that you're doing wrong, or it just possibly could be FAR although as far as I know FAR works just fine with rotors. Some things to check: With the main servo unlocked, when you increase torque on the motor, do the rotors start spinning in opposite directions as you intend? If not, disassemble and reassemble the servo/motor/small servo assembly -- something's not attached where you think it is. For example, the blades attached to the servo might have clipped to its bottom part, which means they rotate with the body, not with the upper half of the servo. You can try attaching them to the bottom half of the motor also. When you increase/decrease collective with no power on the rotor, do all the blades change their angle like you intend? If some of the blades don't do so, re-assign the servo angle to the axis that controls it in the action group set -- there's a bug that causes some of them to be "lost" if you detach/reattach them. If they don't or they move in the wrong direction, re-assign them with the "invert" box checked on one set so they do. Do you have pitch/yaw/roll disabled on the blades? If not, do so. That eliminates one source of potential problems. You can re-enable pitch and roll later once you've achieved lift-off. I can't tell what mods you're using apart from FAR and I'm not super familiar with them, but it is also possible some of them might be causing problems. If I was a betting man, my money would be on (1) above -- you've inadvertently attached the blades to the bottom half of the servo, not the top half like you meant to. In any case, your basic design is sound and it ought to fly just fine.
  14. I'm not familiar with Rald. If airbreathers make sense there then yes Rapiers would be a good choice. Your required lift capacity is pretty big though. I'm afraid I can't really help much with a 3x system as I've never played in one. Seat of the pants it feels like an SSTO helicopter might not make much sense; you are hauling up a fair bit of dry mass with the rotors. Perhaps an STOL spaceplane with tilt jets would work better?
  15. Rapiers are heavy and overkill. You only need them to get off Kerbin, or use some other way to boost into orbit. I would make a compound copter for that purpose, but not with jets: I'd use a pair of props for forward thrust as well, now that small-diameter props are feasible. That would certainly work on both Eve and Duna and you can run them off solar power or fuel cells. Inspiration: Edits: (1) For the boost to orbit, just feather the prob blades and set the main rotor collective to zero. (2) For Duna, use Nervs instead of props for forward speed. If you really need heavy lift capability then you might want to use a higher TWR rocket motor for that purpose instead. But Rapiers are no good because of their lousy closed-cycle Isp.