Vít Salava
-
Posts
21 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Vít Salava
-
-
On 1/5/2021 at 2:49 AM, ralanboyle said:
I am assuming vertically oriented propulsion is not allowed. That would then beg the question: At what point is it vertically oriented? An airplane, with fixed wings will have to be angled upward at some angle of attack in order to maintain altitude. So, if it has to point its nose up 45 degrees; Is that still acceptable? If so, what about 80 degrees? Then ultimately, what if it is able to maintain stable flight and 0 airspeed after pulling its nose all the way back to 90 degrees? Because yes, this is possible, both IRL and KSP.
Same question, slowest speed to hold altitude is essentialy a hover.
-
On 6/9/2020 at 3:14 AM, Pds314 said:
I managed to get 11.3 m/s on 1.26 u of electricity per second for an efficiency of 8.97 m/electric charge.
It's still very far from optimally efficient though. Especially since once it gets past 9 or 10 m/s the rotation rate drops from 800 deg/s to 300, although the actual paddles become more efficient at that point because they aren't going much faster than the boat like at low speeds.
Considering that electricity use is constant and there's potential for 2700 deg/s before anything starts to jiggle to death, and 2800 before jiggle losses are the dominant factor in efficiency loss, this is still only about 10% of theoretical efficiency. We can definitely do better.
On 6/8/2020 at 11:55 PM, Pds314 said:I did this quite awhile ago. You do not need BG to make rotating machines work.
Sidenote: Vmax of 18.4 m/s.
Re: efficiency category, you may want to specify that you need to start at the equator, as it is possible to build boats that fall toward the equator due to Kerbin's lack of an equatorial bulge.
This is why I made this challenge
To learn the witchery of others Congratulations on 18,4m/s, that's almost a practical electric boat I will add the equator rule, that is an interesting observation.
-
13 minutes ago, sevenperforce said:
Clever use of wheels to turn it. I like it.
I'm looking forward to your go at it
-
Well yes, because as I understand, many community members do not have expansions, and console players are (also as I heard) unable to mod their game. Stock bearings have been a thing for a long time, people even made planes using them and attached reaction wheels. It is very doable, but it's likely to wake up the Kraken. And it usually does. But you wanted to see mine. So, 1,7-ish m/s, terrible efficency, I had one that could do 2,5
That's why I made it a challenge. Because It's not easy, yet it isn't as time consuming as circumnavigation and things like that. And mind you I currently have FAR installed so it might work slightly differently in completely stock game, that's why I havent shared yet. PS bearings are easier to make when you can float them.
Here's the vid.
-
Ahoy Rocketeers, Seadogs and pilots, I'd like to see how you tackle my little challenge
The Challenge: Build the fastest paddle wheel boat, powered by electricity, then get in to the shore, and show us how fast will it go.
The Rules: No mods or expansions for the spinny part(bearing), has to be electric
Rating:
Speed category: by sustainable Vmax only
1. Pds314 @ 18,4m/s
Efficiency category: Vmax/power drain while at equator (power drain=power needed to move the boat at Vmax, measure without generating power at the same time, )
1.Pds314 @ 8.97
In this challenge you will have to develop a stock bearing system, way of driving it by electric means. Even getting that to spin is a win in my book, so let's go!
So far my best design reached Vmax of 9,6m/s, while draining 9,68/s, which is about 1000% better than my first aproach(actual math 2m/s with 20/s)
One to get you started:
-
@T-Bouw You have to be really careful, it's touchy
But honestly I thought it wasnt so hard... So I went to try it again, and suprisingly, it is more controlable without SAS, and it just requires fast reactions. Yours looks nice and simple, very clean.
-
I was working on a VTOL design at the time I found this thread, and it was quite unstable, and didn't have the power margin to save bad landing attempts, plus legs as landing gear, negative dihedral and so on, so here you go, one funky version, and one actually stable and nice version, just to warm up my soup...
Attempted flying multiple designs, but I really liked the autogyro, so i kinda fixed it by trim, and it was quite flyable after that.
Props to anyone who landed the Oscar, that thing is truly a challenge.
https://imgur.com/a/mAhG7KU for the other pictures, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uAGKPA2EGVCySTTgHhwwE5_GrQAMfzxF/view?usp=sharing
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ioU2Vy4oqThV2JdK_NeCmd6qUSSyhBbe/view?usp=sharing for the vids.https://kerbalx.com/Vit_Salava/MeatFly-B
https://kerbalx.com/Vit_Salava/MeatFly-A(not the challenge)
-
This challenge is fun, apart from driving the development of my "fancy" VTOL, via removing the rcs and making it flyable without sas, I tried flying @Klapaucius's Oscar, which is really hard to fly, and I didn't succeed yet. Also, @vyznev's Autogyro was nice, after adjusting the rotor tip deploy a bit more flyable, I even landed that. And @ShadoxFilms's Dragon is seriously fun to fly. I will post my attempts and the VTOL in a less controloble version when I'm done with them.
-
-
My entry: The Bugger
Flip m8... where is Chumbucket?
-
Some of you were interested, so here it is: https://kerbalx.com/Vit_Salava/Skim-1
-
1 minute ago, dozerman said:
Nice setup! How did you manage the off-center thrust combines with water drag?
Honestly, I just took how the real planes look and made it in KSP, applied a bit of flying model aircraft builder's "magic"(just the adjusted thrust angle really). The torque isnt that fierce, I havent had any problems with it flippping. It works fine, but I may need to give it a bigger HTP or move the wings back a bit, its twitchy. Aerodynamicaly. If you are interested, I will share the plane tomorrow.
-
1 minute ago, Klapaucius said:
@Vít Salava Very cool aircraft!
Thanks a lot, I like it oldschool, thats why the propellers
-
I set forth to use proppelers, so I built a vague macchi fighter mashup. In the bigger lake, (which is easy mode) I managed to land and fly out of, with 45m/s v1 I had to stuff the plane into one end and nearly hit the wall on the other side. In the smaller hole I landed, but had no chance of getting out. Flatspin landings anyone? Rest of the images:https://imgur.com/a/MMAnxHa
Album pNaiMGH will appear when post is submitted
-
3 hours ago, Zhetaan said:
I'll say that you're definitely faithful to Mad Max, explosions and all.
When I run rovers, I go as far as to remap the rover wheel controls to the number pad (and use 5 as a secondary brake) while leaving the reaction wheels set to default. That allows me to control the wheels without also trying to flip anything over, but also leaves me with reaction wheels for levelling while airborne (vacuumborne?).
...Of course, that usually only makes it so that my Kerbals survive, not the rover.
Have you considered widening the wheelbase? I have some luck with putting the front wheels on a wider stance while leaving the rear wheels closer together--in other words, adding a 1x1 panel (or even an I-beam) to each side of the front. For me, that keeps it from tipping diagonally when I try to stop and reduces the side-to-side rocking without adding too much to the mass and general wobbliness of the whole.
Where's the fun, mad max and explosions in wider wheelbase?
Yeah, I will make it wider. and the controls are a solid idea, thank you for input.
-
On 8/10/2018 at 12:04 AM, TanDeeJay said:
I found reaction wheels on my rovers greatly improved stability, and setting them to SAS only.
Thanks for reminding me of that techniqe. I joined the forums a bit after my kerbal zenith. You saved me a lot of anger nontheless. Appreciate it.
-
Can I use propeller engines from AP+?
-
Decided to try the Elcano challenge, built a mad max-ish rover and set off. After like 3km I rolled of a hill, prior to which i tried to repair my solar panels. Not giving up. Second attempt, rolled it 4km further. REDESIGN NEEDED. After a pause. Pictures are here
-
So, I forgot brakes.
-
See the pictures of my temple landing of a biplane without brakes: https://imgur.com/a/6LwLl42
Challenge by @Triop
To learn the witchery of others 
Turboprop altitude record
in KSP1 Challenges & Mission ideas
Posted
Beat you by a few metres
But seriously, I'm going to try harder. This was literal edge of what the plane was capable of, so next time more wing, less fuel, and reaction wheels to hold the angle...