• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

22 Excellent

About Helmetman

  1. Stock bomber challenge [1.3]

    @TheGuyNamedAlan Gonna work on this now. Just a question.... Is it a problem if I fair the bombs for better looks? Maybe remove the cones themselves (fairing is heavier) I'm a aesthetic kinda guy. probably weighs more but idk
  2. The "You know you're playing a lot of KSP when..." thread

    You play to much KSP when you throw away your Sims 4 collectors edition and start Playing Sims 4 in KSP... Originally created by forum user "katateochi"
  3. @Laie I would also find it a interesting challenge to go to Eve's mountain top, land as many kerbals there as you can and go back to Kerbin. This will limit the Eve goal to óne location (makes things easier me thinks) The only hassle is building something that can get to that specific location. You'd need to glide there or use a trajectory mod if this challenge is going to allow that. Cloud mods obscure the location so it would be difficult to glide to if installed. Ofcourse one would use a new install for this... I only send a max of 3 Kerbals to Eve and back from surface level, and that was quite painfull to accomplish on a somewhat small design. @sevenperforce I've only read those threads from a while back, but there was a "Eve Rocks" challenge a long time ago. These contesters had no problem going from Kerbin to Eve and back. So why is it necessary to lower any bars these days? But 'if' your argument holds true then I have to agree with this. We don't want people running for the hills.
  4. I get some kind of brainwave impression that the posters that ask these questions have their own conditions to what is cheating. That's probably why they ask this. I think that's fun to discuss though in a way. Although I would not call it "cheating" more like... "What rules do you practice to limit yourself?" This is simply because the word "cheating" is just, meaningless in the context of this game. And I don't want the English language changed because people forget and/or warp the meaning of the word. The whole concept of KSP is what goes against the meaning of cheating. The same even goes for if you were to play GTA (any version) and freeroam the city in singleplayer. There are no rules. Only when you enter the story mode are you within the contest of the game. You would be cheating something as there's a sudden objective you could achieve against the tools of the story and game concept. The same goes for Multiplayer as it would suddenly be against other players. Ironically the game industry calls it cheating regardless of the context but does everything to deny cheating in multiplayer sessions where the definition of the word holds true :facepalm: This also confuses me why all those game "cheating" menus and "cheating" tutorials on the internet are called as that because I find the context and the setup of the specific game to determine whether there's a cheating element to it. Why do games not call it the debug panel or toolset panel like in KSP. Rep to Squad for sanity. People think it's cheating when you use autopilots and/or vessel information in game because they're rigidly aware of their own piloting and calculus skills. While some people are bad pilots and don't want to calculate Delta-V. It may be a easy sum, but not everyone is the nerd (#Ilike nerds) that's willing to throw in the same calculations for every vessel launch. There's also the saying, "I cheated death" So if I lithobrake my craft with landing gear at several dozen meters per second and I survived I have also cheated. My guess is that's not the context you were looking for huh? Still it's true, so I bet everyone has already cheated outside their own constructed norms of what cheating is. And some of the comments were pretty funny tbh.
  5. Damn my boosters!

    I think it's similar to what Bewing suggests but we will only know with pics. You could also drag the booster using the move toolset in the vab/sph so that the top end of your booster is attached to the decoupler. Then grab the decoupler and reattach the boosters at a proper spot. This will make sure that the ejection force is to the top of the booster making the boosters curve to the outsides and requires no fin. But you might still need one if this is not enough, it usually is though.
  6. What would the third launch place be?

    @SpricigoYes you can get to any inclination from a equatorial orbit and do the same for less. Launching anywhere from but the KSC (90 degrees) is more demanding Delta-V wise. That said I got a little of track in my previous reply. But I tried thinking ahead a little and perhaps it's actually easier for some people if they're exposed to inclined orbits from the get go by launching in such directions. New people where I refer to Reddit, some videos show inability of people or lack of will to learn themselves inclination changes, and mind you that I'm not that much of a master at it. I rather use gravity assists from a 90 degrees parking orbit around Kerbin to get to places. Adding this my way however may launch people into learning about matching inclinations in game, maybe supported through a in game tutorial right from the start. Thinking about it a 2nd time, a polar KSC might indeed be a better idea. I like to visit the poles atleast once during a career play, it will also be good for what you said, so it be good if I could launch my vessels straight from there.
  7. What would the third launch place be?

    It's all on you my friend. One can build stock propellers (see U tube) that also work as boat propellers one could use this on a empty ore tank submarine and I've seen good working replicas already. They're actually eye catching if you give it some thought/work and they function quite well. If that's to worse for ya one could always use mods. Give it a few days planning on your own and some craft builds and you'll be fishing the kraken from Laythe's sea bed before weeks end. No reason to die horribly when you can be your own superhero today OT: I know the Delta-V requirements are slim compared to real life and that kerbins angle is 0 degrees against the ecliptic. So my initial argument would be to place another launch site on a latitude at a inclination that would match somewhat closer to specific planes like moho and dres if launched from said location during specific times of the year. If that would actually be helpful, I don't know. Just a thought. Ofcourse this wont get you there but might send people in a more favourable departure orbit so these destinations can be easier navigated towards for players still in the ksp learning curve. This might also be a little bit more efficient for spaceplanes as the intial departure burn will be less and you wont have to turn in the lower atmosphere wasting LF for said destinations. Maybe it will actually complicate things for people. I don't know, but it seems handy to me.
  8. What did you do in KSP today?

    @qzgy The glider is a Mk 1 cockpit with a fairing clipped over the nose? Is that aesthetic only or actually a improvement on the aerodynamics? I always thought the Mk 1 cockpit had less drag then a stock fairing but I might be wrong here.
  9. @JhorrigaI really don't know man. But you should think whether you'd want this yes or no. Launch towers are completely different per rocket since a different rocket needs a different launch tower. Makes sense? Basically every rocket in KSP is user build so you'd need some kind of auto rendered launch tower per rocket being constructed. That is if you want things realistic ofcourse. Each different launch site has different launch towers in real life. I saw a video of a very old version of ksp before it's beta release (v0.1x) whatever it was. It had a cosmetic launch tower just outside the deployment zone of your rocket. Problem is, people build quite large rocket these days that would over encompass the restricted deployment zone if there were a launch tower.
  10. Kerbal Combat Simulator

    Wonderful thing this. But please, change Kombat into Combat. And tell ya, it's my own two cents. You decide obviously. But the cynical K word abbreviations are getting old. KCS sounds symphonical, while KKS sounds like I need to thrust a dead ferret through my esophagus. Hope point was clear enough. I'll see what you do with it.
  11. Why do they not fair engines nozzles?

    @wumpusWell, no they don't use it. It has a lot of smaller raptor engines on the 1st stage, I wouldn't even know how they'd fit fiarings on the 1st stage of the ITS. just as the N1 had smaller NK-15 engines versus a few very big F1 saturn engines that are very big in comparison. Also in the ITS animation the nozzles are concealed as it sits on the Launchpad. Nice discussion on the aerodynamics of shells, interesting read though. I can't think of the best types of planes myself but would it benefit any form of tail drag as it leads over the skin of a jet nozzle? Jet nozzles look quite aerodynamic by themselves. But since it's air that creates drag and airliners are there all the time I would wonder if such a benefit would be worth the airline industry. Obviously I'm not the first one as for almost everything. Planes don't got them so I'm sure there's a clear answer to that one.
  12. What did you do in KSP today?

    My new stock VTOL with floaters made from ore tanks to navigate on water that includes a submerged rudder and 6 panther engines for vertical lift and 5 whiplashes for forward thrust and can go to mach 3.2. Can land and maneuver to land on the VAB helipad. Didn't realized I was in Orbit view.... stupid Now I'm gonna work on my cargo version to drop submarines wherever I want them.
  13. Will StratoLaunch Fly?

    @mikegarrison You are very right, and it wasn't specifically to make fun of them. But reading about this myself for some time already and the topic replies covering the implications, lack of need, maybe net loss for required infrastructure (runway) and everything else gets me annoyed about the fundamental priorities of this project.
  14. I'm sure if people throw me a graph with numbers that my next argument is going to be debunked. Although it's more based on experience rather then numbers I have closely compared myself. But unless you have a considerably slower CPU from much earlier gens I find that KSP basically runs as good on any computer I've so far used. Although I did find I could build a scale larger on my own faster Ivy bridge cpu compared to some other computers I tried. That said it's always better to tweak your pc optimally. But basically AMD is worse then Intel for most things (games included) I could also recommend Linux with a low system requirement user interface. This will save you some extra clock ticks that windows or some of your detailed GUI or other background processes might have used.
  15. Will StratoLaunch Fly?

    Will stratolaunch fly/launch? See user above me... I find it more a farce that some entrepreneur with a big bank account without any or *some knowledge gets his business *cough* engineering company running without a idea, concept or ambition to do it properly (*some knowledge = not enough) So B747's and lockeheed L1011's did this and can do this still? So what's the mind, personal or companies limitation to build this then if it was already done before? Is it just to get a few ton to orbit that can be done cheaper with regular rockets concerning the runway, industry and certifications they'd still have to go for? This sounds like some of those bureaucratic CEO's with science and engineering ambitions without knowing what both words mean and think they can be von braun or korolev 2.0. Sad to say, but even Kim Jung'un seems on a route for more kg's to orbit then these guys are. And while I'm at it, screw the guy I just mentioned. Thinking about what I just said, I know now what stratolaunch can be good for...