Jump to content

eskimo22

Members
  • Posts

    203
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by eskimo22

  1. I'm just speculating about the RCS https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/10/its-propulsion-evolution-raptor-engine/ source for spark ignition of the raptor engine
  2. BFR RCS thrusters might use glow-plugs, like in a diesel engine, as opposed to spark ignition. Glow-plugs would be tougher and more reliable than spark ignition. The raptor engine won't be using TEA-TEB because using TEA-TEB limits the number of ignitions to the size of the TEA-TEB tank (ie, why the falcon heavy center core crashed, not enough TEA-TEB). Imagine if the center core had 80 people on it and crashed because it ran out of ignition fuel, that would not happen with electric ignition (spark/glow-plug). Stoves, grills, blowtorches, BBQ lighters all use spark ignition to ignite flammable gas and are very reliable (I have never had my blowtorch fail to ignite). not taking about the mod, I'm talking about the real BFR and raptor engine.
  3. I did build my own BFR, but it's a set of STL files, for 3d printing
  4. The RCS will be connected to the raptor engine's gas generator (high pressure methane and oxygen gas) no need for pumps, and the Raptor engine will use SPARK IGNITION.
  5. I don't mean a literal blowtorch, I mean spark ignition of a gas, which is how a blowtorch works. A blowtorch serves as an ANALOGY to the thruster I am talking about. Spark ignition of a gas is very reliable (ie, blowtorch) and rapid (milliseconds) and could ignite an RCS thruster. I've seen that video before, and spark igntion of a pressure fed oxy-gas thruster is much simpler than the ignition of a J-2 (like it would be in a supersized pushbutton blowtorch)
  6. A self igniting blowtorch is a good analog to what I am talking about, just using methane and liquid oxygen instead of propane and air, and producing 5 to 10 tons of thrust. A self igniting blowtorch ignites 100% of the time with the press of a button and if fed with pure oxygen, could work as a thruster.
  7. The engines will use gaseous fuel, no need for pumps. Thrusters can provide multiple axes of thrust if they are placed diagonally
  8. these won't be cold gas thrusters, they will be gaseous methane+oxygen thrusters (fuel+oxidizer+spark), cold gas thrusters don't leave soot behind. Thrusters firing perpendicular to the side of the BFS won't leave soot on the hull. you should copy the RCS arrangement that is on Tundra Exploration's BFR.
  9. You can see which way the thrusters fire by looking at the soot near the ports, from what I see, every axis of motion is covered. and these thrusters are likely to have 10 tons of thrust on the real BFR, that coupled with elevons, will be enough to control a BFR during EDL. These pictures were in the 2017 IAC presentation.
  10. I say that the BFR will have RCS ports in that location because almost every rendition I have seen has had RCS in those locations and because of these pictures, from the SpaceX IAC presentation in 2017.
  11. I finally got 1.4.1 to work. btw If you are re-texturing the BFR, plz put the RCS ports in the places that they will be on the real BFR
  12. Never mind, I see now. looks a lot better than the current one. It looked like a cone from this angle. also, the BFR's sea level engines will be flush with the vacuum engines, I think that the BFS's fuel lines should be mounted to the hull, instead of the SL engines (like Tundra Exploration's BFR SL engines).
  13. what part of the BFR is that? engine mount? any pics of the new wing?
  14. I agree, 9km/s is INSANELY OP in stock KSP. 6.5-7 km/s is a better delta v for a BFS without a payload (that's what it currently has)
  15. I think there should be a clean BFR as well as a dirty one (if the dark tank is the new BFR)
  16. I looked up the delta V on a BFS, a BFS will have just over 6 km/s of delta V with a 150t payload and 9 km/s without a payload
  17. no, I am saying that the existing BFR ship and booster parts should be put in the composites along with the decoupler. no edits to the dry mass.
  18. Now that i think about it, the entire BFR (minus the engines) will be made from carbon fiber, so the entire thing should be in composites not just the decoupler. 1.4.1 wont work on my computer, what to do?
  19. Plz put the BFR decoupler in the composites node on the tech tree as opposed to the meta-materials node
  20. the real BFS will have ~6.5 to 7 KM/s of delta V I think the Kerbal BFS should match that.
  21. since the BFR will be 5.5m in the new update, the amount of fuel should (to be accurate to a stock fuel tank of equivalent) be 25955 LF and 31732 OX. The thrusters should use LF/OX instead of monopropellant and should have a thrust of around 30 KN (SpaceX will use LOX/LM for the RCS thrusters).
  22. can you make the BFR crew cabin tweakscale compatible in the next update? and has @mrtagnan fixed the realplume configs yet?
  23. The elevons are for extra control during EDL and to save RCS fuel (either monopropellant or LF-OX for the RCS thrusters), not for flying like a plane. makes sense.
  24. Because the 1.4 stock Saturn V parts are 5m, the BFR should be 5m as opposed to the 5.5m size that i suggested previously. I also think that adding elevons to the wings on the BFS would be great for extra control, adding elevons to the current part makes the center of lift go all the way back to the rear of the ship, causing it to flip backward.
  25. I do indeed get what you are saying. what I am saying is that there might be a mod that allows you to zoom in further on the map. If you zoom in on this picture, you will se that they are far apart.
×
×
  • Create New...