• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

171 Excellent

1 Follower

About Aeroboi

  • Rank
    Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

322 profile views
  1. I think the reason a shroud is left out is because the ant engine represents something like a small or even micro satellite engine. These satellite are often encased in fairings in relation to real life rockets while the other available stock KSP engines are actual lifting engines which would be used in the default interstage shrouds/fairings. Because of that I think the ant engines has no use for a shroud. However, this game is a building block game and should allow full user independent creativity, for that reason the option should be allowed to cover the ant engine with a shroud IMO. I hope that in future updates such functionality would be added to the Ant engine, especially as Squad promised to focus on part revamps I wouldn't want the ant engine to be left out.
  2. Aeroboi

    help docking these things

    You aproach the SR docking port at a angle relative to the other SR docking port. Have you tried aproaching it from a mirror symmetrical angle? The docking ports behave (not act) like magnets and IIRC when docking at a angle the magnetic effect may repel the opposite docking port. Always take in mind rotation, don't stare blindly at translation as it is often required to emulate proper rotation against the relative target i.e. the other SR docking port or any other docking port for that matter. This may solve the problem as I had repelling effect of 2 docked ports together myself in versions prior to 1.6 and 1.5 which I can't remember tbh. IIRC I believe my aproaching angle was to great, by any chance this effect still persists and proper rotational alignment might solve your culprit.
  3. Aeroboi

    Auto-Strut Default

    @KerbService The point with autostrut is that the different options have a purpose. You couldn't autostrut to a "default" part because what part would that be then? Heaviest part or root part is notoriously used to create rigidity on parts attached to other stacks as these will often autostrut to a center stack using heaviest or root as that is where root or heaviest parts are often located. And while that is often the obvious locations for root and heaviest part it does depend per vessel. If any vessel had it's "Heaviest part" at a spot near the bottom it would be rigid with the parts at the top connected to it, but if that heaviest part would be near the middle or near the top then that rocket wouldn't be as rigid anymore, probably even wobbly. Since there are to many variables in vessel creation I cannot foresee a algorithm that can be written or even conjured lol. Another things is that ships that dock or undock from one another will have it's heaviest or root part change causing physics to krakenize the game. A default autostrut function allowing random locations of heaviest or root part will seriously annoy you with kraken type things when doing docking. The only solution is auto-strut grandparent part by default. However, that usually doesn't really make the vessel rigid especially if it has stacks hanging on it's side. So it wouldn't deliver anyway. It you want auto-auto strut you can use the Kerbal Joint Reinforcement mod.
  4. @Loren Pechtel Giving us a picture of the craft greatly improves your chances of receiving direct tips, tricks and methods to solve/remedy your problem. AFAIK length of a craft shouldn't make things more difficult. Flight characteristics of a long craft with one stack means it is more aerodynamic so aerobraking through body drag will be less effective. As long as you use other methods of aerobraking besides the use of the body it doens't matter how thing it is. I also never use any heatshielding to protect my nose or anything when retrieving upper stages. The most simplistic working design is a stage that does no flipping at all. It just stays retrograde with the engines facing the fire. On another note... @Snark Gave a brilliant solution that I use myself, very often. Control surfaces have very high 2400k heat tolerances so they can be extended during aerobraking. Using them to slow down high in the atmosphere will keep critical temperatures of bottom engines below overheat threshold. And consequently it will keep your rocket oriented the way you want. Personally I don't see the use of grid fins in stock KSP unless your using KoS and you want to land at a specific spot. In ksp it doesn't matter whether you land on the grass, runway or a small hill. Grid fins can be used to show off VAB, Helipad or barge landings but that is proof of concept, gameplay wise it's not really gamey. I do use a lot of vernors myself to orient the craft before touchdown to help with rotation near touchdown. Then there is the fairing staging trick. You can cover elevons inside a interstage fairing to make the top of your rocket very draggy when staging off the fairings. This creates drag to aerobrake and makes the engines pointing downward. I used both methods on a test craft, which took me a few minutes to build. The first set of pictures on the album below show off the stage fairing trick. The second set of pictures on the album below show off the control surface method advised by Snark. I took it another step forward by rotating them and "change deploy direction" in flight for a even greater deflection angle by the elevons.
  5. Aeroboi

    How to use 5m parts?

    5m stacks also save in part count when trying to lift heavy cargo. One could use 3.75m parts to lift something worth of 500 Ton into LKO but one could also use 5m parts that hold more fuel and thus saves part count. Also, parts aren't always used traditionally. While it isn't functional to do this one could use the fuel tanks as empty assemblies to add bulkiness to your spacestation for looks. On another note, people play with mods. Some have planet packs with larger Dv requirements and you would need more fuel to get to places. For this 5m parts are practical. It may also contribute to part variety when mixed with other 5m parts of part packs. All we need now is a 5m engine.
  6. Aeroboi

    Complete graphical overhaul?

    The next bit should be a mod as it stresses hardware. What I always wanted is more variety and greater density terrain scatters. Variety could mean rocks, bushes, pebbles, animals, trees (other varieties) Density meaning a greater density setting on the default "Terrain scatters" slider option on the main menu. I have a 5.1 ghz 8700K so I want something like this to be.
  7. Aeroboi

    Mastodon Engines on Eve

    Too? You mean instead... To me personally the only engines of best choice are Aerospike, Vector, Mainsail, Twin boar and Mammoth. The mastodon is ridiculously overpriced and then the amount of Thrust and it's horrendous ISP. I know you can make nice working mastodon type EAV's but they're a lot bulkier, heavier and more costly. Totally agree! That's kind of the shorter answer I gave Xurkitree above. Does the density layer change across many versions and has been done in the past? I have tested this and I always thought it was 12.5 km? I can't recall which version, I believe 1.3.1
  8. Aeroboi

    Proper Submarine Parts

    I never understood why the altimeter digits went into the red when altitude became negative. Can we have that with a navball toggle so we can see amount of meters above seabed also? I always wanted to know how low to the ground I were. While it completely depends on how 'good' you build your sub mine can be slow and cumbersome so I want to see the seabed coming before it met me. Such seabed altitude level readings are good for science and giggles anyway. This is not a hijack but I just wanted to add this to it. When submarine parts do come we need ballast tanks. Not sure how they'd work in KSP but we need one. On another note, we don't need a impeller but what is a sloop *cough* ship without a impeller. Now imagine everyone tweaking the impeller so it can be used as aircraft propellers
  9. Aeroboi

    Hybrid Propulsion Please

    Aren't all chemical rocket engines in KSP Liquid fuel and oxidizer? Anyway, we have the Rapier, it uses LF or LFO. Or isn't that then considered hybrid because LF is treated as a single fuel? This may be peoples opinions but there are ISP variances among chemical engines that propose the only answer which is that LF as a placeholder term for anything really. You name it, Bill Pumps it. You can also create a stock Hybrid propulsion system by having any engine of your choice and then use a landing leg or decoupler spring to eject solid propellant mass using any parts of your choosing, I'll choose Kerbal Sounds almost like pokemon...
  10. Aeroboi

    Keeping wings cool on re-entry

    What ^they've^ said, luckily there are these BIG-S thingies that do 2400K.
  11. Aeroboi

    Moho blues

    Tip 1: Launch from Moho to Kerbin or Eve, but do it only when Moho is at it's Pe around the Sun. The reason being is that you use the Oberth effect around the sun when doing your ejection burn at LMO. This shaves off some Dv requirement when doing the final ejection burn. Tip 2: It's recommended before by ZL647. To further explain this. Try to leave Moho when it's plane intersects the ascending/descending node of Eve's or Kerbin's. When targeting your destination (Kerbin) it will visualize the An or Dn in map view. (you probably already knew this, just saying) The plane change is the biggest Dv waste when coming from Moho. Even if Eve is not at the proper location I can park in a 1:3 or 1:2 Eve-Moho resonant orbit until Kerbin or Eve catches up to the desired spot and then do a burn at Pe around the Sun to get to Eve/Kerbin. Tip 3: I take it you only want to bring the Kerbals back to Kerbin? So a small Mk 1 or Mk 1 lander can per each pilot should suffice? Have you thought about electric propulsion yet? (Dawn electric motor) I know this puts people off due to their long low TWR and consequently longer burn times, and then a Moho ejection burn, am I nuts? ... If one or two dawn engines have to push one or two lander cans the vessels peak TWR can be quite reasonable. For reference a single Dawn can orbit a small lander can from the Munar surface so it's doable for a Moho ejection burn at 4x timewarp. You may not like the slow electric dawn motor because many of you don't but it will seriously take the complexity from a entire vessel when used for transferring Kerbals from Moho back to Kerbin.
  12. I couldn't agree more. I really want to make a shout out to @linuxgurugamer for the effort in maintaining a collection of mods that is as numerous as all the honeycombs in a beehive. That they guy hasn't died yet from a mental, neurological or physiological breakdown caused by the effort to maintain these mods. I'm not even talking real life here. Honestly @linuxgurugamer I think I can conclude you like it much otherwise you wouldn't do it. I also think it's your domain and you really don't want to exchange that work. Sorry for making assumptions, maybe none of that is actually true. But something makes you do this on your own and even if hypothetically you would say today that you would never leave this work there are these stories of people that had their change of mind that packed their stuff with even friends and family that were kept in the dark about said persons new whereabouts. I hope your not like that I hope you already made a temporary appointment with someone else willing to take over your work in the unlikely event that there's gonna come a day where this might happen.
  13. You don't understand me correctly. While I should have mentioned it I consider "part updates" and "Aerodynamics properties" as a way to change aerodynamics. Why does Squad do this by changing a part aerodynamic properties without a clear reason? That would only be clear if the part itself changed in it's shape. A 1.25m circular decoupler remains a 1.25m circular decoupler, it's aerodynamics shouldn't change, so why is that then? When I say I don't want aerodynamic changes then it is based on realism ironically. Realism in my view is that aerodynamics don't change. Something doesn't become more dynamic through gas or fluid or becomes lighter without changing it's shape. But, I agree lol. I said I'm not happy about these "constant" changes to aerodynamics. And again, that means part aerodynamic parameter updates also. In a complete overhaul it will be a real aerodynamic update. When it changes all the bits you summarized and does it good like a typical flight sim does I will rejoice. Changing aerodynamics on a 1.25m gasket ring (= decoupler) is nonsensical to me and it fuels my my comment to stop all these minor and frequent changes to aerodynamics whether that is directly or via a part configuration on i.e. a decoupler.
  14. I'm gonna test this. I'm not sure how profoundly I'm gonna do this but if it turns out to be profound I'll post the findings. I did a lot of aerodynamic testing already in 1.5.1 for a project I'm working on so I already have things to use. Furthermore I'm not very happy about these constant changes to aerodynamics. One universal sheet of physics laws across all the upcoming versions of KSP from now on. @SQUAD Because, why not?
  15. Aeroboi

    No SpaceX Flag?

    Just snatch one from the Internet, Elon won't sue you