Aeroboi

Members
  • Content Count

    247
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Aeroboi

  1. The Duna Plasma Shuttle is a stock 7 Ion engine spaceplane cosisting out of 62 parts and can carry 3 kerbals to orbit 3 times with spare fuel to navigate to landing sites. It can also function as a shuttle between Duna and Ike. It uses no control surfaces but has a larger reaction wheel for control. Works with SAS and Mechjeb. Use action group 1 to activate the fuel cells. Can Aerobrake with 90° degrees pitch. Can gather a lot of speed on the ground and steers and bumps into the terrain cleanly. Comes with a front mounted light to see the ground when landing in the dark. To get into the vehicle stand next to the fairing, pan the camera inside and right click to enter the seat. The seats are positioned in such a way that the kerbal is jetissoned outside the fairing. Pan into the Kerbal very closely in order to right click him/her. In space they will catapult slightly. Make sure you have some reserve of EVA fuel when willing to enter another vessel. To refuel have a Xenon fuel deposit on the ground with a claw at surface height and ride into it. Or have one in space Requires Making history. Kerbals inside the fairing. https://kerbalx.com/Aeroboi/Duna-Plasma-Shuttle-143-b Tell me if there are any bugs or complaints so I can improve the vessel.
  2. Aeroboi

    What did you do in KSP today?

    Finished my Duna Ion shuttle (stock + MH) and can carry 3 kerbals 3 times to orbit and back with spare fuel for navigation.
  3. Aeroboi

    An option to disable locked autostruts, please

    I don't know what parameters grants a part a locked autostrut. I have a new spaceplane that has a large kerbodyne tank attached to a parallel set of outer Mk3 rocket fuselage tanks and it has struts locked to grandparent part. Right this moment I have a Duna ION plane that has the Protective aeroshell locked to grandparent part and I can't tell why. This >
  4. Aeroboi

    Gas Planet 2? Poll

    There is room there
  5. I"ve been trying to build a very heavy vessel with a large span and require proper strutting to strengthen the joins. I"ve been attaching a 5m engine plate with 16 rapier engines to the side of a MK3 rocket fuselage and many of the parts on the attached engine block have autostruts "locked" and set to grandparent part. The engine block is a subassembly and the rapiers and the fuel tank are all autostrutted to grandparent part but are locked. I've come across this anomaly many times but didn't care because I was usually able to autostrut the other parts for sufficient rigidity and flexibility but in this instance I require further strutting and I require heaviest part strutting for the engine block to stay connected under stress. Why is it that some parts have autostrut locked? Is there a way to unlock them?
  6. Aeroboi

    Autostrut locked, why?

    I already worked around that problem said way. But it is annoying. I think it's easier to have it strutted by default but have it unlocked so you can still toggle to another autostrut mode.
  7. Aeroboi

    Autostrut locked, why?

    Yeah okay, IMO if "advanced tweakables" is a function of gameplay and it is titled "advanced" then shouldn't the freedom to use this function be "advanced" ? That concludes I should be able to freely choose this setting besides the default autostrut setting. IME on one and ultimately a handful of vessels that have a heavy joint attached to the sides like it is in my current case I would require autostruts to be set to the sturdiest, heaviest or a local heaviest part that is often a good joint for another heavy part to be attached to.
  8. Nothing to add, thumbs up
  9. Fun challenge. From experimenting with heating I"ve done a while ago it seems a deflated inflatable heatshield has the most heat resistance. All you have to do is make sure that all the stacks are 2.5m or smaller and have the heatshield mounted on the side of the heatblast. The deflated heatshield is also draggier then most nosecones so should have some stopping power. My idea is to make a very narrow thin aerofoil using a proper fairing shape so I can punch through the atmosphere ASAP to waste as little seconds getting through the atmosphere back to the surface. A deflated inflatable heatshield should be able to survive ~2000m/s near sea level as long as it covers the frontal cross section. All you need is a few elevons and one parachute activated prior to impact. I expect this could shave of ~30-60 seconds from your normal flight time.
  10. Aeroboi

    Gas Planet 2? Poll

    A gas giant close to the Sun. One that intersects Moho but outside of its plane closer to the ecliptic. Preferably with some hot moons. I always thought it would be cool to add a gas giant closer to the sun. The benefit of this is that you can make very radical gravity assists using Eve to get to the new gas planet. It wont make the game easier since you have to be experienced to perform it and it will be a fun way to ride the solar system and adds immersion by having a preferred gas giant in a hot atmosphere. Why do people always prefer the outer edges? Because it's cool there?
  11. @The Dunatian I might apply for any of the challenges, however I have a recommendation for another challenge. What if you were to launch a 30 part 18 ton vessel using rover wheels and drive it outside the launchpad and then make another rocket with a construction so it can rest on top of the former vessel to make i.e. a 36 Ton vessel while still using the prerequisite tech nodes and facility upgrades? I haven't tried this but I'm sure people are willing to construct something out of the ordinary? Would this seem cool to people.
  12. 1.875m or 2.5m ion/plasma engine
  13. Aeroboi

    1.875M R.A.P.I.E.R.

    2.5M or 1.875M, either one is good, both is better
  14. Since we have 1.875M tanks I thought that it might be a good idea to query if people would like a 1.875M rapier engine. I know a 2.5M variant was asked before but that might be to Op. Maybe a 1.875M fills in a wished for gap. I know the 1.875M variant tanks and attachment parts are linked to making history and are not related to futuristic engine variants but since we now have this form factor I wonder if people see pleasure in a new rapier type engine of 1.875m size. This may reduce part count on larger SSTO spaceplanes.
  15. Aeroboi

    Auto Struts and Rigid Attachments

    @MisterKerman Generally its best to grandparent autostrut all the spacestation modules. Or other modules for any other vessel like a mothership that is constructed in orbit. Usually the cargo that consists of any of your spacestation modules is on the top of your rocket, mostly encased in a fairing. They are generally well connected especially when they're faired so the cargo usually doesn't require heaviest or root part autostrut for rigidity anyway. The lifter itself however which could be quite large has especial need for strutting to heaviest or root part. A Spacestation itself also is under microgravity, or almost all lack thereof (in i.e. solar orbit) so it isn't under strain. Only when you interact with it by docking is there a physics interaction. IME having grandparent autostrut on all the modules is sufficient. You also have to plan ahead. If you want to make a ginormous spacestation but your center modules are connected with the 1.25m docking port then the center connection points are weak so you might want to plan ahead and only use the sr docking port if your intention is to make a much larger space station. Remember that you can change root in the editor. It is best for the root part to be in the middle of your rocket. This is usually one of the center fuel tanks. I personally never use rigid attachment. The only occasion where I used it was for a large contructional tug to haul heavy cargo on the surface made from I beams. The rigid attachment makes sure that any attachments are 100% rigid and cannot be bent. If I hadn't used the rigid attachment the construction would wiggle on the joints and the vesel would steer sideways, worse even clip inside and break apart. Furthermore it's perfectly safe to use heaviest part on your spacestation. Especially if it's wide and sticking out with a lot of modules a center heaviest part connection point could be ideal for optimal rigidity. However, you will have to plan ahead. If your intention is to dock vessels to that station that have a heaviest part that is heavier then the space station consists off then it will change and physics may rip it apart. If your intention is to never dock anything heavier then a regular MK3 cargo spaceplane or 2.5m rocket ship module a heavier kerbodyne fuel tank on your station could be a good option. All you have to make sure is that you never dock a part that is heavier or as heavy as that heavier part, or you will have to re-strut all the heaviest parts back to grandparent if you do so. Remember that these physics bugs don't always surface, usually when the spacestation is part heavy or is over extended in height, width or length.
  16. Aeroboi

    Eve 3000

    Considering this challenge currently runs it might be a good idea to launch one sooner then later. Perhaps further interest will follow. By the looks of it people are both interested in amphibious vessels plus rockets and rovers no mind construction to get it done so I bet a lot of people will be interested in this.
  17. Aeroboi

    Eve 3000

    There are also mission contracts that require you to return a stranded Kerbal from Eve including the wreckage. I think a good challenge would be to retrieve a wrecked ship. The general challenge rule could be to retrieve a specific vessel from Eve surface using a specific savegame file and the one who uses the lightest and cheapest vessel wins. Or divide the challenge into weight or volume classes and the best winner wins. Various ways of retrieving cargo using a pusher or puller rocket or a internal Mk3 cargo bay. One should make a mechanism to dock with a stranded vessel. One should find a way to lift the cargo into a aerodynamic position. So a stranded mk2 vessel that doesn't fit into a mk3 cargo bay should be lifted vertically while resting horizontally on the ground. I won't organize this challenge but maybe it inspires somebody else.
  18. Aeroboi

    Laythe water landings?

    That depends. Most water planes have trailing edge control surfaces like the Cessna 182. If you put wing incidence on your wings (Which I Would do anyway) the plane will takeoff without pitching. In KSP the problem is that the CoM and dry mass tends to be further to the back then in real aircraft where the tail is a light construction work without fuel in it where in KSP it is usually a fuel tank plus a engine at the back. For that purpose you need a longer floater that extends further to the back then in i.e. a real seaplane to balance the floating point because of weight distribution, for that purpose it will be more difficult to pitch out of the water. In KSP all you have to do is workaround those weight problems by re-balancing engines and fuel accordingly. For efficiency I would put wing incidence on the wings and just make sure that the seaplane SSTO can gather enough speed to climb out from the water horizontally. Also make sure that the trailing edge control surfaces are furthest to the back so there's is maximum pitching moment.
  19. Aeroboi

    1.875M R.A.P.I.E.R.

    @mattinoz I very much agree about the aerospike. I Would first want to see a linear aerospike before that but a 1.25m aerospike has very little thrust so you need quite a lot on larger vessels. I personally like the lego aspect of KSP. So part tweaking should be left out to mods. I Think a standard 1.875m rapier would allow larger airbreathing SSTO's so less parts will be used on larger spaceplanes. I want to add that a dedicated 1.875m intake should be added.
  20. @Kerburettor What are your launchpad and vab facility levels? If both are level 2 (I would assume) you should have enough part and weight restrictions to make a multi part vessel. If you have 7 sites to visit one single surface vessel (rocket) should normally not have enough Dv to hop to all 7 areas. Instead you should pack 2 identical rockets or 3 if necessary with about ~2000m/s of Dv (more or less depending on how far apart each landing area is) Alternatively use one single rocket with the science equipment with with a fuel tank in Munar orbit to refuel. Remember that you only need a capsule, FL-T400 + a FL-T200 (or a FL-T800), a terrier plus the science equipment. Let's not forget the landing legs. If you are confident with landing you might install rover wheels on the rocket so you can use it as a rover on the ground. Don't land to hard to they might break. You want to launch with 2 or 3 MEM's in a fairing or a single MEM instead of 2 or 3 but with a larger fuel tank in orbit to redock with once in orbit of the Mun. You want to position this vessel into a polar orbit and then retro burn one of them as the target area zips underneath. In all likelihood you will see the surface target drift away due to the Mun's rotation. Try to guesstimate where you'll end up and thrust normal or antinormal to follow the target in the map view. With F5 and F9 you should be able to land pretty close but I'm a pilot and someone else might not. Use that same vessel to hop over to any of the other surface areas. Launch back into polar orbit and meet either the other MEM or the fuel tank to refuel with and then repeat the process untill all areas are visited.
  21. Aeroboi

    What did you do in KSP today?

    I build a W.I.P 1260Ton spaceplane with 99 or 104 Rapier engines that can lift up to 1100Ton weighing 2360 Ton. It can format 5m diameter tanks or 2 x 3.75m tanks next to each other or a 5m fairing with a max width of 6 meters, up to 7.7meters if I find a way to raise it further above the ground. Max cargo length is up to 70 meters and can support fuel tanks of that size across the total cargo format. It currently consists out of 374 parts including the cargo but I'm confident I can modify the part count somewhat more. Also comes with 2 small sidemounted MK 3 cargo bays to put smaller stuff in. Fps is relatively ok with about 1 second per 1-3 fps on a 8700k Dummy weight is 1040 Tons. Pics: I probably put it on KerbalX once it is finished.
  22. Aeroboi

    SSTOs! Post your pictures here~

    I build a W.I.P 1260Ton spaceplane with 99 or 104 Rapier engines that can lift up to 1100Ton weighing 2360 Ton. It can format 5m diameter tanks or 2 x 3.75m tanks next to each other or a 5m fairing with a max width of 6 meters, up to 7.7meters if I find a way to raise it further above the ground. Max cargo length is up to 70 meters and can support fuel tanks of that size across the total cargo format. It currently consists out of 374 parts including the cargo but I'm confident I can modify the part count somewhat more. Also comes with 2 small sidemounted MK 3 cargo bays to put smaller stuff in. Fps is relatively ok with about 1 second per 1-3 fps on a 8700k Dummy weight is 1040 Tons. Pics: I probably put it on KerbalX once it is finished.
  23. Not in one sitting, I specifically mean MET. Think about a direct transfer using ION propulsion and direct encounters with the moons rather then using gravity assists. I will also try to make it reusable. It's a bit of a cross relation but it's my desired design goal.
  24. I never did a JOol 5 before but I'm thinking about planning such a mission. I personally like to set a rule to do a quik lap, to get there and do it in the fastest amount of time possible. Has anyone done this before? Is it a whole new challenge altogether?
  25. Aeroboi

    SSTO Help

    My way of doing things. For small craft I put 2 x 4 one way rcs ports clustered together on both sides inside the 1.25m service bay. This way you can reduce drag of the entire rcs system. The only issue is the angle inducing cosine losses. I generally use very little fuel when docking and only use rcs for translation so I personally don't care. 8 parts may be a bit heavy but it's the lightest weight option and reduces the drag entirely. Additionally you can put the other stuff into the same service bay. This is what I mean...