Jump to content

Aeroboi

Members
  • Content Count

    464
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Aeroboi

  1. What bewing suggested can be done of course, only if your quicksave is miles away from a lunar interception. If your plummeting into the inner solar system from Jool you can intercept the Mun and use precise node mod to fine tune so the slingshot makes you hit the atmosphere while losing 100+ m/s or so. But you have to intercept the mun from the proper angle to have a effect. Question: which parts heat up? If it's a specific part then perhaps you can shield it by aerobraking in the atmosphere at a specific angle. I know many parts heat up more if they're exposed to a greate
  2. I believe it's "T" on the keyboard. You can also click the offset icon in the top left corner and it will change offset between local and absolute shown on the icon.
  3. I often stick MK2 bays underneath the mk3 cargo bay's. Select mk2 fuel tank to mirror symmetry, attach to the hull and move rotate them under the belly. Properly moved they should blend in well to create a nice looking underbelly. Then just put elevon hydrofoils underneath or to the sides. The only design problem is that the CoM isn't through the middle of the cargo bay's so you should play with the engine layout for the proper center of thrust but that's it.
  4. Yes, I don't see it's "mandatory" or logical for "stock" KSP and the OP mentions 3x rescale but that isn't stock KSP. Engine variations should specialize themselves in different ways and a 330-340ISP rapier would be a turboramjet with high isp rocket capabilities doing multiple roles at once. The most economical way is for a SSTO space plane is to be a SSTO. That means it hauls stuff to and from orbit, going elsewhere is less efficient. That means Rapiers by function should should only be used as the rocket part of a space plane to and from orbit. The only other option is sending one
  5. Minmus can be done easily also. Minmus has a inclination which crosses Kerbins inclination. Zoom out of map view while focused at kerbin to see Minmus orbit line. Set minmus as target and watch the AN/DN lines. You see the An and Dn marked on opposite sides of the Minmus orbit. What you want to do is meet minmus at the AN or DN itself. This can be done easily since it takes about one quarter orbit for minmus to revolve around Kerbin, in the same time it takes a spaceship to meet Minmus orbit from LKO. So determine the AN/DN of minmus relative to kerbin orbit and launch your vessel when Mi
  6. Jet speed involves 3 things. Jet thrust! Aerodynamics! and Wing incidence. Jet thrust should be about 15Ton per Whiplash, you can do up to 25 Ton but then you are tweaking every optimization there is so stick to 15Ton. Aerodynamics: Use as few stacks as possible. One stack is a single end to end fuselage. Try to use only tapered ends like 1.25 to 2.5m or 0.625 to 1.25m. Dont put external parts unto the plane except wings, landing gear and a ladder (optionally) all the rest in cargo bays or you suffer drag and wont achieve the speed you want. Wing incidence is the angle of the
  7. They'd say : "I play with near and FFT" or say "I play with FAR and FFT" and never mention far in the first place. And almost nobody uses Near by reading posts, perhaps I'm wrong It is indeed a large mod, when is Nertea to conclude it is finished I don't know. But since it's quite decently packed and near finished it might draw much attention as a pre-release.
  8. I'm playing mostly JNSQ myself. Heavily modded it could prove testification to something more difficult but doable since stock parts in 2.7x work fine.
  9. I'd say go for Mk3 for the carrier with the crane. It isn't the most hydrodynamic, however it has very good crash tolerance of 50m/s and are larger bulky parts. If a crane is used you need some mass in order not to capsize. This means hitting the water or driving out of the water at speed wont ever destroy the vessel. Stage activated Vector engines are the best sinkable parts. That means a Vector that is staged sinks faster then one that isn't staged? What?? Yeah, what indeed Out of all the ore tanks the radial one is the densest, so if you want as much heavier then water mass kg for
  10. You don't need to install them manually. You can download and use CKAN. Also the actual dependencies for realism overhaul are smokescreen, real fuel, real heat, real chutes and advanced jet engines . The mod page was written for back in year (what?) Kerbal joint reinforcement is substituted with the in game autostruts system since then. But KJR can still be used optionally and is easier to use by all means. Ferram aerospace is also optional since we now have real atmospheres. All the other mods listed are optional in any case. You better discard holding on to it and find a collection of p
  11. Combined with Realism overhaul people often use RSS. This is the mod that changes planets to real sizes and densities. People also use principia that substitutes patch conics with real newtonian trajectories taking into account tidal forces, different bodies within their combined sphere (no more SOI's) As for realism overhaul, what it exactly does is described detailed at the release page you shared. So go and look there. Most notably it adds a collection of real engine types and the mod page suggests certain mod packs that work well with realism overhaul. It has a few dependencie
  12. Use Rigid attachment on the docking ports. This can be done in flight. Enable advanced tweakables in the main menu general settings to enable that option when right clicking any part (except experiments and batteries)
  13. Real planes for which FBW is created tend not to purposely stall and thus fall backwards, ever. So why the comparison? Since FBW is created for actual planes and not KSP the point is moot. If you are intending to stall your ksp plane to fall backward your playing the game wrong and false FBW inputs are of consequence. AFAIK when a emergency happens beyond a specific flight plan it disengages the autopilot. The more modern the FBW is on such craft the more safety measures it has in that regard. But even all functions aren't present on dedicated payware flight sim aircraft so why babble a
  14. My idea was inspired by the inner lock mod. The problem with stock docking ports is that if you decouple you require to be some distance away for the docking port to re-activate. Some people dislike this because you want to re-dock a mechanism, even with the new parts that may still be useful. Instead, deactivate stock docking ports and then have a context menu option to re-activate the docking port at will with toggle on/off action group options.
  15. Since I never use them I come across the fact that the Sabre engine produces less thrust in closed cycle compared to airbreathing. In airbreathing I get about 1100kN of thrust but when changing to closed cycle it produces 800kN of thrust. According to the engine stats that is supposed to be exactly right. I'm used to rapiers where closed cycle produces more thrust, so is the only method adding extra engines or is there a trick I'm unaware of like taking a prerequisite flight path? If additional engines are used may you recommend which ones from whatever mod pack as long as they're mode
  16. You could also get a plane to the peak. If you can build a stratolauncher but bigger for your rocket you could get it to the peak with a use to make it stand upright. It's not for everyone as it may prove difficult but it could be your option. Just make sure you Hyperedit test from that altitude to see what works. There is also something called a space elevator mod using a 100m elevator you could use. I believe you can make it larger using tweakscale also. This way you can lift the rocket up the top and launch it from there.
  17. I know that if you accept the other type of contracts like part tests, aerial and ground survey's they will pop up much more often. For some reason part tests always remain and survey contracts always expand upon newly visited places. So if you go to the Mun first you always have those contracts available IIRC. That means you want to do the ground breaking contracts up to the Mun first. If you opt to do the main contracts first I often find I get a healthy balance that always includes the rescue contracts if you have the proper facility upgrades. I believe I ran stuck in doing multiple early
  18. Good comparison on the Mastodon <> Mainsail. Maybe get a Mainsail upgrade as soon as you get the Mastodon, but by the looks of it that means the mainsail needs a re-balance altogether with some whereabouts related to it's current stats so it isn't rendered a entire different engine. I use the 1.875m engines on 1.25m nodes only if they're in fairings since 1.875m engines without trusses on a 1.25m node still create added drag. On 8 asparagus landers using 8 x 1.875m engines on 1.25m nodes you can see this effect and without a fairing may even create aero balancing problems since these are
  19. I very much agree with this. And 1.25m engine options are lacking on the higher tiers. the 260-270/310-320 Reliant/Swivel ISP ranges prove to be very low tech. Where the reliant boasts better Thrust and Sea level ISP it's part upgrade would ultimately greatly enhance the Reliant's Sea level ISP and thrust. I wouldn't make it that much lighter because the thrust to weight off a reliant or Swivel isn't that bad to begin with. The terrier on the other hand is purely a Vacuum engine but has quite the weight so a part upgrade could definitely lower the weight and slightly improve the Vacuum
  20. Circuit breakers, snacks cupboard, shower cabin, seat height and seat incline. Switches to turn on/off MFD's. Then you have a pilot and copilot copies of the same switches plus a double one for each circuit breaker if one fails. You need this on long flights, it's not a mistake. If anything, the kerbal pods are more sophisticated with more automated functions so doesn't require the amount seen in real air planes. If a actual IVA more sophisticated then rasterprop monitor would be introduced I can imagine more knobs, buttons and switches would be present. Also, on modern or prototype com
  21. Give people the option. It's a little mechanic. Stuff already explodes, so no extra mechanic needed. Just a auto:off setting in the main menu for part failures with a clever configuration formula = no time spent and a few happy faces. Obviously the static failure rate should be very low. The best way of doing it, have a 1% failure rate that any part on the ship fails, with a by-percentage to certain parts like engines having a higher chance of failing after launch. Then add a static formula of further failing of 1% every 1 through 10 year(s). It doesn't have to be that difficult That means
  22. Your relativation seems to accurately put the current Juno at the right spot, albeit that you seem to radiate you aren't much fan of it. Comparing to a SR--71's J-58 a Junkers Jumo 004 is ancient, thus that is the expectation in performance difference logically. The Juno is a low tech turbofan. What Squad did with the numbers is probably a little illogical. Haven't thought through if it's one of their strategic balancing acts that has a Squad illogical explanation that makes it a high bypass turbojet instead of a turbofan in actual sense. Maybe that's what's to argue about. I love creativ
  23. @bewing Exactly! @kenedos Plus you have to make sure that the attachment of your cargo or parts inside are attached to the exact cargo bay inline node, that is not to the surface of the bay itself and then dragged. Looking at the picture you have the command chairs far away from the inline cargo. I assume they're attached to the cargo bay floor itself? Make sure you attach them to the inline cargo, then hold LEFT or RIGHT SHIFT + LMB to drag them far away from it's grandparent part if you want the seats situated at the same spot as they're now without editing the cargo. Also make s
  24. It's the WarpPlugin Folder. Luckily there was a cfg fix posted in the KSPIE thread so I can still use the WarpPlugin. Apparently it's a side fix, better óne then none
  25. I have these mods on KSP 1.7.0... I already tried removing a few and will test later. Problem Using any airbreathing engine the "intake air" is unused and sits in the intake itself where the intake air bar is filled up. This shouldn't happen as the intake air should be used. On top of that, the engine will work initially but then fails. The more intakes per each engine the longer it runs from spool up. It seems it knows the intake air is there, it then seems to use the amount of intake air the combined air intakes can provide but then fails due to intake air starvation after
×
×
  • Create New...