Jump to content

Ol’ Musky Boi

Members
  • Content Count

    179
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ol’ Musky Boi

  1. The big bogey get's a makeover at last!
  2. Built this over 3 days. Has fully stock (no DLC) working S-Foils, flies fairly well, and only has 321 parts! KerbalX link: https://kerbalx.com/OlMuskiBoi/T-65-X-Wing Doesn't come with a targeting computer because Jeb kept switching it off anyway
  3. KerbalX link: https://kerbalx.com/OlMuskiBoi/Rally-Mini Based off "The Italian Job" movie.
  4. Yea I am aware of the forum etiquette thanks. There are images and craft details available on the KerbalX page
  5. KerbalX link: https://kerbalx.com/OlMuskiBoi/KB-5-Turbo I don't usually dabble much with automobiles in KSP, but they're good fun!
  6. A Bell X-1 replica, sans B-29 launch vehicle. KerbalX link: https://kerbalx.com/OlMuskiBoi/Bell-X-1
  7. Not done a ring station before so figured it was about time. KerbalX link: https://kerbalx.com/OlMuskiBoi/Tenacity-Space-Station
  8. KerbalX link: https://kerbalx.com/OlMuskiBoi/Stock-Dreamchaser Not perfect but I'm happy with how it turned out. Launch vehicle isn't anything special, feel free to throw it out for a proper Atlas / Vulcan replica if you want
  9. The testing from 3 weeks ago didn't go quite as planned (high pitched language warning): What happened here was probably something I should've anticipated, the lump of hot glue used to stick the ignitor in place came loose upon ignition, clogged the nozzle, and the engine then burnt through. Despite that, for a fraction of a second it was actually working, and there were visible mach diamonds, so I'm pretty happy with that part of the test. Obviously, there are several things that need improvement. First and foremost are my safety procedures, currently testing is done behind some g
  10. That's quite a difficult thing to judge, considering that even Astronauts don't spend half their time having fun in microgravity or looking at the view, and even then the ISS doesn't have quite the same amount as open space as perhaps a Starship or a large space station would have (those windows in most of the Starship renderings are massive, I imagine that view would be pretty phenomenal compared to the Cupola). Until someone tries it of course we won't know, but I'd wager that people wouldn't get sick of it so easily. What seems most likely to me is that some may spend short ~1 week sorties
  11. I don't necessarily think there'd be a lack of entertainment if you stayed in space for a month, some people like to go on cruises for similar lengths of time, but I do think you're right that the limiting factor may be zero g exposure, so perhaps for an up and down Starship space trip a week would just about do the trick. Although once we start talking artificial gravity stations, where you might only spend a few hours a day in microgravity, longer stays do start to look more attractive. It's interesting to imagine what a Lunar cruise may be like, perhaps a 3 day journey there to spend 2
  12. I agree, I say as much in my post, I think a month is about the max any tourist would want to spend in orbit, since the majority of the cost will be that of launch (even with full reusability), the longer you stay in space and the more passengers there are the cheaper the tickets, somewhere in there there's a balance that people would want to pay for. Though when the ISS is eventually decommissioned sometime in the mid 2020s there will be a need for a new interim orbital research lab for operation and recovery of microgravity experiments. Starship fills this role pretty well, it has more press
  13. Since so much Starship development has been happening lately, I think it's a good time to discuss it's capabilities in the realm of space tourism, and wether or not this could be a source of good income for SpaceX. I am no economist or business expert, but I've done my best to estimate a couple of ways this might work. LEO Tourism, How Might It Work? Musk recently said that Starship could cost as little as $2 million per launch. Which for a 150 tonne payload capability means an incredible $13/kg price tag, about 1000 times cheaper than a Delta IV Heavy, which still boggles my
  14. Ah, thanks for clearing that up. I did think 41.6N sounded a bit much, I've not studied fluid mechanics in my physics course yet so I'm basically learning all this stuff off the internet. Guess I'l have to redo the calculations then...
  15. That's correct, I assumed the mass flow rate would be 38 g/s based on how long it took for one canister to empty. But it may be that when the engine is firing and under pressure the mass flow rate goes down somewhat, I'm not sure. A TWR of 33 would be amazing! You're right about the cameras, next time we'll set up some tripods and try to get a few different angles.
  16. Here's some testing from last week, no ignition but I think we're pretty close, just need to get the burst disc the right thickness, we went too thin for 2 of the tests and too thick for the other, so the sweet spot must be somewhere in the middle. The fuse is a 20cm or so length of plastic ignitor cord (PIC), which is coiled up in a cavity under the burst disc, hopefully that'll serve to both melt the burst disc and to decompose the N2O. The injector piece was 3D printed by a friend (largely because I had no access to metal working tools at the time) who's been helping out with the project, a
  17. I imagine a back-up parachute system would have a similar mass to a drogue + retrorocket system, if not slightly less. Based on this document the Apollo CM's parachute system had a mass of ~100kg (If I've interpreted the data right), so I still think that it would be a lighter way to go even accounting for that. You're right though, we are getting a little off-topic.
  18. Great post, but it's worth noting that in the case of Dragon 2 the landing engines would have also been the LES, so that offsets some of the mass penalty. If we assume that an expendable LES would've been jettisoned at first stage separation (which occurred at ~1,900m/s for the DM-1 mission) and would've had a mass of 2,000 kg, then the payload penalty of bringing the LES to orbit (~7,500m/s) is about 1,600 kg, not 2,000 kg. So about 1,200 - 1,300 kg more massive than the drogue + retrorocket system. This doesn't change the picture much in terms of which is more lightweight though, the
  19. I can't blame him, I gave up on my hybrid rocket project for a year. I've restarted development though, should see a few more tests and the construction of a second prototype in the coming weeks (hopefully). Seeing everyone's work on this thread was a big inspiration.
  20. I tried to build one about a year ago, could never get it to re-enter without spinning out. Maybe it's about time I try again...
  21. Can we get an ETA on 1.8 by any chance? Or is it a done-when-it's done kinda thing?
  22. I second this, 1.25 m and 2.5 m cargo bays are greatly needed!
×
×
  • Create New...