sturmhauke

Members
  • Content Count

    536
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

556 Excellent

2 Followers

About sturmhauke

  • Rank
    SSTO Junkie

Profile Information

  • Location looking for more ∆v

Recent Profile Visitors

512 profile views
  1. First add the image, then highlight it like you would with text and add the link.
  2. sturmhauke

    Work-in-Progress [WIP] Design Thread

    @Jon144 I've noticed your prop blades are at a weird, unrealistic angle. Is that to take advantage of weird, unrealistic KSP physics?
  3. True story. One time I even got a nice capture in Laythe orbit for free after braking at Tylo.
  4. Procedural Wings, AKA Pwings for short: I suppose I could try using a few smaller segments. Currently I have one giant segment per wing and stabilizer, plus some for control surfaces.
  5. They break off during landing tests. Haven't tested reentry yet; I imagine they'd break off there too. I'm using Pwings just for the sake of something different, and to save on part count, but apparently they're known to have breaking problems at high loads. Something to do with when the joint strength is calculated vs. when the Pwing fully loads. I might have to switch back to Tweakscaled wing pieces, or even manual struts (ugh).
  6. I for one am still here. I'm alternating between trying to work out the problem with my wings breaking off of my new STS-9 potato grabber, and boring stuff like financial planning and chores and all that. I've also been cheating on KSP a little with Horizon Zero Dawn. But don't worry, that's just a fling.
  7. It is a stock bug, and has to do with the way heat is calculated when switching back to a vessel or coming out of high warp. The calculation used is simplistic, and can sometimes result in too much thermal energy being added to a part.
  8. You may find that your shuttle pitches too quickly, but you'll have to experiment and see how it flies.
  9. The main thing is to check your center of lift and center of mass. If the CoL is farther back, it makes your craft more stable but less maneuverable. Moving it farther forward will make it more maneuverable, but for spaceplanes (including shuttles) you don't necessarily want too much maneuverability because you risk breaking stuff at reentry speeds. You don't appear to have any conventional elevator surfaces, just canards and angled tailfins, and small ones at that. I generally use a traditional delta wing + tall vertical stabilizer, with separate elevators and rudders. Sometimes I use an H-tail for greater stability (like the shuttle I'm building for STS-9 to haul a space potato). I might use canards for pitch assistance, but never as the only pitch control.
  10. Larry Niven's A World Out Of Time has planetary drives like this. But they're used on the gas giants, not on Earth directly. The gas giants are repositioned, and their gravity is used to alter the orbits of other planets.
  11. I'll probably enter this soon. I did ok in BAD-T IV, but I just could not figure out how to make a stable plane for Juno Ace. I know it has something to do with FAR and transonic speeds, but I just can't wrap my head around it.
  12. sturmhauke

    Work-in-Progress [WIP] Design Thread

    I'm working on a shuttle for STS-9, AKA the space potato challenge. Since offset thrust will be a problem after grabbing the potato, I decided to solve it by mounting some Nervs vertically. These could qualify for VTOL operations on Minmus, but they aren't powerful enough for most anywhere else. That doesn't matter though, because I'll only be flying "vertically" through space.
  13. sturmhauke

    ultimate shuttle challenge

    I think you should define your parameters more with specific goals and such before you can call it a challenge. What you have right now is more of a "show off your shuttles" idea.