Jump to content

sturmhauke

Members
  • Posts

    1,724
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by sturmhauke

  1. Interesting idea. I'll play around with it and see what I can come up with when I have the time. Partly I've been busy with work, partly with family stuff, and partly I've been playing other stuff - Elden Ring for instance. I've also considered doing a completed mission log index, like some of the other long-running challenges have. It'd be a fair bit of work though.
  2. I made a couple of VTOL orbiters with rotating nacelles a while back. Mine were a bit heftier, and somewhat prone to rapid unplanned disassembly events. I found that the nacelles get knocked out of alignment easily, which affects the accuracy of maneuvers. Although as mentioned, my orbiters tend to be pretty big so the extra mass doesn't help things.
  3. Hi @OJT, welcome! The design requirements are strict in some ways but you aren't bound to any real-world designs. There have been lots of STS-style shuttles, a few Buran-style, a few Dreamchaser-style, and all kinds of crazy kerbal nonsense. If you want to stick the orbiter on top of the stack and wrap it in a fairing, that's fine. But keep in mind that without some of the giant modded fairings out there, it will limit your wingspan and cargo volume, especially for missions involving bringing stuff down from orbit. Bonus missions are optional, as are the Test Pilot missions. But they're also good practice for harder missions. If you're thinking of doing Buran-style, in my experience it's more difficult to design and fly them compared to other styles due to some crazy balance shifts during flight. I did a writeup here a while back:
  4. Your orbiter is also required to land mostly intact. How much damage is somewhat subjective, but landing upside down with the wings sheared off is definitely too much. Basically that means the major airframe and heat-resistant components must survive reentry and landing. Missions that involve returning a payload must also have an intact payload. If you're not sure, please ask first.
  5. Mods are unlikely to be easily portable from KSP to KSP2. The game engine is likely too different for that.
  6. Your shuttle can look like whatever you want, as long as it meets the challenge specs. Please read the general rules and the mission you are trying to complete.
  7. I haven't been around much lately due to work craziness, but the challenge is still going. You're welcome to check it out.
  8. You can multitrack the one hype train if you know how:
  9. Flags are technically useless, but people like bling. Lights though? Try landing on the night side of the Mun without lights. Not impossible obviously, but you'll wish you had them.
  10. Moons in polar orbits can only happen if they are captured by the planet's gravity. There are no known examples in our own solar system, although there are some highly inclined lunar orbits. Ring systems are short-lived compared to the lifetime of a planet. The ring particles are easily disturbed by gravity, and a polar moon would tend to pull them out of the ring formation even faster.
  11. So you do contend that the night sky from Saturn orbit looks substantially different than the night sky from Earth orbit. (Let's ignore the sky from here on the Earth's surface, since there are significant atmospheric effects.) The problem is that except for objects in our own Solar System, that's just not true. The average distance from Earth to Saturn is approximately 1.28 x 109 km (8.5 AU). The distance from Earth to Proxima Centauri is 4.02 x 1013 km (4.25 ly), which is about 31,400 times further away. For comparison, say you're looking at a mountain peak 50 km away. What you're saying with the view from Saturn is the equivalent to saying that the mountain peak and surrounding terrain will look different if you step 1.5 m left or right.
  12. I don't know that I'd call Saturn orbit an "alien sky". You'd have to go to a different star system for the constellations to look different.
  13. The most challenging part of Dres for me is getting the encounter right. It's on an elliptical and inclined orbit, and has a small SOI compared to most planets. That makes it difficult to get an encounter in the first place, and more difficult to get one that isn't on a stupid approach vector that ends up costing a bunch of extra dV. First off, if you're not using a transfer planner mod you should look into that, unless you like doing a bunch of orbital math by hand. It's possible to eyeball the transfer, and people have done it and more in the Caveman challenges, but that's a specific brand of crazy that I'm not into. Once you've figured that part out, it's also important to understand how to do midcourse correction burns. The further away you are from the target, the harder it is to adjust your initial trajectory for a good encounter. I generally make a correction at approximately the midpoint between planets to get a more favorable encounter, and again on entering the SOI. What constitutes a favorable encounter, you might ask? It's one where on close approach to the body in question, your relative velocity is as close to 0 as possible. This means approaching in the same direction as the body is moving at the time of arrival. If you approach at a large angle, or especially retrograde, that adds to the dV you need to spend on your capture burn.
  14. Might be possible, it would be extremely difficult though. RCS thrusters have low TWR and are inefficient, especially in atmosphere. Why don't you try it and let us know how it goes?
  15. This thread isn't old enough for it to be necroposting. Please try again a year from now.
  16. Maybe your CTTP files got corrupted. I'd try redownloading them and see if that works. Another option if you have the Steam version is to validate the main game files, in case those got corrupted.
  17. I did a negative relief carving one year - thinner areas to let more light through, thicker or uncut areas for shadows. Looked cool, but it was a lot more work.
×
×
  • Create New...