Jump to content

Mars-Bound Hokie

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Mars-Bound Hokie

  1. 18 hours ago, Echo__3 said:

    Your roll issue is caused by having both of your rotors spinning in the same direction. In the SPH, click on one of the rotors and remove it from symmetry, then change the direction from clockwise. Then you also need to change the propellers on that rotor to counterclockwise. With two rotors spinning in opposite directions, this should cancel out their torque.

    You know what happened when I did that? My drone wasn't nearly as nose-heavy and it started to actually stay straight and level.

    • Actually, it's still a bit nose-heavy when gliding. Nothing a little throttle won't fix, though.
    • I didn't adjust the wing structure because I wanted to test ONE ADJUSTMENT AT A TIME. And since the engine modification alone worked out great so far, I decided to keep the wings as they are.
      • If I need to modify the airframe for Eve operation/transport, I will.



    • It was dark when I took off. With 18,015 units of electric charge ready, I think I was okay.



    • Once I got the drone to a safe altitude (I did 5 km) and kept it level, I just left it alone.
    • It may have descended approx. 1000 m before rising back up on its own, but otherwise not bad.
      • That's why I took it so high.
    • Its cruising velocity averaged at 120 m/s.



    • Mid-flight, I realized that I was wasting electricity by cruising full throttle.
      • I reduced speed to 1/2 to 1/3 throttle, and the airspeed stayed the same while the plane still maintained a (somewhat) level flight without my help. 
    • Note-to-self: when you get your flight path set, reduce throttle.



    • Those bottom lights are more powerful than I thought. They really came in handy when landing on a hilly grassland peninsula and my drone was nearing 5,000 units left.
    • After minutes of some bouncing touch-and-gos (unintended), I brought the plane to a complete stop.



    • It took me almost 1.25 days for the plane to be recharged to maximum capacity.
      • It probably would have gone a lot faster if I remembered to extend the tailfin panels. In my defense, I was too chicken to press the button since the last time I hit it was when I meant to turn on Kerbnet mid-flight and the panels flew off.
    • After that, I took off up the east hill and started flying towards the sunrise.



    • Check the surface info tab and you'll see the general area where I had to make a pitstop.
      • If I took off early in the morning instead of the middle of the night, I would have made it a lot farther.



    • For the next few hours, I'll be flying without risk of a battery drainage.


    Since it was getting boring watching a plane fly with pretty much no problems over the ocean, I decided to entertain myself with some math. Specifically, how fast I would have to go at minimum to keep up with the sun if I was to maximize my solar charge time. Below are the velocities that the planets revolve around their respective axes in m/s.

    • In addition, since the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, I'll have to fly RETROGRADE (west) to stay with the sun.


    • KERBIN: There is no way I can reach that velocity with that drone, so I'll have to time my takeoff to have as much sun time as possible. More specifically, I'll need to take off shortly before sunrise so that I can get a head start on the sun and have plenty of charge left over by the time the solar panels start charging.
      • Then again, why would I need to use that drone? If I need to collect data on Kerbin, I have a whole collection of jets that can do the job for way less than a sixth of the time and half the money.
    • EVE: If I can match that velocity at a safe altitude without losing control (due to going too slow) on Eve, then I can practically keep my drone airborne FOREVER.


    @18Watt, although I'll be paying attention to Matt's video on how to pack and move my current drone prototype, I'll keep your designs in mind in case bringing it to Eve is not possible. Thank you.

    • FYI, the Republic P-47 Thunderbolt is actually a single-engine fighter. Are you actually referring to the P-38 Lightning (not to be confused for the F-82 Twin Mustang)?
      • My drone's stats are not as impressive as the P-38's, but at least I got a general structural design going for when I make that replica.
  2. @Echo__3

    19 hours ago, Echo__3 said:

    You used I-beams for your tail booms.

    Like I said earlier, I only made that plane for show. Apart from maybe posting on KerbalX, I have no further uses for the B.B.


    19 hours ago, Echo__3 said:

    Eve is closer to Kerbol, so solar panels work even better there than at Kerbin. The fan blades in general just seem to work better than the regular propeller blades even though the produce more drag. You will not need as many blades to fly as on Kerbin (or to spin the rotors as fast), but you will need more motor torque because of how thick the atmosphere is.

    After watching Matt Lowne's video on a science plane to Eve (see video), I decided to give it a try myself with some modifications of my own. More specifically, my version is:

    • Completely unmanned
      • Right now, Eve's surface is a one-way trip. I'd rather not send anybody there until I've established that two-way travel is possible.
    • No goo or materials
      • Which is related to the first major difference in my design.
    • More energy storage


    When it came to making the twin engines, I found that if I make one good forward-facing prop engine in the back as usual and then added the engine+blade combo symmetrically in the front (as Matt did here), the engines work out great. Trying to change the direction and blade orientation of the two engines individually didn't work.


    After confirming that my design works on Kerbin (despite being nose-heavy), I teleported it to Eve's surface and waited for a signal. Here are the screenshots of my Eve test run.


    • Almost looks like I'm going faster on Eve than I am on Kerbin.



    • Not bad.
    • Still have to constantly pitch up to keep it level, not to mention it just loves to keep rolling 
      • And the roll hold is completely useless if not treasonous.
    • Took a total nosedive when the signal broke, signaling the craft's doom.
      • I promise you that my career save will have better coverage once this drone is finalized.



    • My first Eve drone prototype in the SPH
    • The front tanks are empty while the rear one is full.
      • I fear that, if I fill up the front tanks, the craft will get even more nose-heavy.


    20 hours ago, Echo__3 said:

    Prop planes can work on Duna, but barely. They only are flyable in the very low atmosphere.

    Well, if it's that risky, then I probably won't be using aerial drones on Duna often if at all. I already have the Dirtblood and a quite popular mobile base, so I'm pretty much all set in exploring Duna. Thanks to you, though, I would have general guidelines for making a VTOL drone when it comes to exploring the canyons.




    13 hours ago, 18Watt said:

    Keep in mind, the max speed of a DC-3 was about 105 m/s.  The DC-6 could cruise at 140 m/s at altitude, and probably (guessing) was able to safely hit 150-160 m/s before parts started getting blown off.

    I checked the Wikipedia pages for both planes, and they're not exactly impressive stats. At least they'd be good places to start when making larger and/or more practical aircraft.


    13 hours ago, 18Watt said:

    I'm not familiar with the VC-118, are you referring to the military designation for the DC-6?  If so, probably the same thing.  That's a bigger plane, but uses 4 engines.

    Holy crap, you're right. At the time I posted on here, I had no idea that the VC-118 was the military counterpart for the DC-6. All I knew was that the VC-118 was the second Air Force One. Now I know what to go for when making that replica.


    13 hours ago, 18Watt said:

    For unmanned drones on Eve, the BG props work fantastically well.  For the size of drone you have in mind, I would use the smallest electric rotor.  I would consider using a twin-rotor counter-rotating design so the torque cancels out.

    If you scroll up on this post, you'll find that I did make a twin-engine drone. I didn't use the small electric rotors since I was unsure on how much thrust I'll need due to Eve's increased gravity (and Matt's recommendation, but I think it was mainly because his model weighed more). Maybe I could still fly just fine with the small rotors like you said.

    • Also, like I said earlier, when I tried making counter-rotating individual rotors, the plane couldn't take off. I just followed Matt's instructions, and they seemed to work out fine for me during testing.


    13 hours ago, 18Watt said:

    Whatever size landing gear looks like it will work, use the next bigger size.  You'll regret not using beefier landing gear on Eve if your wheels keep breaking..

    Thank God for Alt+F12 and Sandbox Mode for test runs, both on Kerbin and Eve. I'll just need to teleport some more relays.

  3. @Echo__3

    Thank you so much for helping me with my problem, and especially for sending me a link with a modified version to work with.


    Test run with your version



    • Why do you have an oversized Mk. II probe core?
      • The regular sized probe core is mine for size comparison.
    • Upon launch, the wings were flimsy and the tailfins fell off.



    • After some modifications to the airframe and some strut connectors holding the tailfins, I managed to get this bird flying.



    • Safe landing after about 11 minutes of flight time and 319 LF units to spare.


    I will complain that your version is quite nose-heavy. However, apart from the range, its real-life counterpart didn't really brag impressive performance stats. At least I got this bird to fly and land in one piece.

    • And I only built the replica for showing off to my friends since we were talking about it the day before (no, we're not Turkish).


    Once I took it to the SPH, I opened the fuel tank PAWs so I can see how the weight was distributed. After that, I opened the engine and propeller PAWs and checked the main throttle action group.


    • Apparently, the RPM limit may have been an inhibitor in my performance.
    • I do have some questions regarding the motor size and output setting:
      • What made you decide 10%? Is that standard for all your propeller motors?
      • What are the absolute minimum and maximum motor size percentages I should heed if I expect the aircraft to fly?
        • Depending on the size of the aircraft (e.g. electric open-cockpit plane vs B-36 bomber), I'll have to adjust as necessary.


    I then took your engine and blade adjustments under advisement and returned to my original B.B. craft file. Below you will find how I adjusted the Lf+Ox setup, the engine, and the blades.


    • To be honest, I don't remember why I used 20% in the motor size and output instead of 10. I think it was because the aircraft was bigger and heavier than yours. 
    • Either way, this design worked out great for me.



    • My B.B. prototype with the new prop engine successfully flying over the KSC



    • Perfect landing.


    I'll need to get my MJ autopilot to work on keeping it level without sending it into an endless spiral first, but otherwise I'm impressed with the results. Thank you so much for your help.



    1 hour ago, 18Watt said:

    Yes.  All the BG props and engines are overpowered,  For a light aircraft, you don't need the big stuff.

    Okay. Would the BG props and engines be fine for, let's say, a DC-3 - or something of medium-large size like a VC-118?


    1 hour ago, 18Watt said:

    I had never recovered a crew from Eve until I learned to use the BG props.  There's an insane amount of things you can do with props.

    I haven't even put kerbals on Eve yet, so crew recovery missions will be a while. However, I should be able to send a drone in the meantime to collect science. Since Eve has no usable atmosphere for the air intakes, I'll have to use the electric motors - which is another bonus, since I should use solar panels and RTGs to charge it.

    • I'll just need to test the drone on Kerbin first. After that, it's a matter of sending the drone to Eve's surface without blowing up.
    • A couple of questions:
      • For an unmanned science drone on Eve, should I go with the ducted fan blades or the regular propeller blades? 
        • I plan to carry:
          • Thermometer
          • Atmospheric GCMS
          • (Maybe) a scanning arm
          • Seismic accelerometer
          • Gravioli detector
          • Barometer
          • Surface scanning module
      • Would this work on Duna too?


    Again, thank you all so much for your help. Can't wait to fly old-school.

  4. 4 hours ago, 18Watt said:

    Screenshots showing the PAW (part action window) open for the engine, and one of the propeller blades, would be helpful.  There are too many possible things that could be going on to troubleshoot your issue without seeing the PAWs for the engine and propeller blades.

    And here you go. Below are the screenshots of my second attempt with the PAWs open for the engine and the propeller blades






    4 hours ago, 18Watt said:

    If your first plane accelerated well down the runway, but crashed after takeoff, you are likely having aircraft design or aerodynamic problems.

    For this prototype, I may actually agree with you. However, when I mounted a three-blade engine on the back of my Baykar Bayraktar drone replica, I ran into worse problems. I know for sure it's not just poor aerodynamic design that's the problem since:

    • This B.B. prototype didn't make it past 2 m/s on the runway, no matter which propeller direction I tried.
      • I didn't know if I needed to change it since it was a rear propeller.
        • If I can master this, then I can make a B-36 Peacemaker
    • The engine was silent (as usual).
    • Even if the plane was able to take off, it should have flown just fine since a different B.B. prototype of the same exact design EXCEPT FOR THE AFTERBURNER IN THE BACK was able to.


    I tried reducing the motor size as you and @Echo__3 said, but that didn't seem to work.  Here are the screenshots I have of my latest attempt at this (and a true replica of its namesake)




    • Apparently, reducing motor size didn't work out.


    How do you recommend I get this baby airborne? If I can fix the problem with this prop, then I can make functional aircraft replicas that won't depend too heavily on electric charge.

  5. The title's self-explanatory, but here are the details.


    I recently acquired Breaking Ground and want to try the new R121 Turboshaft Engine. However, none of the tutorials I find seem to work out for me. Even my most successful attempts turned out to be failures.



    • First attempt as it accelerates on the runway.



    • After taking off at ~60 m/s, it rose for a bit then took a nosedive.
    • Eventually, I crashed into the ocean.


    When I installed the KAL-1000 controller and tried to follow the instructions from the tutorial videos, it seems like it made things WORSE - and, apparently, wrecked all subsequent attempts to correct this error. My second prototype for testing a propeller didn't help out either.


    Below are the craft files of both of my failed attempts.


    Any ideas where I went wrong? Was it due to poor aerodynamic design or improperly setting up the propeller? How can I get the propeller to work?

    • And do I really need the KAL-1000 controller? Sure, the second prototype failed, but initial performance without it seemed promising for the first thirty seconds.
      • WITH the controller, the plane was barely moving at all.
    • Is there a written set of instructions I can reference - one that actually works?
      • And does these rules apply to electric propellers too?
    • I'll test whatever answers are given and let you all know how they work out.


    Thank you very much. If I can get this to work, then I can build USAF aircraft replicas and luxury vehicles for Laythe tourism.

  6. And here I go again. Behold, the Boeing X-45.


    • The Boeing X-45 on display in the SPH.
    • Closest I could get to a functional replica with all stock parts.



    • Flying as close to its real-life counterpart's cruising altitude speed as possible



    • Safe landing.
    • The F3 Menu said that almost 2,000 km was covered, and I had approximately 75 units of fuel left.
      • A little disappointed that I didn't make the real-life counterpart's combat range of 2,400 km. Even so, that's still pretty impressive.


    Come on, people. I can't cover the whole museum by myself here (even though I have Breaking Ground). I can't wait to see your all's replicas in action.

  7. Since I visited the Air Force Museum again yesterday (twice - and yes, twice on the same day) and the Armstrong Air and Space Museum - along with the Waco Air Museum in Troy, OH, I was inspired to play KSP again and revive this thread.


    Anyway, here's my next entry: the Boeing YF-118G Bird of Prey.


    • The YF-118G Bird of Prey on display in the SPH.



    • Jeb and Bob circling around the KSP to depart 2-7-0 (west).
    • Afterburner activated.
      • Flight starts in subsonic mode.



    • Successful landing after a nice test flight.



    • Bob golfing performing an experiment on Kerbin's surface upon landing.
    • The Mk. II cockpit has four repair kits and four experiment kits in the cargo bay.
      • I don't know if they stayed in the craft file upon upload.


    Can't wait to see what you all come up with. 


    On an unrelated note, I recently got the Breaking Ground expansion pack. I wonder what kind of aircraft engines I can come up with now.

  8. Spaghetti Kerman was in a pasta slurping contest with some of his frat brothers. In his haste to stay in the lead, he sucked several noodles down the wrong pipe. His friends tried to save him, but it was no use. By the time the paramedics arrived, it was too late. Spaghetti Kerman was pronounced DOA from choking on pasta.


    Gary Kerman: aurora borealis

  9. I may be late to the party, but at 8/18/2022 after work I found the article below.  Since I live in the Cincinnati area, I jumped at the chance to find the northern lights.


    Of course, neither this article nor any of the other ones I found about this gave any indication as to where specifically to look. All I knew was to look at a high-elevation area with low light pollution, and since the map below shows the high activity visibility line SOUTH of the city, of course looked there. 



    • Like I said, nothing more specific on the location than this.


    Unfortunately, during my trip Thursday night from 2100 - 2340 EDT, all the good spots south of Cincinnati were either in residential neighborhoods, closed-off parks, or on private property. I thought about giving up, but then the next day my supervisor at work told me that he had heard that they would show up "for the next few nights." After work that day, I phoned someone from the Cincinnati Astronomical Society and he told me:

    • I should look NORTH of the city, along the north horizon
    • The best place to look is Hueston Woods State Park - or any other state parks north of Cincinnati
    • Expect the lights to show up between 0300 and 0400.
      • But I think I should have pressed him for a time zone, since other article said to expect the lights to start showing up at 2100 EDT.


    When I got to the park at 0315 Saturday morning, all the trees were blocking the horizon and I couldn't find a good place to stop and look from my car. After some driving around to no avail, I left the park at approximately 0345 and found a spot beside the road near some farmland to look north - but no auroras. Although I did see some lights on the horizon, I didn't really think it was anything particularly noteworthy. More specifically, they seemed like the residual lights you see from a far-away town (maybe Eaton). I then gave up and drove back to Cincinnati and went back to bed.


    To sum it all up, both attempts to see the northern lights near Cincinnati failed. 


    If anyone has pictures of the midwestern northern lights, I'm sure we'd all be more than happy to see them.

  10. El Kerman was at the VAB waiting for the elevator doors to shut when some hot new intern ran inside. He tried to flirt with her, but he had an undiagnosed heart condition which left him extremely vulnerable to heart attacks. The intern thought he had just fainted from shyness and would get up soon, leaving him in the elevator after she got off. Ten minutes later, the janitor was entering the elevator when he saw El's lifeless body. He called for help and tried to use the defibrillator, but it was no use. El Kerman was dead on arrival.

    • As a result, the KSP administration unanimously voted for a new policy that mandated calling for help for any unconscious kerbal found on premises that were not sleeping areas - even if it's a mere faint. Despite Mortimer Kerman's reluctance, they had also agreed to offer free health screenings for non-kerbalnaut personnel to see who would be predisposed to collapsing for any reason - especially from heart conditions.


    Martin Kerman will die from an osprey crash

  11. 1 hour ago, Watermel00n said:

    Johnny Kerman - Iron pickaxe.

    Johnny Kerman was mining for diamonds in the caves underneath his new farm. To clear some rock in his path, he used his iron pickaxe to make a crack small enough for him to place a bomb inside. However, due to his dyslexia, he set the timer to 1 SECOND when he thought it would be 1 minute. He was also dumb enough to place his pickaxe right next to the rock. As soon as Johnny started the timer, he started to walk away. Much to his surprise, the bomb exploded and the force of the blast sent his pickaxe flying right at him.

    Less than five minutes later, his wife Betsy came running into the mines to check out the noise. After she cleared some of the rubble, she found Johnny dead with a pickaxe in his back. The autopsy showed that his cause of death was exsanguination from the puncture wound - and that the damage the body sustained from the rubble was actually postmortem.


    Unfortunately for Betsy, she was suspected with Johnny's murder after Detective Touta Kerman recognized the shinymonkey Gobluk floating behind her. Since none of the other officers could see the shinymonkey, Touta knew that Betsy had a death note since only those who have touched the notebook could see Gobluk. While he could not convince his superiors that Betsy had Kiraken's power, subsequent investigation found Betsy's prints on the pickaxe. That gave the cops probably cause to detain Betsy, who was in possession of a notebook titled "Death Note." The arresting officers who grabbed the notebook freaked out when they saw Gobluk and tried to shoot him - but nothing worked. Touta, however, was not surprised as he had dealt with the shinymonkey previously.

    • Further inspection of the notebook found Johnny's name and cause of death written in the notebook. Chief Trevor Kerman then asked district attorney to charge Betsy for murder, but Trevor remained skeptical as he was unaware of the exact nature of the death note. In addition to that, all of the arresting officers had been named in several lawsuits and assault charges filed by bystanders for property damage and injuries caused by their bullets - and all but one of them (Touta) have been suspected of taking illegal hallucinogenic drugs.


    Trevor Kerman will get hit by a school bus.

  12. 11 hours ago, Johnster_Space_Program said:

    I have a question about this challenge. If you decide to use a multi-stage rocket, do you still get all of the points for reusability if you land each individual stage back on Kerbin without any damage?


    Yes, so long as you can prove it can be done.

  13. Frodo and Samwise Kerman, along with the rest of the Fellowship of the Jewels had just stolen Gollum's cursed jewelry in an epic heist. Instead of going with the Fellowship on foot to the top of Mount Doomsday, they decided to just rent a small plane and just drop the jewels from there. Unbeknownst to them, Gollum had snuck aboard their aircraft. Seconds before the plane arrived at the drop zone, Gollum attacked Frodo and tried to reclaim his jewelry. During their struggle, they inadvertently opened the doors and caused the plane to tip over. Frodo held on for dear life while the jewels fell out. Cursed by his greed, Gollum dove out of the plane in an attempt to save it.

    In his haste, Gollum forgot to strap a parachute on before jumping. As a result, he and his jewels plummeted to their doom in the lava pool on the top of Mount Doomsday.


    Homland Kerman will die from a Compound S overdose

  14. 3 hours ago, 18Watt said:

    Edit:  Curious what a 'Hokie' is?

    I am.


    For those who honestly don't know, it's the name of Virginia Tech's mascot. AOE Class of '21, baby.


    12 hours ago, 18Watt said:

    I managed to get a rover with 2 Kerbals 7.1 km from the flag

    Let's see pictures of it, then.

  15. On 4/22/2022 at 6:43 PM, chadgaskerman said:

    So what you're telling me is that you want an airborne aircraft carrier?

    I built something like that two years ago. It was not VTOL, but rather a spaceplane-carried spaceplane. 



    • The Lazybird dropping off its cargo, a three-man interplanetary mining-capable spaceplane, after achieving LKO.


    No more stopping at Minmus to refuel. After the main spaceplane is dropped off in LKO, the unmanned carrier flies back to the KSC.




    The craft file and usage instructions can be found here: https://kerbalx.com/Mars-Bound_Hokie/Lazybird


    It took me countless hours and prototypes to finally get a prototype that works. So, in a way, although not VTOL, I made an airborne aircraft carrier.

  16. While Elonski Kerman is busy taking over Chirper, YSpace has been forced to take some minor budget cuts. As such, its engineers in the Relay Web project have been tasked with designing a more efficient way to carry its small relays into orbit. A few days later, they agreed on testing spacecraft that can carry two or more relays at the same time.


    Here are the rules for this interesting challenge:

    1. (BARE MINIMUM) Your craft has to carry two or more relays to LKO
      1. Relays being of identical design not required, but highly recommended
      2. Bonus points if you can get your carrier higher than that
    2. Each relay has to have at least 2 G relay power
    3. All relays have to be unmanned. The delivery craft can go either way
      1. BEWARE: if you choose to have any kerbals pilot it, you have to return all of them alive after all relays are deployed
    4. No damage can be sustained to either the relay or the delivery craft upon deployment. Not even the solar panels
    5. (IF YOU PLAN ON RETURNING THE DELIVERY CRAFT) all your relays must be deployed
      1. If not, you can ignore this
    6. You will be placed in separate divisions based on whether your entire craft has:
      1. Simple Tastes - ALL STOCK PARTS, NO DLC
        1. At least no mods that come with additional parts
      2. Spice Things Up - DLCs INCLUDED, BUT NO MODS
      3. Free-for-all - MODS 
    7. You can submit as many entries as you want, but only your best entries will be considered for each division
    8. (OBVIOUSLY) Pictures/video of your performance to be considered


    Scoring Format

      • +10 points for every relay past 2 (baseline: 20 points)
        • e.g. for a 16-relay spacecraft, that's (20 baseline points) + [(16 relays - 2 baseline = 14 additional) * (10 points each) = 140)] = 160 points
        • If you can carry 10 or more relays at once, that would be awesome
      • 75 points if you use a spaceplane AND can (obviously) land the emptied craft in one piece
      • 50 points if you take off the rocket from the launch pad AND can return it to Kerbin's surface
        • + 15 point bonus if you manage to not damage it during re-entry and landing
          • Fairings deployed don't count when it comes to assessing damages, as they were planned
        • If you can take it to another celestial body's orbit and return the emptied craft to Kerbin's surface, that would be VERY awesome
      • No additional points if returning the spacecraft is not possible
      • 25 points - Can only take the craft up to LKO before deploying the individual relays
      • 30 points - Can take it up to Minmus orbit
      • 35 points - Can take it up to the Mun's orbit
        • If you can do that, then you can do Minmus just as easily
      • 70 points - Can put the relay carrier in orbit of another celestial body OUTSIDE OF KERBIN'S SOI before deploying them
        • e.g. if you want to start a relay web over Ike, send your delivery craft to that rock before deploying them one-by-one in various orbits
    • PRICE:
      • 30 points if price<$100K
      • 20 points if $100K=<price<=$400K
      • 15 points if price>$400K





    I'll start us off with my entry, a relay carrier with 16 individually-named xenon-propelled 2G relays



    • The relay carrier getting checked in the VAB, along with ALL SIXTEEN individual ion-powered relays
      • Price - :funds:393,997
        • 20 points since $100K=<price<=$400K
      • Relay Quantity - 16
        • (20 baseline points) + [(16 relays - 2 baseline = 14 additional) * (10 points each) = 140)] = 160 points
    • Boy, checking individual staging was a pain - as well as naming them "Mini-Relay #" one-by-one
    • And if I thought that was a pain, try cutting off the fairing midway



    • Blasting off at an orbital inclination of 25 degrees



    • As I learned the hard way, do not deploy the fairing until after LKO is established. It may be tempting to shed weight and increase delta-V, but your craft will end up wobbly and will break apart.



    • Mini-Relay 2 leaving the carrier right after deployment



    • The relay getting farther away from the carrier before it could establish its own orbit.



    • 4,860 m/s of delta-V per individual relay? That's pretty impressive.
      • However, since it is xenon-powered, it will require a steady power source to be reliable. It may take several attempts and quite a long time to establish the desired orbit.



    • All sixteen relays have been deployed in LKO
      • 25 points - Can only take the craft up to LKO before deploying the individual relays



    • With airbrakes deployed and aiming for retrograde, I intend to bring this bad boy back home.



      •  (50 points for a rocket that returned) + (15 point bonus for no damage) = 65 points



    20 price + 160 relay quantity + 25 for LKO + 65 rocket returned without a scratch = 270 points



    Have fun, everybody. I can't wait to see what you all come up with.

  17. 9 hours ago, swjr-swis said:

    Would this qualify?

    "This aircraft is crude, but it should be adequate to pass off as a replica of the Wright flyer."

    • In other words, yes it qualifies.


    Impressive work with making it all-stock and non-DLC, by the way. I never saw that coming. Feel free to write your name in the checklist.

  18. While I was walking through the National Museum of the United States Air Force last Saturday, I was reminded of all the KSP replicas of those same aircraft. Some of them looked like they can be done with pure stock parts and no DLCs, while others (mostly the older ones) need mods that come with more parts.


    So, I started this thread for everyone to showcase their replicas of the aircraft that the four large hangars (plus the Missile Gallery) have on display. The guidelines for this showcase thread are simple:

    • You are free to use any and all parts necessary, including ones that come in DLCs and mods.
    • Vehicle has to be functional.
      • Which means pictures/video of the craft in action.
      • Similar performance stats are a plus.
    • Vehicle has to look as close as possible to whatever real-life craft you're trying to copy.
      • Therefore, it is highly recommended that you have photographs to reference.
    • Build something not yet claimed on the checklist (link below) first.
      • If you want to show something that's already been showcased on this thread, fine - but you don't get credit for it.
    • I don't care if you built the craft 7 minutes or 7 years ago, so long as it's yours.
      • If you have an old stash of aircraft replicas that you're willing to showcase (and can work), great.
    • Weaponry (e.g. guns, bombs, missiles) not necessary, although I won't object to them either.
    • If the original aircraft was manned, so is your replica. If the original aircraft was unmanned, so is your replica.
      • I won't object to a probe core for your manned aircraft if it doesn't deviate too much from the aesthetic, so long as you include the appropriate crew module/s.
    • You don't need to match the passenger/crew capacity of your original aircraft, so long as your replica comes close to looking like its real-life counterpart AND it's functional.
      • e.g. if you use one or more Mk. 3 Passenger Modules for an Air Force One variant, as long as your aircraft makes a convincing replica I don't mind you exceeding or falling behind its real-life counterpart's passenger capacity.
        • Those things weren't designed for carrying a lot of people anyway; just provide comfort for the president and his staff.
        • (SIDE NOTE) Whoever builds the Douglas VC-54C "Skymaster," I'm not requiring you to install an elevator in the back to load polio-stricken passengers in and out. If you do and the plane still flies smoothly, even better.
          • The one housed in the museum was designed specifically to transport then-president Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who needed a wheelchair.
    • Craft files a plus.


    Below is the link for the replica checklist:



    Here are the instructions on how to use it:

    • Pick an aircraft that has not already been built
      • Like I said earlier, if you want to build something that's already been done here, don't steal credit from the original kerbalnaut
    • Once you're done, write:
      • Column D: Your KSP Forum name
      • Column E: The link to the specific forum post showcasing your replica/s
        • It is acceptable to put more than one craft in the same post. Just leave a link for everyone to find it.
      • Column F: Whatever DLCs you used to make the replica
        • If this doesn't apply to that specific craft, leave it blank
      • Column G: Whatever (parts) mods you used to make the replica
        • If this doesn't apply to that specific craft, leave it blank
      • Column H: (IF YOU WANT TO) Additional notes that other readers may find interesting
        • Please don't modify someone else's notes. If you want to debate/talk to someone about their craft, don't do it on the spreadsheet.

    Source for my list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_at_the_National_Museum_of_the_United_States_Air_Force


    I'll start us off with my favorite, the SR-71 Blackbird.


    • The SR-71 Blackbird on display in the SPH
    • Picture taken February 2020.



    • Ted Kerman enjoying himself flying at high altitudes at a speed higher than the aircraft's real-life counterpart.


    There you have it, folks. Have fun, and I can't wait to see what you got.

  19. My Poseidon Mk. IV won't qualify since it falls below the minimum passenger requirement, but it has a cabin ejection system in case a safe landing (hopefully on Kerbin) is not possible. Below is a picture of a test run of the Poseidon's cabin ejection system.



    • The Poseidon had a nose job done (as it got a more heat-resistant nose cone) after this picture was taken, but the ejection system still works


    Is this the kind of "passenger jet escape system" that you're talking about for the challenge? If so, then it shouldn't be too hard to construct an aircraft that can eject the crewed module and land safely. The Poseidon was designed specifically to be a self-mining SSTO to Laythe, so how hard can it be to slap a larger passenger module on an aircraft that doesn't have so many moving parts?


    Also, I have a couple of questions regarding the challenge rules:

    On 3/29/2022 at 8:25 PM, Maxisdumb said:

    land on any terrain,water safely

    • Does this mean I have to land the aircraft on water in one piece - or be able to take off from it again?
      • If so, then I'm basically screwed.
      • If you only need the passenger module to be intact, I guess I'm fine.
    • I'm pretty sure I've mastered landing on any terrain. After all, I've landed on the surface of Laythe countless times.


    On 3/29/2022 at 8:25 PM, Maxisdumb said:

    .fly up to island airfield and back

    • So, does that mean I have to:
      • Take off from KSC
      • Land at the island airfield
      • Take off from the island airfield
      • Land at the KSC


  20. Questions:

    1. Are we talking about four kerbals in the same craft, or are they spread out?
    2. From which celestial body's orbit do you need to rescue your kerbals from (which planet/moon)?
    3. What are the (general) characteristics of the orbit/s? Polar? Prograde/retrograde?


    I looked through my KerbalX for spacecraft that could rescue four or more kerbals from orbit, and found the Poseidon Mk. IV


    • Craft file: https://kerbalx.com/Mars-Bound_Hokie/Poseidon-Mk-IV-NO-MODS
    • If it can fly to Laythe and back, it can rescue your stranded friends from LKO.
    • The rest of the craft that could carry a minimum of four people to AND from Kerbin's surface were:
      • A spaceplane-launched relay.
        • Unless you also want to deploy a small orbital relay antenna somewhere, I don't recommend using this.
        • It can ONLY carry four people.
      • A docking-capable variant of the Poseidon.


    What do you think?

  21. I know it's late, but if you want to reduce the overall funds expended, I recommend learning the ways of the spaceplane. If you do it right, you can get the entire vehicle back along with your crew and data.


    And if you think building regular spaceplanes is a hard, wait until you meet Duna. The atmosphere alone provides two big hurdles you need to overcome:

    • You can't use air-breathing engines on that planet.
      • Which means that you'll have to use rocket engines that will bring your Duna TWR to over 1 when you enter the atmosphere.
        • This is also crucial when you decide to leave Duna. If you use rapiers on your craft, you still need to have enough fuel to make it to Kerbin - or at least your next refueling stop.
    • It's significantly thinner than on Kerbin.
      • Flying a plane on Duna is nothing like flying on on Kerbin or Laythe. Apart from not using air-breathing engines, you can't make turns as well and you have to be quite close to the ground before you can deploy any parachutes.


    Fortunately, I unlocked the secret two years ago. Below is a picture of the spaceplane I use for Duna missions, the Dirtblood.





    Before you ask, do you think I would have posted this on KerbalX if this craft was unsuccessful? Then again, this was built in version 1.8.1. A lot has changed between then and now, so for all I know it may not work now no matter what I try. 


    After you get this bad boy into LKO, you need to land on Minmus to refuel yourself before you fly anywhere else. Those two NERV engines take up a decent amount of fuel, but it's a small price to pay for a non-rapier TWR of over 1 on Duna. I highly recommend you have an engineer on board to speed up fueling - or repair stuff, now that repair kits are out.* If you have a good enough relay network, you won't need a pilot for this. 

    • I haven't updated this craft in about two years. 


    Feel free to try it out and tell me what you think. 

  22. 14 hours ago, DDE said:

    A fascinating phenomenon, really:

    It would be interesting to see Lightyear in his pre-academy days, as well as what he did for Star Command before Darkmatter faked his death.


    14 hours ago, DDE said:

    I assume it's an in-universe series. I rightly don't remember anything like that making it to the big screen.

    Too bad the 2000 movie was direct-to-video. It totally deserved to be in theaters when it came out.

  23. Spoiler

    I know it's already being discussed on the movies megathread, but I wanted to devote a thread specifically for the Buzz Lightyear movie. It may not be popular for long, but at least we'll get our thoughts out while it still is.


    This thread is to discuss our thoughts/questions/concerns about the upcoming Buzz Lightyear movie. And when it's officially released, we can tell each other how we felt about it without having to dig through any movie megathreads. Let me start us off.


    I thought Disney was done with Buzz Lightyear, but apparently I was wrong. Not only that, this movie will be centered around Buzz Lightyear the character rather than just the toy. I bet it will be interesting to know how Buzz Lightyear became the famous space ranger we all know and love. What I'm really hoping for, however, are connections to the Buzz Lightyear of Star Command series. His story just won't make sense to an "old guy" like me - as in a kid or older in the early 2000s - if I'm left with a lot of questions like "Why wasn't Buzz partnered up with Warp?" or "Hey, Tangea wasn't destroyed." 

    • I might, however, be interested if I see some things in this movie that would explain events that occur in the animated series - like maybe the reason the grubs work for Zurg is because a group within the Galactic Alliance burned their homes down.
    • If you're old enough to remember this series, you'll probably have a lot of questions too.


    Characters I hope to see include, but are not limited to:

    • Evil Emperor Zurg (duh)
    • Warp Darkmatter
      • But don't let Buzz know that he's been taking bribes from Zurg since the academy at this movie. He doesn't find out until some time after Warp fakes his death in the 2000 animated movie.
    • Commander Nebula
      • Although I won't be surprised if he's not a commander at the time of this movie.
    • LGMs
      • Little Green Men - three-eyed little creatures that keep Star Command running
      • Look like the aliens that say "Strangers from the outside." and "The claaaawwww!"


    Other than all that, can't wait to see it.

  • Create New...