• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

About IronMaiden

  • Rank
    Bottle Rocketeer
  1. I'm all for new parts However, moving it down one node would put it on the same tier as the Whiplash, which would severely devalue it. If there's any one part in the game deserving of the highest tier, 1000 science node, it's the RAPIER. It combines incredible versatility with far superior atmospheric performance. It single-handedly makes one of the more difficult destinations in the game, Laythe, a joke. Yeah you can make a rocket that will get the same size payload to orbit quicker and easier, but you get into making SSTOs for a reason, the coolness, the reusability, the efficiency, etc. Payload fraction matters if you want it to matter, since you talked about saving mass in your original comment I assumed it mattered to you as well. Traditional rockets can't hold a candle to cargo space planes when it comes to saving mass. Yeah, the only reason you're using Whiplashes in the first place is because they're better than RAPIERs at low speeds, so why not use the best low speed engine? I came to that conclusion when building this SSTO, good luck and have fun with your own experiments!
  2. The advantages of spaceplanes are mainly the reusability and payload fraction. A plane powered by Whiplashes or even Panthers will still easily have a higher payload fraction than a traditional rocket. Number of engines doesn't really matter, it's all a ratio. If you're using 13+ RAPIERs then you've got a space plane that's 450+ tons, over half of which can be payload. To send a similar payload to orbit with conventional rocket engines your vehicle will be pushing 900 tons, so you're saving a lot of mass. Whiplashes don't really augment RAPIERs all that well, Panthers have much better TWR at mach 0 and better drag characteristics. It doesn't matter if they flame out earlier than the whiplashes, because at that point the RAPIERs are in beast mode. The most demanding part of an SSTO launch is getting it off the ground and supersonic, once you've made it over that hump a single RAPIER will very comfortably push 45-50tons past mach 5 at an Isp of 3200s, Whiplashes don't really add anything here. RAPIERs are already one of if not the best engine in the game. It's upper atmospheric performance is unrivaled, and the basically free built in rocket engine (no matter its faults) is the cherry on top. Making it more accessible, higher powered, better closed cycle efficiency, etc would devalue many other engines. It's in a fine spot as is.
  3. I made a functional swashplate as soon as the DLC dropped. I can confirm that gyroscopic precession is not accurately modeled when the force is aerodynamic lift. It is accurately modeled when the force is thrust from an engine though. I haven't been able to use the new blades yet but I assume they'll behave the same as the blades I used in that helicopter.
  4. I've found the optimal mass to be 30-35t per RAPIER depending on the design, more mass would require substantially more liquid fuel during the open cycle ascent phase, with the maximum mass around 50t per RAPIER, but by then it's way past the point where it's more efficient to have 2 RAPIERs.
  5. I too love RTS games, but prefer the faster pace of the command and conquer series than starcraft, esepcially RA2 and Gens/ZH. I played the hell out of zero hour during undergrad and my grades might have suffered I'm game for a chess match though, what do you use to play?
  6. The new mk2 landing can service bay doors also have less drag when in the process of opening or closing.
  7. Shrouds don't prevent drag on the part inside. AFAIK they do act to occlude the entire flat surface of their equally sized child part, but that's not the problem here. The drag caused by the new variants is applied to the engine itself and the parent part. It is a vacuum optimized engine, however, once you get above 12km it has a very respectable Isp and by 20km it's practically at peak efficiency. I enjoy using them in ultra-low tech SSTOs in the early game and the new variants make this virtually impossible due to the massive increase in drag. Unless you have the new terrier in a fairing or service bay you're losing significant thrust overcoming the new drag, the old terrier model (and I suspect poodle, aside from the newfound roll authority, and spark as well) is superior in every way, which is pretty disappointing
  8. Terrier Comparison At subsonic speeds the "bare" variant (far right) has drag penalty vs old (mid right), "shroud" variant (mid left) and "truss" variant (far left). All the new variants do not completely occlude the 1.25m parent part, so the fuel tanks have additional drag. In the bare variant this can be overcome by node duplication and attaching a part that does completely occlude the tank (e.g. nose cone), but this does not help the truss or shroud variants. It really sucks losing a true 1.25m engine, I don't understand the purpose of the different variants. They look great but that should come second to gameplay. Intuitively, a 1.25m part should completely occlude the flat portion its attached to and why would we use the bare variant when the drag is so high?
  9. If you have making history I don't think there is ever a use for the poodle. Unless you're landing on a surface, the nuke is always better. If you are landing on a surface the skiff, being .75t lighter and having 50kN more thrust can lift far more, and if you need the range such that poodle's better Isp makes it better than the skiff, then the wolfhound is better.
  10. Ok, I'm dumb, I read that as those mods were dependent on this one for some reason I installed both of those and it's working perfectly, thanks!
  11. I'm having trouble getting this to work. I downloaded from the link provided, moved the RCSBuildAid folder into the KSP GameData folder like I have with KER and KAC (which both work fine), but when I go into the VAB or SPH nothing from the mod shows up. When I first loaded the game after installing it asked me if I want to keep RCSbuildaid updated automatically so I assume everything is in the right place, I've got and making history 1.5.1. I tried both the most recent version and version