Jump to content

18Watt

Moderator
  • Posts

    728
  • Joined

Reputation

608 Excellent

4 Followers

Profile Information

  • About me
    Macho Business Donkey Wrestler

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. In your last example, your blades were facing the wrong way. This isn't always required, and not required at all in a single-engine design. Just need to make sure the blades are facing the correct direction for the rotation of the motor. This becomes critical when using twin-rotor designs. The COM (center of mass) and COL(center of lift) markers in the SPH should be taken with a large grain of salt. Just because the markers look like they should in the SPH does not mean they are OK!! You need to do some flight testing to determine if they are in the correct location. That is a whole different subject. Amen brother! Yes. All the BG props and engines are overpowered, For a light aircraft, you don't need the big stuff. Keep working at it! It's worth it! 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.
  2. Well, I am laughing right now at @Echo__3! I was going to link his tutorial in this thread. But he has already done that! One of the most important points in @Echo__3's excellent video is to reduce rotor size as much as possible. I can't emphasize that enough. Reduce the rotor size! A common question I hear is that in real life, there are lots of single-engine planes, and they work just fine! Why is torque so difficult to work with in KSP? There's a few answers to that: Rotor engines in KSP produce orders of magnitude more torque than their real-world counterparts. Real-world aircraft have subtle aerodynamic elements designed to help counteract torque. In the real world, excess torque would result in excess RPM. In KSP, the RPMs stop at 460, but the excess torque is still present. Beyond 460 r.p.m. you are wasting fuel, AND generating excess torque which is doing you no good. The answer is to control your torque. You don't need as much torque as the engines can provide, so reduce their size and output in the SPH. Also, monitor your RPMs. If you are at or near 460 RPM, it's almost certain that you have excess torque which is doing you no good at all, and is in fact generating excess torque which will make a single-engine plane very difficult to control. Start small and simple! Make a simple plane work first, before jumping into supersonic propeller airplanes. (Yes, that is possible in both KSP and in the real world too..). I'm considering writing a propeller tutorial. However, the video by @Echo__3 is excellent, I don't think I can improve on that. Edit: BTW, @Echo__3's video can be found in the tutorials section here:
  3. Here’s what works for me: Open the KSP folder in a finder window. Locate the KSP app. This is the file you click on to run, and has a Kerbal icon next to it. Drag that app file to the desktop, and drop it on the desktop. Next, drag the file from the desktop back to the folder where KSP is located. (Right back to where you found it..) Double click the app, it should start just fine now. You only need to do that the first time you run a new download of KSP, after doing that procedure once you won’t need to do it again. I have no idea why this works.
  4. 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. You do not need the KAL controller to make propellers work. I never use KALs on propellers or engines. If your first plane accelerated well down the runway, but crashed after takeoff, you are likely having aircraft design or aerodynamic problems. Also, working with single propeller designs in KSP is extremely difficult. The reason for this is the ridiculous amount of torque that the KSP engines produce. The torque effects are extremely difficult to overcome. One easy way to counter torque effects is to use two counter-rotating engines.
  5. I got pretty close, but my save files all went bust shortly before I was able to finish the challenge.
  6. Well, this could be my last entry for this challenge. Not because I've completed the challenge (I haven't), but all my existing saves have gone kaput, and will no longer load. At all. Anyway, I got pretty close, and am confident I can complete the challenge. Here's some screenies up until my game saves all went kaput: Some more science: Anyway, that's as far as I got. All my existing saves are shot, and no longer load. I might make another attempt at this challenge, there's a few things I might do different.
  7. Here's another update. I'm getting close to finishing the tech tree! Off to Minmus we go!
  8. Still chugging along. Kind of an odd question for @Scarecrow71: I took a few contracts for deployed science, including ones for seismometer on Minmus and Mun. To complete those contracts, you need to crash something into the planet. So I'm thinking technically I could send a probe up to do exactly that, with no extra contract needed. In the end, I managed to get other contracts to both those bodies, and was able to drop boosters near the seismometers while acting on other active contracts. However, I'm wondering if I end up setting up a seismometer on say Ike, and then never get any more contracts going to Ike. I'm thinking it would be acceptable to just send a probe to Ike for the sole purpose of setting off the seismometer.
  9. Here's the next update. I'm doing a lot of things I normally avoid for this challenge. Part two: Right now I have a contract to put a satellite around Gilly. That won't get me any science, but I'm hoping after visiting Gilly I'll start getting contracts for science at other CBs. One or two more science contracts on the surface of Minmus should get me pretty close to completing the tech tree.
  10. Moved thread to Gameplay Questions. As far as I know, stock KSP is not normally able to generate trajectories which depart Kerbol's SOI (Sphere of Influence). At very great distances from Kerbol the game likely does some strange things. Destruction of your craft might be one of those strange things. Welcome to the KSP forums, @Andrew the Astronaut!
  11. I'd land that on the side of a hill. What could go wrong? Well, at least they don't complain as much... That's a big hurdle in any Career save!
  12. A related thread has been merged with this one.
  13. Hoo Boy! Got a lot accomplished. Bear with me on these, I'll probably forget what some of the screenshots are supposed to show. Here we go. Mission to Mun. Ok, let's see what's next: Off to find 'Green Sandstone'. I think I have everything I need to drop off some surface deployed experiments on Minmus and Mun. That's probably coming up next.
  14. Next batch of missions is ready to report. After enrolling in the Admin strategy Unpaid Research Program, things began to progress well. I had a few mishaps of course. A few more missions. I kinda wish I hadn't enrolled in the Admin strategy now. It helped me get past a hump where I was stuck, but I now have enough tech to finish the tech tree without leaving Kerbin/Mun/Minmus if I want. This is very much long-range planning, but I do have an idea to unlock the last 3 nodes of the tech tree. A few days ago, I finally started practicing using the rovermax probe core to locate anomalies. There's one on Kerbin, Minmus, and Mun which will unlock a tech node each. So that's one possible strategy towards the end of the challenge. I have a long way to go yet though.
×
×
  • Create New...