Krazy1

Members
  • Content Count

    82
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

42 Excellent

About Krazy1

  • Rank
    Rocketry Enthusiast

Profile Information

  • Location Array

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I believe it was 8 deg. The idea was to keep the fuselage level and maximize altitude. This does reduce fuel consumption while also reducing the speed, but the speed loss was less than the fuel rate reduction. I was assuming high AoA was better because the L-I-D was still small compared to the total drag. And I was assuming nearly all of the total drag minus L-I-D was due to the fuselage. Anyway, you're both telling me to stick with 5 deg. so I'll try that. Maybe add a third set of wings like @swjr-swis suggested... might help.
  2. Huh... strange. Maybe my drag is messed up from rerooting? I have higher AoA on the wings to get the fuselage level at a higher altitude. There's a big difference somewhere though. I posted the model I used: https://kerbalx.com/Krazy1/Rapier-biplane2 I'll try to fly it again at lower altitude to compare and update later. Thanks
  3. Not in this case. These pics were taken a few seconds apart. The camera didn't move, stars didn't move, planet didn't rotate (visibly). Moho rotates very slowly. I ran Win10 memory test, SSD test, Win10 "sfc /scannow", all OK. Steam always finds at least 1 KSP local file that it claims fails integrity check and redownloads it. I played it again yesterday and it worked no problem. Idunno.
  4. @katateochiI agree but there is a better workaround: open the "edit action groups" window and close it. That closes the science window.
  5. Me too...permanently. It did it over and over. Screenshots: https://imgur.com/a/mt8umBS
  6. I think you're correct. I did not see the first line about v1.10 either originally.
  7. I'm having similar problems but it's getting worse as I add more craft in my savegame. Every time a craft crosses into a new SOI, the orbit changes. Worst case, in a polar orbit at Moho, I warped from 1x to 5x and the ascending node jumped about 15 degrees east/ west every time I warped or stopped warping. Yep. I still can't bring myself to pay for the DLC.
  8. Like it says, I saw a red stack overflow error in map view while manipulating a maneuver node outside Duna SOI while looking at Duna. Surprisingly it did not immediately crash. I played a few more seconds and got a second stack overflow then it did freeze and crash. PC still working normally after KSP was closed. Craft selected was "Citadel" outside Duna SOI which has 700+ parts and gets constant yellow clock. I've never seen a stack overflow error before, but I have been ignoring some other errors (from mods I believe) just hoping they were not critical. I am using MemGraph, which does affect memory but I've used that for several sessions. https://www.dropbox.com/s/rmn38j75febnp9w/Player - Copy.log?dl=0
  9. @swjr-swis Sorry to have to do this... but you mentioned in a prior post that you're using KSP 1.3.1 and your Imgur post title also says this. This clearly violates rule #1 to use 1.10.something. Perhaps @zolotiyeruki can invoke Smokey Yunick... somehow? May I be banished to Eeloo for outing the guy that tried to help me.
  10. @linuxgurugamer Curious why so much air intake? It seems 2 shock cones would be plenty for 6 RAPIERS.
  11. @swjr-swis Thanks for trying to help here but it seems that the dramatic change in speed could not be explained between the small changes you suggest. You managed to go over 1700 ms/ and I definitely could not go over 1600 m/s. You were a few thousand m lower but still doesn't seem to explain it. Plus your fuel burn rate is lower too. I'm thinking the difference between KSP 1.3 and 1.10 are very significant or perhaps I'm still having trouble with re-root causing drag to increase due to a bug. I don't follow the autopilot comment, at least while flying at cruise altitude, manual flying requires constant small corrections which are less efficient. I flew the climb and descent manually - certainly could be room for improvement but it wasn't terrible. My CoM shift was nearly zero. I'll try give it another go later, maybe this weekend. I'm trying to manage my first career game with 15 contracts and orbits that were jumping all over - I wish this game wasn't so buggy. And plus I feel like garbage from a medical condition and breathing smoke for a week in OR. Anyway...
  12. I'm back with a new plane for Voyager without changing fuel this time (Simple Fuel Switch was not allowed). It didn't fly quite as well as the first one but I'm happy with it. 8 laps complete in under a day (6 hours). I used RAPIERs at high altitude. Full Imgur post with photos and captions: https://imgur.com/a/fYczkIo
  13. Kind words from the committee. But I appeal for Onyx Eyes as well for tech level <=4 parts.
  14. My second entry for committee consideration. Ship: Goo for Two 2 crew, goo (surprised?) and tech level 4 Initial cost: 9916 Recovered >5000 Net 4916 Although throttle was used this time, dubious safety was maintained: the second stage was initially losing speed. Observed goo while "in space high". Full gallery with captions HERE
  15. So that's what I used... I'm confused. I changed the "ellipse parameters" from AU to meters and it says: Semi-major axis 676,768 m Semi-minor axis 676,734 m Eccentricity 0.01 That's a 34 m difference - very narrow margin. But below under Orbital Parameters it gives periapsis: 670 km, apoapsis: 683.535 km So maybe it has something to do with the ellipse center vs. it's focus? Or the app is wrong?