GenJeFT

I know Kerbin is vastly more dense then it should be, but I was more concerned with the star then Kerbin. And besides, I was just pointing out that the system as it is would be impossible. Not throwing a hissy fit about it. It does not take away from the game at all for me.

Hi all. I have been doing research on life around M class stars and noted a few interesting things. The habitable zone for a M class star is VERY close to the star itself. So close in fact that the planet would orbit the star in around 9 days. Which would also make the planet tidally locked to the star much like earth\'s moon is tidally locked to earth. Which creates problems as there would not be a day/night cycle. Also, I discovered that the mass required for fusion is 0.08Sol. In the wiki it is noted that Kerbol is only as massive as 0.0088 solar masses which puts it outside the realm of class M stars and solidly in the realm of Brown dwarfs, or failed stars. So the Kerbol system as it is explained in the wiki is impossible. At minimum in order for Kerbin to be in the orbit its at and maintain liquid water Kerbol would have to be a K class star, not an M class, and have a solar mass of at least 0.6 solar masses.

Same, I was in a hurry as well. Mechjeb shows the stats even if you manually launched like I seem to have to do with most of my ships. Mechjeb just cant get them in orbit. But you do lose a lot of information if you do it manually. I guess I should be happy I can outfly the computer.

1. I launched that before I had mechjeb. 2. Mechjeb has such a little effect on the performance of the craft itself its acceptable.

MechJeb add on.

I\'m quite sure its not even possible. Without drop tanks I can barely manage 750km, with drop tanks I get around 1,500km. But that\'s cruising around 9,500m.

Finally, its like doing real science.

There we go.

I can get 12 of those things there. Not exactly the parts you requested but its got 6,000 kg of fuel left in completely untouched tanks. Sadly right after I took the screenshot I hit the wrong button and ended the flight... blasted. I used MechJeb to get it out there but its to bulky and heavy for MechJeb to manage the launch. I need to rebuild it using only the MechJeb command module instead of the standard command module but its an older ship. I think this broke the 10 part requirement... by a lot. That thing does have lander legs but as I mentioned before, I hit the wrong button and ended the flight.

While I realize that they all do the same job the effect they have does seem to stack. Each one seems to impart some force on the ship and that force does seem to add up. Going to test now.

If you want, I\'m going according to highest speed over ground (level flight). If its interestingly high I will add a dive category.

Not really. The Jets must breath air, that is an altitude limit in and of itself since even the turbojet quits at 18,000 to 19,000 meters. I did not say fastest speed using rockets (someone broke light speed), but fastest speed with jet engines. Those only work so high.

Here is the payload. Here is the lifter. These have been a bit modified since the pictures were taken and the payload is in orbit, and its broke. Time to try again. At least it serves as a nice intercept target.

Hi everyone. I am trying to lift a payload that is 82.5 tons into orbit using a new launcher design. Ive managed to lift this behemoth into space before using a different launcher but now with the changes the game performance drops to an unbearable situation (less then 1FPS on the pad). The old launcher with the payload weighed just over 400tons and the new launcher brings it down to about 310 tons but I am having problems with the way fuel is being consumed, by the time I can do the orbit burn I have fuel left but 1/3rd of my engines cant get to the fuel which prevents me from making an orbit. I think I have it fixxed but I have to go to a county meeting today and cant test it until Saturday. But it got me wondering. What was the heaviest payload anyone has managed to get into space using only stock parts? Anyone know, and screenshots if possible. By the way, the thing I am trying to lift is like a role-playing space station to practice in orbit intercepts with, it holds 11,000kg of rocket fuel and 3,750kg of RCS fuel. It has to finish the orbital burn using its own fuel at this point but when its done its got a LOT left over. I know its got a lot left over because the old launch system had almost no problems with it, but this new one does not work so well. If the test on Saturday goes wrong I just move on to plan B.

I think there is a way the system could support Lagrange like points. If the system only supports interaction with one gravitational body at a time its fairly simple to find a Lagrange like point. All you would have to do is find a point where the gravity of two bodies nearly cancels the other out and the spacecraft will keep rapidly switching between the two gravities creating a situation like a Lagrange point. Just an idea on how its possible.

ps there both the same plane. The new F-35.

My first long distance play for the 'around the world' challenge in the challenge part of the forum traveled 1,110,519m (or 1,110.5 km) using 1650kg of fuel and 2 engines. Every 1kg of fuel that was burned the aircraft traveled 673m. My next plane which got a bit further had 4 engines, traveled 1,177,964m (or 1,178 ish km) and carried 2,850kg of fuel traveled 413.32m per kg of fuel burned. Per engine for plane 1 worked out to 336.5 meters. Per engine for plane 2 works out to 103.33 meters. Cruise alt was around 9,500m since the challenge had a alt restriction of 10,000m. The first plane was not flown as well as the 2nd plane and I could probably do better. This is using the Turbojet engine. Making your aircraft larger and adding more fuel/engines to it really brings diminishing returns.

My entry into the race. I call it the LRA-1 and this was its first flight. A look from above and to the side. A look from behind and from the left. A view from below, after I dropped the first set of drop tanks. The second set of drop tanks after the drop. Third set of drop tanks are off. Whats a screenshot series without a sunset? Gliding? Whats gliding? ??? Thank god for plan B\'s. Distance achieved below. This plane flew for 1 hour, 8 minutes and 2 seconds. Max height was 9,842m with highest land speed was 379m/s and covered a total distance of 1,110,519m (1,110.5km). Ground distance covered was 1,103,601m (1,103.6km). No mods, only stock parts, not even that Mechjeb thing and on the first attempt. This gets me 3rd place! Yay! I think I could get this to go to 1,250km but with some modifications I should be able to nearly reach 2,000km with the basic design.

Yup. I made it from an image of the B-57A I found on wikipedia. It does not fly very well in KSP.

The most recent tests with my Turbojet aircraft. The engines cut out around 19,000 meters. That speed was once again done with the aircraft below.

No, I was in a shallow dive. But level flight was not all that slower. Also, once you get to a high speed its rather hard to maintain level flight because Kerbin is so small, at Mach 3.94 you cant maintain level flight since the ground curves under you so fast. You have to have constant down elevator.

Not the best but close.

Hi everyone. The challenge here is to get as fast as possible only using air breathing jet engines. I have done two tests with the basic jet engine and then the turbo jet engines. The basic jet engines peaked at about 310m/s or around 1,118kph, best speeds achieved between 6,000 and 7,250 meters. The turbo jet engine peaked at around 742m/s or around 2671.2 kph at around 15,000 to 16,000 meters. Lets see how fast you can get. Rules are. Only air breathing engines. Tell us the m/s you achieved (I can do the math for kph later if anyone is interested). Post a screenshot of the plane so others can try to replicate using the same plane. If you want to provide screenshots of the peak speed or video you can but not required. Edit, my conversions were way off. Placement so far. 1st place goes to khyron42 with a top speed of 959m/s 2nd place goes to G Addict with a top speed of 733m/s 3rd place goes to GenJeFT with a top speed of 722m/s 4th place goes to 0muffins0 with a top speed of 663m/s

Ive been playing Dwarf Fortress a lot recently. I fail to see how its difficult. Complicated yes, difficult, not really. Thanks. I have messed with that program before a little bit but I do most of my coding in Visual Basic (still C++ but with an interface I find easier to use right now).

I found one NAN error and I know exactly which piece of debrie it is. It slammed into the surface of Kerbal from orbit and somehow did not explode. I will remove it and see if that helps.