Jump to content

Rhomphaia

Members
  • Posts

    789
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Rhomphaia

  1. When you launch into an orbit around the sun and then Hohmann transfer to your target, you are not really saving any time. You are just waiting for your rocket to get to the appropriate position for its burn around the sun rather than waiting for the planet you are leaving to do the same.
  2. What you are missing is the rest of the rocket the engine is attached to. How much of it is dead weight for the rocket to lift and how much is Propellant for the rocket to burn. This, coupled with the ISP of the engine is what determines the DeltaV. For an upper stage (handles final orbital insertion, and then can go in to perform orbital manuvers) you want the option that gives the most DeltaV, but for a pure ascent stage you want the option that gives enough deltaV while still providing enough thrust. SInce you are using this engine to send you to the Mun it falls more into the upper stage category rather than what I would consider a middle stage from a lifter perspective For a middle stage of a lifer this will depend on the performance of the first stage too. but in KSP I rarely bother with middle stages on my lifters unless I am trying to make a historical replica. Roughly building based on the numbers you gave in the earlier post, either engine will be more than enough for a Mun trip, but the poodle would be my choice out of those two, especially if you plan to reuse this design to go further. From the design of the first stage the upper stage doesn't have to do any actual lifting (the skipper/pollux combo makes orbit without it). It is cheaper than the Bobcat also.
  3. Well you have cropped out the relevant info from your picture, but my guess would be out of electricity.
  4. Rapiers have poor performance at subsonic speeds. you are going to want to build up speed in level flight at low altitudes, don't start climbing until you get over 400m/s
  5. Sounds like this bug could be the culprit https://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/24855 there is a possible fix listed in the discussion
  6. If you leave the docking ports of your station aligned along Normal/Antinormal, then they will stay aligned that way. Then you don't need to spin your station or use any mods to align for docking, just point the active craft in the appropriate direction.
  7. IIRC, rescuing does increase the cost of new hires, but since rescues are plentiful, and can allow you to surpass the roster limit of the astronaut complex, I haven't hired a Kerbal in forever.
  8. Well, I woke up today in more of a building mood than a flying one Not sure which to use now.
  9. Do you have any pics, or a craft file, Its hard to see where you could be going wrong otherwise. You can use the move and rotate widgets to fine tune after you place the ports, RCSBuildaid updates the torque as you do. I would suggest rotating the ports first to ensure they are only firing along the axis you want, then use the move widget to fine tune there position
  10. For everyone else making Dynetics style. remember to check your symmetry when attaching to the launch vehicle. Was zoomed in too far to notice, then wondered why I wasn't going anywhere when i staged. My lander has gone through a few minor changes, but is ready to go. Could I get some clarification as to what is considered a High Mun orbit.
  11. Yep. Edit, with a new pic, Lander is complete, will build a launcher, and fly mission later.
  12. Use the linear RCS ports instead of the thruster blocks. that way you only have to worry about one axis at a time when you place them. You can also use single ports to balance out a thruster block setup. adjusting the thrust limiter on the ports can also help balance them out if you cant balance with placement alone.
  13. Well, its been 5 years since I submitted to the K-Prize. Should I reclaim my Advanced pilot precision award by showcasing my successful mission rescuing Jeb and Bill from an earlier disastrous test flight, featuring a Docking and runway landing... ...Or should I come crashing through the gates, riding a wave of nostalgia straight to the hall of shame and showcase a more successful test flight of the craft that left Jeb and Bill stranded in orbit in the fist place. Lets go with option 2 This looks Kind of Familiar Album, below but if you recognize the wing shape, you probably don't need to look at the staging to see where this is going...
  14. No worries. Today In KSP, I also had a landing gear issue, but with the front gear instead, when it came down, it bounced me hard straight into a tailstrike. The Craft was designed as a K-prize gatecrasher anyway, so I guess now it is just doubly so.
  15. Yep, Moho be like that. Same thing happened to me first time I tried it, second time I thought I would pack plenty of DeltaV, but then forgot TWR, nearly escaped Moho before I could even make the capture burn. Good luck.
  16. Sure. in the settings menu there is a radio button to enable/disable advanced tweakables. You can find it in the general tab if you use main menu settings, or if you access setiings from the escape menu then scroll down to the gameplay section.
  17. Today it is orbital. After rejecting out of hand the idea of switching the Whiplashes out for rapiers, I decided that the perfect tool for the job was the oft overlooked Thud Of course with only one of them, firing through the COM but not along the control Axis, insertion requires a bit of guesswork. Maybe i should have gone with 5 Twitches and 2 Sparks instead.
  18. If you right click in the VAB/Hanger or in flight there should be a button "Spring/damper: auto" clicking this sets it to override and allows you to tweak the setting with sliders. May need advanced tweakables to access
  19. So it is something like the old bug still? but now only affects SAS. Generally hold target is my least used SAS mode.My preferred dockin method is to ensure targets docking ports are aligned Normal or AntiNormal to orbit, then when I approach I set SAS to hold the opposite, and translate into position.
  20. Bingo, Although I was actually referring to some of the other craft I found when I said Spaceplane, this one is only as much a spaceplane as the X-15 or Spaceship one, certainly not orbital. The main issue was that back when I first built this resource flow priority was very different. When you ran out of air, asymmetric flameout was guaranteed. also no velocity curves for the engines so it would be violent. Back in the old days, you could never have too many intakes. Time was a small enough plane with enough intakes, and your pilot could eva and push the thing to cicularize. I pulled a bunch of them off this.
  21. Yeah, I've noticed that too, seems like this could be the culprit for the OPs case, the bug I mentioned was pretty old and mostly fixed by 1.4 and the enhanced edition is more recent than that. Funny thing is I don't remember the prograde/retrograde markers being an issue in older versions. one bug squashed, another one rears it's ugly head.
  22. If you tilt the craft slightly in the VAB then the lift marker should go where it is supposed to. Since airfoils in ksp are symmetrical the will provide no lift without incidence and the VAB is assuming that your craft is parralel to the airflow, pitching it up or down a bit will give the marker something to work with.
  23. It used to be that if you tried to "control from here" on a surface attached docking port. rather than aligning the control axes to those of the port, the game would draw a line from the COM of the root part to the port and align the axes to that instead. Over time updates to how the game handles roots, parents and control points have mitigated the bug, So i have not been able to replicate it on PC current version, but i recall it still being an issue for edge cases back in 2018. not sure how far behind the console ports are. Some Screenshots would help.
×
×
  • Create New...