Jump to content

zarakon

Members
  • Posts

    905
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by zarakon

  1. When waiting for planetary alignments or going to Jool/Eeloo, even 100000x warp feels too slow, and can require waiting 10+ minutes doing nothing. Can we get a higher speed of 500000x or 1000000x?
  2. * Fix for vessel on the Launch pad at Baikerbanur (KSC 2) blocking ability to launch vessels from the KSC. Wait, what? 1. KSC2 has an official name now? 2. You can launch from there somehow?
  3. I think it would be worth experimenting with thrusting in different directions. I suspect that in Sharpy's experiment, he was thrusting forward and losing some efficiency from wobble at 4x physics warp, since EVA kerbals will waste some fuel trying to stay aligned with the camera while going forward. Thrusting UP instead would probably give a cleaner result
  4. you should still be able to fix that by right clicking the docking port and doing an undock or decouple also when building, you can attach things directly by docking ports without the need for decouplers or separators at all
  5. Screenshot? If it's on a docking port, you can right click the docking port and decouple
  6. Speaking of which, what's the best/simplest mod for that? Assume that I know nothing at all about mods, other than I think they go into the GameData folder
  7. Setting something as a target so that it shows up on the navball is helpful for the final approach
  8. High TWR results in less gravity loss, but the amount of delta-v you can gain by adding more fuel is greater (as long as TWR doesn't get too low)
  9. If I had to rebalance just one area of the game, it would probably be the mass of the large crew capsules. I feel like they should be MORE mass efficient, not less.
  10. Found it in a thread on a totally unrelated message board I used to browse. It was probably something like "See if you can reach orbit in this neat rocket sim", which was pretty much the only objective there was at the time in 0.8.x
  11. Looks like some more testing is needed to find out the differences then
  12. The actual mission probe that I lost was a HECS mounted directly behind the heat shield. I also experimented with a Stayputnik which had a round battery and small reaction wheel in between. It seemed to last a little longer but still died Hm, cool idea. Do you know if that would satisfy the contracts that ask you to return a vessel to Kerbin from a destination?
  13. If you're planning on returning some science to the surface using a probe in career mode, be aware that the 0.625 heat shield won't do you much good with the early probe cores. The OKTO, HECS, and Stayputnik are all too wide for it, so they'll stick out into the airstream and go poof. I think it's fine for the QBE and OKTO2, but those are from a later tech node.
  14. Well, that's easy enough to solve with a rocket. Either make an ICBM to rach halfway around the world (preferable because of the long travel time), or use airbreathers to get close, then fire the rocket for a zoom climb. Panthers can get you to 18km anyway at least in a zoom climb, so you must be talking before panthers, and I wouldn't want to go halfway around the world using a juno or turbofans... so this contract screams suborbital rocket to me... Put a LF rocket on top of a SRB, and use the LFO rocket to fine tune your trajectory. Two problems with that: 1. If the best way to complete contracts that are nominally designed for planes is to use rockets instead, that's.. basically what I'm complaining about. 2. It's "easy" in theory, but kind of a pain to actually do and not at all practical, especially since taking measurements from 3 zones would then usually require 2 or 3 different trajectories. If you could use an actual airplane and do it for just the cost of fuel, it's worth it, but if you have to use rockets anyway you're better off doing more lucrative satellite or rescue contracts instead.
  15. My biggest issue with planes in career mode is that the contract requirements are all out of whack compared to what your available airplane tech is actually capable of. Oh, I see you just unlocked the first aviation node! Now you can go take some samples from above 18km halfway around the planet, right?
  16. In the main Settings -> General tab: "Orbital Drift Compensation" "Ease in Gravity" Just updated to 1.2, and I don't recall seeing these before. What do they do? I can't find anything in the release notes
  17. From 0.8.5: And a couple days later...
  18. AoA 5.874 degrees in the first screenshot, 7.004 in second
  19. Please, yes! Tweakable Reaction Wheel Torque When using small cheap probes in career mode, even the smallest reaction wheel provides way too much torque. It would be great to be able to tune them down a bit.
  20. I'm gonna say that you were just getting a bit lucky before.
  21. Tried it katateochi's way, and it worked for me too
  22. It's flawed because by the mention of "first landing gear" this thread is most likely about career or science mode, where the landing gear in question is in a tier 4 research node. The chair is in a tier 7 node, which means it's irrelevant to the discussion of low-tech issues.
  23. My first thought for it not moving is the same as what bzimac said - you likely have something blocking the exhaust. On mine I actually used the rotation gizmo to turn the tail connector up a notch, which puts all the tail fins above the center line of the plane. I don't use any of the elevon parts on it. All three of the tail fins are the control surface type craft file: https://www.dropbox.com/s/jia9b3nkrxcsp44/Biplane%201.craft?dl=0
  24. Here are a few planes that I built using only the first tier of aircraft parts: The biplane is the easiest to use by far One trick is to drain some or even most of the fuel. With jet engines you can go pretty far without much, and reducing the weight makes it a lot easier to fly, especially at liftoff and landing
  25. 100% agree The level 1 runway could be just like the island runway, short and dirt-looking, but still flat.
×
×
  • Create New...