Gryphorim
-
Posts
337 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Gryphorim
-
-
fantastic work, inspirational! Can't wait to try it out. Actually glad you are looking to weld a stock docking port, personally prefer the stock feel.
-
I like option 2, but I like how the NASA SEV has common windows (or at least, similar windows) to the existing cupola module.
-
This is impossible with stock games, you can achieve this with some mods.
Specifically Hooligan Labs lighter than air parts.
Lets you try one of these:
-
+1 do want to see these parts released. Also would like matching Mk2 hypersonic intake and RAPIER or aerospike engine.
-
I've asked this a lot on the forums of late, but would you consider making a docking port with flip-top nosecone-cover. Like the Dragon V2.
-
Thanks, i'll check SXT out. As for SABRE compatible, i meant having an air-breathing and a pure rocket mode. My reasoning being that from the look of Reaction Engines' cutaways of the SABRE prototype/mock-up, it uses traditional rocket nozzles and combustion chamber. Thus I figured it should be possible to make a SABRE aerospike.
-
Would you also consider a mk2 hull linear aerospike? Also would it be realistic/plausible to make it SABRE compatible?
-
Yeah, I know about the Laztek pack, but it isn't really "stock-alike." I used to run a long list of mods, but I've been trying to get down to no mods for when 1.0 drops.
The recent real-world use of the landing legs and steering vanes prompted me to try some kerbal recreations, but a 1st stage scale landing leg and a folding control surface or air-brake/drag fin feel like they are missing.
Besides, it could be some good PR for Squad given the recent back and forth banter between Squad and SpaceX.
-
Contents to include =
Aerodynamic landing legs of the style seen on the Falcon 9 v1.1
Fold out control surfaces/airbrakes
Propulsive Landing module or aerodynamic version of 24-77
Also maybe to include...
4-Kerbal command pod 2.5m base, 1.875m top, with matching 1.875m covered docking port
Multi-nozzle engine 2.5m. (I usually use widgets to stack 7 - 9 LV-45s, but a single part would be nice)
Also, I know Laztek pack covers all of this, but the aesthetic is real-world in that pack, what i'd like to see is a Kerbalised version of SpaceX's technology.
Final note: I realise I have requested 1 part at the 1.875m scale, and I know It's not a supported size at this time, but I believe it should be.
-
Oh man, do want those Mk2 parts. What sort of capability will the Intake and engine have? 2x Stock? 2.5x stock? more?
-
Does this update include the new 3.75m drive ring?
-
Is it possible to add a single seat hitchhiker pod that actually fits the 1.25m form factor? The landing pod is great and all, but is horrifically bloated for a single seat pod.
-
That looks amazing! 1.25m top port, 3.75m bottom?
-
I've just installed, but there's way too much cloud, and it's tiling in places. How can i adjust the settings for this pack?
-
I am having an issue getting RO to install using CKAN puffy planet. It downloads the required mods, then begins to list the mods it's installing, then just says it's done, and nothing is installed! I've tried rolling back to the last stable version of CKAN, but it wouldn't even boot up. I then rerolled to puffy planet and tried to install one-by-one, and for some reason cannot get FAR to install, is this a clue, or the same bug? How do I get it to work?
FYI, I am using a clean install, moved away from my steam install, with the CKAN install path updated to suit.
-
1 million meters, yeah. It's pretty concievable that a drive like this, that uses what is effectively a gravitational shear point to decouple the inside of the bubble from the universe around it, would be awful sensitive to local gravity wells.
Also, for balance reasons.
Edit: Corrected by OP
-
RoverDude, If you are making a 3.75m version, could it be omitting the "Star Trek" style nacelles that you've fitted to the 2.5m version. That way it naturally fit with the IXS parts, without needing to be an overt tie-in.
Also as an idea, is it possible to have floating diffuse light sources just outside the bubble, but lacking mesh entities of their own, that cast light on the ship within, one at the "front" vortex, and one at the "rear" vortex. Both cast very dim white light at 0% throttle, but as you progress to 100% throttle they saturate to blue at the front and red at the rear.
-
won't work at any less than 1000 km for Kerbin, man.
I think it's technically something like 3 times whatever the local planetary radius is, but it's still pretty damn close to 1000 kilometers for kerbin.
-
Oh man that pod looks good! 1.25m top and 1.875m bottom? I'd love to see a 1.875 top and 2.5m bottom, 4 man capsule with a Dragon-2-meets-Mk1-2 aesthetic. With matching hollow nosecone with opening animation, that con be placed around the standard 1.25m docking port.
-
Any chance you could update the Science lab with some interior lights? Also, any chance you could put together a 1.25m engine, about as long and heavy as the LV-N, but with a max thrust of about 400-ish. A heavy-duty 1st stage engine for the 1.25m size is something I think this game truly needs.
-
Because the US have been exaggerating about their 'Advanced' plane.
If you compare stats, the F-35 would be useless. It can only carry 4 Sidewinders without losing stealth. It's slower than my grandma, and it would risk crashing if the engine failed. at least 2-engined planes would stil be able to land safely if one engine failed.
4 Sidewinders, 4 kills. With the integral sensor-fusion, as well as superior target lock angle, maneuverability is of limited importance, besides the people I've spoken to, who've actually flown the few that exist, they maneuver just fine, thanks. Minimal weapons bay is true enough, if you have to maintain stealth. Stealth loses most of it's relevance once you own the sky, so it only needs to be maintained for 1st strike ops. After that, adapt to a larger payload for freer engagement of enemy targets. Besides, as a multi-role aircraft, it leaves the role of dedicated Air-to-Air to the specialists.
Straight-line speed is militarily irrelevant. Back in the 80's it was possible to be pinged on enemy radar, and if you were fast enough, hit your target before a response could be mustered. Now, sensor ranges are so great, that unless you can hit mach-5, you will be engaged on approach. As such, flat-out speed, at least much past around mach 1.5 is unneccesary, unless you are an interceptor, and even then, modern sensors, warning, take your time to get in position ahead of your enemy.
F-35 carries a significantly higher internal fuel/weapon load than any 4/4.5 gen fighter, so it does not have to suffer the parasitic losses associated with under-wing stores.
I completely agree with the 1 engine failure risk though. Pilots I've spoken to have said even in a twin-engine they'd bail if they completely lost an engine, though. I dunno, I'd wanna get the plane home, though.
-
I really like the look of the ARIE engine and intake. I was hoping a version of these that fits the Mk2 form factor would be released in this patch, maybe 1.5?
-
Out of curiosity, are you taking off under Air-breathing or Closed-Cycle mode? IIRC, Skylon is planned to use closed-cycle power to take off, the switch to air-breathing for the bulk of it's in-atmo run-up to mach 5-6.
-
Porkjet, will .91 or the like include updates to the dated nose cone parts, namely, the one that's half covered in heat-tiles & the matching cap?
Or updates to the radial liquid engine? (the big one)
Also, will we be seeing bigger air-breathing/RAPIER type engines (and intakes) to help lift these larger shuttle-bodies? If yes, can you say Mk2 or 2.5m?
Finally, will your work on centrifuges and inflatable habitats be included in stock, or returned to as a mod? (Still hanging out for the 2.5m centrifuge!)
[WIP] Modular Rover Parts (RV-X)
in KSP1 Mod Development
Posted
Looks pretty good! "Cheek" windows look a little awkward, but other than that, fantastic.