Jump to content

Yargnit

Members
  • Content Count

    252
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

157 Excellent

3 Followers

About Yargnit

  • Rank
    MechYarg

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. yeah, you have to throttle the torque manually once you hit target rpm. Also, if you can only his say 350 rpm at 100% torque, make sure you set your RPM limit to 350. you'll use less EC/fuel with the RPM limit set to 350 than 460, even if it takes max torque to reach the 350.
  2. They are basically the electric motors, just with their resource's changed from EC to LF/Air as far as the game in concerned. Really they'd fit equally in either category, but this makes them a bit easier to find because that tab is less crowded. The usage model has changed, you'll see higher peak usage in some cases, but other cases will see much less EC used. The current fuel use is correct per intended design. ReBut yes you are correct with the reference of 230 meaning the listed fuel usage in the editor is for 50% max RPM. This was never actually a working thing, it
  3. FYI The limit before Unity starts going haywire is 50 rad/s (just over 477rpm) The reason for this is because Kerbal runs physics at 50 'frames' per second, so this is the point where Unity crosses 1 rad/physics tick. As you cross this line Unity's ability to accurately calculate where the parts are in relation to each other rapidly breaks down. You can see this even approaching 51rad/s, and anything above that is almost certain to cause explosions. The limit of 460 for rotors is just a safer buffer again over-speeding causing it to cross this threshold.
  4. Glad you guys like it. I swear I just watched it fly for an hour because it was mesmerizing. Just seeing the shadow as it flaps is so cool. I obviously can't talk about things that haven't been revealed. What I can say is this barely scratches the surface of the potential of what things can be used for. This was a ~20 minute build that I designed in my head at work, and my first time trying some things. I can't wait to see the stuff that the community will come up with once everyone gets a chance to build with the new parts and learn off of each others advances. I've watched what ever
  5. Nice run, yeah landing is the hard part. How'd you got enough fuel for 3 Rapiers in a body that small? I'm going to have to take notes from your bowl turn, I thought mine was getting good, but yours is sick. My advise, take 5 extra seconds in the landing. Get a time in, then try to refine the landing to shave seconds. You're going to make me redesign now lol...
  6. A bit more time shaved off, down to 4:38 now. I landed a 4:32 but I was 5 meters off the island into the water... I think I need to delete my craft before I finally put my controller through my monitor in frustration one of these times...
  7. It's funny, I started out trying to skim as close as possible to 3000m or so for a while, but after probably 50 different trips in and out of the bowl I actually found that often my ~3500m runs were actually faster on the turn-around than the ones that just barely reached or even came just short of 3000m. The reason I determined is 2 fold. One, often times (such as in this run) when I notice I'm cutting it a bit close it means adjusting the flight a bit to add more height at the last minute, which takes significantly longer than just flying a few hundred meters higher in the 1st place. Also di
  8. Well I've crashed roughly half a dozen sub 4:45s, and a couple sub 4:35s times trying to land intact, but I finally got one down. This ones only a 4:48 thanks to a meh turn around and a bad landing, but at least it's very solidly in the sub 5 minute category. My game was starting to lag from so many reverts which threw off my timings a bit, but I was in such a groove with not crashing at least I forced myself to push through until I got a time. Sub 4:30 is very much possible with my plane. I nearly put down a 4:32 that still left some time on the track, but I dinged the nose a bit too hard on
  9. Really... you're going to make me stress myself for another 2 hours until I can do another run without crashing just to shave 2 seconds... Maybe later lmao. And RAPIERs being the best option for a speed run was never in question unless the course is so tight you 're averaging a bit below mach 2. RAIPERs produce more thrust than Whiplashes are capable of above mach 1.8 (like 630m/s) I literally have to be pulling max turnrate hard 90 degree corner to even briefly drop below that speed. And the RAPIER's continuing to put out higher thrust than the Whiplash is even capable of at optimal spe
  10. I guess it's time for me to throw the gauntlet down with the 1st sub 5 minute time... 4:59 from wheels off the ground to wheel stop! (Up at 3:02, stopped at 8:01) And the plane's still got some legs in her with better piloting as well. with more practice I could get below 4:45 with it no question. A perfect run maybe around 4:30 but that would be extremely difficult from a piloting/reaction time perspective. The engines/air-frame certainly have it in them though. Xbox controller was used, not that it appears to really matter from the relative times posted This is her
  11. Well, unfortunately my lift is a bust. The smart auto-struts keep the vessel itself from falling apart, but the actual hinge joints have way too much flex, and it does not approve of having a 30+ ton aircraft on it in the slightest
  12. Dude, works brilliantly! Didn't massively test it, but worked perfectly with an adjustable height docking birth for my carrier. Well done Only final thought would be possibly make it so if you connect the nodes in the VAB the rotation works even if the part it's attached to isn't actually a docking port. That's mostly just to save a bit of part count if I could attach the port directly to what I wanted to rotate as opposed to needing a matching port. (so I-beam > port > i-beam, instead of i-beam > port > port > i-beam) for example. Just a very small idea i thought I'd throw
  13. Sweet, with work I'm not sure I'll get a chance to test it for a couple days, but I'll try and see if I can jump on for a few minutes tonight and throw an adjustable arm on my carrier to give it a quick go. You rock
  14. I get that, and in an ideal world I 100% agree. I just think it's far better than not being able to work with auto-struts at all.
×
×
  • Create New...