Collin Dow

Oh, thanks! I'll get that installed asap.

So I've got a weird problem with this mod; every time I launch a new mission, an icon appears and persists in the top right. http://imgur.com/ZMCUHn5 I really like the idea of this mod, I rather dislike having a billion damn red and green antenna icons.

Way I see it, Kerbals don't eat, or drink, or excrete. So why should they care if they're a little cramped for years on end? Hell, with how good I am at interplanetary work, they're like as not going to end up drifting in IP space for all of eternity regardless. That or they'll crash into Duna, because, someday, I will land something will only parachutes!

Hell, the TWRs of the previous stock parts were really low compared to what we have in real life. The F1 still has the new parts beat for lift/engine weight...although we have much better ISP, which is nice.

A good way to estimate twr is to open the map, and then hit the "I" for info, and check your mass. Then, recall what the thrust in kN is on your vehicle. Divide the thrust by the mass. In null g, that is twr. You have to multiply mass by gravity. However, for killing horizontal speed over the mun, that isn't important. Fun fact, in null g that formula will also approximate your accelerative ability. Thrust (kN)/mass (t)*grav(m/s2)

I do my duna aerobrakes at approx 20km, tending to favor a little lower than a little higher. I also like to abuse airbrakes for my aerocaptures, because I'm a bad person. Like fed said, changing inclination is best done from as far from the celestial body in question as possible. So once you're captured, burn your apoapsis to some really large number, and burn normal/anti-normal at that point to change inclination. You will likely be best off doing this over the course of multiple orbits. Once you are equatorial, just circularize as usual.

The air thing makes sense. Unfortunately, this beast refuses to speed up while low...engineering time!

Damn, those are some impressive ships, and a fun and interesting write-up!

I've got an imgur link in the main post. The rapiers are on opposite sides of the ship, and I'm too bad at this game for deadly reentry! I managed to push myself up to about 1600m/s before I was forced to switch to closed cycle (where the heat completely disappears, unless you switch back to air-breathing) and actually made a stable orbit, with literally 0 OX left. So I guess the design is feasible even with the heat issues, if one is super careful about managing thrust and altitude. Still...I'm going to keep screwing with the design, see if I can find the issue. E: I broke into orbit with the rapiers on the very verge of explosion. When I came back to the world, they flipped to air-breathing and immediately exploded upon application of thrust. Darnit.

So I've got a decently workable SSTO. (Hell is likely freezing over as I type this.) However, it has a small problem...about 30km up, just before the switch from air to closed cycle, they explode from overheating. From about 20km up, they start to overheat, regardless of where I put the throttle. http://imgur.com/HKTRm1b My theory at present is that the presence of air intakes overlapping the engines must be causing it. However, I was under the impression that having things surrounded by parts didn't actually increase heat retention, and the intakes are not directly attached to the rapiers. I'm in the middle of a flight now with the air intakes that overlapped the engine removed, and the heating problem is still present, and in full force. I await the answer that points out the little thing I miss that makes me feel like a dummy. Thanks! Collin

Yeah, if you stage your chute in space it will open as soon as it hits 500m or whatever altitude you choose. But you can't repack or anything, because it hasn't actually popped.

I've been entertaining myself lately with designing the largest IP boat I can reasonably run on one 3.75m nuclear-thermal engine with an upgraded 3.75m reactor and generator, from KSP interstellar, while doing it with only one launch (no orbital assembly.) The current paper plan is an approximately 300t payload to LKO, where the approximately 3000kN of the nuke-therm will take over, with an ISP of 1800.

Crap, I missed the subtract sign! Thanks, I used the page on the rocket equation pretty extensively when I first started KSP...not that it helped much, as math impaired as I am. Yeah, I figured the 9.82 was m/s2, that was why I was curious if it was specific to kerbin, since that ~is Kerbin's gravity. But it makes sense, when I think about it. I'm finally getting reasonable results, hooray, thanks a bundle!

The formula, 9.82*Isp*Ln(M/(0.005(LF+O)) gave me a really weird number, until I realized I was just using LF in the equation. Herp. But I have a question, does this equation apply for calculating null-g dV? Because I ran the numbers for my KSP Interstellar IP boat, and it reports a dV of ~5.5km/s. However, in practice it is getting much less than that, as in getting to Duna, aerobraking hard, circularizing, and not having the fuel to get hom. To my recollection, only about 2km/s is required to reach and return from Duna (although I don't know if that counts circ burns, I always forget to track the dV.) In case you're curious, my numbers are as follows: 9.82*595.8*Ln(150/(0.005(5200+6420)). I'm using a KW rocketry tank for most of the fuel, and it has 5200 LF. I couldn't recall the oxidizer off the top of my head, so I just used the ratio from a stock part (hopefully I got that right!) So TL;DR, does the 9.82 multiplier change based on where you are in space, or is that a constant somehow? Thanks for all the help, maths aren't my strong suit, but by golly I need something to do on breaks at work and school and calculating mass fractions, dVs and acceleration are as good of stuffs to do as anything.

I've been playing around with this today, and I'm in love. I love building stations, but their having no purpose beyond refueling always made me sad. Now I can be happy!