Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

47 Excellent

About Teirusu

  • Rank
    Rocketry Enthusiast

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. For my own uses, I've been happily enjoying poking at this mod to figure out what I can do with EVE and decided to use SFVE as a base for my own setup. Mashing it up with SVE so I can have some of these neat effects in OPM along with SVE's effects, as well. So far, I've been pretty happy with it. Thanks @panzer1b !
  2. So originally, the engines I designed for that P-38 Lightning I posted in another thread not too long ago, came about because I wanted engines powerful enough to make one of these... A functional stock Osprey. It.. manages to hover, barely. And it manages to fly like a plane, although its very slow... But trying to get it to transition between the two modes is... basically impossible while the plane is moving. The plane itself is more willing to tilt itself then the center axle once the plane is in motion. I figure this is something that can not
  3. Oh yes, she flies really nicely. I've spent a lot of time tuning that bearing setup on that engine so it runs as smooth as possible. Pretty much up to the limits KSP can do with such a setup. The engines hiccup a bit on a steep dive, but otherwise seem to stay together no matter the G-loading. Jeb definitely enjoys it!
  4. Some one gave me an idea the other night in Roverdude's stream SAS powered stock part Lightning. Built with a bit of EE Redux magic, however. Engine pulled out on the bottom there so you can see it, the SAS bits are fairly clipped in there but at least instead of using RTGs, they're powered by fuel cells so they're slightly less cheaty? https://www.dropbox.com/s/z2g7q5pdz6nv1ax/P-38 Lightning.craft?dl=0 How to fly, for those interested! Best to turn on SAS and the brakes first, then hit '2' to turn on all the fuel cells.
  5. So, after a lot of trial-and-error and much mucking around, I believe I've come up with one of the smoothest bearing setups possible with the tried-and-true Stayputnik along with 650 I-beams. At least on my machine, it is exceptionally smooth spinning and fast! While also being fairly compact. https://www.dropbox.com/s/5ismrasz1vll9ic/Electric Prop Motor.craft?dl=0 As you can probably tell in the images, the Stayputnik head gets cupped by the octogon edge created by the 650 I-beams and it pretty much just locks in there. It does seem to work with 6 or ev
  6. Ahh! Well, I was aiming for efficiency on that one. Wanted to see if I could make something that could fly around for a good long while and the MK3 was to mostly test how much weight it could carry. On the other hand.. After a quick edit for more blades, it can -just- barely get off the ground with only the 4 panthers. Woooo
  7. So, by mucking around with the new floaty nodes on the fairing bases, I came up with this work-in-progress co-axial copter with a hybrid rotor design. Definitely need to work on the bearings a bit, but seems to fly reasonably okay. Certainly more fuel efficient then the quad I came up with.
  8. After watching EJs stream a few nights ago with him making a co-axial helicopter, I got the urge to mess around with these stock axles and came up with this quad-copter. Uses four stayputnik bearings with a bunch panther engines blowing on them. The caps to the bearings are SAS reaction wheels, so they can spin up on their own.. just not fast enough to get off the ground by electric alone. The panthers can spin them up fast enough to get off the ground without using the reaction wheels. Although it looks pretty ugly it as pretty fun to build! But flies a bit.. squi
  9. Another issue I've run into, (And I believe I've seen this one for a long time, just couldn't put my finger on it..) although I believe this is more of a bug with Kopernicus itself then OPM, but I've done all my testing of it within OPM. The short version is if you don't use a template planet the atmosphere that Kopernicus creates appears to be.. a little wonky. I've been doing some aero-braking testing of Jool, Sarnus, Urlum, and Neidon atmospheres to test the changes to thermal mechanics. Jool works exactly how you expect it. [imgur]H0tpu[/imgur] Used
  10. Well, your just in luck. I wanted a cloud config for Sarnus as well, based on the Oblivion pack. I think this is pretty good, if I do say so myself. Ironically, it makes Sarnus look alot like Jupiter, but.. that's not a terrible thing, in my opinion. Sarnus shouldn't be completely like Saturn, after all. https://www.dropbox.com/s/p8rtoa8y5f9tdyc/Clouds-Sarnus.cfg?dl=0 Try not to get vertigo on the way down! Some of those clouds go really fast!
  11. This is similar to what I was trying to setup in my .25 career game for.. the fun of it. I wanted an asteroid base in high Kerbin orbit (Above the Mun) to be some kind of fuel dump, for the heck of it. Obviously this wouldn't qualify since its faaaar to high up but it might give people some ideas. This A and two Bs weren't too difficult (For me, once I figured it out.) to get all docked together with minimal hardware. The Kraken did attack at the beginning, but this was because of some Fine Print bugs that have since been fixed in .90 Once I figured out the issue with it, I was able to d
  12. I never said they were the same, you should reread my comment a bit deeper as I didn't make that claim. My claim is that 'because of the construction of the spacecraft' the electronics would probably be fine from some kind of discharge. I gave 'highly shielded from from radiation' as an example of such construction, but not necessarily the reason they would survive, mostly because they're built tough. These things aren't like your typical cell phone with their fragile electronics. The cores of these things are built to survive cosmic rays and gamma rays. (Hopefully many times) What are th
  13. Not that I truly believe in the electric universe theory myself (Although the Standard Model is quite holey itself) but in this case, there wouldn't have to be some massive discharge. You have to remember that Rosetta matched orbits with 67P and came up from behind the comet/asteroid itself and thus came from a similar orbital distance. It was also in orbit around 67P for some time before hand. Thus, it's possible that whatever charge difference existed was eventually balanced out before the landing. ...Its also quite possible that the reason the harpoons and thrusters failed in the first p
  14. As far as Part Clipping goes, I always enable it. I do not consider part clipping a 'cheat' for two main reasons. A) You can already clip parts fairly easily without it being enabled: Stick an engine on the BZ-52 radial plate, pick up the plate and rotate it around. Tada! Engine clipped into the tank. Works for anything stuck to a surface mountable piece. The game doesn't bother to check for collision with any of the parts attached to the piece that your moving. Just the root part. All enabling part clipping does in the debug menu is disable checking for collision with the root part t
  15. Alternatively, you could design a rover where flipping over isn't too much of an issue. The structural panels and short I-beams are quite impact resistant, for instance. But, In general going slower is a good idea.
  • Create New...