Jump to content

Heagar

Members
  • Posts

    130
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Heagar

  1. ..snip Next time offer an exel-spreadsheet without makros, please. Because with that i will not download it. For your information: In Makros an programming-language is used called VBA (Visual Basic for Applications) with a runtime.exe. You can write Worms, Trojans and so on or format the Hard-disk, if you want.
  2. Thanks for your suggested support, but it is nothing to take personally for Xeldrak. It's only that i had flown gliders, so that i am used to pitch up a little or trim the plane. That's why i build my planes in the same way to preserve that it will get into a flat spin. For people who uses the keybord instead of an joy-/flightstick it could be annoying when they don't know that you can trim a plane in KSP using "Alt+(direction)" keys.
  3. I've had seen this thread too late, but here is my suggestion: The HOTOL II c 4 It's not a fancy plane with an super-duper effectiviness, but is able to do the same as the Aries 4 a. My intention was to build a plane that doesn't change it's CoW throughout the flight and therefore doesn't change it's flightcharacteristics. Plus a neutral behavior when using RCS (no wobbeling) during a docking attempt - even without SAS. The next thing - it can't flip over so easyly during takeoff or landing. The downside of this is clear, it has a tendency to pitch down (Yes Xeldrak, it's heavyhanded - again). When s.o. want to land this plane manually (without SAS) using the keyboard she/he should trim the plane 2 - 2,5 notches up (Could be achieved with Alt+S). For someone like me using a flight-/joystick for spaceplanes it is convenient but not nesseary. craftfile: http://www.filedropper.com/hotoliic4
  4. That this is a matter for all in the time beeing is correct. But that adding weight dosen't change anything, is wrong. If you like, download following crafts: http://www.filedropper.com/roverfuniiia1d1 http://www.filedropper.com/mb-tanker With the buggy, even with Kerbals on board (the seat is a pod, but the Kerbals are in the EVA-state and therefore have weight) you have to avoid velocitys over 30 m/s downhill, because it becomes uncontrolable then. In the flat the topspeed is 22 m/s when the suspension is in the low state, down to 17 m/s in the high state. Annotation: This buggy was build when HOC-gaming made his charity-run for the north pole and i tried to be there before he arrives. But the original buggy had it difficultys in the steering even in the flat when exceeding 20 m/s. It didn't worked out. The refueler on the other hand has an top speed of over 23 /ms in the low state and mostly 22 m/s in the high state. And he is controllable up to 50 m/s downhill. You only have to avoid jumps, because the tires will give up because of the weight of the craft --> and then you have a crash. BTW: The refueler was an study only when these weels where released. Let's say we both take part in this challenge with our cars and see, who is the first (MET-time ) at the north pole? I will use the mod "persistent trails" to mark my route.
  5. There are a few simple reasons for that behavior: 1. The suspension modeled in KSP is a bit weard. Every time you drive on an new polygon (or triangle) in the landscape it alters its state (obvisioly ther are only two) from low to high or reverse. At the high state the traction is nearly gone and steering a hard task. 2. These weels are intended for heavy loads (i build a tanker to refuel my spaceplanes). A light car as my buggy have the described problems. You can change it by adding weight to it. After several iterations this car works finally.
  6. Only one entry per participant or more? If multiple entrys are possible, i have already one of my early designs to submit: A CTV/Refueler (for a space station) witch is capable of delivering over 2/3 of the fuel of an orange tank.
  7. After testing each plane in the enviroment (Stock/FAR) they where intended for, there where three planes witch where my favorites: 1. The "mike STTO Rapier P3". A solid design with not tendancy to pitch up (unlike most of the others) and an wingarea to take it up anywhere.The only flaw is, it have to have a "ramp" for takeoff. 2. The "ZRC Zirsdaedge". Nice idea to take a LV-N with in space for elongated trips. 3. The "KermaJet KR100 Kodachi". Wow, with a single engine up to a 130 km orbit? Great. Because the last two ones use an unusual design they are most intersting. In this case i wish there are two polls, one for stock enviroment and one for FAR-vehicles. But it is not, so i have to vote for the "KermaJet KR100 Kodachi", since it achives an orbit witch the least amount of fuel, witch was the goal here, i suppose.
  8. You have only a few minutes to make an action within this forum. You may have the state "logged in", but you are after time went by unable to submit a post or poll. Therefore log out and log in again, an you should be able to poll.
  9. m1sz, it would be nice to have an link for the *.craft file to be able to test it out. BTW: You did not mentioned witch mods you used. P-wings clearly, but how about FAR etc.?
  10. This is my third SSTO with the new engines. I wanted to try out a kind of a new design with upwards pointed positive v-shape of the wings, witch doesn't payed off. Maybe KSP is not capable to calculate such a wingshape or the wingtip tanks are the reason. So this plane have an drawback: Don't alter the course sharply at high altitudes without applying power. Under 6 km there are no flaws. On the positve side: In this testrun i achieved an 500 by 500 km orbit, witch makes the plane capable of reaching most targets within a 400 km orbit. And you will have up to 94 kg liquid fuel left if you used up every single drop in rocked mode. That means, if you fall short or overshoot KSC it is no problem at all to reach the runway. Don't forget to change the mode for the engines to air-breathing mode manually! BTW: I will possible not poll, in case that i have not the the time to test all crafts poperly to be fair. Craft is stock only Part count: 52 weight: 22 t Engines: 2 Rapier, RCS docking port: inline stabilizer: ASAS Craft file at: http://www.filedropper.com/x53a5
  11. If i understand you right, it is allowed to build two crafts instead of one: One "ro-ro-ferry" (the actual spacecraft) and a rover?
  12. Let's say it in this manner: What he wants is a one stage lander witch is a rover at the same time. As i see it, the docking capability after liftoff (e.g. mun's surface) and establishing an orbit around a moon/planet is only possible without beeing forced to overcome an athmosphere.
  13. Hello Mister Flagg,

    i've seen your recent video (first of the KSP v0.22 series) on youtube. Because i have no youtoube-account i inform you in this way. Two tipps i have for you:

    1. If you don't know witch part was the first in the building process, simply klick then on any part of the craft while holding "Shift"-key. Then you will have the hole craft "docked" to your mouse, witch means, it's moveble. This is also fine when you have a ship under construction, where the first part isn't visible, because you have placed a shroud around it for example.

    2. But if you want to use the subassembly: The part witch is attachable to other constuctions is always the first part witch was used by the builder of the craft. So the rover witch you wanted to add on top of a space-booster have to be rebuild, because the docking port you wanted to use have to be the first part edited!

    With kindly regards

    Heagar

  14. to noghiri: Things you may/should change at your design: 1. An ASAS instead of the probe one. 2. Take 3-4 RamAir-intakes instead of those you used, there are a way more effective at high altitudes and speed. 3. Get rid of the engine mount/cooler, you didn't need that. It adds only weight and drag. 4. Check your center of lift, it should be considerably behind the center of mass. Things i recognized by watching your attempt: At the ascend you should be perfectly at 90 degree if wanted, at higher speeds a course-correction is an heavy task/impossible (depending on the craft). At 20k reduce the pitch to have an vertical climb-rate of 10 to 15 m/s. Your where tapping wildly on your keyboard in order to get the wings at level with the horizon, not noticeing that you had broken the 25k altitude-limit already in the beginning of your flight. If the controls are too sensitive you could: 1. Engage the "fine Controls" by using the Capslock-Button. 2. Avoid to position ailerons to the wingtips and to have too much/big ailerons, this will increase the roll-rate. Engage the SAS/ASAS after launch with the "T" key alltimes. If the center of lift is behind the center of weight you only have to tap the "F"-key (temporaryly disables SAS/ASAS) once in a while to pitch down --> let the plane work for you! When the center of mass changes during the flight pump fuel from the aft to the tank in use, ore more up to the front, if needed. KSP will always use the tanks from front first and than switch to the next one to the rear witch holds fuel.
  15. @ Faark Ok, let's say it this way: The idea of an muliplayer in KSP in my opinion would be to play with other people rather than against them. And i mentioned that it would be a heavy server load nesseceary to make the given senario save. The *.craft-files would be used to minimize debris and "stranded" craft's in my suggestion. There are people out there with weird constructions like that one in the first link. Copy that craft into the savegame for the mp and a game would then last 38 minutes for the player and 35 minutes MET. And there are guys like "the winter owl" who are able to edit an part's *.cfg file manually (therefore the mentioned check). BTW: That ability is a must if you want to create new parts like e.g. the kethane mod, C7 pack and so on. So it's anything else than insane. Besides: There is a mod existing (i don't knew it's name at the moment) with witch you can automaticly resize fueltanks (creating an new part *.cfg file it seems) to match the diameter and length you want. A bit fiddeling with it's code, and you are able to equip nearly anything into an normal tank automaticly with the same name for the part *.cfg file. The first FPS-games (like battlefied) - where is a sort of competition too - where suffering e.g. from so called "wall-hacks". One person is coding, several other people are using the hack then to have an advantage. Unless you prevent this on serverside, there will be at all times people who will using hacks or bugs when playing. You can't stop cheating in SP-mode, that's right. But when using the career mode with an encrypted savegame for the mp, it make sense: - you have to complete goal-steps - research have to be done - there are limited resources for a fraction Witch means: A longer game and more fun. To say it in short: If this mp would be released under the current conditions there would be only short, imbalanced games. Therefore i'd argued to reconcider the senario.
  16. I would really like an mp-solution, in witch i can interact with other people (and/or their crafts). But that would mean that the server have too mutch to collect and distribute. After a little brainstorming of mine, the possible needed minimum data for following steps: //For the players own craft// the *.craft file (please think of ships with more than 200 parts) comparison of the actual craft with the *.craft file (i'll discuss this later on) //Additional data when the player can see other ships in the map-view.// the velocity of the spacecraft and it's vector altitude above a gravity-source (Planet, moon, star) //Additional data when the player can see the other crafts in flight (he have to be down to 2 km, where KSP load the nearby crafts)// attitude and accelaration of the spacescraft //Additional data when docking etc. is implemented// mass of the actual crafts (with fuel load etc.) data of the physics simulation If you really want a "race to the mun" with different fractions only, the following is important: //There may no docking to an other players spacecraft needed for archieving the goal.// A single ship can do the work. Maybe you watch for a few hours your ship to land on the mun without time-warp. //Better wait for the career mode from SQUAD. Because:// This "race to mun"-scenario complicates this kind of mp in a manner, witch you should reconcider. A savegame on a local computer can be overwritten. And then a guy could easyly do this: . Mission acomplished for her/his fraction. A player can quicksave and load a mission a player can restart/abort the mission The solution would be, to store all regarding savegames and their *.craft files on the server, quite a heavy load. And that's mean further: to deactivate the debug menu to make it impossible to use the F5-/F9-option and the "revert"-button. to use a plugin like "mission-controller" without the option to start a flight without using it. A fraction then have to earn money with some "goal-steps" or normal missions in order to be able to effort the building of a mun-rocket with lander. Look at RiS to knew what i mean http://sourceforge.net/projects/raceintospace/?source=directory. In this nice manager-style program even the reliabilty of a given mission is lowered if you jump to the next goal-step ahead, without performing the actual one (Going for an manned orbital flight without an succsessful completed manned suborbital flight first e.g.). Your plugin has prior to the connection to the server to check out, wether the part *.cfg's are altered or not (build in probecore/sience equipment in tank, or tank in wing e.g.). If the condition for that is true it have to deny the connection to the server. The source for comparison have to be on the server (and that will take it's time, longer as the loading screen). to destroy all debris automaticly, even ships witch are "stranded" and no kerbal is in it. For this your plugin have to check, if the ship is operational and in use. Otherwise you quickly will have "leftovers" everywhere, witch the server have to compute. This could be quite tricky to decide, especially when a craft (especially probes) "dies" during a munar night, when using e.g. solar pannels or a landing leg is broken and so on (actual stage is different to the design). And e.g. a descend/ascend stage of an LM with a probecore after an mission is present (Is mission_end true or false?). to prevent a "takeover" if the player is clicking on a alien vessel (map view in tracking station) of his fraction/competetive fraction or trying to change to an alien vessel nearby. Nearly all above is impossible to achieve, because you have to reverse engineer KSP for that purpose, i suppose. And that is against the law. Of course you can beg SQUAD to add the several needed points in their API . If you wait for the career mode from SQUAD, a few points may be solved already. Because i think they will: encrypt the savegame in that mode make use of the prices for the parts for an craft make quicksave/-load and "revert"-button not accessible adding research, in witch you can advance with: achieving mission goals / spending credits / (game)time passing by
  17. I could do the challenge, if it is ok when i reach the desired zone where no buildings are displayed (that happens on my installation from time to time). My rover isn't fast - only about 20 m/s - and needs some tweaking (weight-balance for breaking), because the new weels have an increddible grip. So it will last a while until i can reach the destination. @tokay gris: KSC and KSC2 are roughly about the aquator. So the distance should be a bit shorter than halfway arround kerbin = ~ 1965 km.
  18. To Xeldrak: Damit, the System didn't allow me to reply on your message directly. So the other way. The MIG 17 is a nice looking plane, but that is all. The farmoust better plane is the Double Delta III witch i then choose as my entry. Even if it is a bit conservative design, it is for new players better conrollable. They should only avoid mountainous terrain when landing. Hilly sides are ok.
  19. First of all: When you want to have fighterplanes like the Me 109 or the F4 you have to be aware, that such a plane have to be agile - and therefore have to be somewhat instable in it's flightcharacteristics. Such a plane - with an other task - is my SAR I b (search and rescue). It have to be flown with a analouge input device, such as a controller or joy-/flightstick. On the other hand you wanted an easy-to-fly plane, i think mostly done with the keyboard. And only a basic layout without any clipping or tricks, am i right? Well, my conclusion therefore are the early jets, witch were'nt so agile. In fact a lone flying DH Mosquito (originally designed as a fast bomber!) on a recon mission could outmanouver a Me 262 easyly. Voila, here is my first suggestion: A MIG 17-alike jet. There are only the nesseceary parts on it. The cockpit-SAS is enough to have a stable flight, witch should be engaged all times, when the pilot is a newbee. ceiling 15 km max speed 650 m/s range (at ceiling with full thrust) 500 km download craft-file: www.filedropper.com/mig17 But because (don't ask me wy) a aircraft with an longer fuselage is in KSP more stable/controlably than a short one, a second suggestion from me (if you don't mind the clipping of the airintakes): The Double Delta III It is much more foregiving than the short one and can be flown easyly even without SAS. It's needing only one fuelpump-action: When the pitch of the SAS shown on the lower left during level-flight nearly is reaching the zero-mark, pump the aft tank into that one witch is in use. Ceiling 27k max speed 1700 m/s range 11,000 km (when flown between 23-25km with a speed in the vincinity of 1100 m/s) download craft-file: www.filedropper.com/doubledeltaiii
  20. And a new proposual: Build a rocket with a one or three man capusule that is lauched on a 90 or 270 degree path. Achive at least a 80 by 80 km altitude for the orbit. So far so easy. Then perform a descend burn at 80 km or higher altitude and detatch the capsule. Only the capsule and it's parachutes are allowed to enter the atmosphere. Try to to land as close as possible to the KSC-lauchpad. Rules: All kinds of parachutes (Normal, drouge, radial) are allowed, there behavior may be altered through action-groups. The woman - or man - who lands savely nearest the KSC-lauchpad wins.
  21. Climb the tallest mountain west of KSC? That would be the "needle", witch you couldn't "climb" with a rover, witch you mean i suppose. The other mountain to the the southwest is already be beaten.
  22. Last video you nearly nailed my suggestions. So: How about to launch a spaceplane towards a polar orbit (witch one is not essential; min 70km by 70km altitude fully orbit initial), then alter the course and land at the KSC-runway 09?
  23. I don't know actually if this will be working. This is the first time ever i implement a visual source from an other origin. I hope the best. Since i didn't know how to refer to an album, there are single pictures only. It was already done in KSP Version 20.2 but now i have the time to post it: A three times circumkerbin voage, with a totaly stock plane. After takeoff http://imgur.com/YFra4Uv First pass of KSC: look at the eclipse! http://imgur.com/ukIttgK second pass over KSC http://imgur.com/jwIVo1W stats after landing http://imgur.com/7B617aT Remaining fuel after touchdown http://imgur.com/KEuqNV4
  24. That's not the main problem. I suggest that it is the maintainace of the rover. After a rough landing or due to damage of roving it should be possible to replace damaged systems. Witch can mean: Diverd (fly to an other location) the service-station to the actial position of the rover to replace these damaged systems. Since the creator of the thread did'nt response, it is tricky to have some suggestions what he is up to want to realize.
  25. How about an LLRV/LLTV; or should i say MLRV/MLTV? HISTORY: The Lunar Landing Research/Training Vehicle was a free flying machine, witch was used to train the Mission(LM)-Commanders. For that there was an vertically build in jet-engine in that craft, witch was used for liftoff. Then it was throttled back to simulate 1/6 of earth gravity. Several little rocket-engines - positioned around the jet-engine - simulated the descend-engine. Attitude-control was done by RCS-Thrusters. Avarage flighttime was about five minutes with a full tank of jet-fuel. If you want to know more about this craft download LLRV_Monograph.pdf at history.nasa.gov/alsj/alsj-LLRV.html Due to the fact that in KSP you can only alter the thrust generally for all engines simultaniously, there have to be some changes. CHALLENGE: Build an craft with a vertically mounted jet engine, witch's thrust nearly equals the gravitation on the launchsite. Launch it with RCS-Thrusters from the launchpad/runway and land it safely beside the lauchsite (aside from lauchpad/runway). - Wings are not allowed. - Use RCS-Thrusters for lift- and attitude control. - U can use any SAS and Remote-control/Probe-core for stability issues. - The Pilot have to sit horizontally. - There have to be an escape-system for the pilot with zero-zero capabilitys. - Minimum altitude witch have to be exceed is 20 meters above the ground. TIPP: If you use (small) weels you can see at the lauchsite when the thrust of the jet is high enough. The suspension will be near it's highest point. ANNOTATION: I have already build such a craft in v 19.1 of KSP. So the goal is achieveble. It will be that you have to adjust the throttle of the jet a little during the flight, especially at a longer flightduration.
×
×
  • Create New...