Jump to content

DoToH

Members
  • Posts

    272
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by DoToH

  1. Lucky you. Maybe you aren't the only one, maybe there are more like you, but I'm not one of them.
  2. I love RT. Try it and you'll love it too. Best results if used along with a life support mod (I didn't see any LS mod in your screenshot).
  3. Tried. Without heatshield. No explosions. - - - Updated - - - And this (10 char)
  4. So... if you want a game mechanic to have some of impact in gameplay, you must do things that no one would ever do?. Nice Reentry heat development time is wasted time, because nobody would ever need a heatshield unless a reentry planned with that purpose. Blame on me for thinking that a direct reentry from Jool to Eve, hitting atmo faster than 6000m/s without heatshield should be dangerous. And yes, earth has an orbital velocity above 7km/s, but RL manned spaceships always have heatshields. Aluminium melts at 933,47 K, not 2000K as almost every part in KSP. And RL astronauts aren't green.
  5. 1.0.2 100% reentry heat. I landed a pod at EVE. Direct reentry from JOOL (40Km Pe). Speed was over 6000m/s when hit Eve's atmo. WITHOUT heatshield. Don't know what you have done to lose ships, but reentry heat in 1.0.2 is not as dangerous as it should. New players can set easy options. See above. Not right at all for me. I remember that post. IIRC the station lost 2 or 3 parts (batteries?), but without structural damage. - - - Updated - - - And: Someone landed a one part ship (mk2 cockpit) safely at KSC runway from orbit. I can't find the post right now. 1.0.3 is a must, but I prefer waiting a bit more than having some weird balance issues again. So, let SQUAD test it.
  6. ^^This. While I use KAS' ones, this is useful for players who don't want to use mods. Driving claw rovers around and ramming them into fuel tankers is a bit "primitive"
  7. With current settings (1.0.2) you can reenter directly from Jool, without heat shield and your pod and chute will survive if correctly oriented during reentry. Tested with Mk1 pod and Mk16 chute. Works even in a Jool -> Eve direct reentry (hitting atmo at 6000m/s). On topic: Since heat is not a true danger, choose the most fuel efficient reentry profile.
  8. ^^ this. Hohmann transfer is easier, but you don't have to wait until the optimal launch window There is a mod to use it ingame here
  9. If you want to prevent structural failures in big rockets: Whackjob youtube channel If you want to reach minmus: you can achieve it with much smaller rockets.
  10. Ok. Partially agree with that. My point is still there: If subsystem B performs calculations based on data obtained from subsystem A is advisable to fix subsystem A BEFORE trying to tweak subsystem B values, because you're using WRONG input values for your testing. You might have to tweak subsystem B AGAIN after fixing subsystem A, because you've fixed susbsystems in the wrong order. This will lead us to: 1.0.3 -> fix for subsystem A. 1.0.4 -> fixes and tweaks for subsystem B to adapt to new subsystem A. It could have been like this: 1.0.1 & 2 -> Fix for subsystem A 1.0.3 -> fix and tweak subsystem B And that's why I think 1.0.1 was a mistake, premature and poorly tested. Releasing a hotfix because of incorrect aero behaviour and not fixing aero behaviour is, IMO useless. They should have waited until they had fixes for BOTH subsystems.
  11. I think this is related to the way the game handles docking. Internally, It creates a "new ship" and remakes the part-tree. However, I fail to see how it will prevent the goal to be achieved.
  12. Wiki is outdated. Jool's atmo begins at 200Km (from ingame data and tests). In 1.0.2, I can timewarp on rails anywhere over 200Km high.
  13. Temp Ext is always the same as speed. This was pointed before (I can't find the thread). It doesn't take into account atmo density (altitude). I don't know what "Temp Ext" stands for, but is a bit weird
  14. But now, objects face more drag than they should, because of their drag coefficients. The simulation is broken, because it doesn't do what it is suppossed to do. The only way to create this issue was to increase the global drag multiplier, which Squad did in the 1.0.1. patch. It was a premature and insufficient step towards fixing the drag issues.. If tapered and blunt aren't treated differently enough, as NathanKell said (and I agree), increasing the global drag multiplier doesn't solve the issue. It moves the issue to streamlined parts, instead of blunt ones.
  15. The overall drag increase was not the right choice. It fixed pod terminal speeds, but broke some other aspects. Now, a pod doesn't fall too fast, but a Mk2 cockpit alone can reentry and glide to land safely. After reading some posts here (posted by people smarter tham me), I think the underlying problem is the difference between coefficients of streamlined objects and coefficients of blunt objects. That problem is still there. Increasing or decreasing drag and lift will not solve the issue. - - - Updated - - - Totally agree, but is the only way to fix it
  16. When using fins, you are adding drag (also lift, but drag is the important one here) to you rocket. Placing them on your rocket is like placing feathers on an arrow, you want them behind the CoM.
  17. I think we can safely assume some sarcasm in the OP. Also, if changes to aero were made only because of Scott Manley's advice..... well... I hope it is not true (and I'd love to be sure about it). - - - Updated - - - Nope. I'm playing 1.0, didn't upgrade to 1.0.1.Career mode with permadeath active. I've unlocked the tech tree and only lost one kerbal (launch failure - staging). I never open chutes over 5000 m. In 1.0, you can do a Mun flyby, free return trajectory, reentry and land without heatshield. Not easy, but not very hard either.
  18. This^^ Reentry speeds are much slower than IRL because of the scaled down kerbol system. RL pods (and shuttles) have heat shields. Devs said they want reentry to be possible without heatshield from LKO if done with the correct profile. IMO, balancing reentry is more about balancing part heat tolerance and heat system than aero, having in mind not real life performance or tolerances, but the final result and gameplay they want (heatshields needed for hard aerobraking or steep reentry profiles). While it's perfectly reasonable to heed his advice on that, it's perfectly reasonable to expect some testing about consecuences to other gameplay mechanics, such as reentry heat and excesive lift.
  19. With the new resource system. KAS pipes and surface docking functionality are mandatory.
  20. Using the words "simulator" and "fun" in the same sentence????. You heretic!!! :sticktongue: On topic:
  21. Me too. But I don't think 1.0.2 is great. I think 1.0.1 was a mistake. There are more people who don't like it and posted explaining their point. If you read complaining threads, you will find some rude "Deal with it", "whiner", "learn to play". And those aren't from the complaining people. Just wanted to note that having manners is not equal to not being critic.
  22. False. OP is friendly, positive, nice, but not constructive. In fact, "aero is unplayable" gives much more information about suggested game development than saying nothing at all about gameplay.
×
×
  • Create New...