Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TheBedla

  1. Hey guys, seems like Tantares is close enough to reality at least for Czech journalists http://vesmir.stoplusjednicka.cz/cinska-orbitalni-stanice-je-mimo-kontrolu-brzy-zanikne-v-atmosfere
  2. Crafts look nice but this TKS bugs me a lot... its engines are facing backwards (or actually forwards... TKS is confusing) and are in the wrong place. There is no need for that antenna on top of the VA retro engine. RCS blocks are in a wrong position (although placing correct RCS on a TKS is hard, this placement puts solar panels right in the stream of propellant... I know there is no game effect from it but it bugs me. I try not to be rude but if you offer these crafts as "beale-approved" I'd expect them to be more authenthic. I do not know the other crafts' real life equivalents so well but this probably should be changed. I do like how awkward and confusing the real TKS was
  3. That's a good point. I don't see why it wouldn't be the case, but then again I know about as much as Jon Snow.
  4. There's a new peer-reviewed article proposing a theoretical basis for fitting the EmDrive into current physics: http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/adva/6/6/10.1063/1.4953807 Dumbed-down article:http://www.sciencealert.com/new-paper-claims-that-the-em-drive-doesn-t-defy-newton-s-3rd-law-after-all Whaddya think?
  5. Kerbalkosmos. Based the name and logo (see profile pic) on the Interkosmos program that sent the first non-Russian and non-US person to space, a Czech like me.
  6. It looks gorgeous, but can a different port/thingy be attached to that node? I would probably prefer an open node and this nice extending docking port as a separate part. It seems it would open more possibilities, no?
  7. EDIT: yeah, should have read before posting. Thanks for the info, T-Bouw! Here's hoping the "orbital decay" bug will be fixed. Unfortunately it makes my game essentially unplayable beyond sub-orbital. Good luck!
  8. That's funny, earlier this week I put together a long post with a very similar outline, but it disappeared when I wanted to post as my login session had expired... But those ideas seem very similar to what I'd love to see. I also remember reading an interview with Squad stating that KSP originally was intended to be a sort of "space tycoon" game. Anyhow, it seems many people seem to agree on many aspects of this economic/science overhaul. One of which being that it is highly unlikely it would ever find its way to the stock game. So... is there a chance we might put a mod together? At least some of the aspects seem doable - manipulating funds, unlocking the tech tree - are there tools in KSP that can be used for modding such things? Perhaps it could be based on the sandbox mode and that way the stock structure would not intervene. Personally, I'd love to see the player's role as more "putting the infrastructure in place" rather than "must fly each probe by hand". Let me fly the first batch of tourists to space and then let the rest of the agency handle that. Let me put the first satellite of the GPS system in place and then let me have the option to skip the remaining identical launches and make my control center do that. I'd love to see the economy working... you would get "contracts" (in the real world sense of the word) from customer for putting tonnage in orbit - develop a lifter, fly a test/first flight, and then let me earn the money, until the economy changes and I'm forced to develop a better lifter, or a heavier lifter, or a reusable lifter, to make more money I need to spend on research.
  9. Thank you. It was a glorious feeling to see a rocket fly to (almost) orbit without my input. One question though - the rockets seem to verge pretty heavily from the eastwardly course even with stabilizers. Is there anything I can do to prevent that? Fixing that through manual steering feels contrary to this hands-off approach.
  10. Oh yes please. Learning yet another set of controls for the same game makes so little sense...
  11. Thanks for the replies. I was going to stay out of Konstructs in this save, but this seems to be a good reason to implement them. Magico13's plugin also seems very promising, I'll keep an eye out for that!
  12. Duh, I suppose I mixed up the two names, I meant the one derived from Spektr, it's probably called Spectre, right? Dunno why I believed it's called Spica (even called my orbital craft using that capsule Spica). Maybe cause it's so pointy, and Špica means "point" in my language. Sorry for the mixup. Great news about the 1.875 tanks. Thanks guys, I'll be sure to check those out!
  13. Hey everyone. Is there a mod that would make craft recover take non-zero time? I'd like to have the choice between waiting for a while before i get my Kerbals ready for the next flight and zooming manually in a jet to get them back sooner for another mission. I assume the time would be shorter the closer the landing zone would be to KSC, so I'd try and hit at least the right hemisphere. If not, it'd be awesome if someone made that mod (it could be just a simple plugin, but what do I know? Spoiler: Not much about these things).
  14. Hi Beale, you awesome piece of pastry! Just jumped back into KSP after 1.1 (even though I've been lurking around the forums in the meantime) and I must say, Tantares parts are gorgeous. Especially when compared to the old ones that were posted recently, it's clear how incredibly your skills (and our demands) have improved. Really looking forward to the new smaller LK! It's looking gorgeous. I'd have a small request though - could you add some 1.875 upper stage tanks and engines please? I've been putting together a new workhorse orbiter family around the VA capsule, but getting it to fit with the British 1.875 lower stages has been awkward. A fairing base would be nice too. I've also had my eye on the Spica, but one thing has been bugging me. The model looks as if it is not intended for reentry (as it has a bulkhead with a hatch at the bottom instead of a rounded heat shield), but has 500 units of ablator, which says "I like it hot". Unless there's something I'm missing, it should be one or the other (a purely orbital pod with no heatshield OR a high-resistance ablative bullet), no? Keep doughing the awesome things you dough!
  15. Hi Beale. I must say I'm not a fan of the mock-RCS thrusters in the "skirt". Since they don't have a function in KSP and since they don't reflect actual orientation of thrusters (i mean - your shading indicates their direction of thrust is towards the back, maybe at a slight angle, while Soyuz's actual thrusters there are only for pitch/yaw control, and they seem to be angled perpendicularly to the fore-aft axis), I would prefer to keep that part clean so I don't feel a need to cover them somehow... It's a small point in any case, I just felt since you're remaking it (and it does look gorgeous) I would point it out. Not that it would make much difference for me, I rarely have time for KSP, and what little I have would be spent updating new versions of KSP and mods... still come here almost every day to see your awesome work though! Keep it up!
  16. Well you can reduce the requirements for translation with rotation of the passive ship (your station). When you get to a close rendezvous distance (say <400 m, the closer the better of course), simply switch vessels to the station, select the docking ship as target, select an appropriate docking port and select "control from here" and rotate so that it faces the target. If you have powerful fore and aft thrusters (RCS or otherwise), you can dock with barely and translation at all. If necessary, you can repeat the process once you get closer. If you decide to go with Belphegor's suggestion, I think you might use the "actions on the fly" mod. Haven't used it, but it should allow you to assign action groups after docking with the tugs, and if you select your action group smartly, you should be able to translate pretty smoothly using your numpad. The functionality would be different than RCS, as the action groups would toggle the individual thrusters, but it should get the job done.
  17. The new Soyuz looks very nice! But the stripes were (and would be) nice! Wow, really? My impression is just the opposite. I use the Soyuz rockets to lift my small payloads - Soyuz spacecraft (called Khleb ) and satellites, and I find myself either using the second-stage four-nozzle engines on the first stage/boosters, or dialling the thrust way back. That being said, I don't mind that they are that way, it allows for good flexibility using the same basic design (as the Semyorka also gradually evolved into a much larger launch vehicle), and since I'll probably be switching to an upsized Kerbin soon, I'll appreciate all the thrust I can get.
  18. Hey, how have I missed this? I've been looking for a rescale since I started playing post-1.0.X. and been disappointed by 6.4x not working in Career. So just to check - this does work in career, right? If so, I'm looking forward to it!
  19. As I prefer playing with the randomly named Kerbals, and may have a bit of an antipathy to Jeb specifically, in my current save I keep him exclusively as an airplane test pilot. I figured his BadS mentality is perfect for a fighter-jock style character. However, he probably got bored and sneaked on board my first space station (which was strictly against regulations as it was not equipped with return capsules). I only realized a few days (or kerbal-weeks) later when I could not put him on a new test plane. He was just sitting in orbit and gorging himself on Snacks (yes, the actual life support variety), and I had to mount a relatively expensive rescue mission to get him back. Classic Jeb.
  20. <spoiler alert, i guess> Wasn't a similar maneuver used at the end of The Martian? The MAV was a bit short on dV due to higher than expected drag on ascent, and what they did was an impromptu maneuver with the _entire_ interplanetary ship to match velocities with the MAV. Of course they didn't dock, but eva'd over.
  21. 'Twas midnight, and after doing some serious missions I was looking at Tantares parts I barely use, and I managed to somehow throw together the funnest aircraft I've ever flown. Let me present Geoffrey Saucer: It's ridiculous. Almost impossible to crash, flies stably from about 30 m/s to 0.75 mach, can pull 15G turns, and fly sideways and backwards. And if you think anyone's following you, no problem, just pull a 360 turn and check your blind spot. Requires Tantares (obviously) and MRS (for the tiny jets and the very important and stylish forward control point). After that it's quite easy to put together, but I can share the craft file if anyone wants to give Geoffrey a try Sorry for the shameless post, but I wanted the most awesome modder to know that his parts made me genuinly grin and chuckle. Also, congrats on the little one, and being a fresh father as well (soon a double one), I wish you an awesome family life!
  22. Ooh, I read a bunch of those yesterday. First: This article (otherwise quite interesting) contained this part "That's because bodies floating through space could (...) even float over to alien planets and effectively colonise them with human remains and whatever..." Second: I started reading Ghost Fleet and it had the exact same problem in the first chapter. An astronaut is locked out of the ISS, and he pressed on the hatch button so hard that "If he hadn't been tethered to the station, that push would have sent him spinning off at a rate of ten feet per second on a trajectory toward Jupiter". Really, guys? All it takes is a gentle push and we can float to other planets? Third: In general, Ghost Fleet seems interesting, but the authors should have someone to fact-check them on space stuff. When describing the Chinese Shenzhou (and bear in mind, this is near-future projection, no alternate history stuff), they say it is a cheap copy of the US Gemini spacecraft. I did not have enough face to palm when I read that.
  • Create New...