Chase

Members
  • Content Count

    47
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Chase

  1. I am curious are you doing n-body with the planets as well? I am wondering if it would just be easier to keep those on rails.
  2. So.... Who else is psyched for 0.29? :3 In short, it's gonna happen, nothing you can say or do will stop it (unless you somehow blow up the internet or something).
  3. Welp, my latest tests show that a slight increase in drag on one or two parts does not make up for the added weight of the nose cones still. So ignore my pull request. But you may still want to look over my bug fixes and slight optimizations.
  4. I ran a quick test against itself. A single solid booster gave more height with the nose cone then without across a sample size of 3 per (just aiming straight up), but that was against 5% rather then the 10% drag. I haven't tested the altitudes reached against stock, but I can do that. I will retest everything now, and publish the results here (or in the pull request).
  5. I ran a quick test against itself. A single solid booster gave more height with the nose cone then without across a sample size of 3 per (just aiming straight up). I haven't tested the altitudes reached against stock, but I can do that.
  6. Actually I forked your code and did the nose cone thing yesterday. I even built a simple copy in releases. See my pull request for full details.
  7. I look forward to your fairing/nose cone fix. For the nosecones, what I would do, is I would increase all drag by a certain percent (like 10-20%) unless it has something above it in the stack, and remove it if the item is "aerodynamic" such as a wing, or a nose cone. Perhaps 10% for each side that it has nothing on in the stack. So a fuel tank would have a 20% increase by itself, a 10% increase with a nose cone on one end, or normal if it has a nose cone (or something else) on each side. Which means the items with the most `extra` drag would be items on the end of a stack. The fairing issue is just the matter of finding everything within the fairing and removing drag for it (and somehow applying drag for the cross section of the fairing).
  8. No, not even white shock cones. It just a few hundred feed up, but at like 200 m/s, the nose started to slide off to one side, and then the entire ship flipped on it's side and became uncontrollable.
  9. I just want it so that if my rocket is perfectly symmetrical I can let loose with all the thrust I could ever want and not have my rocket suddenly flip out a few hundred feet up. Basically I just want it to be somewhat more forgiving, though I have no idea how to make that possible.
  10. PRESSING F5! FASTER AND FASTER! AAAHAHAHAHA!!! And by that of course, I mean, I hope it comes out soon.
  11. I know this is a bit outdated. But I am bumping it due to the massive outcry against Curse on this reddit thread: http://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/26yqdy/rip_spaceport/ The site is still relatively unused. But is probably an acceptable alternative if you don't want to use Curse.
  12. Nice mod. Of course I don't want so many parts, so I went and removed a few. Like the combo shoots (which are a bit too much like cheating to me), and most the drag chutes, and the main stack (the large one didn't work anyway) chutes. Also the main cone chutes when deployed are kind of far enough apart that they bug me.
  13. With NexusMods' update, they now support any game, including KSP. NexusMods has the largest mod website for game such as Skyrim, Oblivion, Fallout New Vegas, Fallout 3, and so on. Which is not bad company. http://www.nexusmods.com/kerbalspaceprogram The site only has one mod on it at the moment. But as part of the NexusMods set of sites, it will likely have all the benefits of other nexus sites. Though their mod manager will likely never support Kerbal Space Program (unless that ksp site really blows up). I know most people here use SpacePort, which is fine, but another mod site never hurts. A NexusMods site is much better then the current SpacePort, however I can't be sure how it will compare to SpacePort 2 when it is released. Also, I apologize if this is off topic for this section, but this forum seemed to best fit the topic.
  14. Some of these are good, but a lot of them don't really fit the nature of the game. Like direct quotes or paraphrases "scotty, lets go to warp", referencing planets or constellations from our solar system/planet "jupiter", "big dipper", use of other alphabets/codes, such as morse code, does that mean you would be okay with people writing english messages in greek? I wouldn't. References to the game itself "days playing KSP". References to previous missions which may have never happened in your career mode "As you look through the logs of missions past". Also glitchy text seems to appear very often, none of the stock messages are like that as far as I recall, and it bothers me to have it in this.
  15. Because of this mod, I just go and delete whatever fairings come with any of the other mods I use, they are an eyesore.
  16. I was wondering if anyone had any suggestions for additional engines or other parts I could make. I don't mind doing some more modeling and texturing for this.
  17. Okay, I decided that since Hey, I have a realistic engine that seems massively underpowered to the point I had to tune it up, why not add a realistic engine that seems massively overpowered to the point I have to tune it down. With that in mind I humbly present the Merlin 1-D Rocket Engine. It has about half the thrust of the real thing, but the ISP is the same. Once again forgive my poor modeling and texturing.
  18. Ah right, I didn't consider that. So I should reduce the output to 20 kN, or increase the mass to 3?
  19. Well the real thing as I read has very nice ISP but rather horrible TWR, and it needs to be going fast to be of use (Mach 4+). That and KSP limits your maximum velocity at lower altitudes, requiring me to make this a high altitude part. Which also makes sense for the real thing anyway. The one I read about only has a TWR of about 2, where as this one has a TWR of 60, which is 30 times higher then the real thing has.
  20. Okay I updated it to run slightly cooler (hopefully it's emissives still work correctly). See Original Post.
  21. Well they do have a warning sticker. Heh, joking aside, these do run VERY HOT (just look at the emissive). The engines themselves can handle up to 6200, but still sometimes manage to make themselves overheat. I have found that I have absolutely no skill when trying to play with Deadly Reentry. Try changing the part config as so, and tell me if it fixes it for you. maxTemp = 2500 heatProduction = 480
  22. My modeling isn't the best, but I guess I can put up the source .mb and .psd. I also add an .obj for those who can't open a .mb file. I actually based it off from a lot of research from various sources. Wikipedia, wind tunnel tests, the information on the X-51, speculation and stats on the new SR-72. But I also tried to balance it out so it was KSP friendly, and had a niche in aircraft design, but all that came as a result of the research, not the other way around.
  23. This is a simple and yet useful ScramJet engine. On the ground and at low speeds and altitudes, slow, and it guzzles fuel like a SUV from the 90s. You're lucky you can get anything out if it. But at high speeds an altitudes it is a golden god among jet engines. It's niche, if you will, is after your other engines cease working, to push you even closer to the edge of space without needing rocket engines or air hogging. Of course you still need rocket engines to circularize, but this should be able to push you out into space. This engine only really starts to shine once you hit Mach 4, before that it can only provide limited thrust. But once you get above Mach 4 it starts to being able to produce usable thrust, hittings its peak at 1700 m/s. But even then its not even half the thrust of the standard Jet Engine. It's real benefit lies in its ISP at high altitudes, at about 8000 meters its ISP starts to sky rocket, allowing it to function at altitudes that your other engines couldn't hope to even with 4 times the intakes. In short, as soon as you hit about 20 km and over 1350 m/s this engine starts to be somewhat useful, you have to find some other way to get it to that point however. The engine is far more useful at 30 km and above 1500 m/s, as this is the point most other engines start to fail on standard intakes. Download from Mediafire Change Log v1.3 - Nov 4 2013, 1:02 AM Changed name from ScramJet Engine to BT Engine Pack. Added the Merlin 1D rocket engine. v1.2 - Nov 2 2013, 1:26 PM Reduced the heat values on the engine, hopefully they are more compatible with mods like Deadly Reentry. v1.0 - Nov 2 2013, 1:55 AM Initial Release Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.