Jump to content

Rocket Farmer

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Rocket Farmer

  1. Hello Its true KSP did humble the best CPUs of the time but time does march on and hardware is improving. Expect that the game will still be CPU (not GPU) bound so that fancy GPU you have will always be idling. Also expect that modern monster CPUs (say a soon to be released 7950x3d) will be able to tear through it. However if you have a below mid level CPU expect performance to suffer a lot.
  2. I really really doubt that. The original KSP spent several years getting to 1.0 and Star Citizen is at about 8 years of alpha access. Ok the absolute tightest schedule it will take 2 weeks for testers to run through the full game. Then it will take KSP a minimum of 1 week to classify the bugs and determine which Dev should even tackle them. Then that Dev will need a couple of weeks (absolute minimum) to make the fixes and probably much much more. Then there needs to be at least a week plus of internal testing of the new code then another week testing all the new fixes together to get to gold code. Most companies can manage a normal full update about once every 3 months (hot fixes for more critical elements of course are much faster) Then the whole process starts over again as the alpha testers try the new build.
  3. Sigh. Let me get this straight. You bought the original KSP about 5 years ago. You have over 1,000 posts on the forum so you probably have at least 500 hours of play time and another 100+ hours of forum posting time (also entertainment). You originally paid somewhere around $40 for KSP so you’ve gotten immense value off purchasing the original game. Now you are upset at the value proposition of spending another $50 upfront before seeing the new sequel? Let’s face it at worst KSP2 is a completely unplayable jumble of code which never gets fixed at which point you’ve paid $90 to the KSP series for an amazing amount of entertainment. That’s the worst case here for you (which is very unlikely). So all of the mock upset and concern is total entitled bunk.
  4. Not really VTOL but life like air breaks. I have a decent solution for landing and takeoff on very small spots on Dina. My airplane is primarily powered by 2 Nervs in the traditional spot at the back of the airplane. however I have 2 small rockets (I forget their name right now) with their thrusters mounted beside the cockpit but aimed forward and down (about 30 degrees below the plane of the plane (that’s a pretty plain plane pun). So when I am descending I do an unpowered glide and I lock my wheel break. If I’m coming in too hot I nose up and do quick bursts with my reverse thrusters to slow down. If I’m coming in too fast I nose down and hit the thrusters to give me more lift. After a few practices you can touch down with around 15m/s of speed which with your breaks locked means you don’t go far. On takeoff I Lee the nose down and use both sets. My main engines give me thrust while my lower one pushes the work plane off the ground. Makes for short runway takeoffs.
  5. All time favourite Kerbal thing was last Halloween when I opened the door and was greeted by a 4 foot Kerbal in full costume. When I asked if he was Jeb Kerbal the kid was so excited that somebody had finally recognized him.
  6. I don’t think there is a hard limit. I stacked about 10 on top of each other (column style) and as I turned on more and more units Jeb (sitting on top for science purposes) defiantly turned faster and faster. Eventually the stubby wings I had on started to look like they turned one direction while jeb appeared to spin the other direction (always loved that optical allusion). Anyways eventually (after 5 or 6 rotors are turned on) the whole unit starts blurring and then the column explodes. Before it explodes you get some very weird optical items (mid way down the column it appears to spin off access like it is flying apart but things stay together). Lastly In one iteration I had jeb jump out of his chair and he flew several hundred meters turning like a top but survived.
  7. Found a fun bug. Take a rocket in the VAB, attach the small pistons. Extend them to full length. Connect parts on the other end of them. Retract. The parts stay in their original location when they were hooked on but are still connected. I had a rocket take off with floating attachments.
  8. Problem one possible (truly Kerbal) solution to slow rotation of the rotors/servos. Combine multiple rotors together on top of each other. If one spins at 600rpm then if you attached another in front of it together they would achieve 1,200rpm. Keep adding to desired speed?
  9. I’ve never used it but Mechjeb is fine because it makes the game more accessible to more people. Some kids need training wheels. It’s great they make biking more accessible. Some never outgrow them. Again it’s great they are biking. Some people even prefer training wheels because “pick your reason here.” It’s still great they are biking. So my advice is to not worry about other people on training wheels because it’s what makes them happy.
  10. Sorry, you missed the other option. Load up on SRBs and don’t fire the center stack until the SRBs are done. Ill try some modeling on this tonight but last time I looked more SRBs instead of drop tanks had better starting thrust (high early thrust is more efficient to get up to speed early) plus cheaper in credits.
  11. Ok I come down on both side of this. I haven’t ever put tanks on top of my SRBs. Personally I like to do the first stage on only SRBs (I fire the main stack engines only for a couple of seconds to clear the launch pad). SRBs are much cheaper thrust so instead of drop tanks why not just use more SRBs? I do disagree with Vanamode though. Drop tanks can be very useful even within the rocket equation in a myriad of situations. 1. Using 1 Nerva. I can’t exactly cut it in half so a drop tank on it is ideal and increases DV (youvarent carry dead tanks). 2. Small rockets in the 10-20 time range. Often there are no equivalent smaller rockets to divide the work. 3. Etc
  12. Agreed. it should be either explore or contract that gets you to those locations. at which point Jeb should note the place looks good for a launch site. Then you should be able to buy facilities at hay location (ie start from scratch). Really there should be 8-12 sites around Kerbal like this that can be developed. Some should be ridiculous (middle of an ocean, top of a mountain etc). You know Kerbal.
  13. So today I was reading up on Elon Musk’s latest heavy rocket. Basically he is duct-taping 3 rockets together and using them to launch his car (yes his car) into an orbit beyond Mars...... They also say it and I quote “might” work....... Anybody else ever heard of anything more kerbal like ever?
  14. Ok Im an arm chair rocket guy. So I do call the burn to circularize my perapsis burn because I'm raising my perapsis but you are correct it should be called my aposis burn because it occurs at my aposis. As well you are correct that I do raise my perapsis regardless during the Mun burn. Also hats off to OhioBib. I had not considered that the viewing angle from the surface was different than from orbit. On the other hand the Mun is a very wide target so that likely wouldn't matter. However there are a couple of asterisks to everybodies comments. Size effieiency: This goes back to the air hog days (1.0-1.1) but at one point it was possible to intercept the Mun with a stock no clipping air hogged engine SSTO and a very small delta v outside the atmosphere. You could almost hit the pre-requisite velocity (2200 orbit + 865 Mun transfer) near the top of the atmosphere using air breathing engines. This made for a very efficient transfer fuel wise. I haven't played with SSTOs much since then so I'm uncertain how much extra velocity you can now build but anything you manage is extra efficiency. Price efficiency: I use a more ballistic than SSTO but still one continuous burn for launching an SRB rocket early on tocthe Mun. No unlike the famous video I have never landed onche Mun only using SRBs.
  15. @JasOn Actually that's about perfect for an efficient mun intercept. Doing a direct ascent and mun transfer in one shot saves you the delta v of doing your perapsis burn. Probably saves about 50m/s of delta v over the traditional method of getting to orbit and then doing a separate burn for your mun intercept. As well he also has the correct mun location to pull it off. I like restarting career every new update. Typically I like doing a Mun flyby very early (2-3 launch) typically with stacks of SRBs). I don't ever have the guidance system up at that point so I dead reckon the Mun. Fire about 865m/s pointed prograde just after the Mun clears the horizon will get you a nice intercept (old tip from before we had a guidance systems). Lastly the guy is using a SSTO. So how exactly will you do it more efficiently? I'm sure a true pro (which he might already be) might shave another 5% off with a different vehicle configuration and maybe another 5% with an optimum ascent profile but he is very close to optimum in my books as he has his flight profile perfect.
  16. Personally I have a laundry list of things I would really love in the game and would happily pay for in a DLC (I bought May 14, 2013 so I'm on the hook which is fine. Also I don't use mods. I just haven't found them balanced enough for my tastes. 1. Specialty parts including A. An electric propeller. Something that would allow plane exploration of Duna and Eve. Both of these planets have atmospheres but you can hardly scratch the surface of them with rockets and wheels. Also make it work in water. Different sizes would be fine too. B. A hose reel with 50 feet of hose. For delivery of fuel or electricity. Make it so only an engineer can operate it. So badly needed. C. Folding wings. A crane with a swivel. More options for space station parts or landed buildings. Space base infrastructure. 2. Another gas giant. Something with rings, or a storm etc. With planets including: a. A oxygen atmosphere but with mountains that extend out of the atmosphere. Maybe a lopsided planet to cause this to occur. b. A Gilly or slightly larger planet just outside the gas giants atmosphere. Imagine sitting on a moon with a planet filling the entire sky. c. A rock garden cluster of small moonlets (at least 6-8 ) all clustered together with little space in between. They could even be gravityless as long as you designed a harpoon or anchor for holding a ship down. D. An elevator planet. A planet with an atmosphere that has a really elliptical orbit meaning you could enter its orbit close to the gas giant and then ride it up to the outer edge of the gas giant to hop off and get into orbit of another planet or vice versa with little delta V use either way. E. a planet orbiting backwards or with a orbit out of the plane of Kerbol (like 75 degrees out). F. A water world that would require floating bases and ships to land on it (that or channeling our inner Elon Musk and pre-dropping floating platforms). 3. Upgradeable kerbals a. Upgradeable EVA suits. More thrust, carry more fuel etc. Or specialized suits for science, exploration, or survival each with their own pros and cons. B. Have More actions than just flags. Maybe go golfing, sit down, eat some snacks, wave, etc)
  17. So I started a new career with the 1.2 preview normal difficulty totally stock. I have acutally found it quite easy (payouts seem higher). As typical launch 1 was suborbital, launch 2 achieved orbit but the magic happened with launch 3. Typically with my 3rd launch of a new career I don't have guidance yet as I typically can't afford the update for it so I achieve orbit, point for he mun and do a 860m/s burn and figure it a flyby and return when I get out there. This time however with the higher payouts I could afford the guidance system so I thought I would put the game through its paces. so I preplanned 5 separate burns. 1. Was my traditional burn to the mun for flyby. About 860 delta v. 7km passing distance. 2. After just passing the Mun I did a course correction of 130 delta v to send me towards Minmas. 3. Mid course correction of 12 delta v to get my vertical approach to Minmas set (5km passing distance). 4. A 330 delta V burn after just passing Minmas to again pass it (polar route 5km passing distance). 5. Which shot me back to Kerbin which I hooked around to again intersect the Mun (7km flyby polar route). I did a 97 delta V burn at this point to lower my kerbal perapsis to 55k. 6. 7 orbits slowly and safely degrading my apoasis reeled me into a nice easy kerbal landing. I managed this without solar panels, on the small sized rockets and boosters and 30 parts over 45 days. I think the tweaks to the planning software are awesome for multiple burns (no twitchy lines that through out calculated burns 40 days later). I knew I had 1,445 Delta V (thank-you excel math) and I knew the plan took 1,429. Before I left Kerbin I knew how much the entire burn would be and that I could pass the Mun twice, Minmas twice and do a high pass on Kerbin to boot.
  18. "I think you're seriously underestimating new players. The fact that they can't slam a plane into the ground with a 10m/s vertical speed, or have to move the plane over a few meters is certainly within the grasp of most minds, particularly the kind that pick up KSP. " Personally I have logged a couple hours on KSP. I have made SSTOs that could land a small payload and return from Minmas or land on Ike without refuelling. I got good enough that I used SSTOs fairly regularly and had no issue landing on the runway from orbit. That said last night I couldn't get a basic level airplane off the basic level runway last night. I reverted to my old standby from pre 1.0x when you didn't get landing gear for quite awhile in the tech tree. I used gantries for takeoff and parachutes for landing and didn't even bother with landing gear. The basic landing gear are very difficult to use.
  19. For me it's my Jool 5 mission. I've designed it at least 5-6 times (always with some remaining technical difficulties) but have never pulled the trigger and sent it out. Duna, Eeloo, Dres missions etc I can do in my sleep but for some reason hitting all 5 Jool moons has always alluded me. So tonight I do it. I am going to design a Jool 5 mission from scratch including 1 multi purpose lander to hit all 5 moons, one aircraft for Laythe, rovers and small landed bases for Laythe, Val & Tylo, and small orbital space stations for each moon plus Jool. All in 1 aircraft. I shall not rest until all Kerbals have been returned to Kerbin from this mission!
  20. While that is interesting I think Microsoft Hololens would be better. Imagine launching rockets off your living room table. Doing landings onto your floor. Doing docking maneuvers while you walk around each space craft to check angles. The possibilities are endless.
  21. Please enlighten me how fairings don't work? They seem to work fine in my game. Also cargo bays are nice for lifting rivers too. The new cargo bay opening is particularly handy for unloading and reloading rovers. If those 2 fail then design an aerodynamic rover and fly it up. Kerbal for me is about figuring out how to do something with what I have. Rovers onto other bodies isn't that difficult with the tools given.
  22. I was just doing a wheesley test contract and noticed the same issue. Internal temperatures climbed whenever I pushed over about 330 m/s (about the speed of sound) the internals started hearing up faster than the external skin. This occurred at 3,000 m above sea level so being low isn't the answer. It probably is a hard cap allowing short term bursts of speed but not long-term cruising. Alternatively maybe try going higher. I was able to get wheesleys cruising over 12,000m with an optimal flight pattern. Going higher with significant deployed radiators might help while not running at 100% thrust.
  • Create New...