Jump to content

g00bd0g

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    412

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by g00bd0g

    Stock BG KerboProp Aircraft Speed Challenge!

    in KSP1 Challenges & Mission ideas

    Posted

    10 hours ago, Pds314 said:

    Alright. Another run at 301.7. No damage. No PRE. No runway-destroying.
    Warning: music

    No runway destroying because you didn't land on it :confused: Also, the speed record is the SLOWEST speed displayed during the 10 second run. I saw 301.5, please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong by providing timestamp of start/stop.

    I have added you to the leaderboard, as it is an impressive craft and I believe you are "trying" to comply with the rules, but please make sure to read the fine print for any future entries, Thanks!

    3 hours ago, mystifeid said:

    Unfortunately 16 'S' type blades don't fit on the small turboshaft engine without serious clipping. Even with 12 blades there's a small amount of clipping and when I tried 12 on the Arrow it went slower.

    So I went the other way and tried 6 blades per engine and saw the speed increase to more than 298m/s. This time best speed was achieved at low altitudes. Go figure.

    Adding another eight engines made absolutely no difference to the top speed but for sheer amusement, it is the 24 engine "Barbwire Canoe" in the video below. It gets down to 4m above the water and it's a pity there's no ground effect in the game.

    Speed run starts at 4:21 on the game clock. Speed 298.6m/s.

    Super impressive! Appreciate your adherence to the "spirit" of the challenge. Are we approaching the theoretical maximum for LF power prop aircraft?

    Stock BG KerboProp Aircraft Speed Challenge!

    in KSP1 Challenges & Mission ideas

    Posted

    1 minute ago, Pds314 said:

    Hyperedit can teleport the craft to Jool at millions of times the speed of light. Or teleport Jool to the craft for that matter, which is a way bigger physics alteration. But whatever. I can just press the disable mod button.
    
    Question: would a landing with a non-disabling prop strike be disqualified?

    If it destroys the part it is disqualifying.

    Stock BG KerboProp Aircraft Speed Challenge!

    in KSP1 Challenges & Mission ideas

    Posted · Edited by g00bd0g

    A successful intact landing on the runway is a requirement and part of the challenge. This ensures aircraft are actually stable and handle well and have low enough stall speeds to land without RUD. Also adding a no parachutes for vertical descent rule, OK for horizontal decel.

    Also, while I beleive PRE doesn't "intend" to change physics, how do we know? Have you or anyone ever validated it? Given that it DOES directly interact with physics code. I would rather disallow it unless it is proven to have no effect. If you can't be bothered to uninstall it for the challenge, I will just add a note to your entry, assuming you provide a valid entry with a landing and everything :)

    Stock BG KerboProp Aircraft Speed Challenge!

    in KSP1 Challenges & Mission ideas

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Pds314 said:

    It isn't up to competitive speeds yet, but it is an unpowered 260 m/s plane. I think the next step is increasing the blade count. Since I'm getting many problems I normally encounter at 280 at 260. Probably because of additional drag from the turbine.

    Just remember "stock parts only, stock props or rotors for propulsion only". This mean no rotary wings or other parts for propulsion.

    Stock BG KerboProp Aircraft Speed Challenge!

    in KSP1 Challenges & Mission ideas

    Posted

    4 hours ago, Pds314 said:

    Is there a category for planes with no electric OR LF?

    If  it's propelled by the new BG props let's see it.

    10 hours ago, mystifeid said:

    Something completely different - the flying pig Broad Arrow. Uses 16 turboshaft engines. Top speed - 291.2m/s.

    Very nice! I think the top prop speed might just be in the low 290's. Until someone proves otherwise...

    Stock BG KerboProp Aircraft Speed Challenge!

    in KSP1 Challenges & Mission ideas

    Posted · Edited by g00bd0g

    This challenge is simple. Go as fast as possible in level flight at any altitude using the new BG motors and prop parts. The spirit of the challenge is to create "realistic" (in the Kerbal universe) prop driven aircraft. This means stock parts only, stock props or rotors for propulsion only, no reaction wheels and no torque enabled, no cheaty clipping or assembly techniques. For example, you can put parts inside of structural tube, but not clipped into a fuel tank. You cannot clip 100 motors into each other, etc...

    • Must takeoff from the runway, perform the speed run, and land on the runway, with same parts you started with.
    • No parachutes for vertical landing, though drogue chutes for decelerating are fine...
    • Must maintain altitude +/- 10 meters over 10 seconds for the speed run. Lowest speed value displayed will be your record.
    • No parts or physics mods. Graphics and info mods allowed.
    • I will maintain Electric (including Fuel Cell) and LF categories.
    • Video or sufficient pics for evidence required, craft file may be requested for validation.
    • Must provide craft name, claimed speed, and timestamp start and stop for speed run.

    I'll kick it off with my Kornier Ko 335!

    https://kerbalx.com/g00bd0g/Kornier-Ko-335

    Leader Boards

    Electric

    Pds314 - unnamed? - 301.5 *(did not land on runway)

    g00bd0g - Kornier Ko 335 - 290.5

    LF

    mystified - Barbwire Canoe - 298.6

    mystified - Broad Arrow - 291.2

    Frozen_Heart - Pr-1C Biplane - 150

     

     

     

    Jettison Resources Please!!!

    in KSP1 Suggestions & Development Discussion

    Posted

    On 2/11/2019 at 9:28 AM, Martian Emigrant said:

    Hi.

     

    A good desirable option. Maybe at a price (A part, a mass, a drag) by adding say a spigot on a tank (Or two, one for LOX, one for LF).

    That would add a slight cost and some flexibility. You could assign a button to toggle it.

     

    As for "All aircraft", well, no.

    Aircraft still have to burn fuel to do a "Quick" return to the airport (When actual weight is over the maximum landing weight).

    A fuel dump capability adds more maintenance check (More cost) for something rarely needed on a commercial airliner.

    An aircraft might need such a thing on take-off if it can't climb with the lost of an engine. Not happening much with modern, reliable, OP engines.

    Plus (It does happen) imagine say an A380 like aircraft accidentally dumping on the ramp in say JFK. Nightmare on more than one level.

    If they can get the aircraft certified without then it doens't have one.

    Even an aircraft that can dump will take a few (Or more than a few) minutes. It as to do with the size of the valve and the size of the tank.

     

    ME

     

    EDIT: Adding a plume of fuel from the spigot would be a cool visual.

    OK, not "ALL" aircraft, but quite a few military and commercial aircraft do. Purely FYI.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_dumping
     

    SPH CoL borked in 1.5.1?

    in KSP1 Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)

    Posted · Edited by g00bd0g

    Further testing is even more confusing!

    Fresh KSP 1.5.1 install with MHE DLC 1.5.1.

    Video starts with me demonstrating weird CoL behavior from a save game I copied over from my previous 1.5.1 install. Then I switch to a new save created in the fresh install, no mods, and problem is gone? Hrmmm...

    Original 1.5.1 install had been updated, not a fresh install. Only had a handful of mods installed through CKAN.

    • BetterTimeWarpContinued
    • ClickThroughBlocker
    • Distant Object Enhancement
    • KerbalX Mod
    • MechJeb 2
    • Toolbar Controller

    In both instances I am in the same game install, and only change the save game I am in. Both craft were created fresh during the test, they were not saved craft.

     

    So the question is, why would the CoL behavior change between different saves in the same install/instance of KSP? It makes my brain hurt thinking about it...

    To be clear the video below is a virgin 1.5.1 install with MHE DLC 1.5.1 installed. No mods or anything else. I only copied my save folder from my previous install.

     

     

    SPH CoL borked in 1.5.1?

    in KSP1 Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)

    Posted · Edited by g00bd0g

    On 11/6/2018 at 12:24 PM, FleshJeb said:

    Is your root part in that cargo bay, and is it rotated 90 deg?

    No it is not, though I did have to go and double check :) I replicated this with the simplest plane you can build and it definitely still has the same behavior. This is a fairly significant bug, I mean, how are you supposed to properly design a plane if you can't tell the CoL?

    The Landing Legs & Gears Is Killing Me!

    in KSP1 Discussion

    Posted · Edited by g00bd0g

    All the people who say "I've never had this problem" have never tried to land a large ship on a small body. It is utterly and totally broken. Please show me a video of successful landings and loadings, of a large ship with large landing gear on, let's say gilly.

    Additionally, landing gear on small aircraft are basically broken also. Combined with a ridiculously bumpy runway, early game aircraft are basically impossible to operate. Again, show me a video of a basic small aircraft, or almost any of the stock aircraft taking off and landing with reasonable behaviors.

    It's borked...

    I posted bug reports when 1.1 came out and squad literally denied the issue existed .... They did finally "confirm" one of the reports. and it's at 10% after 2.5 years. The other they claim "needs clarification". Seriously? Squads team can't load a stock aircraft and try it and see for themselves?

    https://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/9557

    https://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/9561

    C'mon Squad, put on your "big boy" pants, and issue an official statement on the issue (unless it exists, I've never seen it?). At the minimum say, "yeah, there's a problem but we can't fix it". Or *gasp* maybe make an effort at least equivalent to what several mods have done to make it better.

×
×
  • Create New...