Jump to content

-Velocity-

Members
  • Content Count

    863
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

204 Excellent

1 Follower

About -Velocity-

  • Rank
    Rocket Scientist

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I just tried your design. I cheated it with infinite fuel to Eve and landed it real quick. It doesn't get close to making orbit from 1.6 km ASL, either with the throttle firewalled or by carefully controlling the throttle to TWR = 2. Are you sure you didn't mean it could make it to orbit from 5 km altitude, not sea level? Is it right to have the smaller side tanks stage first?! Please upload a craft file. Also, the small circular intakes ARE there, they are buried under the ground for some reason. By the way, this is with 4X xenon tanks under the fairing. 4 xenon tanks weigh
  2. Well, I hope so. The aspargus staging is strange, the smaller tanks go first according to the arrows on the fuel lines, but yea, 6 km/s. But wow, only 8-9 km/s?!?!
  3. I admit it's possible that the rules have changed significantly since I last played, but if they changed this much, I am extremely surprised. The rule I always heard- and that I experimentally found to be roughly true- was you need 12000 ms dV to get to orbit from sea level (with some safety margin). This craft only has a delta-V of 6000 m/s!!! You mean to say that they changed the game's aero model so much that you can almost entirely negate drag?! What is at the end of the side tanks? How does one fly this thing? At maximum thrust? You go from sea level to orbit in less than
  4. Four Kerbals in command seats attached to a rocket with a probe core, two panels, a reaction wheel and some batteries and an antenna. Dry mass about 1.15 tons including the kerbals (see the mechjeb info). The xenon tanks are kerbal mass simulators. The payload fraction of this rocket is worse than my last one but it ought to perform vastly better... at least it LOOKS like it will. I’d appreciate any feedback people who are more knowledgeable about KSP’s aero system might have. If the rocket is as aerodynamic as it looks, I wouldn’t be surprised if I had enough dV left over upon reaching
  5. This is my new Eve Launcher. Like all my Eve launchers I've made, it's two stacked asparagus-staged groups with a final, vertically-staged stage on top. I HOPE it's more aerodynamic than the last, but I'm not sure how the game's aero model really works. Any tips? I'm not planning on integrating it into a mobile base, it will be stationary, situated on a ISRU-enabled launch pad/base. The base it launches from will include the ladders the kerbals will use to get inside the fairing. (Fairings DO shield kerbals from aero forces... right? Or did Squad screw that up too in the latest patch?
  6. I just did my first Eve landing and return mission in a couple years. Both entry and return were significantly harder than the last time due to changes (or outright addition, can't remember how long it's been) of atmospheric heating effects and the aerodynamics model. I didn't use any heatshield at all to land my 150ish ton (mostly unfueled) rover/ISRU/ascent return vehicle. There simply isn't a heatshield large enough for it. Instead, I put a large de-orbit and entry stage on the bottom of it with about 3000 m/s dV, a starting Eve TWR of about 1, and an insane number of verner thrust
  7. In KSP, this one was pretty good. This was from a much older pre-official-release version. Things used to be a lot more explody, like, joints would fail much more easily. Also, nose cones weren't actually needed because aerodynamics weren't in the game yet...
  8. Ugh... just came back from a long break and this is one of the first things I noticed. There was always a physics jump but this is getting much more extreme. Also, landing legs on my ISRU bases just randomly fly off or start exploding when I load into them, especially if I have a giant ship docked onto the top of them.
  9. If you can do a reasonable approximation of a suicide burn, 6000 m/s works well as a "safe" value. "Safe" and "suicide" don't really belong in the same sentence, but it is what it is. If you don't use quick saves then don't get too attached to the Kerbals you're going to try sending down there.
  10. Back before they nerfed ISP on the stock engines (what was that... 0.23?) you could quite easily make a lander that could land and take off of Tylo all without discarding a single part. Basically, your lander had to be almost entirely fuel tanks and high TWR, high ISP engines. Heck, you could even put it on wheels and make it a rover, since wheels didn't weigh much more than landing legs. You just had to be a low orbit when you released it from your mothership, and it could only fly back up to a low orbit. I doubt that's possible anymore, you're probably hard-pressed to exceed 5000 dV n
  11. Something greater than zero and less than 100. Perhaps you are not aware that we actually regrow brain cells, that we pee out used-up neurochemicals, or that cells constantly are repairing damage to themselves. But I think you are just are trying to be argumentative.
  12. Do you experience death every millisecond as your body starts converting some different part of your brain into urine or feces? The point I was trying to make is that there is nothing special about the atoms that make up your brain. Sleep is irrelevant to the topic. If you want to know, then sleep is just the temporary suspension of the conscious operation of the information pattern that makes you, you. The fact that you wake up and remember who are is because that is by definition a part of the information pattern that makes up your mind.
  13. There is nothing special about what specific set of atoms presently make up my brain. The body is self-repairing and the brain is naturally throwing away tiny bits of itself and rebuilding itself with new atoms. A very large fraction of the atoms that made up your brain five, ten years ago ended up being flushed down the toilet a long time ago as urine and feces. So if you think that the atoms of your body make you, you, then you're constantly dying and being reborn as a different person. That does not match our real-life experience of consciousness at all. What if you were to replace
  14. Incorrect. There is overwhelming evidence to show that all animals are sentient. The law already recognizes animal sentience (through the existence of laws against animal cruelty) because it has been plainly obvious to anyone who has eyes since the dawn of mankind that animals have sentience. Just because a large number of science fiction authors misuse the word "sentience" doesn't mean it's fine to do so as well. Actual scientists certainly don't misuse the word: https://www.livescience.com/39481-time-to-declare-animal-sentience.html, nor does the dictionary: http://www.dictionary.com
×
×
  • Create New...