It'snorocketscience

Members
  • Content Count

    183
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

30 Excellent

About It'snorocketscience

  • Rank
    Smaller is superior

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. That's a really cool concept, although the floating control surfaces make takeoff look like witchcraft. Do the surfaces need to be offset that far? Otherwise the rotors/autorotation are great. I'll add it to the list, witchcraft isn't against the rules .
  2. In light of AHTech's press statements, Periapsis Co. would like to remind all builders that auto-strutting to the root part is "not to be trusted" when docking vessels. Consider auto-strutting to the heaviest part, or better yet, the grandparent part. Sorry I had to roleplay lol.
  3. Yeah, the mun's equator is pretty good, although Bob did some math recently - inclined canyons aren't an issue . Obviously many bodies like the Mun don't have a large enough SOI to allow a synchronous orbit, but I can set things up so that after 8 orbits (for example) I'll be over the same canyon. Don't forget to raise your periapsis after the canyon pass lol. To be specific, make the time it takes to orbit (the game calculates it for you) divide nicely into the time it takes for the area (a canyon) to rotate once. The only tricky part is figuring out how long it takes for the planet to rotate at higher latitudes. I used a few sites to help me calculate this, if anyone's interested, let me know.
  4. What planet/moon has the deepest canyons? I'd prefer a planet with no atmosphere, so I can do orbital flybys at very low altitude. Obviously I'd prefer a planet without an atmosphere. I'm thinking Dres' canyon might be an easy place to start, but what about Moho, Eeloo, or Jool's moons? Tylo's strong gravity would make for a very fast white-knuckle flyby, but does it have any canyons?
  5. Of course, that mod is a stage recovery mod, which is allowed. Wow! Congrats on completing the challenge! I'll add you to the list of challenge winners.
  6. Just some food for thought: This isn't my design, but this design (before stock props) is VERY light for a stock Eve SSTO. Pardon the music, not my video. Maybe a reusable Eve shuttle isn't so far-fetched after all? I tried it myself and it does work, although it's very picky with takeoff/ascent profiles.
  7. Well, err... I, uhhh In all seriousness I have a return vehicle, but it only works once, for one kerbal. The landers are currently more expensive than the kerbals. For the purpose of this challenge, you can pretend you already have a orbital and ground-based refueling station. You don't have to manually refuel your craft if you don't want to, since it's already pretty time-consuming designing a reusable eve lander anyway.
  8. After starting an outpost on Eve, I remembered (much to my relief) that I remembered to build a return vehicle. However, it's completely disposable and only works once... not good for rotating crew on and off Eve! The cost to rotate crew would be astronomical... Goal: Build a reusable vessel that can land on Eve, take a Kerbal to orbit, and repeat. But wait! Before you dismiss this as impossible, let's make this easier: You don't have to build an Eve SSTO if you don't want to. You may discard stages, land them, and reassemble them on the ground with docking ports/Breaking Ground parts/by landing stages atop old stages. You may use a stage recovery mod. Also, to save your time, when you land or enter a stable orbit, you may simulate refueling with a mining vessel and cheat your fuel tanks back to 100%. You may teleport your vessel to Eve orbit and start from there. Recommended mods: Hyperedit (to simulate refueling, make testing easier), Stage recovery mod. Winning criteria: Build a semi-reusable vessel that can shuttle 1 Kerbal from Eve's orbit to the surface, and vice versa. Completing the challenge earns you a spot here. If the design is an SSTO, it will be placed in a second category. Winners: (Name, vessel name, link) EveMaster's Eve Infinity https://kerbalx.com/EveMaster/Eve-Infinity Brikoleur's Seraph https://kerbalx.com/Brikoleur/BAK-9900-Seraph Rules: You may cheat in pre-existing infrastructure. Your vessel may start at LEO. You can ignore commnet (built-in antennas will reach LEO anyways in a real game). You may simulate refuels with Hyperedit, but only when: 1) In a stable orbit around Eve (simulating refueling at a station) or 2) Landed on Eve (simulating refueling at an ISRU base). Take screenshots. Upload your craft so we can use it too. I have several Kerbals stuck on Eve... Pilot aid/build aid/stage recovery/planning/cosmetic mods are OK. Good luck!
  9. Yes. My lander doesn't use EC or reaction wheels. Engine gimbals, 4 fins, and Jeb's SAS comfortably get the lander to orbit. I could build a bigger lander, but i'm strapped for cash in my career save. Other players/youtube videos seem to have no trouble with fitting seats inside service bays... My command setup: 0.24 tons (payload bay, command chair + kerbal inside) vs 0.6 (lander can with no monoprop), not to mention the lander can's heat tolerance is poor. The nosecones (2000K tolerance) were already getting quite hot during ascent and descent tests...
  10. I have a command seat inside a small bay (weight savings), but no matter how many times I tweak it, when a kerbal enters/exits, he collides with the vessel and violently topples my lander. Does anyone have screenshots/subassemblies of the correct seat position? Who knew that this would be the hardest part of designing my first Eve lander? Getting to Eve orbit was a charm compared to trying to fix this cursed chair...
  11. After starting a permanent outpost on Eve, I remembered (much to my relief) that I remembered to build a surface-return vehicle. However, it's completely disposable and horribly unsuited for rotating crew on/off Eve to an orbital station (then back home). The cost to return all those homesick Kerbals, let alone rotate crew, would be astronomical... Goal: Build a reusable vessel that can land on Eve, refuel (with pre-existing infrastructure), take a Kerbal to LEO (Low Eve Orbit), then land to refuel and repeat. Required payload: 1 Kerbal. That's it! However you bring him up is... up to you! The idea is to have a crew shuttle that can be reused within the Eve system infinitely (until you break something ). Note: Your vessel doesn't have to be an SSTEO! Reassembly (with parts you already launched) is allowed. To save time, you will be allowed to cheat in pre-existing infrastructure (see rules). Winning criteria: Completing the challenge earns you a spot here. Entries ranked byspent. If the design is an SSTEO (SSTO but for Eve), I will create a 2nd list. Rules: You may cheat in pre-existing infrastructure. Your vessel may start at LEO. Disable commnet (built-in antennas will reach LEO anyways in career). You may simulate refuels with Hyperedit, but only when: 1) In a stable orbit around Eve (simulating refueling at a station). 2) Landed on Eve (simulating refueling at an ISRU base). Take screenshots. Upload your craft so we can use it too. I have several Kerbals stuck on Eve... Normal difficulty or harder. PIlot aid/build aid/planning/cosmetic mods are allowed. If I can use your vessel with similar results in pure vanilla, it's OK! Stage recovery mods are allowed. If your rocket isn't an SSTEO, you must reassemble your rocket (with the same old parts you originally launched) in some way so that you can reuse and refuel it infinitely within Eve's SOI without shipping new parts. There's one reasonable way I can think of to do this, and one that requires Jeb's piloting skills and precision landings! Good luck!
  12. I have a working T4 SSTO plane that uses the "reliant" rocket and it can land back on it's wheels. It can comfortably reach orbit. Those landing wheels are a pain, but if you balance the dry CoM and CoL correctly and use your command pod torque, you can point your wheels retrograde which protects them during reentry. If that's not possible then you can at least tilt them away from prograde and use your plane's body to shield them. Shallow re-entry trajectories are important. I will get a video (or at least some screenshots) of my craft soon... I got 2 school tests on one day this week! sorry
  13. Do you think I should make a separate category for FAR SSTOs then? On a side note, I actually managed to get to LKO with these requirements with ~900 m/s of dV left, believe it or not. That means my design can do a mun flyby, but I have to do some more testing if it can return, let alone meet all those bonuses (tier 1 tracking station is such a pain!). Basically the plane resembles a fuel tank more than a plane... this thing has a takeoff speed of 70-80 m/s in stock ksp, but trust me; it launches, flies, and lands like a plane. It comes in at 17.9 tons and exactly 30 parts. I'll post a video in a bit... you might find the runway braking mechanism (or lack thereof) a bit interesting.
  14. I think I might need to disqualify that plane... I can't get it to work in stock... maybe I'm doing something wrong but the aerodynamics overlay (stock ksp) tell me that those angled tanks create a crap ton of drag (since they're radially attached instead of attached to the mk1 pod node)... Maybe FAR fixes that or something... sorry I'll try flying it again since I forgot to use any of the flaps the first time around... I didn't know stock ksp wings had fancy flaps and spoilers...
  15. Maybe I've set up something wrong, but some of the graphs I'm getting for my planes don't make sense... I've gotten 3 different flight envelopes from one plane! The zigzag and chopped off pyramid don't make sense, and then one graph tells me I have excess thrust with Juno jets above 18km (that's impossible! flight ceiling is very low on this craft). Somehow, graphs for other planes work just fine. https://imgur.com/a/aHZx3rY I've tested this plane... It's ceiling is about 6-7 km on jets, has a wet takeoff speed of around 60-80 m/s and can almost touch the sound barrier. I tried disabling the rocket engine and making sure the jets are on the first stage, but the flight envelope calculation still makes no sense... Edit 2: Here's the output.log file: https://drive.google.com/file/d/15FwzV2wEbECT6Fl_9o4LMUVliQExNXWo/view?usp=sharing I have modded parts installed on vessel, (a life support canister + kerbal engineer jammed inside the payload bay) but I tried those parts on other planes and updating the wind tunnel, yet their flight envelopes still look fine. I have a lot of quality of life mods installed but none of them change stock aerodynamics and only two add parts (kerbal engie and usi life support). I installed this mod using CKAN but I think I was having issues like this before I switched to CKAN. I reinstalling the mod to no avail.