brooklyn666

Members
  • Content Count

    302
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by brooklyn666

  1. What about the possibility of resource transfer the same way fuel can currently be transferred in game? I dock an unmanned supply ship to my space station, fill up the o2 tanks, and then undock. That sort of thing.
  2. I seem to be missing all of the tanks from the game, despite the fact that the folders and cfgs are all in the correct spot, and all of the other parts show up properly. Has anyone else had this issue?
  3. That's it. Right there. That's what I was trying to say but was too hungover to properly elucidate.
  4. It didn't happen with the previous version, so my assumption would be that it has something to do with the attached decoupler.
  5. It's not so much a resource management problem as it is a "we don't need the giant tanks for this short trip, so let's save mass and space" problem.
  6. There's the Apollo SM. It's 11m high and 4m in diameter. And look at all of that stuff that fit in there!
  7. Is that assuming gaseous O2 storage? O2 has an expansion ratio of 1:861, so cryo tanks contain the same volume of gas while being much smaller. And we could reasonably assume that Kerbals use less oxygen than humans, since they are only half the size.
  8. I've got a bug on the latest version. Engineer doesn't recognize any parts placed below the built-in decoupler. Even with a fuel tank and engine, I get null readings on mass/dV...etc. Has anyone else had this problem?
  9. I'd love to see something like this implemented. If you look at the Apollo SM, it's volume was only 6.17 cubic meters, yet it contained 2 weeks of life support (H2 and O2 tanks, fuel cells,) avionics, plus all of the fuel and RCS tanks, and the necessary plumbing/wiring. The O2 tanks themselves were only about .66 meters in diameter, but held something like 128 kgs of LOX.
  10. There is no "outside of any gravity field." galaxies are gravitationally bound in groups, groups are bound in clusters, clusters in superclusters...
  11. Just to double check, I take the B9/Textures_Reduced/GameData/B9_Aerospace folder, and put that in my KSP/GameData folder, overwriting the original B9_Aerospace folder. Is that correct?
  12. Ok, clearly you're going to continue on with this, so I'm going to bow out.
  13. Does this conflict with Universal Replacer? When I installed it the first time and loaded the game, it went super slow (like you said), but then gave me the spinning beach ball of death when it got to the UR sub-folder.
  14. Since he brings up BOTH FTL and near speed-of-light travel, how about we stop quibbling over minutiae?
  15. Does the reduced texture pack not work with .23? I installed the regular version just fine, but I keep getting game freezes. When I use the reduced texture pack, none of the B9 parts show up.
  16. The title of this thread is "Would it be a bad idea to travel the speed of light?" So how is that not talking about FTL?
  17. That depends entirely on how you plan on achieving that speed. If you plan on using an artificial wormhole or some sort of Alcubierre Drive, you avoid all of the consequences mentioned above.
  18. What was your Eve periapsis? The closer you are to your flyby planet, the more of a boost you get , the only caveat being that you need to avoid drag from the atmosphere, which in the case of Eve, can be extreme. Also, for a powered assist, you need to perform your burn at periapsis. All told, a perfect direct slingshot from Kerbin to Eve to Jool is difficult. In real life, probes that use a Venus assist to Jupiter or Saturn often use a double or even triple assist. They'll swing by Venus, and then Earth a second time before they have enough energy to get to the outer planets.
  19. Why deadstick? Every craft that reenters the atmosphere in a controlled fashion (with intent to recover) has a guidance system that keeps it properly aligned during reentry. I think the problem is with stock atmospheric model. I'm not sure how DR modifies it, but it doesn't accurately apply friction, lift, and compressive forces, which in real life would a stabilize a pure ballistic reentry.
  20. This is really the simplest explanation. It can't be summed up any more than that. Although a powered slingshot can use the oberth effect. At a lower orbit compared to a higher one, a rocket has a higher velocity, right? This means the rocket (and the fuel inside it) has more kinetic energy. When this fuel is burned, some of this kinetic energy is used to do mechanical work (propel the vessel). At a higher orbit, the vessel is moving slower, which means less kinetic energy which then means less work (less efficient propulsion).
  21. Are you sure they are rotationally AND linearly aligned? It looks like they're a bit off, but it's hard to tell from the video whether that was before or after the collision.
  22. There are significant technical problems to developing a stable, self-sustaining artificial fusion reactor; namely, containment of the fusion product. It's much harder than fission.
  23. Also, Kerbol is too small to be a star. It's below the minimum threshold radius for sustained fusion and hydrostatic equilibrium. In real life it would be a gas giant or a brown dwarf.
  24. Right, which is why things like surface samples should only get full points if they are returned, but for all of the other science instruments (gravioli detector, seismometer...etc), the data is the same whether its transmitted or physically returned, so the value should be the same either way.