KerikBalm

Members
  • Content count

    4,176
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,739 Excellent

3 Followers

About KerikBalm

  • Rank
    Capsule Communicator
  1. Patch 1.4.3 to be released next week!

    Indeed... the players that are fine waiting make no noise. I've been waiting, I want the patch and the fix to the fairings (and hopefully the breaking solar panels), and some of the other new features... but I can wait and I've been silently waiting. Lets not forget something that applies to many aspects of society... you tend to notice the a--holes and whiners more
  2. Guess That Mission

    Correct, the ISRU was already place on the surface, and that's loading the science lab and habitat in Munar orbit. The 2 piece rover and an additional hab + life support module are still docked to the orbital tug
  3. Guess That Mission

    Nope Here's a picture from a little later: Obviously, that craft with the mk3 parts is not designed to do a soft landing on Kerbin (it has no chutes... although maybe... just maybe it could pull off a powered landing)
  4. WHAT ATMOSPHERIC PLANET HAVE RETURNED FROM?

    Well, from surface, I mean - altitude. It has no hard surface, and stuff does explode after getting into negative altitude numbers (sidenote, I've thought about giving it a liquid surface to represent a supercritical fluid) The small amount of thrust could allow for atmospheric flight, in this case you can take the craft L/D and multiply that by TWR, and that needs to be above 1. This would still require a ludicrously huge craft beyond the capability of our computers, and massive numbers of staging (i'm not sure the craft would even work structurally) Videos prior to 1.0 shouldn't really be used, as before 1.0, thrust did not vary with Isp (instead rocket engines consumed more fuel at low altitude, instead of producing less thrust, so TWR was the same at 15 atmospheres or in a vacuum). Various "exploity" ways can be used (like abusing reaction wheels for stock propellers, as in on video posted by @AVaughan , and at least until 1.4.3 comes out, one can used the bugged fairings to make a craft that can drop its perapsis down to zero, and return back to space without suffering any drag losses. *Edit* fired up KSP and used KER to display thrust of engines at 0 altitude on Jool.... nope atmospheric flight is not possible with stock parts Aerospike: Thrust: 0.001 kN Vector: 0.003 kN Mammoth: 0.013 kN Now the mammoth is 15 tons, it would need ~15 kN of thrust to have a 1:1 TWR at 0.1 G. At 0.8 G (jool surface gravity), it would need ~120 kN of thrust to have a 1:1 TWR. 0.013/120 = 0.000108 TWR. Required L/D for atmospheric flight would be about 920:1. Not possible to do with a rocket design. You'll need a propeller that abuses reaction wheels, or a dragless fairing exploit
  5. Guess That Mission

  6. WHAT ATMOSPHERIC PLANET HAVE RETURNED FROM?

    Jool's surface gravity is rather low, making it more like a Saturn analogue than a Jupiter analogue. Are you talking about the "size of the gravity well" or the acceleration due to gravity at the surface? As for a denser atmosphere, without modified engines, you can't return from the surface of Jool because none of the engines produce enough thrust at 15 atmospheres IIRC. Maybe the mammoth and aerospike can lift themselves, but any such vessel would be too much for a normal computer to handle. Practically speaking, the most you can do is a Jool "limbo" (see how low into its atmosphere you can go and still get back up), or one way probes down into the abyss
  7. Colliders are a bit bugged with this update?

    Yea... I'm not sure why that ended up on this thread... but no one else is finding extenable bits breaking when they shouldn't?
  8. I think that heat is from being in contact with the hot skin of the capsule. The heat tolerance for the kerbals is much lower than the capsule. The skin of the capsule can be 1000K, and its less than half the max, so the heat bar doesn't show up on the capsule, but a kerbal can't stand 1000k, and their heatbar will appear at a much lower temp.
  9. Patch 1.4.3 to be released next week!

    Well, most of the mods I use don't seem to be broken by the small updates. 1.3 to 1.4 breaks them, but 1.4.1 to 1.4.2 didn't, so I doubt 1.4.3 will... Even though many still give me a message about the wrong version, they work (TAC, KER, Kopernicus, Scatterer)
  10. Back right after 0.23.5 came out, with the new SLS inspired 3.75m large parts (now only medium large with the making history 5m parts), I built my first attempt at a Saturn Vish replica, then did a Mun mission... I spotted an unnatural feature as I was on my final landing approach, I altered my approach to land close to it... and it was a fitting easter egg to find on my first flight of a Saturn V replica with the (then) new parts). It was also the first time I had seen that particular easter egg - IIRC its in the dark if you start up a newgame, and takes some time to get sunlight, so its good for me that I did the mission on an old sandbox save, rather than starting a new throwaway game to test it.
  11. Colliders are a bit bugged with this update?

    Has it been reported as a bug... I'm not even sure how to report this. Here's an image sequence that shows it better: (again, this used to work just fine) Looks like it should fit, its a tight fit for the rear gigantors, but it should fit) But nope, the one on the rear right (assuming the visible docking port is the front of the rover) of the rover breaks: Well, that ones was a bit close to the edge, maybe this is forgivable, no? The ones near the front surely shouldn't break right, they aren't sticking out like the rear one was: What the heck? That ain't right! And why are they always breaking on just that one side???
  12. Patch 1.4.3 to be released next week!

    Will this update or the ground positioning thing fix solar panels breaking when they shouldn't? Its really interfering with my gameplay and surface base construction. These designs had worked fine in the past, now....
  13. NTR is hard to deal with for manned missions, and storing propellant for long missions is a problem. It could be interesting if they made a design that could run on multiple propellants... like Lh2 for the outbound journey, and ISRU+water ice for the return. I'm more interested in nuclear-electric unmanned concepts, like JUICE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter_Icy_Moons_Explorer *edit* oops, confused that with this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter_Icy_Moons_Orbiter Which was sadly cancelled
  14. I've used some of my old designs that were tight/cramped fits but worked well in 1.3, and now I've often having bits go flying off in the weirdest ways. I wonder if its also related to the issues some have had with docking (where a bump that doesn't result in docking can fling the 2 craft apart at a velocity many times greater than the bump). Take this craft for instance: Its a rather tight fit But for some reason, the right (left on this image) gigantor near the docking port oftenbreaks off as it passes through the ramp-> cargobay connection. It shouldn't be hitting anything, if the ISRU doesn't bump anything, then that gigantor shouldn't. It happens even when the ramp is at a shallow angle (its not like its hitting the roof). It doesn't make any sense why its breaking off, but I'm finding many of my cramped 1.3 designs have their breakable bits breaking off in 1.4. Has anyone else noticed this?
  15. If not SSTOing, then I can mostly just decouple just before the periapsis rises above the atmosphere. For going to a moon, I can have it impact the moon... if I really don't want to clutter my tracking station list and use the empty stage as a propellant depot. For ejection stages, I tend to have a probe core on them so that they can decouple and retroburn, then aerobrake into low orbit for refueling for future use.