Aazard

Members
  • Content Count

    421
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

39 Excellent

About Aazard

  • Rank
    Sr. Spacecraft Engineer

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. @Starwaster Thanks for the reply, so the issue is only in editor, not in flight? does it effect mass readouts in KER or Mechjeb while in flight?
  2. Humm, I think your right. I'll repost the "full story" of my issue incase anyone has had this issue and found a fix. ------------------------------------------------- post from RO thread detailing issue ------------------------------------------------ anyone find a fix for the 100kg extra per crew per part attached to a crewed pod?? i Its become a "biggie" issue as I have a current obsession with very early single engine supersonic jets in rp0 and trying to find my design error i finally rebuilt from the ground up noting CoM/CoL, FAR data, notes i had made reading insanely complex papers online. Anyways part of it was noting weight of every part/fuel/life support and I was dumb founded the mass shrank from my original aprox 5050kg to aprox 1450kg. I figured "I MUST TEST THIS!!" and added a pilot and my heart sank it jumped to aprox 3250kg, add a 2nd crew and bang its aprox 5050kg. This more than doubles my weight with just 1 crew... if the mass was right this little jet might really push some serious altitude. TLDR: why are kerbals adding aprox 1800kg each? they weigh more than a 17m long supersonic jet? Even the fittest (or fattest) person that would reasonable be an astro/cosmo-naut might weigh 90 to 110kg (198LBS to 220LBS) so its like i'm carrying 18 people instead of one. HUMM thats like 36 people... i built a 1/3 sized concorde! Quote Edit
  3. anyone find a fix for the 100kg extra per crew per part attached to a crewed pod?? i Its become a "biggie" issue as I have a current obsession with very early single engine supersonic jets in rp0 and trying to find my design error i finally rebuilt from the ground up noting CoM/CoL, FAR data, notes i had made reading insanely complex papers online. Anyways part of it was noting weight of every part/fuel/life support and I was dumb founded the mass shrank from my original aprox 5050kg to aprox 1450kg. I figured "I MUST TEST THIS!!" and added a pilot and my heart sank it jumped to aprox 3250kg, add a 2nd crew and bang its aprox 5050kg. This more than doubles my weight with just 1 crew... if the mass was right this little jet might really push some serious altitude. TLDR: why are kerbals adding aprox 1800kg each? they weigh more than a 17m long supersonic jet? Even the fittest (or fattest) person that would reasonable be an astro/cosmo-naut might weigh 90 to 110kg (198LBS to 242LBS) so its like i'm carrying 18 people instead of one. HUMM thats like 36 people... i built a 1/3 sized concorde!
  4. I just noticed kerbals are about 1000kg extra mass when added to a craft, any one know why?
  5. Aazard

    Real Airplanes (RO, AJE, FAR)

    @winged i got it fixed, it was my own foolishness with dependencies. Now i just noticed kerbals are about 1000kg extra mass when added to a craft, any one know why?
  6. Aazard

    Real Airplanes (RO, AJE, FAR)

    @winged which is the mig-15 cockpit? Edit: quiztech parts seem to crash game load after mm patches but before menu when loading part names. running ksp64 1.3.1 on windows 10 any chance of just getting a drop box link to a single zip folder with just the requirments for the MIG-15 cockpit. I'm not sure if i'm being a noob or if i have incomparable files with my version of ksp
  7. Aazard

    Real Airplanes (RO, AJE, FAR)

    i noticed a small error in one of the ...?tree?... files that didnt add the tag "pressurize = false" or something similar "fixed it "in my install. Its not like i can get a plane over 50km anyways, but it limits manned test flights to under that altitude ... which i think is realistic?? I'm interested in both as options to test, which ever would the lightest would get my pick though. Can you help me get started on the lighter of the 2, but the MIG-15 looks more FAR friendly in its lines and is much more fitting the starting timeline. Just to give RP0 users an option for a slightly lighter and smaller cockpit, if lets say they were trying for rp0 starting node supersonic (399m/sec / mach 1.35+) stratosphere cruising (25km ceiling, 30km climb to stall ceiling) single engine jet. It could become an obsession lol. Honestly winged or anyone else reading this that really understands area ruling, mach tuck, pros/cons of different wing configurations etc i need help cracking 20m ceiling at 363m/sec (mach 1.22+)
  8. Aazard

    Real Airplanes (RO, AJE, FAR)

    @winged A while back i asked about mods you use supporting RP-0 and you said: "Mods which I am using to create planes are usually not supported by RP-0 so I'm creating custom support mostly for cockpits and BD Armory parts." Any chance you have a single seater UN-PRESSURIZED 1st/2nd generation fighter cockpit, like a F-86 Sabre or MIG-15 (or something else in service by December 1949), with RO configs and pricing in RP-0 thats in the starting tech nodes? I'm hoping to get an "official" single seater cockpit added to the start nodes of RP-0, as one is oddly missing. The mass/length savings alone would be welcomed.
  9. On the topic of leaky cockpits and the X-1 cockpits slight OP'ness... Where is our 1 seater plane cockpit in the RP1 starting tech nodes. We have the big cargo/bomber cockpit, the multi-crew passage cockpit and the 2-seater light bomber/fighter cockpit but we have no single seat light nose or in-line cockpit. Even un-pressurized something half the length and mass of the 2 seat cockpit would be very welcomed. Both the F-86 Sabre and the MIG-15 were in service by 1949 we could use one of their cockpits? Anything to save a few hundred kg and a meter of length lol. **MIG-15 & F-86 Sabre pictured** heck if someone can model or find an existing one, i'll take a Gloster Meteor cockpit or a ME-262 cockpit On the subject of jets, I noticed something about the break the sound barrier's "Fly faster than 343 m/s" requirement for competition. Doing some reading I found that Mach 1 AT SEA LEVEL is, depending on temperature and a few other factors, between 331m/sec to 342m/sec BUT at 11km, the start of the "Tropopause", the cooler part of the atmosphere between the Troposphere and Stratosphere @ roughly 11,000m to 19,000m (11km to 19km) Mach 1 is only 295m/sec. This is an altitude that takes little design effort to reach. Should contract reflect this? like over stating this contract only requires you to be in a state considered flying at this speed, regardless of altitude? Or an optional completion at the lower speed if altitude is over 11km? Just thinking...
  10. until you get the x-1 cockpit... that thing needs a nerf
  11. As to my earlier post, a starting single engine jet that fast was very hard for me, I think major improvements could be made. Its mostly empty tanks even with 12min worth of full throttle flying, so vastly reducing body and wing size would save alot of mass. But i'm having issues scaling it down, anyone know more about planes and area ruling than I do, using the limits of RP-1 starting tech nodes? I'd like to see it break its current 20,000m ceiling, 25,000m would be my goal and to get up closer to its engines max speed of 399m/sec in level flight at 10,000m, currently its limited to about 362m/sec in level flight at 10,000m. TLDR: help me redesign to save alot of mass while keeping/improving its ceiling/flight characteristics.
  12. @Bornholio try this quoted from my real aircraft or simmilar post, done with parts from the starting nodes of RP-1 as 1st aircraft, mostly for crewed attitude and speed records (anything upto 399m/sec due to the jet engines thermal limits) and the break the sound barrier crewed contract. Yes this design is infact Supersonic. At altitudes of 10km to 30km supersonic is Mach 1.21 which is aprox 357m/sec (1285 kmph or 798 mph), not trans-sonic which is mach 1.0 to 1.2 or aprox 341m/sec to 356m/sec. This has a max speed of Mach 1.22 or 362m/sec (1304 kmph or 810 mph, The first jets like this didn't fly until 1952 with the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-19 for the USSR and 1953 with the F100 Super Sabre for the USA.This flys January 23rd 1950. Here we go, it was the wing mass stopping me. Area ruling could be tweaked more, but it works. Even spalshes down full safely 100 meters mach 1, ceilings, cruise 18.500 meters and zoom lift ceiling 20008 meters (then it spins out) Even my U2 knock offs cant pass 20,000 meters, so I'm pretty happy stats here: its a Derwent V Performance Maximum thrust: 2,000 lbf (8.90 kN) at 16,000 rpm at sea level, Derwent V 4,000 lbf (17.79 kN) at 15,000 rpm at sea level Overall pressure ratio: 3.9:1 Turbine inlet temperature: 1,560 °F (849 °C) Specific fuel consumption: 1.17 lb/(lbf h) (119.25 kg/(kN h)), Derwent V 1.02 1.28 lb/(lbf h) (103.97 kg/(kN h)) Thrust-to-weight ratio: 2.04 lbf/lb (0.0199 kN/kg), Derwent V 3.226 1.724 lbf/lb (0.0316 kN/kg) Military, static: 2,000 lbf (8.90 kN) at 16,600 rpm at sea level, Derwent V 3,500 lbf (15.57 kN) at 14,600 rpm at sea level Cruising, static: 1,550 lbf (6.89 kN) at 15,400 rpm at sea level, Derwent V 3,000 lbf (13.34 kN) at 14,000 rpm at sea level Idling, static: 120 lbf (0.53 kN) at 5,500 rpm at sea level, Derwent V 120 lbf (0.53 kN) at 5,500 rpm at sea level
  13. on this note... @Bornholio I think its time for a quick chat about any recent changes to getting a Dev build of RP-1 Seeing as its abit "tricky" keeping everything updated to "most current supported version" of the "required/recommended/supported" mods with any needed fixes or additions (scrapyard returning part reuse to KCT for example) for the user to get the "FULL" RP-1 experience , running on KSP 1.3.1. I'm personally starting to feel abit lost and I've been around career mods for RSS/RO from the "realistic progression lite" days.. Note this is no way said disrespectfully, I know things take time to get done, and I thank everyone involved for their time
  14. I've been doing some testing of whats possible the "start" of of career, before any tech unlocks. This started with 2 nearly obsessive quests to finding: a tier 0 orbital vehicle... Which i did find in 79 second RD-100 core with 2x 79 sec RD-100 boosters, carrying a Cluster of 9x 56.5 second WAC sounding rockets, in a radially attached 6 to 2 to 1 rockets, with a "payload" of a sounding rocket core, barometer and thermometer. ...and: designing a single Derwent V engine, Bzzard cockpit jet that could break mach 1 (342m/sec), cruise at 15km and reach 20km+ in a spike climb Which I did also, but learning area ruling took abit to get right,but well worth it, max speed level ended up being 360m/sec. I found a few things that escaped me over many RP-0/RP-1 saves. One was that while I was tweaking a WAC boosted by RD-100 sounding rocket I was talking with a friend, and I mentioned its "impressive" altitude capabilities to him. His first question was "where can it reach", something i had never really tried, so i added "down range" tracker to mechjeb window flew it east in a lobbed arc (75 degree pitch @ 80m/sec to 26km quickly making way to 5 degree pitch with 60km Spin/Seperation)) with final AP hitting about 200km. Watching it travel I saw the down range tracker hit 1420km just as i crossed back into upper atmosphere, almost 1650 km before it burned up. My friend was unimpressed, but I realized that I had always assumed that water, shores, and forests were my only early science point hunting grounds other than a time limited tight to fly polar orbit (and that only opened up 8, with luck, near in space telemetry reports, about 18 science), but now I had access to atleast some of them. So i put a 1500km radius on a map with Cape Canaveral launch as the center and got this: This compared to biome map showed me at least tropics and grasslands in my reach, but mountains, deserts and tiaga where very close by Texas, likely reachable by adding 1 additional WAC stage to my WAC/RD-100 sounding rocket. Savanna was oddly present at the top of South America, tundra was in Quebec (my current RD-100 LV with 3 WAC's in a 2 to 1 setup would reach both likely), and ice cape started in Greenland ((my current RD-100 LV with 5 WAC's in a 2 to 2 to 1 setup would reach it, if not the 6 to 2 to 1 setup would). So Basicly instead of doing very little useful in the "start" of career I found I could collect ALOT of science and get more free VAB/SPH/R&D upgrade points faster. About 11 missions should net you all the science you can get, but film canisters are a pain to recover without burning up, requiring a breaking setup or makeshift heatshield. The second was that I was researching tech and spending upgrade points poorly. I used to through all my starting efforts into better rockets and spent upgrades without a plan. Now I set aside the 1st 20 upgrade points for the VAB build rate, giving me decet build times for even large starting rockets, then dump everything into R&D. I now research buying the cheapest nodes first (buying as many separate nodes as i can each time I buy) but change research order to this: 1st flight node, for X1 cockpit > 1st avionics node for batteries > 2nd avionics node for Sputnik > 1st solar power node, for solar panels > 1st rocket node, for XASR-1/RD-101/A9 > 1st SRB node > 2nd SRB node, for castor/baby sergeant >1st materials node, for service module tanks > 3rd avionics node, for explorer core > 1st science node > 2nd science node > 4th avionics node, for early controlled core > first RCS node for 1kn thruster > 1st heat shield node > 2nd rocket node > 3rd rocket node > 4th rocket node > lunar range comm node Rushing manned sub-orbital flights directly to solar panels is a huge speed up for satellite missions, and with RD-101/A9/XASR-1 rocket upgrades moon impact/flyby missions are possible, baby sergeants help that further. Also rushing the 1st orbit flight ASAP after the sub-orbital return mission injects your space rogramwith alot of useful cash. Also the lack of any starting add-on battery makes little sense to me. In 1942 mercury oxide - zinc and by 1949 alkaline were in use, sure they dont recharge and are larger/heavier then more modern batteries but there were in use according to Wikipedia. It would be helpful to have some way of adding power craft. See Wikipedia info here: Cell chemistry Also known as Electrode Re­charge­able Com­mercial­ized Voltage Energy density Specific power Cost† Discharge efficiency Self-discharge rate Shelf life Anode Cathode Cutoff Nominal 100% SOC by mass by volume year V V V MJ/kg (Wh/kg) MJ/L (Wh/L) W/kg Wh/$ ($/kWh) % %/month years Mercury oxide-zinc Mercuric oxide Mercury cell Zinc Mercuric oxide No 1942–[6]1996[7] 0.9[8] 1.35[8] 0.36–0.44 (99–123)[8] 1.1–1.8 (300–500)[8] 2[6] Alkaline Zn/MnO 2 LR Zinc Manganese (IV) oxide No 1949[9] 0.9[10] 1.5[11] 1.6[10] 0.31–0.68 (85–190)[12] 0.90–1.56 (250–434)[12] 50[12] 0.48 (2067)[12] 45–85[12] 0.17[12] 5–10[4]