Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for '창원콜걸【KaKaotalk:ZA31】200%보장 전지역 모두 출장가능●●서천부경샵'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • General
    • Announcements
    • The Daily Kerbal
  • Kerbal Space Program 2
    • KSP 2 Discussion
    • KSP 2 Dev Diaries
  • General KSP
    • KSP Discussion
    • Suggestions & Development Discussion
    • Challenges & Mission ideas
    • The Spacecraft Exchange
    • KSP Fan Works
  • Community
    • Welcome Aboard
    • Science & Spaceflight
    • Kerbal Network
    • The Lounge
  • Gameplay and Technical Support
    • Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
    • Technical Support (PC, unmodded installs)
    • Technical Support (PC, modded installs)
    • Technical Support (PlayStation 4, XBox One)
  • Add-ons
    • Add-on Discussions
    • Add-on Releases
    • Add-on Development
  • Making History Expansion
    • Making History Missions
    • Making History Discussion
    • Making History Support
  • Breaking Ground Expansion
    • Breaking Ground Discussion
    • Breaking Ground Support
  • International
    • International
  • KerbalEDU Forums
    • KerbalEDU
    • KerbalEDU Website

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Skype


Twitter


Location


Interests

  1. 240 meters in length. 200 meters at the waterline. The craft is 39 meters wide with a maximum deck width of 19 Mk3 sidepanels, meaning in theory my Cipher jet should be able to land on it *horizontally.* The deck sits around 21 meters above the waterline, though it's slightly frontheavy so it's not perfectly level. I usually aim for 24-25 meters altitude at the end of an approach. The craft itself is IIRC 44 meters in height, but about half of that is the tower. It's 600 parts and moderately laggy but still perfectly playable on my 8-year-old laptop. Re: Splats.. Yup. Splattering cra
  2. https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=ru&tl=en&u=https://forum.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/index.php?topic=11365.0;all https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=46198.0 A model of the cancelled UR-500MK launch vehicle with TKS installed. A kerolox rocket, was proposed to replace Proton. "NK-33 and NK-43 engines: a four-unit 11K98 (15 tons per orbit 200 km / 51.6 °, 11-12.5 t on SSO) and seven-block 11K99 (30-31.5 t to orbit 200 km / 51.6 °, 25.5-26.8 t on SSO). "
  3. Thank you, HvP. I could not find those items in the coupling, or any other category. I checked the validity of my KSP installation (using the Steam client) and found 200+ files needing update. After fixing, I have the engine plates.
  4. Now SN15 used did an 4:30 minutes burn reaching 10 km, that is an average velocity of 133 km/h who is car speeds not even propeller planes, driving at 120 km/h you do 2 km / minute. Why so slow? MaxQ Structural? doubt it forces on forward fins coming down is pretty large and sideways, TWR? well Wikipedia list over 200 ton trust. Safety? I say doing an shorter burn is safer as the engines run for an shorter time so less time for something going wrong. What is I missing.
  5. And I always use them unless there are good reasons not to. So, on Rosetta, I have 200% on the rear and 100% on the nose. I tried 200% on the nose but with the layout of this undercart, hard braking causes it to tumble. (In this case, I actually wanted 200% merely to hold the craft until the engines had fully spooled. Turns out that 100% on the nose and 200% rear while stationary will hold it (almost) on full dry power and one triggers the afterburners instantly exactly upon releasing the brakes.)
  6. I use 200% brakes. 'Chutes might actually be a good system for some larger fighters and bombers and especially if for some reason a tanker is landing with fuel. Though I suppose tankers will likely use either Wheesley or if that's too anemic, Goliath engines. I personally think Goliath would just be too crazy for something 14x8, and that putting that extra several tonnes into folding wings or something is probably better.
  7. You're all missing a very simple solution in the form of 200% brakes
  8. I use KAC’s transfer window planner and find it pretty accurate. I usually set an alarm for maybe 20 days before it says, then when it goes off, design/build/launch whatever I’m sending and leave in orbit of Kerbin. Then I use MJ’s Porkchop Plotter as described above and it usually ties in with the KAC prediction. I’m happy not to go for the lowest possible dV as sometimes it’ll only cost maybe 100 dV more to go in say 5 days than in 200 days. Edit: also worth noting that Transfer Window Planner suggested above is actually another mod by TriggerAu (who did KAC) so presumably uses the
  9. Well it works with docking ports in KSP. In short you have two docking ports around 4 structural panels apart for max effect, set magnetism on front to 0% back to 200% and you get an constant force, it stacks so using 8 or 64 is that much stronger, you only need one forward port even if combining 64 at rear
  10. I don’t think there is one (not directly). Efficiency is handled by the Isp (specific impulse) of the engine which is found in the ModuleEngines/Key section. If you like maths, you can find the answer using m = F / Isp where m = mass of fuel in Kg used in 1s, F = Force in Newtons (thrust for engines) and Isp is the specific impulse of the engine. I’m not sure of the context of your question but if you are trying to change the efficiency, just change the second number of the 2 separated by a comma in section mentioned above as this is basically the Isp the game uses. Higher
  11. In order for me to reach the 50 years and 95 days my ship has I needed to turn on every single habitat. If I missed even one the highest I could have gotten was 44 years. I designed it this way intentionally. I also ensured my nom o matics were enabled and loaded the craft up with batteries. If you watch the video linked in the post (here), you can see the ship being fast forwarded through 200 days or more and because everything is turned on none of my resources drop. If I had even one habitat turned off I wouldn't have reached the 50 years and 95 days I had before I started the vide
  12. I can't remember if I've done the math on this before or not.... 120 tonnes dry mass, 30 tonnes landing reserve prop, and 100 tonnes payload to LEO, so mf is 250 tonnes. 1200 tonnes prop at staging but that presumably includes those 30 tonnes in the header tanks so m0 is 1420 tonnes. So dV expended to LEO is 6473 m/s. We know that Starship needs all six engines to light at staging to help avoid overmuch gravity drag, which means a fairly lofted trajectory and some gravity drag losses -- probably as high as 600 m/s. So we can ballpark staging velocity at LEO - 5873 or roughly 2 km/s.
  13. Leg 16 [prev] [next] [progress] [click + arrow] slideshow Departed: -59.210/31.415 @ 3.257.3.28 Airborne: 45m Heading: 243 Distance: 297.3 km Altitude: 2.0 km Arrival: -60.337/-27.427 Yes, I know what you're thinking... "Come on, Dick! Get a move on!" Or you'd even completely forgotten multimillionaire Dick Smith's solo attempt to circumnavigate Kerbin by helicopter?? Nope, it's still happening. At snail's pace. What a great flight, though! The scenery was great. The transition to hover was effortless. And we got a bonus (pa
  14. KSP is not known to tackle down all the bugs of a major release before issuing the next - it's exactly the opposite. Once a bug happens, you can expect it to linger for years without being correctly handled. So, unfortunately, every bug that happened in the past cannot be considered completely fixed and need to be considered a probable suspect when coincidences are detected on 'new bugs' (that, not rarely, are only different side effects of a root cause that was not tackled down). So the thing is specific to Mk1 Illuminator? That makes things easier (or less hard) to replic
  15. @Lisias I think the ablator resource also has a "storage tank" on part's that have ablator... hmm. RESOURCE { name = Ablator amount = 200 maxAmount = 200 } from HeatShield1.cfg. Could it help to set maxAmount to some value that's big enough? This is from a save: RESOURCE { name = RefundingForKSP111x amount = 1150.0000000000002 maxAmount = 0 flowState = False isTweakable = False
  16. I'm in Sandbox and in the GDLV3 (doesn't really matter the rocket) and I lose connection at ~100,000m above in a suborbital trajectory. For the ComSat Lx, it's around ~70,000. Others vary between ~70,000 and 200,000. Also, it doesn't matter if theres an exposed antenna or not. https://imgur.com/a/w7ueI58 Ha, I've been on here since 2019. Anyway, yes, my probe has power, and I'm in sandbox mode. Someone mentioned something about CommNet, but I'm not entirely sure what.
  17. Yeah, it's a pretty niche "record". The longest time a "US" "crew capsule" has been in space. Because the Shuttle used to just drop people off and come back, it never stayed there that long. The Russians tend to rotate their Soyuz capsules, but they routinely stay up there more than 200 days, so 168 days is only a US record. The Russians can pretty easily rotate their crews through different capsules, with a departing crew just taking the oldest one up there back home. That might become difficult for the US, if there end up being both Boeing and SpaceX capsules up there, because I don't t
  18. Last year In the summer I was playing ksp on career mode and having fun as usual until one day I was viewing planets in the Tracking station and boom my game crashed. Now I got used to the game crashing alot because the game would backup and usually fix the problem. but not this time. when the game crashed I was like Oh okay that sucks welp reload. so I went on to doing that but when I pressed resume save and pressed the load it didn't load. all I heard was the music which at first I thought this was a little problem but later I realized I couldn't even load it even after closing the applica
  19. Hi all, I had a big ship hit within 200 m of a passive seismometer on the Mun and only got 3 science points- very annoying. I'm not the only one. @RizzoTheRat Perhaps we should read the directions: What point? I did some trials: My best effort was >0.9999 at 3978 m. It impacted >1000 m/s and I got >100 science. That's more like it! Using the Impact Marker in Kerbal Engineer Redux is very helpful. I don't know if the optimal distance is the same for other celestial bodies. Please report if you try it elsewhere. Good luck!
  20. You have reached 200 posts! Congratulations!! :D

    You are also almost to 500 rep points!

    1. Stormpilot

      Stormpilot

      Oh hey your right! Thanks!

      Spoiler

      I would like but the forums say: YOU HAVE GIVEN TOO MANY REACTIONS TODAY :( 

       

  21. Dacott Kerman, ”hey is that a docking port?” -Dacott Kerman while “litho braking” with a space station docking port at 200 m/s.
  22. The chair has a 200 unit battery, it does not produce electricity, just uses it to power everything. That was where the drain was. Separately the Porpoise point drive no longer produces electricity because it runs off it to heat and push water, but the sub runs on RTGs so that isn't a problem.
  23. i think i only stayed here until page 200 how is this thread still alive
  24. And thus total amount of heat to warm the cabin or to leak and self-ignite on a tank damage, say, on a hit by ground or on the upper stage destruction, is by an order of magnitude greater. All initial presentations were about the Crew Dragon landing on legs and engines, rather than chutes, and they were trying to proof that the chutes are too heavy, etc. And as the Dragon uses the crewed capsule as a way to make all engines reusable, they have to keep all fuel in the capsule, so inside the capsule heat protection, right under the crew cabin. To vent by RCS, say, 200 kg of the
×
×
  • Create New...