Jump to content

What did you do in KSP today?


Xeldrak
 Share

Recommended Posts

Yeah, probably one of the best patches since we now have a working weapon system that is quite well balanced and BDA sorta died for me ever since they broke space combat with turreted weapons (which was the whole selling point for me regarding that mod...).

dLy90R9.png

Feels like we have come full circle though, the first combat mod i ever used (and even developed my own variant of) was the DYJ gattling gun, and these fireworks after some more testing appear to work on the same principle, firing a small physics object that can bounce off and impact whatever it contacts (velocity is adjustable, and the projectile is a bit phasy and can sometimes pass thru a target entirely, but it works well otherwise.

Z1so6E5.png

Fairly performance friendly all things considering (just do not try to fire all 8 shots from 5 launchers simultaneously or it will slow the game to a crawl :)...

Qnhvu5v.png

I also found that you can use KAL to jack up the velocity to a extent that it will 1 shot kill ANY vessel in game...  Velocity of ~280-320 pretty much cores out anything with a few well aimed shots.  Im so using these things on all my craft as point defense replacement for the part count savings alone, but im not going to use the speed boosting via KAL (except maybee on battleships which would make sense to have such insane point defenses as to take down any other ship) as it is just overpowered and has no working counter to it short of modding the game.

And as much as the weather sucks today, it actually gives me a reason to be able to enjoy a few hours of KSP time id normally be spending outdoors...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crashed my JNSQ Duna lander.  Again.  All was going perfectly until the drogues deployed, then the lander began spinning violently followed by tumbling.  Even enabling RCS I couldn't get it back under control before impacting terrain - due to the low pressure, even the drogues can't deploy until close to the surface, leaving little time to react.  I really don't understand what is going on, because the outpost that I previously landed - while somewhat hard to handle - didn't react like this to the drogue deployment and the basic designs are similar (2.5m core with quad 1.25m radial landing engines with drogues on top)

Fo4rOKDh.png

T80U8pih.png

Edited by Cavscout74
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Cavscout74 said:

Crashed my JNSQ Duna lander.  Again.  All was going perfectly until the drogues deployed, then the lander began spinning violently followed by tumbling.  Even enabling RCS I couldn't get it back under control before impacting terrain - due to the low pressure, even the drogues can't deploy until close to the surface, leaving little time to react.  I really don't understand what is going on, because the outpost that I previously landed - while somewhat hard to handle - didn't react like this to the drogue deployment and the basic designs are similar (2.5m core with quad 1.25m radial landing engines with drogues on top)

Fo4rOKDh.png

T80U8pih.png

I know that Airbrakes don't do a massive amount of slowing but if you are going to use them and assuming that that design is so you come down through the atmosphere nose first. They should be 2 per nacelle , down either side of the landing gear pods so that when they are deployed they are at the back and causing the rear of the ship to want to stay at the back. Your design is causing a mid ship pivot point and making it more likely to tumble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probe designs, first updating an existing design with new science experiments to send to Venus, Mars, Vesta and Ceres (with different solar panels on each) and then creating something completely new for an ambitious sub-decade trip to Pluto,

Then I noticed some rocket engines had no sound, then I discovered that I hadn’t updated a mod that needed updating and then I discovered CKAN hadn’t refreshed itself and there were two dozen updates waiting… 

So then I had to go through all my modded KSP copies and update them all; fortunately the same mods needed updating in a lot of places which made it go a lot quicker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the new update I have started a new career save, with the goal of finally going to all the planetary bodies. But first gotta brush up on my Apollo Era designs and taking advantage of all the new features of the last few updates! Mainly kerbal-construction ;D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Caerfinon said:

Bill completing the scuba dive portion of the KUMA Dive Certification test...  (The flag was Bill's idea. He's such a kidder).

TEegOCS.png

Everytime I see your submersible I think, "that is cool, I want that" and yet I am reasonably certain I have it in the pile of mods I have downloaded but never installed. Sigh!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, ColdJ said:

I know that Airbrakes don't do a massive amount of slowing but if you are going to use them and assuming that that design is so you come down through the atmosphere nose first. They should be 2 per nacelle , down either side of the landing gear pods so that when they are deployed they are at the back and causing the rear of the ship to want to stay at the back. Your design is causing a mid ship pivot point and making it more likely to tumble.

Actually it descends tail first & the brakes are as far up as I can make them without extending the radial fuel tanks.   The gear deploying makes it slightly wobbly, which makes sense as they add drag to the "front" during descent.  But it is still ok right up until the chutes deploy, then it goes haywire - and it spins around its long axis initially.  Very fast along its long axis - which you would expect would stabilize the craft (like a bullet), but then it tumbles.  Maybe that is just a result of trying to regain control, but that phase only lasts a few seconds before the ground rises up to smash the lander.   I think I just need to do an almost entirely propulsive landing because the chutes deploy so late.  Gonna try again but then I may just need to redesign the entire lander.  I've used the same basic design for stock Duna, but JNSQ Duna is not being cooperative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Cavscout74 said:

Actually it descends tail first & the brakes are as far up as I can make them without extending the radial fuel tanks.   The gear deploying makes it slightly wobbly, which makes sense as they add drag to the "front" during descent.  But it is still ok right up until the chutes deploy, then it goes haywire - and it spins around its long axis initially.  Very fast along its long axis - which you would expect would stabilize the craft (like a bullet), but then it tumbles.  Maybe that is just a result of trying to regain control, but that phase only lasts a few seconds before the ground rises up to smash the lander.   I think I just need to do an almost entirely propulsive landing because the chutes deploy so late.  Gonna try again but then I may just need to redesign the entire lander.  I've used the same basic design for stock Duna, but JNSQ Duna is not being cooperative.

Ummm, if it lands tail first then your Airbrakes are on backwards. Probably doesn't matter with KSP physics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if this works for a descent on Duna but I have found that when I get an aircraft tumbling out of control, that if I go counter intuitive and rotate and pitch in the directions I am already tumbling, that I more often than not stablise and regain control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, ColdJ said:

Ummm, if it lands tail first then your Airbrakes are on backwards. Probably doesn't matter with KSP physics.

True, but it never has in the past.  And it didn't for the small base I already landed on Duna.  Mounting them correctly would have them too far towards the tail too.  

11 minutes ago, ColdJ said:

I don't know if this works for a descent on Duna but I have found that when I get an aircraft tumbling out of control, that if I go counter intuitive and rotate and pitch in the directions I am already tumbling, that I more often than not stablise and regain control.

Which might work if I had more than a few seconds before impact.  I appreciate the help btw, not trying to be difficult.  Just having an odd problem that isn't making much sense.   I'm thinking more and more that I will need to do an almost entirely propulsive landing and not worry about the chutes.  That might leave me short of dV for the return to orbit though - but if I land close enough to my outpost, it has some left-over fuel from it's landing. 

Here are the two designs for comparison - and bigger outpost landed mostly safely, just breaking a single gear while the smaller lander keeps losing it when the chutes deploy. 

Outpost:

umHu8gch.png

Lander:

T80U8pih.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tried yet again to land on Duna.  When that still didn't work, made some edits to the lander design & cheated it to Duna to try.  Same result

AXHQhlZh.png

The first try was actually going somewhat ok - but I started braking too late and slammed into the ground at about 80 m/s.  And it was still getting hard to control after parachute deployment, which makes no sense to me

VPD4VDJh.png

Redesigned lander taking a try - it was more stable right up until I deployed the chutes

P4vmDSXh.png

At that point it started spinning around the long axis again, then tumbling.  Makes zero sense, the chutes are adding drag to the top (aft end) and the fuel is set to burn from the top tanks down to the bottom, keeping as much mass as possible in the bottom (front during descent).  And this one had more fuel and had burned less, putting more mass up front than the original lander.   And the rotation it picks up should stabilize it more rather than cause it to tumble on all 3 axis.

IojISUeh.png

 

Edited by Cavscout74
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cavscout74 said:

At that point it started spinning around the long axis again, then tumbling.  Makes zero sense, the chutes are adding drag to the top (aft end) and the fuel is set to burn from the top tanks down to the bottom, keeping as much mass as possible in the bottom (front during descent)

Looking at the pics I think the shortness of your craft combined with sideways momentum and algorythmic atmosphere mean that due to your chutes being not at the very tip of the nose it is tumbling you around the connection points of the chutes.  Some smaller drogue chutes added  up around the grabber and  manually released when not considered safe but will deploy, might get your rear end headed in the right direction for long enough that when you do  deploy the main chutes they will pull up along the length rather than at an oblique angle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, ColdJ said:

Looking at the pics I think the shortness of your craft combined with sideways momentum and algorythmic atmosphere mean that due to your chutes being not at the very tip of the nose it is tumbling you around the connection points of the chutes.  Some smaller drogue chutes added  up around the grabber and  manually released when not considered safe but will deploy, might get your rear end headed in the right direction for long enough that when you do  deploy the main chutes they will pull up along the length rather than at an oblique angle.

That makes some sense - although these are drogues.  The thin JSNQ Duna atmosphere won't even allow main chutes to deploy - even the drogues set at 0.02 deployment pressure deploy at less than 5000m.  But sticking a pair or so of the radial drogues to the nose instead of on top of the radial tanks might work better. 

The weirdest part is this basic design with minor changes has been my normal Duna lander for years without any of these issues going into the thicker stock Duna atmosphere but the near vacuum JNSQ Duna is giving me fits

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Cavscout74 said:

The weirdest part is this basic design with minor changes has been my normal Duna lander for years without any of these issues going into the thicker stock Duna atmosphere but the near vacuum JNSQ Duna is giving me fits

Yes. It doesn't take much playing around with atmospheric algorythyms to mess up everything that used to work in stock. :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...