Rakaydos
-
Posts
2,522 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Rakaydos
-
-
4 minutes ago, paul_c said:
Doesn't weight come into it at some stage? You're launching 100+ aerials at 70kg each, that's 7000kg you're sending to a far-away planet.
Compare with a piloted spaceship to the far away place, at about 900kg for the CM and astronaut. No aerials whatsoever needed.
Even if you take into consideration you HAVE to do a return trip to get the science points back home, 1) returned points are greater than transmitted ones 2) if you can get there (with the Caveman transfer), you can get back 3) the weight saving can be used towards the extra fuel for the return trip 4) piloted trips mean you can gather crew report science too. I would have thought some maths shows that (1) alone, means a piloted return trip gets you over the line with less trip(s) than a remote trip.
Obviously for Mun and Minmus, remote probes make sense. Its fairly easy to set up a relay constellation and/or put enough comms power onto a craft to do it. But you'll need to send a pilot for the full points from crew reports.
I think you missed the context. This is planning for post-game, caveman-tech monolith hunting. That requires kerbnet access, which crew cannot provide.
-
9 hours ago, fourfa said:
I found it was *very* marginal to get a Hitchhiker to orbit in actual practice. Like, juuuuust barely but you're definitely not taking it anywhere. You'd need docking to make it useful, but you'd be better off just skipping the Hitchhiker and launching and docking the useful things directly.
Maybe it could be the core of a space station but without EVA that means leaving Bob floating near it and having to re-rendezvous him each time. I can't see it being worth the effort. Or - maybe you were thinking as a KSC-based rover parts transport? yeah, that could work
You may or my not have been able to make out my "KSC biome rover" design. I'm thinking 16 hitchhikers and a pair of pods for reaction wheels rolling off the runway, getting 3km clearance for lag reasons, and mounting docking ports where they can link up with previous hitchiker rolls. That means I only need about 100, 120 launches, plus a buttload of engineer time to mount the antennas.
-
Yea, looking it over, hitchhiker containers look like my best bet, 18 parts per part.
But starting my actual caveman run....
Day 1Spoiler
Initial "rover" missions to unlock science.
This was a parachute accident, but was good for an extra biome.
First space-rated design
Went up...
Came down (with a spin)
Survived entry and descent
and landing
Orbit shot
orbit achielved!
-
5 hours ago, Blaarkies said:
There's a tool for that
https://ksp-commnet-planner.blaarkies.comHmm. My prior calculations (done many updates ago) seem to be off by a solid order of magnatude.
If this is correct, I need 30,000 HG5s near kerbin, to link to 20,000 HG5s near duna.
I know I can (could?) reasonably put ~10 antennas up in a launch, but there's a big difference between a hundred launch campaign and a thousand launch campaign.
Can storage parts bypass the launchpad limit? is there even storage in caveman tech levels?
-
Since the final update is in the news, I may be coming back to this. I've long had a plan for building my own DSN with spammed mass relay antennas, in order to monolith-hunt on Eve/gilly and Duna/Ike at closest approach.
I havnt played since the SLS part update, though.
What caveman-related changes will I need to watch out for/shamelesly abuse, when completing a basic Caveman run in preparation for Caveman 2: Monolith Hunter?
-
13 hours ago, Spacescifi said:
OK...you got me there.
Yet I also think being pulled into a headrest pillow repeatedly won't be so bad.
Congratulations, you just added a piston system, one that only works for the heads of crew members who are strapped in at the time. The entire point of the Orion piston system is to be a pillow for the whole spacecraft at once. A really well designd pillow, that allows higher useful acceleration by dampening the detonation pulse into a continuous stroke of acceleration.
-
And because this author is notorious for not getting the point let me give an example with numbers.
You're floating in your cabin and the captain says they're about to engage the Orion drive, so you float over to the back wall. There's a countdown, and when it reaches zero the entire room seems to suddenly start moving. The back wall impacts you at 3.6 km an hour, and you bounce away from it because you're still in zero g.
One second later, the room jerks forward again, and you impact at another 3.6 km an hour. This happens again once per second for about 10 minutes.
That's 600 m per second of Delta v at an acceleration of 1 m per second per second. 1/10 of an earth gravity.
-
The problem is, each munition in an Orion drive only releases a single pulse, which passes over your entire spacecraft at almost the speed of light. That means your change in velocity per pulse, is however many meters per second, times an insanely small fraction of a second.
Basically if you don't have a piston on the back of the spacecraft, your passenger's legs have to be the piston,to absorb the spacecraft suddenly moving when it wasn't before.
It also means that there is no acceleration between bomb pulses. That means there's nothing to hold you against the ground, so the next time the bomb pulses, you're going to fall against the back wall, based on how much you bounce off of it the last time it went off.
The piston isn't to moderate the acceleration. Is to moderate the change in acceleration... Meters per second per second per second, which is technically called jerk.
-
5 hours ago, RealKerbal3x said:
Yeah, you can see them painting the nosecone at the end of this video:
But where did you see that they're painting SN5 white as well? I don't see any sign of that.
Speculation on NSF is that the white sections Will go to join the other lunar lander mock-ups.
-
On 10/13/2020 at 4:22 PM, Nuke said:
well if you assume the plane is and will remain completely prependicular to the motion vector. and if you assume that impacts will be infrequent. but take this up to near relativistic speeds and every little hydrogen atom represents a lot of energy and the forces on the moon would be fairly consistent. assuming a prependicular starting condition, the first impulse will slant the orbit such that there will be a nonzero prograde component to the force vectors. it will be tiny and would take a long time to build up any meaningful orbital energy.
there will also be natural plane tilt caused by the acceleration of the host planet. the moons will accelerate to keep up and this will tilt in the forward direction. impacts here translate into a retrograde component. managing throttle and velocity might find a breakeven point, but if you wanted to accelerate faster (and you would) you would have to re adjust the orbits of the moons to compensate for any prograde/retrograde force components. but hey if you are moving a gas giant, so you can probably figure it out and have the tech to make it work.
You're missing my point. On average, every single point in the orbit will receive the same number of relativistic hydrogen ions. As such, it doesn't alter the plane of the orbit so much as it shifts the plane of the orbit aft. This provides a drag force back on the gas giant due to gravitational coupling, which the fusion candle will have to compensate for.
-
1 hour ago, Nuke said:
wouldnt the space debris hitting the moons do a plane change on them? as soon as the orbital plane wasn't perfectly perpendicular to the angle of motion, you would get a prograde/retrograde component. your orbits would either spiral out and you could lose them or spiral them into the roche limit. keeping them in place might require they have their own thrusters to cancel out any thrust they get from incoming space debris, which always hits one side.
Statistically, debris should be striking evenly on all points of the orbit. It's no worse than the planet the moon's orbiting flying out from underneath them. If a piece of debris is large enough that the impact could significantly alter the inclination at a single point, you should be able to see it coming far enough out to Miss it if you try hard enough.
-
19 hours ago, Spacescifi said:
At what tonnage is a spaceship too heavy?
Building a gas-giant colony ship is not as difficult as it looks.
- Build a fusion candle. It's called a "candle" because you're going to burn it at both ends. The center section houses a set of intakes that slurp up gas giant atmosphere and funnel it to the fusion reactors at each end.
- Shove one end deep down inside the gas giant, and light it up. It keeps the candle aloft, hovering on a pillar of flame.
- Light up the other end, which now spits thrusting fire to the sky. Steer with small lateral thrusters that move the candle from one place to another on the gas giant. Steer very carefully, and signal your turns well in advance. This is a big vehicle.
- Balance your thrusting ends with exactness. You don't want to crash your candle into the core of the giant, or send it careening off into a burningly elliptical orbit.
- When the giant leaves your system, it will take its moons with it. This is gravity working for you. Put your colonists on the moons.
- For safety's sake, the moons should orbit perpendicular to the direction of travel. Otherwise your candle burns them up.
- They should also rotate in the same plane, with one pole always illuminated by your candle (think "portable sunlight")
- The other pole absorbing the impact of whatever interstellar debris you should hit (think "don't build houses on this side"
-
4 hours ago, kerbiloid said:
They will mine Tesla lithium from spent Tesla batteries?
That's called recycling, and yes.
-
6 hours ago, KSK said:
Godspeed SN25 “Funny - it worked last time.”
I'm calling "it worked last time " as the second rocket lab launched to have reusability.
-
2 hours ago, zolotiyeruki said:
What are they hoping for with SN6's 150m hop that they didn't get with the previous hop? It seems like "same song, 2nd verse" to me. Or is it just practice?
Practicing countdown and fueling ops, and other mission control related operations. In general, they want to figure out how not to have so many holds.
-
3 minutes ago, YNM said:
Wonder how are they getting comms issue but camera works ?
Dragon can talk with the ground, or radio the station, but is having trouble connecting the CAT-5 cable to connect "hard line" with the station.
As with most aerospace problems, "I could probably solve this with my boot if I could GET TO the problem."
-
10 hours ago, StrandedonEarth said:
Oops, I jinxed it... Horus was not appeased.
At least on Saturday I won’t be trying to follow this thread while working
Especially since Horus does not have storms in his portfolio. Set does. And they're kind of enemies. By invoking Horus you brought the wrath of Evil Day.
-
14 hours ago, mikegarrison said:
I wasn't actually hoping to be prophetic.
Thou shalt not invoke the demon Murphy.
-
At 500 starlinks a flight, that's still 60 flights every 5 years for the full constellation, if I recall correctly. One flight a month baseline load, while also supporting other missions, can justify plenty of reuse.
-
15 minutes ago, Nightside said:
Is there a jet stream?
There's a super rotation, which I've always assumed to be like a jet stream on steroids. Anyone want to correct me on that?
-
39 minutes ago, mikegarrison said:
I know we're not supposed to talk politics, but it is impossible to avoid when discussing funding priorities. This really hamstrings our ability to discuss this sort of thing.
There is an official statement from the NASA administrator that he wants to get human space flight added to any post coronavirus economic stimulus spending bill. I won't get into why space flight is considered economic stimulus, to avoid the politics.
-
12 hours ago, tater said:
Even the lunar version could aerobrake, just don't go too deep, and make multiple passes.
Someone on NSF estimated that without a heat shield, you'd only be able to scrub off one to two meters per second per pass. Translunar injection, as done by Apollo, is a bit over 3 km/s. That works out to 1,500 aerobreaking passes to return to LEO.
-
9 minutes ago, Kartoffelkuchen said:
What about the offcenter gimbal induced rotation though? I doubt current RCS thrusters are powerful enough to compensate (if SN4 has any at all?).
... That's why you gimbal to the center of mass so that doesn't happen.
-
6 minutes ago, Wjolcz said:
Would glue be reliable enough?
The problem is thermal expansion- specifically that steel and ceramic do it at different rates.
The KSP Caveman Challenge 1.11.x - 1.12.x
in KSP1 Challenges & Mission ideas
Posted
That's what the monoliths are for....