Jump to content

Rakaydos

Members
  • Posts

    2,522
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Rakaydos

  1. 0.90.0 broke my spaceplanes. I was using the old Mk2 to Mk3 adpter as an improvised Mk2 to 2.5m adapter, until it was removed in the update. There is a debris field on minmus where I had landed one of my spaceplanes. And a certian amount of kessler synrome where my space station used to be.
  2. There is some speculation that the Abercrombe Warp drive might accidently cause time travel on longtrips where they develop relativistic sidreal velocities. So consider an FTL "scout craft"- the FTL ring, a tokomak fusion ring, engines and tankage on the bottom to keep the warp and thrusters aligned, habitation in a few broad decks on top. Give it some basic lateral aerodynamics/heat shielding. Classic "Alien craft" design. We send it out in the 2200s and it comes back in the 1960s. What happens? The crew doesnt want to cause a time paradox, so they cant just introduce themselves to the world.
  3. I've had similar high-drag results, though I havnt done the side by side comparison wih the VAB you seem to have. (I've just been sucking it up and lighting rockets early.)
  4. Built a new tanker/crew rotation spaceplane, and just put 20 kerbals into a 80km orbit with over 3600 oxidiser and over 3100 liquid fuel left, with over a thousand monoprop for docking the monster. (because that was the size of the mk 3 monoprop tank) Say what you will about biplane designs- the wing strengths range from .2 at the wingtip to .8 at the root. The crossstrutting does wonders for them despite the flimsy wing material. 1500 D/V on Rapiers, twice that on nukes alone, if you unlock the foward tank. More if you drain the monoprop.
  5. At most, I'd give the stayputnic a really energy-efficent reaction wheel with no SAS. So an "Advanced Stayputnic" would be a flat octo core (all the piloting SAS stuff, no reaction wheel, low mass) with a Stayputnic "Reaction wheel" on top (Iconic shape, energy efficent reaction wheel)
  6. Is that after the 100% recovery from landing on the runway?
  7. Kipard, the Staputnic isnt a pilot core. it is a satelite core. As the first probe core to be unlocked, it also unlocks satelite contracts. Withot batteries, it can only survive a few minutes after engine shutoff- once it's in place, you cant fly it around anymore. it's stuck in the orbit you left it in. As a satelite. Without SAS, a more experienced pilot is required to launch it, making shuttle designs worthwhile It's called a Stay-Put-Nic. It's not meant to fly anywhere.
  8. The staputnic isnt any more a "Pilot" piece than a Scientist is. Unlocking the Stayputnic unlocks satelite contracts, which reqire a stayputnic or better probe core. Satelite contracts are lucrative, so you must either come up with a manned satelite launcher, wait for a more stable probe core, or figure out how to fly the satelite into position without SAS.
  9. I sent a probe to explore Eve and made it without patched conics.
  10. That's not an issue. Assuming you have enough material for the final baloon surface area, as atmospheric pressure drops, the same lifting gas that's carrying the baloon will expand, inflating the excess material as it goes higher. (which is why weather bloons look half-deflated at launch) Ergo, as the -volume- of lifting gas rises with lowering pressure, lift actually increases with altitude.
  11. How resisant is graphine to Sulpheric acid? If you can crack CO2 into oxygen and graphine baloons, you should be able to expland your living space.
  12. Those were the first draft of the class abilities, before a public outcry forced them to strip out anything that modified the performance of an otherwise sharable vessel. "This craft can land on Eeloo, but only if you have a level 5 engineer and a level 3 pilot."
  13. When your suborbital science rocket accidently gets a Mun encounter. (Explore Mun before Orbit? really? I needed that contract!)
  14. You may have noticed whenever I post one of my double hull designs, someone comes out to say "Biplanes suck", because it IS a FAR design. The skin drag of the most recent update is a pain in the butt, though. I have to lite my rockets way earlier than I want- though I can still make orbit, I'm not an efficent fuel transporter anymore, and a certintly cant single stage to minmus orbit of raipers anymore.
  15. My apoligies... I Didnt see KCS's post so I missed the context of your "I'm working on it" post.
  16. I did a munar flyby and return before achieving kerbin orbit. BACC at 100%, RD10 at 33.5%, capsue and parachute, straight up, in FAR.
  17. I'm still having flaps problems, at least in the editor FAR window, though it seems to be working on the runway at least. But without FAR aero analysis in the hanger, I'm hitting a brick wall in tuning my flaps.
  18. Hmm... it now has the same ISP and TWR as a LV45, with a better gimbal range, and it's drag doubles as tailfins.
  19. Actually, looking at my craft family in the editor... with the wings separated by the thickness of a Mk2 hull (so, a bit over 1.25m) and two delta wings long at the root (call it 6x 1.25m=7.5m), unless there's something weird going on with supersonic airflow, I shouldnt get any loss of performance until I hit an angle of attack of... (googles geometry from years ago) CoTangent N degrees = adjacent/opposite = 1.25/7.5 =1/6 of 90 degrees, call it, 15 degrees. Did my math fail me? is supersonic airflow doing weird things to simple geometry?
  20. You can use the Offset gizmo to move the Mk 2 tanks up and down the side of the Mk3 hull My 4 rear wheels are all 1 snap off center of the lower Mk2 hulls, 1 snap rotated, so they are vertical and all the same height. Then I offset them 1 snap into the hull so they didnt stick out.
  21. Supposedly the design would be more efficient with only 1 layer of wing/secondary hull, but I managed to brute force this thing from 1400m/s to orbit on raipers alone.
  22. The stayputnic is only good for staying put. who'd'a'thunk'it.
  23. Having used the old Mk2 to Mk3 adapter as a 2.5m adapter in version .24-.25, I was disapointed that the stock mk2 to 2m adapter was so long and high off the ground. I would like to see something based on the older mk3 part, though perhaps better fit to 2m parts (almost the same size anyway)
×
×
  • Create New...