GoSlash27

KerikBalm, It's not actually as difficult as you think. The intake air resource merely shows how much air is left in the intakes after the engine has used it's allotment of air in the previous timestep. As the engine operates at higher altitudes, Isp decreases (the curve I mentioned earlier). Likewise, the intakes are drawing air in proportion to AVpcos(a). As the speed increases, thrust is reduced in accordance with the other curve. If the engine finds itself with insufficient air, it will throttle back even more. Getting an engine to operate at higher altitudes with the same intakes is simply a matter of increasing the high altitude Isp (allowing it to consume less air) and/or high speed thrust (allowing it to go faster to collect more air). Best, -Slashy

*edit* Derpage removed. Wrong contest. Best, -Slashy

arkie87 and LethalDose did a lot of work along these lines last month. I was able to apply arkie's results to an analysis of available engines/ tank types and find the T/W ratios at launch that yield the lowest mass and lowest cost for each engine. Results are here. Counterintuitively, you will get the lightest and least expensive overall vehicles at surprisingly low t/w ratios, particularly when on larger bodies and when using high Isp engines. Despite costing more in DV (and thus fuel), the mass and cost of fuel/tankage ends up being less than the mass/cost of additional engines required to raise the t/w ratio. Best, -Slashy

Kryten, WildLynx was referring to transport and vehicle assembly, not when it's fueled. Best, -Slashy

Many of the advantages mirror those represented in KSP. Solid boosters have higher t/w while liquid boosters have higher Isp.Solid boosters are cheaper, while liquid boosters can be throttled, and so on. In addition to these, liquid boosters tend to be safer to handle and operate, since solid boosters are essentially "a trash can of boom". Liquid boosters require refrigerated storage of the fuels, while solid boosters can fail due to cracks in the propellant. Also, you can't stop a solid booster once you light it, while a liquid booster has a lot more parts that can fail. Best, -Slashy

11/10. That's one sharp- dressed ship!

7/10 Very fast, but something doesn't bode well...

That would make a whole lot of sense. In fact without something like that happening, time travel has been arguably empirically proven impossible at any time. Good one, -Slashy *edit* but upon further reflection... this universe would have to be immune to time travelers from alternate universes. Else they would've shown up. Why would this particular universe be different?

I calibrate them to have just enough fuel to do the job and return to KSC under power, but remember that keeping the fuel tanks in the CoM means that your CoM doesn't really go anywhere as the fuel drains because it lacks leverage in comparison to the static leverage of the airframe and engine. I'll post a worst-case with the forward tank dry. Best, -Slashy - - - Updated - - - This is with no payload and the forward tank empty. IRL this situation would never occur, since the plane will have depleted most of it's fuel on the way up when it still has a full load of O2 and payload. Nevertheless, the CoM remains centered. Best, -Slashy

An example using .90 As you can see, the CoM hardly moves at all with changes in fuel or payload mass. Think of it like a balance beam. Best, -Slashy

You don't have to balance the weight, but rather the leverage. The mass times distance of the engine should be counteracted by a lighter mass at a farther distance for perfect balance. Having said that, remember that the balance doesn't necessarily have to be "perfect" so long as it remains within limits at all times. I'll post an example shortly. Best, -Slashy - - - Updated - - - This is a tanker I built back in .24.

KV, No problem! Thanks for sorting it out so quickly. Best, -Slashy

Johannes, Yep, this is all in line with what I've seen before; warping makes it stop. Pretty sure it's a part clipping thing. I would guess it's due to that i-beam you're using to mount the okto. This is not confirmed, but I have personally seen this more frequently since the .90 update. Could you do me a favor and try pointing the ship in the opposite direction? I'm curious to see if the behavior reverses. Thanks, -Slashy

KV, A mod on another forum having this same issue said that she was able to block lemode-mgz. They still have adchoices running and no issues. Not sure how that works, but if you can do it then you won't lose revenue from the non-malicious ads. Best, -Slashy

I checked my java, and it was up to date. Disabling redirects did not fix it. I updated my Adobe flash, but since you've stopped ad streaming (thanks!) I don't know if it would've solved the problem. Best, -Slashy

*update* According to google, this was the result of a virus, but within the past couple days it started showing up on forums all over the place using adchoices and it's not onboard the browsing computer. Everyone reports the same thing; their browser is hijacked to lemode-mgz.com. I'll see if updating my java and adobe flash fixes it.

Yeah, just started happening to me 10 minutes ago. It's an advertiser with malicious code. I have it set to warn me of attempts to redirect. I'll report what I find. Best, -Slashy *Edit* it's Lemode-mgz.com It just redirects the user's browser to their website. Warning of attempted redirects doesn't seem to stop it.

Yeah, just started happening to me 10 minutes ago. It's an advertiser with malicious code. I have it set to warn me of attempts to redirect. I'll report what I find. Best, -Slashy

Johannes, It can be any part. The good news is that going to warp can cause the problem to stop. The bad news is that there is a small risk of "unplanned spontaneous disassembly", especially if warping while you cross an SOI boundary. Good luck! -Slashy

An Eve SSTO *is*, in fact, possible. You just have to exploit the glitches in the physics engine. http://s52.photobucket.com/user/GoSlash27/slideshow/KSP/krakelicious/Eve%20mission This one uses "infinigliding" and "kraken drive". There are also plenty of examples of SSTO capable "ladder lifters". Maneuvers requiring n-body physics are impossible. Landing on the sun is impossible. Best, -Slashy

xriz00, The optimum intake type and number depends on what you're trying to do. If you're just bombing around at low altitude, you want minimal drag, so a single structural intake is fine. For a spaceplane, you want at least .18m^2 of intake area per engine. Wings will begin to lose their effectiveness at around 25km and become useless at around 32km, depending on wing loading. I have some tutorials and comparison data on intakes, wings, and spaceplane construction tips in the tutorial section. Best, -Slashy

It could also be a clipped part creating a phantom impulse. I've seen this happen a couple times. Best, -Slashy

IMO people are the cause of *all* crop circles. If extraterrestrials are observing us and wish to communicate, they'll do so in a way that they know we'll understand. Best, -Slashy

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=eu.jahnestacado.arduinorc&hl=en This plus an Arduino BT should do it. Best, -Slashy

RIC, good to see them finally make you pull your weight! Best, -Slashy