GoSlash27

Update: Apparently the Kerbal Flat- Earther had a falling out with the "Research Flat Earth" people. Launch is still on, though. Best, -Slashy

Nicias, Unfortunately, it's unlikely that the interplanetary transfer window will happen to coincide with an ascending or descending node. When it does, it's not necessary to perform any inclination change at all; you'll still get there. For simple transfers where there's no specific window, then yeah... roll the inclination change into one of the burns; whichever burn is at the Ap of the transfer. Yeah, the answers to that are as fuzzy as the math. Your best bet is if the orbits are coplanar, do the transfer where they are farthest apart; physically largest transfer orbit. If they have a substantial inclination difference, do the transfer at the ascending or descending node, whichever allows you to fold in the plane change at the higher transfer altitude. If there's a difference in the argument of periapsis between the two orbits, you will have to incorporate some radial in or out as well. Again, at the higher transfer altitude. There's a lot of gray area in the math, but sticking to these rules of thumb helps to keep you under the DV budget. Best, -Slashy

Yeah, that always amazes me when people do that. Cavemen don't have the tech to establish an interplanetary transfer, yet these folks find a way to do it anyhow... My mammoth- skin cap is off to dvader. I've never encountered Duna in caveman and never tried Best, -Slashy

I ran the numbers on the worst possible Kerbin->Eeloo Hohmann transfer. I get 4,528.6 m/sec DV. This is assuming that Eeloo is at Pe and the maximum inclination error needs to be corrected at 6.15°. If you run the launch window planner out to an infinite number of years, you should never find a local minimum that exceeds this value. The Vorb and Vesc never vary about the parents. The changes are all in the Vxs and plane change DV. The worst possible transfers occur when (perversely) the difference between the planets' altitudes are at a minimum. This is because while it takes a little more DV on the burn out to Eeloo at Ap, it takes a *lot* more DV on the retroburn at Pe because the planet is moving faster at the time. The additional velocity at midcourse adds to the total a bit, but overcoming the velocity difference is the big killer. The numbers... Eeloo Ap 1.135E+011m V@Ap 2766.8 VAp 449.5 slower than nom at that altitude Pe 6.669E+010m V@Pe 4711.0 VPe 514.1 faster than nom at that altitude 6.15° inclination. Vxs to Ap 3126.8, save 449.5 on retroburn. V@Midcourse= 6954.0 DV 746.1 Vxs from Ap 1279.2 Vxs to Pe 2684.8, additional 514.1 on retroburn. V@midcourse= 7210.6 DV 773.6 Vxs from Pe 2268.2 Kerbin Vorb 2295.9 Vesc 3246.9 Eeloo Vorb 568.8 Vesc 804.4 Kerbin->Eeloo at Pe sqrt(3246.9^2+2684.8^2)-2295.9= 1,917.2 Eeloo ->Kerbin at Pe sqrt(804.4^2+2268.2^2)-568.8 = 1,837.8 DV plane change at Pe = 773.6 _________ 4,528.6 m/sec Best, -Slashy

tt213, If memory serves, the Whiplash works best if you dwell in the 18- 22km altitude range to max out the airbreathing velocity. Getting supersonic should be a breeze with such a high t/w, so shoot for 18 km and then slowly climb as you build speed from there. The nukes will give you a low t/w, so plan on dwelling at 43 km to build orbital velocity, then let it loft out. Best, -Slashy

xendelaar, It's been a lot of years since I've done automotive stuff, and Volvos weren't something I worked on back in the day. I was able to track down the BCM on your car. Should be mounted under the MAF sensor near the brake master cylinder. I found a scat that may or may not be yours, but I can't make heads or tails of it since it's all in German. Each wheel has a shielded wire running to this module. Should look something like this: You should be able to tap into one of these lines and count the pulses as they feed into the BCM. You'd have to run it through a comparator to translate the pulses to TTL level, then the Arduino will be able to keep count. Unfortunately, this system will not be able to tell if you're moving forward or backward. It will simply total the rotation of the wheel to a very fine degree. HTHs, -Slashy

If that's indeed the question, then it's solvable. Unfortunately, I'm super busy today. Best, -Slashy

radonek, Jhorriga's sci- fi universe is very naval- themed. Best, -Slashy

Foo Fighters. Epic "Falling Down" reference. All full of win. My favorite Foo Fighters song of all time was never released in the 'States: Why "Walking a Line" was never a bigger thing, I'l never know... Best, -Slashy

What Spricigo said. My closure rate is a function of my distance to target. Best, -Slashy

My advice: - You don't really want maneuverability in a space plane. You want it to be extremely stable, like a sled. - Don't make it look "fast" by clustering the engines at the back, and using canard delta. Make it look boring by keeping the CoM and CoL near the longitudinal center and a conventional tail. - It's important to keep the pressure center behind the CoM as well as the CoL. Otherwise you wind up with a plane that wants to fly backwards at high speed. The pressure center isn't shown, so you have to guesstimate it. - Turn down the deflection angles on your control surfaces so they don't oscillate. - Make sure your control surfaces only respond to their intended inputs. Ailerons only respond to roll, elevators only respond to pitch. I personally leave my rudders turned off, but if you use them, they should respond only to yaw. Best, -Slashy

Actually, it depends on which wheels are doing the driving. If the vehicle is RWD, then the front wheel would be preferable. xendelaar, You never mentioned what kind of car you're driving. Did you try monitoring the wheel rotation from the OBD2? If your car has antilock brakes, then it already has a hall effect switch and reluctor plate on each brake rotor to monitor the wheel RPM for slippage. Best, -Slashy

Just so I'm clear... "SSTO" literally means "to orbit". Are we allowed to stage after reaching orbit? Thanks, -Slashy

I know the US Navy was still conducting forced boardings and sinkings as recently as WWII. Ex. USS Tirante and USS Cod. I don't know how much of that has gone on since. Best, -Slashy

Easier to fly, sure... but more expensive. I orbited some 15 tonnes of ore, which is actually more expensive per tonne than orbiting a fully loaded Kickback and it contributes nothing. Plus there's the cost of the decouplers & struts. If going for the ultimate cost/launch mass in this competition, I think the SRB SSTO is going to wind up cheapest. Best, -Slashy

Actually, I think going SSTO gives you a bit of an advantage. SRBs are cheap and it doesn't matter how much "payload" gets orbited in the end. I'm still thinking too conventionally I suspect this whole competition will be dominated by SRBs. Best, -Slashy

I couldn't quite catch @sevenperforce. $33,151/193,050 kg at launch = $0.172 /kg. Keeping in mind that this isn't actually an efficient lifter design by the usual standards, It's not a bad entry for this competition. Best, -Slashy

Warzouz, Yeah, it seems a bit wasteful to me, but not terribly so. I would've adjusted the intercept to get a lower Pe. Combining the burns would've allowed him to add the DV vector- style instead of algebraically, saving about 250 m/sec. Best, -Slashy

My rendezvous ends at 20-30m before I begin the docking process. I definitely wouldn't attempt a docking from kilometers away. Best, -Slashy

dvader, There's no reason why you shouldn't use biome maps. Best, -Slashy

Yeah, he publicly admitted that he cheated on the Tylo single tank video. Best, -Slashy

The Aziz, None of those scenarios have been a problem for me. I tend to keep my missions as simple as possible. Best, -Slashy

I'm with the OP on this. I send 4 Kerbals per expedition; one pilot to fly the mothership, one pilot to fly the lander, one engineer to fix the stuff that breaks, and one scientist to reset the experiments. Any more than that is asking for trouble IMO. Best, -Slashy

Still stuck in the way- back machine, but this time with Kate Pierson and the B-52s. What an awesome voice! Best, -Slashy

Streetwind, As a worldwide community of space- geeks, I think it's safe to say that we don't get wrapped up in nationalism or regionalism. We wish everyone good fortune in the peaceful exploration of space. Best, -Slashy