Jump to content

GoSlash27

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,797

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by GoSlash27

  1. GoSlash27
    From the SquadCast, there's definitely a "HarvesteR-Massif tracking station". https://www.twitch.tv/ksptv/v/88304909 35:00 Best, -Slashy
  2. GoSlash27
    Exactly my thinking. Streamlined service parts, bulk discount on the equipment, single R&D effort. Best, -Slashy
  3. GoSlash27
    Well... I'm not among them. so that whole argument is lost on me. Best, -Slashy
  4. GoSlash27
    Did I say it was? I'm fine with it. Did I say it was? I'm fine with that too. Your responses here raise a similar question in my mind: Is failure to share your disapproval of certain visual aspects of this game some deep insult or a crime of some sort? Best, -Slashy
  5. GoSlash27
    I'm curious to see if the new ground stations improve with upgrading the tracking station, what their range is, and whether they are considered "biomes" for science collection. Best, -Slashy Andem, Why would they be different? Wouldn't it make sense for KASA to use standardized equipment for their remote stations? (Incidentally), I have reason to believe that each remote ground station has a unique name, and the names assigned are, themselves, easter eggs. Best, -Slashy
  6. GoSlash27
    Wcmille, I don't know for sure, as I haven't played with it, but *in theory* a single relay just a few degrees away from Kerbin would make a solar occlusion impossible. Of course, once a "month" you'd still get a lunar occlusion to the relay. The chances of that happening simultaneously with a solar occlusion *and* a critical event is so unlikely that I wouldn't worry about it. Even better, if I put a single relay into nearly opposition of Kerbin, it would do the same thing and extend my range. Best, -Slashy
  7. GoSlash27
    I dunno. I was watching a Twitch stream earlier where they had a 2 orbit rendezvous get screwed by a solar occlusion. I always do simple Hohmann transfers, so that sort of thing should never be a problem for me... but I've never played with comm networks before. Guaranteed, tho'... if you do Hohmann transfers both ways, you will experience a solar occlusion in the middle of your stay at the destination planet. There's probably nothing important going on when it hits, but it will happen. Best, -Slashy
  8. GoSlash27
    in 1.2, it'll be worth having 2 relays to avoid occlusion. Best, -Slashy
  9. GoSlash27
    Andem, Sorry, but they don't appear to be in the demos I've seen. Maybe someday.. -Slashy
  10. GoSlash27
    I like the experiment storage box idea. Also, the control limitations with power. At some point, it will be necessary to upgrade the ground relay stations with more powerful antennas. This means (hopefully) we'll finally have a use for those cargo plane parts. HYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYPE Train!
  11. GoSlash27
    My life needs this pause menu:
  12. GoSlash27
    "Ask not what Squad can do for you"? -Slashy
  13. GoSlash27
    Congrats to your team, ULA, and the USAF range team. Really a textbook launch yesterday. I was impressed with how easy you folks made it look. Best, -Slashy
  14. GoSlash27
    Well... glad you figured it out -Slashy
  15. GoSlash27
    Andem, We're not "right" and you're not "wrong". It's just a subjective disagreement where the majority happens to disagree with you or (at the very least) doesn't share your concern. Given that, there's no benefit to further discussion of the subject in the hype train thread. Best, -Slashy
  16. GoSlash27
    Alshain, If I had to guess (and clearly at this point I do), I'd say it's a revamp of the round-8 toroidal tank. *edit* I just had an unhappy thought: What if the LVT-15 and LV-303 aren't actually new engines, but rather simply revamps of the 48-7S and LV-1 "Ant"? Not complainin' about the looks, mind you. Just looking forward to having more engine choices. Best, -Slashy
  17. GoSlash27
    Also, it appears that we have the option to turn off "auto-hide" of the nav ball in map mode. One less thing to monkey with during launch. -Slashy
  18. GoSlash27
    Actually, it's not that difficult to get perfect placement in your constellations. It's a matter of launching them on a single bus and using resonance to space them. You can plant strings of 6 sats in polar orbit, 1 string every 60° rotation. This would give you a sat in view of every point on the surface at all times. Best, -Slashy
  19. GoSlash27
    Laie, Ah. I didn't see anything earlier about a 'lander', else I wouldn't have mentioned it. Good luck! -Slashy
  20. GoSlash27
    Yeah, I'm with @Curveball Anders on this one. I design my equipment to perform it's function cheaply, efficiently, and with minimal operator headaches. Any aesthetics it happens to have are strictly a result of form following function. Best, -Slashy This is what engineers refer to as "functionally elegant". That's pretty much what I strive for. If it's been optimized to perform a certain job well, it takes on a certain kind of aesthetic all its own. Best, -Slashy
  21. GoSlash27
    StrandedonEarth, This was a "Munar orbit rendezvous" mission. Upon orbital rendezvous, I EVA'd to a return capsule for Kerbin... which did have a parachute. I also realize it looks odd to have monopropellant for the sole source of propulsion. That's the way we did it back then Best, -Slashy
  22. GoSlash27
    True... but tailless planes don't have rudders, active or otherwise For planes that *do* have vertical tails, they fly better if those vertical tails don't respond to yaw inputs. They are also not likely to ever encounter a situation where active yaw is needed. Trust me on this one. Better yet, try it yourself. You'll see what I mean. Best, -Slashy
  23. GoSlash27
    Laie, Did you check the numbers for a full circularization at the gate orbit? How does the DV budget stack up in comparison? I can run the numbers on that if you'd like. Best, -Slashy
  24. GoSlash27
    foamyesque, I definitely agree with your suggestion to disable the pod torque. As for the subject of adverse yaw, IME the only source of that in KSP for a reasonably designed plane *is* the yaw authority itself. Particularly when SAS is engaged. That is to say; airplanes in KSP with a vertical tail will not sideslip unless commanded to. There is therefore no reason to have active rudders on anything other than aerobatic aircraft. If you disable yaw response entirely, you can fly with the SAS engaged without the normal cross- controlling it tries to induce and turns become much smoother. Best, -Slashy
  25. GoSlash27
    I see... Well, you may be able to save more dv by using the gate orbit instead of doing the high eccentricity thing. That would kill 2 birds with 1 stone. Best, -Slashy
×
×
  • Create New...