Jump to content

GoSlash27

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,797

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by GoSlash27

  1. GoSlash27
    I second what @regex said. KSP is actually an educational program masquerading as a toy. If you want to know the t/w and DV, it's a simple matter to calculate it from the available information. Pretend you're a rocket scientist and figure it out. It's much more fun that way! Best, -Slashy
  2. GoSlash27
    Guns, rock climbing, flying, and motorsports. My latest phase is vintage Vespa scooters. Best, -Slashy
  3. GoSlash27
    Moogoob, It is, and it also isn't. It's more efficient in the sense that infinite t/w is ideal for maneuvers with an absolute minimum of DV waste. *But* considering that t/w costs mass by way of extra engine mass and quickly outstrips the operator's ability to control it with precision and efficiency... my experience and calculations show that the cheapest and most mass- efficient designs will be under 2:1 t/w local. Ultimately you have to use enough t/w to operate safely with your preferred technique, but I really don't recommend "moar boosters" beyond that point. Best, -Slashy
  4. GoSlash27
    LordFerret, That looks like a very handy table. Kudos to whoever put the effort into it... but it wasn't me Best, -Slashy
  5. GoSlash27
    1G acceleration on the Mun's surface is 1.63 m/sec2. Figure 2Gs local for a good balance between weight and engine mass, That's 3.26 m/sec2; about 1/3 G on Kerbin. Best, -Slashy
  6. GoSlash27
    I agree. The Panther has been the entry level SSTO space plane engine ever since it was introduced. The nacelle is adequate for air, so you have everything you need... except a shielded docking port. It's good for small crew transports, but not cost effective for tankers or heavy cargo. Best, -Slashy
  7. GoSlash27
    Pretty much anything from Heinlein. Ender's Game (the book, not the series) Jules Verne Ready Player One - Ernest Cline Wool (the series) - Hugh Howey The Martian - Andy Weir I'm also big into alternate history stories like Resurrection Day by Brendan DuBois
  8. GoSlash27
    I haven't noticed any problems with the 'chutes in 1.1.2. In fact, they seem a lot better now. A single Mk.1 'chute was adequate for me to land a Mk.1 pod, Science Jr, 2 goo experiments, and thermometer. If you're using 5 chutes and still coming down at 15 m/sec, I think there's something wrong at your end. Maybe one of your mods has altered the aerodynamics or you're using drogue chutes instead of mains? Best, -Slashy
  9. GoSlash27
    Same here. The satellite has whatever the contract says it must have. Other than that... it just has what *I* need it to have. Best, -Slashy
  10. GoSlash27
    ^This. When I say STS- style, I mean it's modeled after the American shuttles as opposed to the Buran or something of my own design. And as for a space plane with drop tanks... I guess that's what I'd call it; "a space plane with drop tanks" Best, -Slashy
  11. GoSlash27
    Snowstorm, Oh, absolutely. No insult intended for people who use standardized lifters. I used to use them myself. It's just that in my situation, due to the tools I use (and lack of the tools I don't use), custom designs actually require *less* time and effort than standardized lifters. Most players don't go about it the same way I do, so standardized lifters make perfect sense for them. In fact... I actually go the opposite way; custom lifters and standardized modular payloads. Eventually I end up with a lego set of standardized launch stacks that I use to construct my missions in orbit. Best, -Slashy
  12. GoSlash27
    I build STS shuttles for the challenge of making them, but they're not really cost- effective. I can build disposables that are cheaper than shuttles, partially reusable stacks that are cheaper than that, and SSTO spaceplanes that are crazy- cheap. Best, -Slashy
  13. GoSlash27
    Sounds about right to me. Except you *could* plot this sort of maneuver using a spreadsheet. And an addendum to 2: Not only must you not come in tangentially, you must also leave more tangentially than you entered. It'd be much simpler to pinball your way to higher velocities by using other bodies, and of course the Mun is always there to help boost your initial burn. If you just lob it up to Munar altitude, it's like chucking a softball in front of a swinging bat. Best, -Slashy
  14. GoSlash27
    All, I have a temporary work- around for this. It's not perfect, but it's a big improvement over stock. Best, -Slashy
  15. GoSlash27
    I have a stage designer spreadsheet that takes my mission requirements and spits out the ideal engine, number of tanks, how much to fill 'em, and where to set the throttle limit. Since the process requires no guesswork, trial and error, or testing... I can design, build, and launch in less time than it takes to write this. Best, -Slashy
  16. GoSlash27
    This is true if you are trying to match an argument of right ascension. If you just want (say) a generic polar orbit, then you do the correction at the apoapsis of a barely- closed orbit where velocity is minimal. If you have to match a specific orbit, then it is indeed the ascending or descending node, whichever is closest to apoapsis. Actually, I don't bother setting those up at the escape burn (although some do). I do it at the midcourse correction. It's much easier to set up there and it's cheap. Best, -Slashy
  17. GoSlash27
    If you really need to make an inclination change, you should do it at apoapsis, not periapsis. Inclination changes are cheaper at low speed. Ideally, you would not need to do this, since you were careful to intercept in the desired plane in the first place... Best, -Slashy
  18. GoSlash27
    Alshain, That checks out. Nothing different in my .cfg files from stock. And you are using my 1.1.2 gear fixer for ModuleManager? Silly question, but I gotta ask... Anything different at all between how you're flying it and how I'm flying it? Dirt runway, any trim adjustments, etc? Any mods you're using?
  19. GoSlash27
    Yes, please But just for the fixed and free gear. I want to see if there's a change I made that's not in the GearFixer. -Slashy
  20. GoSlash27
    Wow! There must be some radical difference between your setup and mine. This is the one I just gave you: ^ That's with absolutely no control inputs. Could you please send me a copy of your .cfg file for your fixed gears? Thanks, -Slashy nli2work, could it be suspensionTransformName = suspension that's missing? I noticed that the free gear has it, but the fixed doesn't. Best, -Slashy
  21. GoSlash27
    http://wikisend.com/download/207162/Alshain.craft Alshain, Try this. I brought the mains closer to the CoG (still ahead of empty), Snapped them, the tailwheel, and the rudder to absolute. It still pulls a little left, but shouldn't be a problem for you now. The mains seem to track better when close to the CoG. Best, -Slashy
  22. GoSlash27
    Alshain, Got it. I'm looking at it now. -Slashy
  23. GoSlash27
    Alshain, Try that. If that doesn't get it, kick me a copy of your .craft and I'll see if I can spot anything else that'll help. Best, -Slashy nli2work, That's brilliant! Incorporating it into the fix. How did you figure it out? -Slashy
  24. GoSlash27
    PLAD, Yeah, that's what I figured (other than the reason you did 2 Kerbin passes; too fast to do it all in one shot) So in the case of the OP's scenario, nothing can be gained from Kerbin->Kerbin->points beyond, right? I mean... he launches from Kerbin into a resonant orbit, leaving tangent prograde. When he arrives at Kerbin on the next pass, he will arrive tangent prograde. Therefore the most he can hope for from the encounter is to not *lose* any velocity, which isn't really possible. The only way to get another boost directly from Kerbin would be to alter his velocity (either with a boost to raise his Pe) or by using another body first. Is this all about correct? Best, -Slashy *edit* Thanks for explaining the VILM maneuver. That's what I was missing!
  25. GoSlash27
    RIC, Right... but all of the energy *could've* been added in the first pass with the same exact result, right? Except, of course, Jool would've been in the wrong place for an encounter. So in that sense, the second pass didn't really "add" anything. It just restored what *could've* been added the first time.
×
×
  • Create New...