Jump to content

blowfish

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,559

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by blowfish

  1. blowfish
    I see where they're coming from but this would actually be quite difficult. Kerbal Konstructs statics are placed using 3D cartesian coordinates relative to the planet's center. You could scale those coordinates, but then all of the statics making up a base would either be smushed together or pulled apart by the rescaling. I don't think it's possible at the moment.
  2. blowfish
    Do you have any other effects mods installed, say HotRckets or RealPlume? They might not be compatible with the latest versions of B9. If both of those are no, did you install SmokeScreen? (Required dependency for B9) It's always been like that and it's not changing. That's why those parts are now legacy. That was the original Mk2 cross section before Porkjet's Spaceplane Plus parts became stock.
  3. blowfish
    Yup. As the OP says, engine configs come separately.
  4. blowfish
    This was about SHA time, not total MM time. MM can take quite a while, but the SHA should be generated relatively quickly: [ModuleManager] SHA generated in 0.633s
  5. blowfish
    Thanks for fixing the link, but I still don't see where you're getting "better performance" from. The Blackhorse concept they suggested has a lower payload fraction even at takeoff (i.e. before refueling) than the Skylon. To get up to the Skylon's payload to orbit (15t), it would need to weigh 750t at takeoff, and nearly 2.5 Mt after refueling. That's considerably larger than any plane that has ever flown.
  6. blowfish
    And why does fuel density even matter? A larger tank means somewhat more drag, but remember that most of the delta-v is in rocket mode anyway. Nuclear ramjets and rockets are going to have low TWRs anyway - not suitable for propelling a craft to orbit. I still don't see the use case. Shipping payloads is easy and cheap.
  7. blowfish
    On the release page, there is a file called B9_Aerospace_HX_6-0-1.zip. Do you not see it?
  8. blowfish
    I don't doubt that this is possible, but I fail to see the use case. In addition to LH2 fueling infrastructure, you would need dedicated payload integration and maintenance facilities. The Skylon is not intended to land and then immediately take off again like an airliner - there is going to be significant maintenance between flights, even non-orbital flights. So you could build all that infrastructure, deal with the cost and liability of an additional flight, and not actually get the payload to space any faster. Or you could just put the payload on a cargo plane and fly it to the launch site. Seems like a solution in search of a problem for me.
  9. blowfish
    Just saw this. Unless you have a specific reason to download the repository, you should just download from the releases page. All of the packs are there. See my answer above.
  10. blowfish
    That link leads nowhere for me.
  11. blowfish
    The only way is to edit the code and recompile the plugin. There are plenty of ways to reduce memory under 32 bit in Windows though. If you're too stubborn to try any of them, then just wait for 1.1
  12. blowfish
    [citation needed] Also what do you mean by "outperforms" ? If you mean it has a higher payload fraction on takeoff, then that has nothing to do with H2O2 and everything to do with propellant transfer, since most of the mass burnt in rocket mode is oxidizer. But takeoff mass hardly affects anything, particularly since the launch facilities have to be specialized anyway, and the propellant mass burnt from takeoff to mach 1 is tiny. Re: Alternate takeoff sites: @AngelLestat is 100% correct that it's very easy to ship payloads and very difficult to ship spaceplanes ... not to mention all the infrastructure required for payload integration and fueling at each launch site. The only justification I see for alternate launch sites is for highly inclined orbits for which an equatorial site isn't favorable. Re: Alternate landing sites: The Skylon would weigh practically nothing on landing (most of the takeoff mass is fuel), so it could probably land just about anywhere, but you want to land back at the launch site if at all possible. The only reason why the Shuttle had alternate sites was because weather conditions might be unfavorable at Cape Canaveral - something similar might be desirable for the Skylon, but only as a last resort - the Skylon could fly itself from site to site, but it would be both very risky and costly to do.
  13. blowfish
    They show up fine for me. Check again that they aren't showing up in the "command and control" category in sandbox mode, and if they aren't, then post your logs.
  14. blowfish
    Yes. I'm not aware of any mods that restrict support on Linux.
  15. blowfish
    Just FYI, last I heard the rocket part revamp was for 1.2, not 1.1
  16. blowfish
    It's a float curve which maps atmospheric pressure to engine specific impulse. So for that curve, it will get 4200s Isp in a vacuum (0 atmospheres) and 100s at sea level (1 atmosphere) (and 0.001s once you get up to 1.2 atm, which in the stock system only happens on EVE).
  17. blowfish
    The main benefit to mid-air refueling would be lower takeoff mass, but it's at least questioning how much benefit that would bring ... as far as taking off goes you can always just build a longer runway. The fuel mass required between takeoff and mach 1 isn't that large, and the refueling would have to take place at much higher dynamic pressure than usual (since the Skylon has stubby wings for good hypersonic performance). This means that aerodynamic forces are a lot higher and the margin for error is lower.
  18. blowfish
    Not quite SLS, but similar.
  19. blowfish
    @tater You're going to have the same problem for stock parts. Just reduce re-entry heating in the difficulty settings. It's much simpler than trying to change the settings on many parts.
  20. blowfish
    https://github.com/shadowmage45/SSTULabs/issues/258
  21. blowfish
    Just turn down re-entry heating. It's simpler than trying to make a patch that works with every rescale mod. Stock heating is scaled way up to make it work in a tiny solar system anyway.
  22. blowfish
    @sevenperforce The nozzle also has to choke, otherwise you won't generate useful thrust. The diverging section beyond the throat can be pressure actuated, and is in many engines. However, before the throat, the flow is subsonic and must be constricted to reach mach 1 at the throat so that it can go supersonic in the diverging section. Note that pressure works the opposite way you want for isentropic flow when it's subsonic - if flow A has greater pressure than flow B, then flow A will expand, but you really want it to contract. Supersonic jets typically have hydraulic actuators on the nozzle throat and allow the diverging flaps to be actuated by pressure. Rockets don't have this problem because they are (mostly) constant flow devices, so the entire nozzle geometry is fixed (keeping the throat choked is a major reason why throttling is so hard).
  23. blowfish
    It doesn't quite work like that. The expanding section of the nozzle can be actuated by pressure (though you probably don't want that on a rocket), but the nozzle throat has to be actively controlled to maintain the correct area.
  24. blowfish
    You'd probably have to have a variable area nozzle for this, yes, but that would be the case regardless. The area of the bypass doesn't matter - it only mass limits through the nozzle throat where it chokes. And that nozzle throat has to be the correct area to accept however much air mass the intake is giving you (or, as you way, it will unstart, or going in the other direction the nozzle will cease to choke and you won't produce useful thrust). The SABRE's bypass ramjets will need to have variable throat areas in order to accept a variable amount of bypass mass flow. I don't know if the core will to - it's certainly doable on an expansion-deflection nozzle, but maybe not necessary if the bypass is variable enough.
  25. blowfish
    I've definitely moved models and textures around in GameData and had them work just fine. I've also opened smaller .mu files with a text editor - you can find the texture references pretty easily, but it doesn't store a GameData relative path anywhere. Interesting side note, it does store the texture names with extensions, but it doesn't care about them ... if you replace blah.png with blah.dds it works fine.
×
×
  • Create New...