Jump to content

Gaarst

Members
  • Posts

    2,655
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Gaarst

  1. Ratio is 9 LF for 11 Ox (in units and mass) which does not correspond to any real LF/Ox ratio LF and Ox have the same mass density: 5 kg/L or 5 kg/unit (LF and Ox units are L)
  2. I also feel like range and strength of docking ports have been improved, but I couldn't find anything in the 1.0 and 1.0.1 changelogs
  3. @itstimaifool (and others) Thank you for your reply I was just telling this as an idea I got spontaneously and I know that in space the only efficient way to cool is through radiation. What I said is not physically accurate as fuel ducts indeed have poor radiating area and would not cool fuel efficiently. FYI: conduction does not involve displacement of matter but collisions between the vibrating atoms themselves, that's why it is more efficient with solids. Convection on the other hand requires matter displacement: hotter particles move around amongst cooler ones and make the overall temperature homogeneous without really transmitting it to other particles, that's why it is more efficient in fluids (liquids or gases). And radiation depends on the area exposed, the emissivity of the material and (a LOT) on the temperature difference between the hotter and cooler materials.
  4. Had something in 0.90: 1st stage powered by 1 mainsail with 2xJumbo64 + 2 boosters with Skippers with 1xJumbo64 2nd stage: 1 Skipper with 1xJumbo64 3rd stage (lander + return vehicle): Pod + FL-T800 + LV909 That was enough to get there and back and I usually had enough delta-v with 2nd stage so that it followed me until it crashed on Duna. Not sure about it though, this is an old design. It may not be enough for 1.0 but it is a good start. (I can upload the .craft file if you'd like)
  5. Yes you can fill it with only LF but only the specified amount, ie: if your tank is 360 LF and 440 Ox, then you can only fill 360 LF, not more.
  6. Thank you for this, but I already noticed it myself when there weren't any struts (that did not end well) but the struts and ducts are enough to maintain the tanks or engine in their place. And I prefer the ducts to be from the tanks to the engine directly as it makes the whole engine-coupler-tank link more rigid instead of just coupler-tank link and having the coupler-engine link weaker.
  7. Makes sense to me: someone gives you a big pile of explosives with a controller, what is the first thing you do ? Press the biggest button, which on a keyboard is the space bar
  8. About multiplayer: doing something in Minecraft doesnt take 3 years of ingame time. Whereas in KSP, going from Kerbin to any other planet and back easily lasts several years. In solo you can always timewarp, and I guess in a private server with only a few friends you could also do it. But if you start considering big multiplayer servers with at least dozens of players at the same time (like there are in Minecraft) then all you can do is launch your rocket and come back 6 months later IRL... Big multiplayer is not possible in KSP for this and all other reasons above, and therefore, it will not get the same success as Minecraft. On the other side, KSP community will never be full of trolls as Mincraft's was (or is, dunno) which is a good thing: KSP players are more mature than Minecraft ones.
  9. I think Kickback always had 2500 solid fuel and 650 kN thrust but its burn time and Isp have definitely been reduced. Burn time is now ~49s in atmosphere (according to KER) but was 65s (according to the not-updated wiki)
  10. F10 for the heating bars, but I don't know about smoke effects EDIT: ninja'd
  11. I am currently working on a nuclear powered ship that needs external fuel ducts between the tanks and the engine, as below: Then I thought that, as there were big heating issues with 1.0 (less with 1.0.2), it might be a good idea to add a feature that makes the fuel passing through these ducts cooled while in space. This would happen because the ducts are directly exposed to the coldness of space. So, for example, the longer the duct, the cooler the fuel. Cold fuel being consumed in the engine could then cool it down or reduce its heat output (just like real rockets) as long as the engine is active (so that there is actual fuel flow). Though this might not be necessary with 1.0.2, it could be a good thing to reintroduce more realistic heating, while having actual ways to manage it without adding any stock or modded parts to your rocket. I think it could be good thing to consider and that it could lead to interesting rocket designs to manage heat other than just an engine stacked to a tank, where the fuel would go directly from the tank to the engine without being cooled through the ducts.
  12. Jet fuel can't melt steel beams !!! Wait, wrong thread...
  13. Take the number of pods needed, add SRBs, launch. If AP not high enough, add moar SRBs.
  14. Are you sure you didn't simply forgot to stop time-warp ?
  15. Yeah, about that... Magic boulder was orbiting Ike and was removed some time ago, sorry to break your dreams
  16. Intakes have higher drag than other parts due to their function. Closing intake reduces their drag and make it similar to same sized parts.
  17. Parts considered as debris disappear as soon as they are >22 km (not sure) from your active ship when inside the atmosphere. So they will be gone if you just leave them falling and expect to recover them at your return. What you can do is go to map view and switch the vessel type of your decoupled stages from "debris" to any other (eg: lander, probe...); that way the game will consider them as active crafts and won't delete them while in atmosphere. Don't take what I'm saying for granted, this is not 100% sure.
  18. Yes I do when docking: as I said if you're off your CoM, your ship will gain torque, and as you cannot predict what exact amount of fuel you consume, you don't exactly know where your CoM will be when approaching the ship to dock; so leaving SAS on, set on target (most of the time), will keep your ship to the right orientation when you translate. Then I usually deactivate it when about to touch the other ship to let them dock correctly.
  19. It depends on what you use RCS for. If you want to move your ship around then you have to put your RCS on the CoM. If you want to orientate your ship more easily then you have to put your RCS as far from the CoM as possible because torque depends on the distance to the CoM. When translating, if your RCS is only off your CoM by a few centimeters it will induce torque in the ship, if your SAS is not active or not strong enough to counter it. Or you can decide that RCS is for the weak and dock without it. I did it once because I forgot to put RCS on my ship; the ship was small so it was easier than I expected
  20. Fairings are in the same categories as plane parts. Yes this is completely counter-intuitive (not to say something else)
  21. You can always configure action groups to do what you want. Default action groups are: Space: next stage (duh) G: toggle landing gears B: activate brakes U: toggle lights (not sure) And probably a few others. You can configure your own action groups, used with keys 1 to 9. When in VAB/SPH go on the menu left of crew selection, select an action group, right click on a part and then configure what you want it to do. EDIT: ninja'd
×
×
  • Create New...