Arugela

Looking for any help on design as well as sharing! 8) Also can anyone fly this well. I'm a little lagy with it. (This is technically a WIP!) FYI, I designed this to test our the multi engine config and see how it works out. Still doing that! 8) http://www./download/jpdfd9ab6kd4s91/AEIOU_NIRDm_Lifter_v2.craft http://www./download/7plxvzf6epcewna/AEIOU_NIRDm_Lifter_v3.craft (Updated version. See post below) Name: Aurora Explorer Interplanetary(?) Orbital Universal Nuclear Ion Rocket(R.A.P.I.E.R.?) Drone Lifter(AKA it's large cargo is aprox. centered. Uncertain of weight capacity.) Parts: 1497 Mass: 160.7t Height: 5.0m Width: 21.8 Length: 25.6 Electric Charge: 108533 MonoPropeliant: 810 Liquid Fuel: 4860 Oxidizer: 3740 Xenon Gas: 50400 Air intake: 3**/719(going for 800 max) Solid Fuel: 96 Engines: Ion: 66 Nuclear: 4 R.A.P.I.E.R.: 12 Turbojet: 12 0-10 MP engine: 12 Sepratron1: 12 Control: Varied Cargo: Large Cargo(unknown capacity) Crew Capacity: 6 In Cargo: 1 small self sufficient drone rover. Also, one of the introduced problems was that the center of mass was supposed to be directly in the center of the large cargo bay. but I managed to mess that up while adding stuff. so you may want to weight it down before flying. I still have to find a way to make it centered like this during normal takeoff potentially. Unless the current design is better. The point was to get rid of issues with weight and fuel changes during takeoff and flight. The same reason most of my fuel is stacked on the wings. UPDATE: 125kish orbit with lots of fuel. Not sure how far it can get though as it weighs 160t and It is very laggy. 3 real hours to get into orbit. So this will be more interesting when and if the game gets more optimized. I have gotten an earlie version to the mun but kept crashing it as I have virtually nil experience landing on low gravity bodies.

I get ctds a lot with high part counts and similar in linux x64. It does, not unfrequently, end up running in the background. But I think I have to do something to make it do that. It had to do with shutting it down when it's locked in a particularly manner. But I forget what it is. Something did make me have to shut down the process or have steam tell me I can't run it while it's running. Just can't remember what! 8)

What I'm refering to is aprox 1/10th the way to the moon.... Maybe it's 1.25 million meters.

It was turbo jets plus rapiers. Maybe it can get higher.

I'm challenging people to get the max apoapsis in an air hog with only liquid fuel and jet power. Show a pick of your max orbit/apoapsis to prove along with fuel types etc. Only put LF as well. And no tricks with the pics! 8) I don't have a picture of it, but my older air hog jet had 12 engines on an MK2 body. 6 Rapiers with 1 turbojet on each. I managed to get an apoapsis of 1.25million Killometers and a periapsis of about 40-50k. Can anyone reproduce and or beat that? I'm currently messing around with a hogger with only two engines of teh same type previously mentioned built around 300LF 2xfuselages and a drone core surrounded by radial air intakes. 156.5 per engine max intakeair. The previous plane with 12 engines had about half that per engine but I kept it flatter while gaining speed and projected altitude. I believe it also held and I flew it to the apoapsis. So for optional added challenge also fly it the apoapsis and take a pic! 8p Also include a pic of the plane itself. Preferably in flight. If you want make it available for download for others. This does not require stable orbit, as it should be impossible, just max altitude of the apoapsis. Though if you manage to get a true stable orbit with just jets do share. Everyone would be interested.

I installed HDparm. I didn't think it was in the repository for some reason. Or it was saying it wasn't. I apparently have 600ABBF0.

My vision is a little bad and when I saw this I thought it said "A great Idea for lovers!" >< Sounded interesting, particularly if it was a clever way to tieing something into the game. FYI, your sig is basically what my main plane designs look like! 8) I always use sprawled out engines. But usually on multiple wings. I'll have to try one wing next time! And I'm hoping they add alot of stuff like that. We need more to do when we reach planets(or even on kerbin). I think they were discussing stuff like that but I'm not up on what they are doing. It would be nice. If they add enough stuff to the game I want to go for a big exploration ship with lots of drone/rover abilities to aid in various functions around the SS.

That makes sense. Is this something they were improving later? I didn't find anything specific enough to say.

The problem is it will not let me use mirror mode but only radial when adding these new Delta wing sections on the top or bottom. It locks in radial. And I also have to keep it in single part mode until I make sure it's touching the underbody below(There is a space where the fuselage below is esposed) the intakes or it gets stuck in 8x mode also! If I keep it in single mode then move it to where I want I can then move it to double but only with radial. It will not allow mirror. This lets me put it so it's on both sides of the plane lined up with the wing sections angle. The problem is because it's in radial(I assume) when I go to rotate it to make it level with the middle wing, the one side levels out but the other side rotates up in the opposite direction. Is this a bug? If not will this be addressed eventually so the logic to apply beyond one layer parts fully is present in the coding? Currently it seems the game can only account for one layer of items and afterwords it's limited to virtually no addition afterwords besides the type already accounted for on the parts previously placed. This limits functionality of the editor severely! Actually, I can keep it in mirror mode if the symmetry is in single part. But the moment I change it to two pieces it changes to radial. and once it changes it cannot go back without deleting the part and getting a new one or duplicating a new one. This type of things happens similarly if it goes to 8x if I run it over a part that was already in 8x radial already. And I have to do more drastic things to get anything but 8x radial again. This does not seem like it is how the editor should function. I'm on Linux Fedora x64. Edit: And to add more insult to injury, now when I try to slide the engine blocks around they aren't even sinked on both sides anymore. This editor just keeps getting better! http://www./download/9542h06xmxzeiib/AEIOU_NIRDm_Lifter.craft

Is it your place to tell people to go to another forum? Why say something when you could just let someone else answer who wants to. It's a very simple question. And there are lots of linux users. You don't have to respond if you don't know the answer or get involved in the conversation. How about you go to another thread and find a way to amuse yourself in it since you can't be useful. I'll sit here and wait and see if anyone can help who knows the answer! 8)

Yes I know, but HDparm doesn't work for the fedora install I'm using.That is why I'm asking and why quick google searches don't work. I did those already. And the Cold start bug is supposedly related to driver versions. I have all sleep modes disabled until I find my HDD's current firmware and investigate further. but I"m having trouble finding it. I'm asking what the native commands are that would show Firmware. Hdparm doesn't come default on fedora and I have no idea if it causes any problems or not. Not in the mood to install something and find out, even after looking it up, that it conflicts with fedora and destroys something on my system.

I think I had one of that size and it didn't seem to hold. I assumed they couldn't do it after that. i just built one with the large ASAS and SR. docking port. I haven't tested it though. I'll have to test more later to see if it works with it sunken in.

I guess that leads to my next obvious question. When are they going to make an MK2 inline docking port to connect to another MK2 part. As opposed to the current MK2 clampotron that connects to another ship above or below the craft. 8) Or did I miss that also? maybe I'll try the multi sided docking port thing with 6 sides.. It will look odd though. But might be good for flying large chunks of station up like it were a station. Could add some function to my plane.

If they implement better memory management and don't just dump it all in memory right off the bat you might be able to run more later with the same ram. Depends on what they change. Unless I'm missing something.

I mean check the current firmware on the device. Or is that what you mean? I don't think any of them make linux apps to do that.(They always seem to be .exe. And I'm not running firmware stuff through wine!) And there is usually a way to check these from a cli in linux. I just don't know what it is.

Are they strong enough for taking off of kerbin or eve after reconnecting? I thought they just connected with magnetics lightly? I'd be reconnecting very heavy 100t plus parts together that would then be producing 4500+ thrust in uneven ways. I would have, in one design, a 100t front section with ION and Nuclear and a lot of lift. the back section with 145t would have lots of engines for eve and kerbin, etc. If disconnected, depending on the planet, they(the back section or front depending on planet) can easily take off and refuel or get new parts or kerbals. If connected they are strong enough to reascend and go to a new destination etc. But they need a really strong connection. the back end would have 1 MK2 crew compartment and a small cargo bay and drone core. the front would have most of the rest besides some electric or other things not as needed when split but the back would have the rest needed when together to compensate for weight differences and burn times. I haven't tried docking ports enough I guess. I tried the sheilded ones but thought they only partially lightly connected. Not enough for gravity bodies. Are they that strong?

Are they planning parts that recouple or have the structural strength of prebuilt ship parts after reconnect for the future stock game? Something that lets you fully recouple parts and hold them in a cargo bay(heavy parts) or lets you make a ship break into 2 or more separate controllable pieces and go back together and fly off(One being a large engine body for heavier gravity takeoffs). I have various plans for things like this including rovers I need packed back in the ship for reuse for takeoff on other planets(an exploration design) and the ability to make it two ship to seperate a drone portion that is connectable for heavier gravity bodies but also capable of interplanetary travel and reconnectable incase I need to fly back to get parts for the mission from kerbal or from refueling stations to continue exploring. Or the idea of having a nose cone with science cone break off with an ion engine on the rear and act as a temporary satellite or scout. Or anything else I can make it useful for. I was thinking of a whole plane where the engine parts can break off to perform mission tasks during flight return and help do things. combine that with potential Cargo bay ships that can make an asteroid moving kit while being seperate landers and exploration vehicles for multiple various situations to make a complete exploration mega ship that is also sleek and easy to use. I'm just asking because I always feel like I'm cheating with mods and prefer doing things with stock first.

Illegal U.S. Boarder crossing alert. Get the giant fly swatter! >< No, I kid! Oh, he's flying out of detroit.. Maybe with a private flight he'll be more likely his flight will make it's takeoff time then. Not to mention make it past security with and in a giant explosive device.. They don't mind giant explosive sound barrier breaking rocket devices flying at Canada do they. I don't think they have terrorism there yet. So, maybe no worries! >< To be care free!

I like the weird more creative over sized older aircraft. There was so much more adventure back then! That sounds like I'm trying to say I'm in to older large women from yesteryear. I guess that is an analogy for being into old large planes so... The older, more wooden, and spindly the better!! 8D

I would almost assume Venus could be metaphor or analogy(did I say that right?) for something somehow.. >< Something besides a smoking hot round celestial body.... Though I could be wrong! And American was a Canadian band, correct? What is Europe? An American or Australian band? (Wiki says Sweden. At least it's in the ballpark!)

It's a giant ship made with public money(I'm assuming). It shouldn't bother you for any reason if people criticize it. Even if it were or was paid for with private funds on the side it still shouldn't matter. If you were involved with making it and that bothered you it would/should be a concern to your ability to engineer and maintain it. That pretty much sums up the rest. 8) Criticism is the only healthy thing in the world. We need more not less.

Sorry for putting this here, but as you can not in any linux community ask a question you do not already know the answer too nor expect any work in information being written for others to educate themselves with the same reasoning. Does anyone know how to find firmware for and SSD. I need to check for the susceptibility to the Sandforce cold start bug on my mushkin chronos enhanced ssd. I'm on Fedora 21 64bit atm. And I don't dare ask questions on the official forums(or any linux forum) or be told endlessly to learn more before asking a question... 8\ It's not worth the stress of putting up with those lazy obnoxious sobs.

I wonder how these will all fair out if they ever get full multicore support for physics and whatnot. Whole new tests will have to be done! 8) I have a weird hunch those amds that underperform will not be quite as bad any longer. But who knows.

I would love to travel around the solar system refueling my plane in flight and through flight or something.. It would be cool to make a very complex multi engine type ship that can use the environment to keep itself going.

I started using Ubuntu before some of the modern problems with it and privacy. It was fun(Especially when it was more rustic feeling! 8p), but then I moved to Mint found it had similar problems with how they used firefox for funding and then moved to Fedora. the biggest problem I've had with it was the root partition being 50gb by default. Once I reinstalled and set it to 15-16gb(which is very easy with their installer) Haven't had much of a problem since. Wayland doesn't work for me though. Sadly it doesn't help the cpu issue but it runs really nice on 64bit as far as I can tell besides that. I just make really high part count planes(still learning and experimenting). I did get an update recently that did give a nice general performance boost. Not sure if it was a driver/system update or if it was one of KSPs updates. I just wish I had alot more ram and could afford to do some other upgrades to my computer.