Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Bubbadevlin

  1. Uggg.... i hate "cannot deploy while stowed"... freakin ruins half the things you can DO with fairings!! 

    So far out of my testing, the only thing you can actuate inside a fairing, is docking ports (cuz logic) and other cargo bays (also makes TONS of sense!)

    Anyone know a way around this thing? because I want to have my engine inside a fairing, but in order to deactivate it, the  legs must be retracted, something impossible inside a fairing... 

  2. ITS ALIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



    Max speed so far is ~160 m/s, With a simple fairing around the legs, and optimization, i have reached over 200 m/s with this beast :wink:

    max altitude ~16km 

    To get around the annoying mass bug, i used the legs being on the rotors.

    Still lots of optimization and tweaks (mainly making the body of the plane much more aerodynamic). During the past day and 1/2 of testing, i have learned that while the larger landing legs do not appear to have any more power, they have the advantage of being more durable. I have also learned that there is a max "speed" at which the legs CAN push, meaning that the diameter of the engine must be actually quite small in order to have any chance of speed.  Landing legs also appear to have a great torque to speed ratio, making larger inclination propellers more beneficial, however over torquing the legs will, rather than slowing the prop down, simpily overstress them. I also have found that the more radially attached legs, the less power per landing leg you get, however the less radial attached legs the more unstable the rotor becomes, making once again, a balance act between power and usability. Having more legs attached side by side, however, is a nice way to add more potential speed and torque, but not too many can be used, as they will start to over weigh the mass of the prop, and cause the instabreak problem to appear. 


    I have also discovered that having multiple crafts inside one fairing bearing is buggy AF.

  3. 4 hours ago, Azimech said:

    @Bubbadevlin try it with the smallest retractable landing gear, they're almost impossible to break.

    Btw, never heard of such an engine before. Seems a funny concept.

    I was working on something like this a few months ago (did not have much success, and have not played much KSP)

    The problem with the retractable landing gear is the hitboxes and very little amount of suspension, rather than "pushing" the plate, the plate clips into the hitbox almost anywhere you put it meaning that even VERY small intervals will just jam. 

  4. I decided to get back into some KSP stuff, and have been working on my leg propelled props some more.. unfortunately, i still have no luck with that. I did find the very interesting phenomenon that while my propeller would spin fine with a very light craft,


    When I increased the weight of said object, the propeller would completely fail. (ore tanks on bottom added, nothing else changed)


    This combined with the already known aspect that these legs tend to break when moving faster makes me believe that KSP is modeling like the legs are on the ground when they touch the panels. So if it is a heavy caft, even if the weight is not resting on the legs, they will still break like it is. This would also make sense since legs have a maximum speed that they can travel over ground before breaking at (roughly the same as when the legs break on an aircraft). This is unfortunate because that means that there is not real way to get around this fact, and it is just part of KSP's odd coding, Forever dooming these great t/w ratio engines to  very slow and light crafts. 

  5. 16 minutes ago, The_Rocketeer said:

    Yes, lower speeds do seem to be much less troublesome. I also have had some success with moving vehicles - as I said, I have got airborne, but have since realised that most of the torque effort was probably coming from reaction wheels. Even so, the engine didn't explode!

    Yea, i did manage to get airborne on full leg power, however i was only moving like 25m/s (and as I sped up, and the rotor spinned faster b/c less drag, the legs broke) 

  6. On 12/6/2016 at 10:43 PM, The_Rocketeer said:

    So turns out I had no idea what I was talking about, and strut overstress on moving vehicles is bizarre. Works perfectly on a static engine, but as soon as the struts are moving, kabom. I am mystified.

    Sadly, thats exactly the same conclusion I have came to. Although it did seem to me that if I kept the rotor bearing below like 20 rad/s it tended to function better. (although that might just be because the craft was moving slower)


  7. 46 minutes ago, The_Rocketeer said:

    @Bubbadevlin I'm intrigued, because based on my experience of 1.1 I was expecting to have this problem - overstress and boominess - when I first tried it, but everything turned out to be really weak and gentle. I had assumed it was something they'd changed in 1.2. Would you object to sharing a craft so I can compare our approaches and see if I'm missing something?

    Not at all, I would post pics but imagur seems to be broken with me today.. 

    I found it was just about placement, the greater spring force the more power (and zero dampener). Honestly, the gear only over stresses when i start moving in a plane or something. Even at 50 rad/s they didnt over stress if on launch clamps. I think this is just me failing to make a great bearing

    https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bz8Cg6FNj53Ebnd0SFF4cWZ1ZkE - Testing craft

  8. 4 hours ago, The_Rocketeer said:

    :0.0: I believe I just built a perpetual motion engine.

    Unfortunately it's only in the order of 2 or 3 rads, so no turboprops here :(

    For anybody interested, I positioned extended landing struts against my turbine blades, so that each blade rotated into the collider ray of a strut and was then pushed around by the extending piston. With a little tinkering, I'm getting fairly smooth rotation, but the pistons are too slow for high revs. This is the closest thing I've seen anywhere to the timed application of force like a reciprocating piston though. And yes I've seen Klond's car.

    I actually have been trying to get this to work too! Its actually very easily possible to get up to 50 rad/s, but my problem with it is the legs over stressing and exploding. It seems like legs actually have much better torque than electric too 

  9. 12 hours ago, Claw said:

    Do it!

    Of course it's entirely up to you, but I'm not sure if I would start with Eve. It's fairly large and (unfortunately) the terrain/water/sky/everything is about the same shade of pinkish/purple. Though, again, it's entirely up to you. :) Not many folks have been there.


    I have done Kerbin before (1.0 era).

    I already have a craft built and its currently sitting in Eve orbit... But.. re-entry is being ****** because I used Gigantor solar panels.. which just seem to heat up SO much 

    Edit: So I somehow made it into Eve's Atmosphere, but... I put the parachutes on the underside of the rover for some reason.. time to start over 

  • Create New...