Jump to content

KerbonautInTraining

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    600

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by KerbonautInTraining

  1. KerbonautInTraining
    I have actually placed bets on the landing...
  2. KerbonautInTraining
    So I finally checked, my CPU is an FX-8320. When it comes to single threaded performance it's just over half as good as most intel i5 and i7's. And that's... that's just great. no im not crying right now what are you even talking about
  3. KerbonautInTraining
    I'm still confused as to why they don't have near future plans for an LH2 upper stage.
  4. KerbonautInTraining
    I'm saying that a TWR of 0.9 after booster sep is a death sentence in stock KSP due to the insane gravity losses. In real life the boosters will burn for 2 minutes and get the stack to over 2000m/s. In KSP you might be going 600m/s when you drop the boosters. (Also that number doesn't take gravity losses into account) Actually, how did you get that number...? 1.4 x 9.8 = 13.72m/s^2 acceleration, not subtracting gravity losses 13.72 x 90 = 1,234.8m/s
  5. KerbonautInTraining
    Try putting a fixed radiator on the fuel tank next to the bay holding the ISRU. The rads heat up during ascent sucking as much heat as possible from the craft, they won't overheat before anything else.
  6. KerbonautInTraining
    With size a 3 core SRB's are only useful for boosting liftoff TWR from 1.1ish to 1.4ish. On the real SLS they're gonna boost it from 0.6ish to about 1.8. The main reason they can do this is because a TWR of 0.9 at booster sep is no problem in real life, in KSP it's a death sentence.
  7. KerbonautInTraining
    Yes! I do feel this is more suited to a mod though. Only problem I see is having to add dedicated parts for the tanks, so I'd pair it with interstellar fuel switch.
  8. KerbonautInTraining
    According to the devs the thermal system (that sucked up CPU usage and hurt post 1.0 performance) has been cleaned up and has "virtually no overhead" now. I'm gonna be doing some experiments to see if we can exploit the whole 1-ship-per-thread thing. I proposed it here.
  9. KerbonautInTraining
    OK I've decided that I will do this challenge (and return to Kerbin) if SpaceX performs a successful barge recovery today. Btw, I'm thinking about doing a suicide burn on ion engines that's "boosted" with a terrier. Is it OK to get rid of the terrier stage while it still has fuel so I can land without changing the throttle?
  10. KerbonautInTraining
    Landing this thing on any celestial body would be no trivial task... You would have to rely entirely on thrust vectoring for lateral control during the final descent unless your attitude thrusters are SSME's
  11. KerbonautInTraining
    With N-body physics that's possible, but not in stock KSP. You have to make some sort of burn once in the SOI to capture with patched conics.
  12. KerbonautInTraining
    I'm following the Announcements board so that explains the notification part, sort of. Still have no idea about the origin of the thread
  13. KerbonautInTraining
    So I earlier today I got a notification saying: [user] posted a topic in the Fault Vault: HACKED (name redacted for privacy reasons just in case) I know what the fault vault is but that just makes it more mysterious. What the heck? Did everyone get this?
  14. KerbonautInTraining
    I know what you're talking about and it's definitely graphics settings. KSP will only show shadows that are within a certain radius of the camera. The "render quality" setting determines this radius. On the lowest option that allows shadows the render distance is WAY too short, like 15 meters or something. Try bumping the render quality (main menu > settings > graphics) up a few notches assuming your PC can handle it.
  15. KerbonautInTraining
    I'm not excited for multiplayer at all really ...probably because I don't have anyone to play it with...
  16. KerbonautInTraining
    If you want a bit of extra realism, the ascent and descent stages started with a TWR of ~1.6 and burned out with a TWR of ~3.5. Thrust limiter adjustments could simulate this, although the ratio between wet and dry TWR is probably different from real life. What engine is used for the ascent stage?
  17. KerbonautInTraining
    I love how Conrad was known for having a very, uh, "adult" dialect and scared the PR departments with the idea of him going on live TV while on the Moon. It was actually Bean who slipped more during the EVA's. Some people on the ground were used to working with Conrad's language and got driven to tears laughing when he forced himself to replace curses with words like "thingamabob"
  18. KerbonautInTraining
    My personal favorite Apollo misision. Probably just because of how childishly excited Shepard (where did that come from?) Conrad and Bean sound when the landing site comes into view.
  19. KerbonautInTraining
    Trying to get the hang of flying with this using a craft in orbit. [lots of snip] I decided to use this only for atmospheric craft now, it works great.
  20. KerbonautInTraining
    How on Kerbin could a single mod patch so many things
  21. KerbonautInTraining
    Holy %! $*, obviously our definitions of the bolded are not the same
  22. KerbonautInTraining
    20 hours after it was first mentioned and a model is already in the works Hot damn, necrobones
  23. KerbonautInTraining
    I know it's way too late to change the current episode, but contrary to popular belief it would appear the Apollo missions didn't perform a skip re-entry. I could be wrong, but that's what it looks like as discussed in this thread. Apollo 11 did perform a climb during the reentry to reach an alternate landing site but the G-forces only went down to 0.85. (I'm pretty sure a skip would go down to less than 0.1) No idea how something like this could have gone unnoticed, I hear everywhere that they skipped but according to the transcripts they didn't.
  24. KerbonautInTraining
    Oh its a walk in the park! Super simple stuff. ... if you're a computer. It sounds easy but I think our F9 keys are gonna take a serious beating.
  25. KerbonautInTraining
    I propose a version of this challenge for the truly insane KSP players out there. 1. Throughout the mission the only allowed throttle commands are "full" for launch and "stop" once that's done. Then "full" for the landing burn and "stop" once that's done. No shift or ctrl. 2. The craft must return. Sounds impossible? It isn't. If you are very good with timing your suicide burn and use steering losses for fine tuning you can touch down relatively softly and immediately lift off again without cutting the engine, from there it would be easy to get an intercept with Kerbin's atmosphere. I have no intention on trying this for myself, mind you. Just throwing it out there (*cough* @hazard-ish *cough*)
×
×
  • Create New...