Nefrums
-
Posts
647 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Posts posted by Nefrums
-
-
How would you find people that what to go?
It is not like if someone suggested a totally unrealistic one way trip to mars, they would instantly get 200.000+ people signing up .... or would they?
-
1 minute ago, lajoswinkler said:
What the hell is wrong with the people asking questions? Random trolls or true nutters?
space nuts!
-
2 minutes ago, RedKraken said:
Internationals want to work for spacex. But cant.
Could russia/china/india/europe pool resources to set up a competing mars transport system?
Far more likely that China does it by themselves. China is not a small country unlike the European countries, Russia and US
-
I like that they used a moon gravity assist to get to mars.
But how can the booster land on the same launchpad? It must either SSTO or turn around in order to do that, dV requirement looks to be huge for both of those options..
-
25 minutes ago, lugge said:
So, is there a stream for the talk? When it is scheduled?
18.30 GMT
-
Here we go:
695 parts, extremely flexible and very draggy rocket, powered by 28 Thuds and 5 sparks.
Album: http://imgur.com/a/DaMwr
-
8 hours ago, K^2 said:
Can we please get a blanket ban on anything violating conservation laws in this forum? It's worse than "Moon Hoax" conspiracies.
We are 100% certain that momentum conservation laws are valid for any mechanical device like the one in this topic, but we are only 99% certain that they are valid on the quantum mechanics scale.
-
22 hours ago, Crocket said:
Even for you, that's crazy.
On-topic, it might be (even if you're talking about a good-old-fashioned land-and-return), just barely. Fuel margins would be insanely tight, and the Eve ascent would have to go absolutely perfect. F5 is your friend.
Nothing is to crazy for me!
Both spark and thud have ok isp at 4km autetude on Eve, so it should be possible.
I tried launching a 30t payload to LKO with only tiny parts. It felt like trying to fly a jelly worm... The amount of struts needed was ridiculous.
-
Hmmm... Do you think maned Eve+return trip is possible?
It might be if any of the tiny engines produce any thrust.
-
3 minutes ago, DBowman said:
@Mesklin @Nefrums lovely low mass missions!
I see you both used inline fairings - last time I tried that it sent my drag way up. Are there any gotcha with those? like: don't 'only just' close it, or something about the size of the node connected to the front of the fairing, or radial stuff in the fairing (seems like you had plenty). I'll have to give it another try but if you all have any advice I'd appreciate it.
One tip. the inline fairing does not affect the drag of the part it is closed around. That part still has normal drag, and this drag is affected by the relative size of the part infront and behind it. This is a bit counterintuitive as the part behind it is inside the fairing.
So to avoid extra drag make sure the part you close the fairing around does not have a smaller part behind it.
Also note that there are some bugs where some parts still generate drag inside a fairing, I think it is mostly RCS parts and kerbals in command chairs.
-
I have read somewhere that the first flights with MCT to mars would be few (4-5) people and lots of equipment. MCT would be modular design where the could have ether cargo modules or crew modules.
It was a while ago I read these things and I cannot find the source right now, so I might be mistaken.
-
5 hours ago, manaiaK said:
"Dark matter" and "dark energy" bug me (and not just me) a lot, though...
I find it more likely that your models are wrong then that dark matter/energy exist.
And when I say wrong I don't mean that general relativity is incorrect, but rather that it is not general enough. Just like special relativity it does a good jobb of explaining a special case. More general than the special relativity but not completely general.
-
After having read this maths exercise about MCT: http://planete-mars.com/what-could-the-mars-colonization-transport-mct-spacex-project-look-like-continued/
and combining that with Musks statment that ITS can reach well beyond Mars, it looks like that is a bit above what can be done with chemical engines.
Will ITS use chemical engines or something more exotic?
-
On 2016-09-16 at 9:10 PM, Kuzzter said:
Looks like two thousand dV to eject from Tylo, intercept Vall, and get an orbit.
That solds like alot.. There should be transfer windows every 10 days or so to do it in for 1k dV.
-
On 9/13/2016 at 7:11 PM, sdj64 said:
That's ridiculous.
Congratulations Nefrums, you have completed the Jool 5 Challenge on Level 6.4! (actually Level 1 but it's so much more impressive than that). The little radial reaction wheel seems like a surprise MVP (most valuable part!) because it makes all of those tiny final stages that much lighter. I also see lots of VX series 2 engines. It was interesting to see what you did with reentry when the speeds are so high and the rules don't exactly account for balance with a rescaled system. It was impressive to see the efficiency and arrangement of everything, especially the landing on Tylo.
@sdj64 thanks! It was actually alot easier than i expected.
What should I do next? Level 2 with x10 scale and TAC life support? That might be fun.
-
Why would they put fixed fins on the top of the first stage like that. That would cause the rocket to very unstable during ascent.
Deployable fins like spaceX uses makes alot more sense.
-
I have now completed the challenge on level 1 in the KScale64 Kerbol system.
Approximate dV used: 52 000 m/s....
Kerbin ascent: 7000 m/s
LKO -> Laythe : 5500 m/s
Laythe Landing: 8000 m/s
Laythe -> Tylo: 70 m/s
Tylo landing: 2100+13000+2100=17200 m/s
Tylo -> Vall: 60 m/s
Vall Landing: 4500 m/s
Vall -> Pol: 500 m/s
Pol landing: 900 m/s
Pol -> Bop: 1000 m/s
Bop landing: 1400 m/s
Bop -> Kerbin: 6000 m/s
Mods used: All allowed part packs was installed, KER, MechJeb, Joint Reinforcement,Precise Node, KSkale64
-
9 hours ago, GwynJHawke said:
I wonder, but has anyone ever looked into how the order of planetary vists affects fuel efficiency? I was looking into hitting Tylo first, followed by Layth, and then Vail. Has anyone else thought this out or did the math?
It is best to discard the heavy landers first. That is do Laythe and Tylo first.
I usually do Laythe first as you can get from Jool intercept to Laythe orbit for free (gravity assist from Tylo into Jool orbit with PE close to Laythe orbit and then aerobrake at Laythe).
Laythe -> Tylo transfer can be done for 10-20 m/s dV. By using a gravity assist from Vall to match Tylo orbit the dV required to get into Tylo orbit can be reduced from ~100 to ~10 m/s.
-
Another landing done. Main album updated.
-
Bang sound before the explosion?
What would happen if a bullet ripped through the fuelline...
It was probably an alien with an alien sniper rifle!
*Puts on tinfoil hat*
Edit: Yes bullets from alien sniper rifles are slower than sound!
-
@Firemetal Try the Kerbal Joint Reinforcement mod, it helps with the wobble.
Here is a small teaser of my ongoing mission. A 340t mothership cursing at 6000 m/s in LKO:
Full progress report: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/147173-jool-5-on-a-bigger-scale/ and here http://imgur.com/a/BiSNM
-
Yes, it turns out that a large inflatable heat shield makes for a good flotation device.
-
Full album of the mission so far including Laythe landing and ascent. http://imgur.com/a/BiSNM
-
I went back and redesigned the engine section for the mothership. It now has 5 quad nukes.
I have started the mission and done one landing:
Reentry on Laythe was really hard, I had to make extra pass through the atmosphere before the final descent to avoid the heat shield overheating. Reentry speed was ~6500 m/s, and that is when starting in Laythe orbit.
Blue Origin Thread (merged)
in Science & Spaceflight
Posted · Edited by Nefrums
If a plane crashes during landing you lose the plane and the runway.
When there where only one plane and one runway this was a problem, not so much anymore.
Only the scale is different this time.
They are not going to try to land on the only pad and take of again within a few hours on the first launch. The vidio only describes the vision on how this will work when launching/landing rockets are as easy as planes are today.
We have more than one plane and one runway today. Tomorrow we will have more than one rocket and one launchpad.
I think that a feasible time plan for this should be as long as it took from wright brothers to commercial flight (~50 years). Slightly longer if we don't get any new world wars to direct funds towards developing technology.