gridghost

Ya, i'm not getting crazy mileage out of things anymore, which is good. And it wasn't so much fuelconsumption as weird readings of how long i travelled.

It's not the fastest one around @ Mach 5.1 but it can do 2 circumnavigations

Not FPS-related, but GPU related as the GPU, if loaded, uses more CPU-cycles to handle throughput. More so if it is an integrated GPU. And loading the CPU seems to be what KSP needs to not give way crazy numbers. It's still not correct tho. Even when playing around with the Physics-time-delta thingie... I thought about locking the FPS, because of earlier forays into moddable games, where the physics-calculations were framebased, way back in the day

@Van Disaster Ya, i'll do that. And Day-um... But naming the flight after one that ended in disaster seems out of place This one ended in triumph. @Gman_builder Ya, and the other one did 1300 m/s and 9.1 kkm. This one did 1200 m/s and 6.7 kkm. The first one should have had a shorter distance @1300 m/s and -3 minutes. Fact of the matter is that the length of a circumnavigation (or any flight really) seems to be tied to CPU/GPU power (at least in the 64bit windows-build of v1.1.3). When using mods doing calculations in the background and added visuals, i got 2.4 kkm less in a plane that should've travelled a longer distance. I chose to use SVE, KER and scatterer because i saw both you and Van Disaster using it or similar mods. But as you stated before, it's probably still more accurate to calculate the distance from flight-time and average speed. And BTW, what do you think of the Big Bird as a plane? It's more or less a heavy fighter w/o any weapons (and getting 24.7 kkm from a fighter must be some kind of record, don't you think )

@Van Disaster @Gman_builder After installing SVE (clouds), Scatterer and KER, i seem to get more resonable length, still too long though. (added some beautyshots )

I did another clean install, with only FAR, Dynamic deflection and Pilotassistant, locked the FSP @ 60 and still got 8 kkm on a circumnavigation that normaly would have netted me 5.424 kkm (390ms/s at 15.500 m) It's still better than the crazy mileage i got earlier... I think that it's somewhat linked to FPS and Physics-calculation being bound to 24 or 25 FPS and without any graphical mods i can't get the FPS lower than 60.

@Gman_builder Why are you using afterburner at low altitude? As to my rig and my install... seeing as i have a clean install with just FAR, Pilot assistant and BD Armory (not used here) and a constant 120 FPS i would rather think that it's not MY install that not up to snuff. But yes, @Van Disaster i'm rather confused by the numbers myself... as you say, the numbers doesn't add... any circumnavigation eastwards should show up as approx 3.768 kkm (some variation of course but not much) plus rotation. In my case that would be 4,396 kkm given 1/6th rotation in 55 minutes. And going Mach 4 would affirm that. Going 200 m/s would take 5 hours and 14 minutes to get 3,768 kkm and the planet would have orbited 5/6th rotation giving 6.908 kkm. Ah, well... I'll lower my FPS to 60 and see if my theory works.

I would like to see an unedited sceenshot of the results of the trip later on... @Van Disaster Going Mach 4 @ 23000 km, i got 9.1 kkm

@Van Disaster I haven't tested that in this install yet. Will do and get back

Nice I only got 9 hours (ish) out of the 12 predicted. And hopefully we get some answers as to why i get crazy mileage, still. And you might want to up the speed to 485 (I saw you had it on 450) With the Wheesley one i calculated that i should have traveled 19 (ish) kkm given time and speed, but got 62(ish), which is 3.2 (approx) times longer then expected. It would be nice to know why.

Nope, i got 62 kkm with the Wheesleys and 51 with the Panthers...

Did a reinstall (and redownloaded the mods to be sure to have a clean install) and i still get crazy mileage from my planes. Did a retake on the Big bird with Wheesleys and got this... (Coming in for landing)

As i said, just right-click the link and save as whatever-name-you-wanna-call-it.craft and you are good to go. The *.craft files are text-files just renamed as .craft... And to get it to fly right i'm using FAR and dynamic deflection, BTW

What is wrong with dropbox? Just right-click the link and save as Yada.craft

KAF X-75 Big bird You may be required to right-click and save as...

I tried a run w/o using the afterburner and headed for 90 degrees and 15000 m altitude at Mach 1.5, and after 1 and a half kerbin day (9 hours 36 minutes) i landed after 51,5 kkm

As far as i can see my last screenshot shows a distance of 10,4 kkm after landing at KSC

I edited the post already... Ctrl + F5

Well, now that i got the album to play nice, you can see for yourself... it's still 10 kkm (give or take some)

Well, i am doing this manually, but... i'm not that shaky and keep my detours within a degree from 90 :D.

Ok, so i'm pretty much 3/4 into the circumnavigation and i'm standing at 7,5 kkm so far... As i said, i'm going east at a speed of around mach 2.3 - 2.4 on average (ground speed), using version 1.1.3.

No mods other then FAR, BD Armory and VesselMover, so no... no planet rescale mod.

Ya, i know... and it's only one circumference, at 90 degrees heading all the time... But it was fun... i forgot to take screens of the whole trip so, i'm doin it again, just to be sure there's no bug.

I think this is rather fun to see the difference in cirucmference between people... i did one run, rather straight eastwards and got this: https://www.dropbox.com/s/0dll0wykofjo53c/screenshot161.png?dl=0

NP, finals are a tinsy bit more important