Jump to content

Acvila

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    250

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Acvila

  1. Acvila
    I suppose
  2. Acvila
    Is it possible to integrate this with linuxgurugamer's state funding saving an air-flight with passengers and giving daily income? Like in a strategy games, something like 100 credits per passenger for 100 km of flight. First you make contract flight and at it's end, save it for generating daily income.
  3. Acvila
    May i suggest for low tech flying saucer one based Coanda effect because of the design?
  4. Acvila
    http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/coanda.htm https://www.mysteriesofcanada.com/ontario/coanda-effect-avrocar/
  5. Acvila
    from what i know, they have maximum MW, so if you have reactor of 5GW, you put nozzle up to 5000MW... i think now it's only for electric engines... however at low power it's better with smaller engines. L.E. after testing seems that bigger engine give more thrust at same power... i thought that the smaller evacuation the bigger pressure, but no.
  6. Acvila
    why to you put engines matching the reactor size? you should match rector power anything bigger it's just ballast. i think that pebble it's fine with 1.25m nozzle. aesthetics?
  7. Acvila
    you should have possibility to build lighter and of course fragile planes, something like FAR wings... but should also apply to structures also.
  8. Acvila
    any way i can change tech entries without losing them when update mods?
  9. Acvila
    i'm frustrated cause i started a campaign with standard income and research and i can't build anything, just rockets... and of course, men should die first before sending some probes, cause, logic
  10. Acvila
    https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Tc6LXO6zcP3Cc7PIOtK3Q8bMfWMVReLN as you can see they create a lot of drag, the plane can't accelerate, without them deployed it has like 500 drag.
  11. Acvila
    no dependency, ksp 1.4.1 with latest MM 3.0.6, i think i installed it through ckan enabling compatibility for 1.3. procedural wings vers. 0.12.2. Pcontrol surface mark 1 work perfect for me, i can use them like flaps(brakes) or control, no problem.
  12. Acvila
    Shouldn't wheels be researched before rockets and planes? How can you move a Rocket to the launch pad, on logs? Can you make a config with wheels in a lower tech? i know this is squad idea about wheels, but i think rovers should be built before rockets.
  13. Acvila
    Working in 1.4.1
  14. Acvila
    for me pcontrolsurface mark 1 are working well and they are nice, i think you used wings mark 2 and thinking they are control surface. yeah b9 control surface are ugly, but if you make them thin, will look better. just use control surface mark 1 and for tail all moving pwing mark 1. B9 wings, i can't modify them, they are not transparent, but no possibility to change anything. i use ksp 1.4.1 dx 11 with shadow mage patch for dx 11. however, i like pwings better, they are lighter i think
  15. Acvila
    is it possible to add solar tracking to these docks?
  16. Acvila
    if i didn't try to make a stock plane for you...
  17. Acvila
    I think i find what's wrong, engines attached to procedural parts, so you need to instal procedural parts for this craft. When i tried to make stock plane i saw that the plane fly very well, with PP when on hover over accelerate and when goes down wait last moment to accelerate, but is to late when fly low... https://drive.google.com/open?id=1GBLCs3RnCKRkjqzdiyidAbtKS-yBwec9
  18. Acvila
    simple plane, 4 juno engines, perfectly balanced, twr 2+, hover input example 100m, plane go to 100m and after that decrease throttle, plane lose altitude and crash to land because it's starting to throttle to late, if i play without hover plane can be balanced to keep altitude, it's like it can't read thrust of the plane well. ksp 1.4.1
  19. Acvila
    thanks, i will try and report back LE https://drive.google.com/open?id=1o_Sbiy0buoRv4DcwHXdZLMGMIEKskDm6 with basic rotatron an added fuel crosfeed https://drive.google.com/open?id=1suZjYjzLOUfXPe16Zz0FEUCC8AuLzXQO without with rotatrons i managed to fly only after twr was over 2.6- 2.8
  20. Acvila
    where can i find this config file? however i attached a fuel pomp to the container which hold the engine, same thing... twr reported 1.6 but no lift... and without 8 or more air intakes one of the engine always flame out.
  21. Acvila
    ksp 1.4.1, with your mod and kjr, i tried to make a vtol plane and seems that engines attached to rotatron don't have power, also don't take enough air intake, can't fly even if KER readings show me 1.6 twr. if i attach engines without rotatron they provide enough power to lift easy.
  22. Acvila
    i saw that first time in 1.4.1, i also think it's a bug, because without radiators and increasing reactor heat disappear... also, solid fuel fission reactor doesn't provide any thermal power to thermal engines. however for now just increase reactors size and attach them to wings...
  23. Acvila
    i had the same problem with low power input in thermal jets, if you have like 50MW they overheat over 100MW is good to go. i tested with thermal receiver mk1. in his picture he surely don't have more than 50MW, those reactors are small. first picture show only 11MW... that's why overheat, he should put bigger reactors to work without radiators.
  24. Acvila
    from what i know in previous version thermal jet didnt't need any radiators, radiators only for electric consumers. now they heat... just try with bigger reactor without radiators, it work for me. from what i see in your picture reactors are small and engines big... try reactors big and engines 0.625 metres. add radiators only for electric supply, so, something small. LE, EC goes in radiators for cooling
  25. Acvila
    be sure the MJ2 you have to match the version of ksp you play, i had trouble when 1.4.1 vers installed for 1.3.1 version. for me 2.7.1.0 version MJ2 do perfect landings in ksp 1.4.1
×
×
  • Create New...