Jump to content

TheEpicSquared

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,456

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by TheEpicSquared

    Thread to complain bout stuff

    in The Lounge

    Posted

    9 minutes ago, NSEP said:

    I agree with you. But luckily, in The Netherlands, we have news dedicated to science, economics, and politics seperated from celebrity, fashion, and crime news. So i cant relate.

    Meanwhile in Sweden... https://www.svt.se/nyheter/lokalt/vasterbotten/se-honom-satta-coola-flasktricket?

    Spoiler

    (bad) TRANSLATION TO ENGLISH:

    Spoiler

    The new trend "Water bottle flip" is spreading in Umeå. It's about doing cool tricks with half-full bottles - like in the video above
    "Water bottle flip" is the new trend that has spread from YouTube to Swedish high schools. The goal is to throw a bottle and get it to land with the top or bottom down. Some harder variants could be flipping [the bottle] from roofs, railings or from behind your back.

    Tips for beginners
    Wilma Grönlund is one of the teenagers at Tegs fritidsgård who practices the Bottle Flip. She thinks that the hardest part is staying focused but she has a trick for all the beginners.
    "Don't put too much water in the bottle," she explains firmly.

    Winning gesture "dab"
    If you succeed in pulling off a water bottle flip, don't forget the winning gesture called the "dab"; you lean your face into your elbow and stretch out your arms, kind of like when you are about to sneeze. Wilma Grönlund and her friend Ebba Spetz explain that it's very important.
    "You can't forget to dab," they say while laughing.

     

    *sigh*

    KSP Weekly Challenge Suggestions

    in KSP1 Challenges & Mission ideas

    Posted

    On 5/15/2017 at 7:04 AM, linuxgurugamer said:

    Well, I'm going to be posting a challenge in the next few days, maybe @Badie would be interested:

    I'm reviving the 2.5m Spaceplane mod, the challenge will be to build a spaceplane/shuttle using the parts.  I haven't yet finalized, but largest payload to orbit, fastest to orbit are some of the things to do.  Winners get to have their creations included in the mod (If the want).

    @linuxgurugamer Is this challenge still on? :) 

    Mission Idea: Emulating Real Life in Kerbal Space Program [WIP] [Submit a Payload] [Become a Launch Provider] Craft Submission Thread!

    in KSP1 The Spacecraft Exchange

    Posted

    On 5/3/2017 at 1:47 PM, Brent Kerman said:

    Its heavy, I need to run some calculations, but initial math says I should be able to get it suborbital for :funds:25,000. (Definitely not orbital)

     

    On 5/4/2017 at 0:58 PM, Andiron said:

    To have goals for manned spacecrafts, I created this docking target equipped with two docking ports (one normal and one Jr.). It was build in the intent of using it with my craft, the Vincin, but everybody can use it! I decided to put it on a 100x100km orbit with an inclination of 120° to make it reachable by rockets from Baikerbanur.

    KerbalX file: https://kerbalx.com/Andiron/VDT

    Zenk7pG.jpg

      Reveal hidden contents

     VDT

        a) Payload name? VDT (Vincin Docking Target)
        b) Payload provider? @Andiron
        c) Type of payload? Docking target
        d) Payload price? 3942 kb
        e) Payload mass, part count and dimensions? 1.485t / 34 parts / 1.78x1.25x1.25
        f) Intended orbit (apoapsis, periapsis, inclination, any other orbital info)? 100 km circular LKO, 120° inclination
        g) Short description of the payload? Docking target for manned spacecraft

     

    @Andiron, are we still on for a suborbital launch of a Vincin I+ capsule on an Iridium I first stage for 10,000 funds, and a launch of 2 docking targets on the Iridium I for 19,500 funds? I'll add our confirmed 3 orbital Vincin I+ launches we already decided on. :) 

    On 5/15/2017 at 5:57 AM, quasarrgames said:

    Hello Everyone! Back with an exciting new craft:

    The Aeolus

    odasfG2.png

    A unique but realistic staged spaceplane with incredible capabilities.

    The high-performance j58 (whiplash) engine gets the craft up to about mach 3, then the aerospike upper stage detaches and carries the payload the rest of the way. So it's all present-day technology.

    Also, it obeys all the rules. It's 20m long and 1.25m in diameter (excluding its fins and landing gear).

    Pictures for publicity:

      Reveal hidden contents

    88oNRvX.png

    7egAq58.png

    Features

    Payload Capacity: 8 TONS (yup. That's as much as the next two heaviest lifters COMBINED) to equatorial 75km LKO, or 5 tons to equatorial GTO

    The jet stage can be landed in the water, or flown to the next continent and landed there (if necessary), in about 8 minutes' time after separation

    Has a light so you can display your favourite color on your payload while you launch! (if you don't specify the color you wish on your launch, it shal be kept as fabulous purple)

    Tested in simulators for any payload that fits in a 2.5 by 5.5m fairing

    Flight instructions:

      Reveal hidden contents

    1-Stay level until you reach 600m/s, then pull up into a 20 degree climb

    2-At 20km, once your speed starts to drop, engage RCS and stage

    3-Try to keep the pitch at the point where the time to apoapsis is just increasing. Should reach cutoff velocity about 45km up

    4-Remove fairing once in space and circularise normally

     

    Since this is vastly superior to my trinity rocket, i wish to replace it with the Aeolus in the upcoming test launch and in the craft manifest

    Cost of the lifter: :funds:18,830

    Recovery cost: :funds:7,360

    Customer cost: :funds:31,000

     

     

     

    On 5/15/2017 at 8:02 AM, Rath said:

    I'm kinda butting in here, but those wings seem like they could be a bit unrealistic.  Attached by a single strut?

    They are unrealistic.. :/ 

    On 5/15/2017 at 8:22 AM, Skylon said:

    I don't think a craft like that would exist in real life. They would either use a separate carrier aircraft or use vertical launch with rockets. If there is a real world example or concept, then I'd like to be shown it :). Remember not even Rapiers are allowed, and they are in development.

    Yup, no Rapiers allowed at the moment,

    On 5/18/2017 at 4:53 AM, quasarrgames said:

     

    Darn. Didn't expect to get this much negative feedback from this craft. Though i guess there is no real life analogue, the closest thing i'd say is the Xb70 supersonic bomber, which could reach similar speeds and carry many tons of cargo, just like this craft. It was very large, but that's mostly because it needed a lot of fuel for its huge range. This little thing only needs to go two hundred kilometres or so, so it needs significantly less fuel. Replace its payload with any generic plane-launched rocket, like Orbital ATK's Pegasus, and you have the craft i made. 

    As for the wings, I'm currently trying to make a version that looks a bit better. 

      Reveal hidden contents

    bKCPMLf.png

    Is this realistic enough?

    Until then, take my Trinity Full Thrust. For 23,000 funds, it carries up to 5.7 tons to equatorial LKO. Costs 16,000 on its own, and parachute recovery of the lower stage takes 6,900 off that.

      Reveal hidden contents

    6rrVc7l.png

    Yes it's a bit wide at the bottom, but not by much, and it is the second iteration, so i hope it's acceptable @TheEpicSquared

    Post the updated Aeoleus when you're done with it, and hopefully it gets the approval. 

    The Trinity FT is fine for a second iteration. It'll launch when 1.875m rockets are allowed (does anyone remember when that was? @Oliverm001x, anyone?).

     

    Mission Idea: Emulating Real Life in Kerbal Space Program [WIP] [Submit a Payload] [Become a Launch or Payload Provider]

    in KSP1 Challenges & Mission ideas

    Posted

    On 5/2/2017 at 10:43 PM, Brent Kerman said:

    Will do when I get to KSP. Hopefully tonight.

    Also, I think an off-KSP-forum forum is a great idea, we can have our companies again! :D (No slight to KSP forums, I know from experience that role-play can get out of hand very quickly.)

    EDIT: Was video even recorded of the first several flights?

    I haven't contacted @ZooNamedGames, I'll do that now. Video was recorded starting with @kerbinorbiter's flight (Pimenova). However, I've been having some trouble with my recording software, so I'll try to fix that. 

    On 5/2/2017 at 11:54 PM, VektorWorlds said:

    An urgent meeting of the Kerbal Sun Physics Society has deduced that the need for a solar observation satellite is paramount. A new Payload Provider, Dets65, is now formulating a plan for a basic solar observatory... We shall soon see the results.

     

    On 5/3/2017 at 0:03 AM, StupidAndy said:

    HEY! I'm doing that :D

    are you thinking what I'm thinking?

    INTER-COMPANY PARTNERSHIP!!

    or not

     

    On 5/3/2017 at 0:12 AM, VektorWorlds said:

    Maybe... we shall see. Care to share any details of your mission plan? :wink:

    I'll let you two figure something out.

    On 5/3/2017 at 0:27 AM, StupidAndy said:

    if you go over the last few pages, you'll see my launch negotiations, and lets see, find my submission...

    its at the bottom of the page

     

    On 5/3/2017 at 0:41 AM, VektorWorlds said:

    Here's my probe plan (it uses a few parts from not yet approved mods, which is why it's a plan right now)

    http://prntscr.com/f3f0ef

    Of course, I could be more than happy to develop a new mission :)

     

    On 5/3/2017 at 3:02 AM, StupidAndy said:

    what's the mod list? the parts look good!

     

    On 5/3/2017 at 1:25 PM, VektorWorlds said:

    Bluedog Design Bureau, ProbesPlus and DMagic

    I added those after you PM'd me, right @VektorWorlds?

    On 5/4/2017 at 5:51 PM, Uace24 said:

    I am hereby pulling out of this competition untill it transitions to RSS/RO and I am focused on ISEA  We are taking payload submission to full about a dozen launch slots this year. So feel free to submit somthing.

     

    Ok.

    On 5/4/2017 at 6:53 PM, Skylon said:

    I would like to schedule a launch of 3 Skysat-1Bs to 500km. If they don't have reaction wheels, tell me. They may have to circularise under their own power. If that is the case (and if it is possible), releases them at 60 degrees from each other, using a 2/3 orbital period. 

    @TheEpicSquared

    Will do.

    On 5/4/2017 at 7:37 PM, icantmakemodels said:

    @TheEpicSquared, here's some proposed equations:

    Grr, the forum won't parse and display TeX for me.

    XvlFTmM.png

     

    On 5/4/2017 at 7:44 PM, Skylon said:

    Duration at destination?

    Maybe an equation to determine price as well/instead? 

    I'd one myself but...

    Good equation though.

     

    On 5/4/2017 at 7:46 PM, icantmakemodels said:

    I don't think it would really matter; you could game the equation by using a greenhouse and timewarp.

     

    On 5/4/2017 at 7:50 PM, Skylon said:

    Maybe something quadratic then with diminishing rewards, up to a certain point. Also comfort is not a numerical  value. And of course redundancy/reliability is something to consider.

     

    On 5/4/2017 at 7:53 PM, icantmakemodels said:

    It's just a rough equation; It probably needs way more terms. Perhaps,

    6XpghXK.png

    T is time in days

    t is some arbitrary constant ~2. Depends on how quickly you want diminishing returns.

    EDIT: Prettyprint TeX equations

     

    On 5/4/2017 at 7:59 PM, Skylon said:

    Yes, I think. But maybe also the Kerbals gone previously should be with diminishing returns also. I'm trying to work out an equation with price instead of n

    Not the best at that kind of thing though

     

     

    On 5/4/2017 at 8:20 PM, Skylon said:

    Here is my proposed equation for comfort or C: 

    C=(H/K)*((sqrtO*2)+S

    Where C is comfort, H is habitation space, K is the amount of kerbals, and O is the amount of Kerbals minus 1 (I could've used K again but I only noticed it afterwards and it would use too many brackets). 

    S is for signal. If there is constant signal, the value is 1. If there is signal during launch and at the destination it is 0.5. If there is little signal the value is 0.1; kerbals won't fly if there is never any signal.

     

    On 5/4/2017 at 8:28 PM, icantmakemodels said:

    Why not use the Kerbalism stat?

     
    Poor 1
    Good 2
    Great 3
    Excellent 4

    I can't be bothered to boot KSP to check what the actual stats are called and how many there are, but something like this

     

    On 5/4/2017 at 8:32 PM, Skylon said:

    I suppose you could, but you sorta want more values, with lower intervals. A custom one is more, well... customisable... and the kerbalism stats don't really tell you how they decide values.

     

    On 5/4/2017 at 8:33 PM, icantmakemodels said:

    Graphs!

     

    On 5/4/2017 at 8:45 PM, Skylon said:

    p=(C*sqrtR)*(D*sqrtT)

    Where p is price, C is comfort, R is reliability (number of kerbals who have been before), D is distance as decided by icantmakemodels and T is time.

    I need to fix leverage when I can apply the equations.

    You may notice that if no kerbals have gone before, the value is 0 due to the square root of 0 being 0. However, if no kerbal has gone before and it is the first kerbal (ever), they pay a bonus price. If it is the first kerbal to fly a certain craft to somewhere, but that place has been visited before by a tourist, then the value is ~0.1

    Something like that anyway

    Well, that's some awesome maths! Have you come up with a final equation? If so, give it to me and it'll come into effect. 

    On 5/5/2017 at 7:57 PM, Skylon said:

     I would like to schedule a launch of 6 of my SkySat-1As in Launch Configuration 1. They would launch to a 500km orbit. Since I would like to test re-entry of the Arthur-1 upper stage from a higher orbit, leave the periapsis of it after deorbits as high as it can be while still maintaining an impact. It will  re-enter radial out for as long as possible, then retrograde. Use the RCS.

    Are all 6 launching on the same rocket? I'll add you to the manifest.

    On 5/6/2017 at 7:10 AM, Skylon said:

    @53miner53 how much do your station resupply modules weigh? I will probably only let you dock 1 or 2 for now.  What docking port size(s) do they use?

     

    On 5/6/2017 at 11:20 AM, Skylon said:

    Here is a schematic I drew of the planned StarGate-1 station. L-1 is the logistics module, C-1 is the cargo module, H-1 (there are four of them, three not shown) are the habitation modules, and A-1 is the airlock module. A-1 will have a Cupola on the side to view Kerbin. The squares at the top are a bad representation of engines, and the straight lines are a small docking port. The straight lines with crosses between modules are normal sized docking ports. There are solar panels on L-1 and C-1.Fsqtr4V.jpg

     

     

    On 5/6/2017 at 0:39 PM, Skylon said:

    I've finished up the modules, and put them together: 6asyGsS.jpgThe picture came out badly for some reason, and Kerbalism says no E/C will be produced, but oh well. And I just noticed it needs more batteries, probably.

     

    On 5/6/2017 at 2:24 PM, 53miner53 said:

    They are 1 ton each, and I'm not sure I can get them beyond a 100 km circular orbit with Copper 1. They use a standard clamp o tron on both ends, so I could dock them to each other, and to the spacecraft.

    My Kerbalism is saying no ec production too. Please tell me if you figure out how to fix that.

     

    On 5/6/2017 at 2:44 PM, Skylon said:

    If you can make a craft that can take 2 months or more of supplies and dock that is under 2.7t, I will launch it on my Arthur-1 rocket and you will get some of the profit from government/tourist contracts if your resources are used. Or if you like I can pay you directly for the resources you provide. I am now working out the projected costs of StarGate-1

    I'll let you figure something out.

    On 5/10/2017 at 5:07 PM, icantmakemodels said:

    @TheEpicSquared, schedule another two Helium+Xsat Launches under the name "Helium+Xsat2" & "Helium+Xsat3", assuming the first launch works.

    Put it them in Geosync 120 degrees from Xsat1 each other; schedule the launches accordingly.

    https://kerbalx.com/Blacksilver/Helium-Xsat1

     

    Also, how much does the gov pay per Kerbal month for the satellites?

    -----

    Someone post something because I have more equations.

    Ok.

    On 5/11/2017 at 8:29 PM, icantmakemodels said:

    http://www.desmos.com/calculator/0lc974a9sl

    Is this the final equation? 

    On 5/12/2017 at 0:26 AM, SpaceAeronautics said:

    This group still active?

    Yes.

    On 5/12/2017 at 4:14 PM, HobbitJack said:

    I found a nice 95% reusable launcher... I'll sell it!

    *Made*

    Looking forward to it!

    On 5/13/2017 at 11:30 PM, Kerbiter said:

    Oh hi...

    I decided to check this here thread, but I'm not so sure if SpaceY will even go into this...

    @TheEpicSquared Will you approve of glorious SpaceY?

    Providing your rocket meets all the rules, you're in.

    On 5/15/2017 at 4:02 AM, 53miner53 said:

    I think he already did. Check the mod list.

    He means his company "SpaceY", not the mods. :wink: 

    On 5/15/2017 at 5:00 AM, Kerbiter said:

    No he hasn't.

     

    On 5/15/2017 at 0:35 PM, 53miner53 said:

    SpaceY heavy lifters and SpaceY expanded are both on the list.

    He means his company "SpaceY", not the mods. :wink: 

    On 5/16/2017 at 6:10 PM, icantmakemodels said:

    @TheEpicSquared, since you liked the previous post, I'll assume no SSTOs for now. I'll do the Virgin Galactic thing then.

    Yup, no SSTOs please.

    On 5/18/2017 at 2:23 AM, HobbitJack said:

    @TheEpicSquared I finished my Relay-Sat series, could you please update the OP?

    Sure.

    On 5/20/2017 at 4:40 AM, Drew Kerman said:

    I just remembered getting mentioned here. If you did reach out to me since then I never got anything

    No, I didn't reach out to you due to RL. I'll do it sometime. :) 

     

    @Numerlor, expect your launch report to be out tomorrow or Wednesday. :) 

    Development Update for Consoles!

    in 2016

    Posted

    8 hours ago, LegendaryAce said:

    FROM THIS WEEK'S KSP WEEKLY!!!

    "In other news, progress on KSP for Consoles continues. Blitworks keeps sending us new builds and consequently keeping our QA team busy. We even had to get new test-kits to help share the load in that regard. All in all, the builds are looking good and, slowly but surely, we’re getting close to our objective of delivering solid KSP versions to console players."

     

    This is EXACTLY my point. We get nothing more than Blitworks this, console build that. No release date, no time-frame, not even a DAMN SCREENSHOT!

    To be fair, SQUAD never released release dates until recently. They did say "early 2017" though, so I see your frustration.

    And as for screenshots, tbh they wouldn't look very different from the PC version. And they did release a video of the new maneuver node tool a few weeks ago.

    8 hours ago, LegendaryAce said:

    So how about this. After you guys get your 1.3 release, you get to wait until July 2018 for your next update. Sound good? No? Well, that's how console gamers feel they've been treated.

    I'd willingly wait for a year or more for a quality update (emphasis on quality). Better to wait longer and get something good, than to quickly release a half-finished product (remember the 1.0 and 1.1 releases anyone?).

    8 hours ago, LegendaryAce said:

    And don't even get me started on the fact that we're getting the last update, not the current one.

    I think, unfortunately, console versions will always be of second priority compared to the PC versions. For the near future anyway.

    Forum designs new rocket to replace the SLS

    in Science & Spaceflight

    Posted

    I'm with @magnemoe I'm this one. FH can already take 63.8 tons to LEO and adding two or four more first stages would easily take the payload capacity above 70 tons.

    Another idea would be to literally take a Falcon 9, and add 4 more Falcon 9's to it. Upper stage included. Of course, the center rocket would have to be heavily modified to be able to support four more rockets, but hey, we have 5 billion dollars! :wink: 

    Maybe the four side stages would burn at liftoff, or the middle as well at a low thrust if needed. Some time into the flight, two of the side cores could throttle down, with the other 2 side cores operating at full thrust until burnout (I'm assuming an expendable configuration here). When the first two side cores separate, the two remaining throttle up to full power, and the middle core ignites and throttles to 50% or so to aid with thrust (if the middle core ignited from liftoff it would just throttle up to 50% or so). 

    When the two remaining side cores burn out and are jettisoned, the middle core throttles up to full thrust until burnout and jettison.

    At this stage you would have a middle upper stage of an F9, along with four strap-on upper stages. The staging sequence would go similarly to the first stages' staging sequence. 

    The four strap-on would ignite first, with two throttling down a bit to conserve propellant. When the 2 strap-ons that were operating at full thrust burn out and separate, the 2 remaining strap-ons throttle up to full and the core ignites to 50% thrust or so. When the final 2 strap-ons burn out and separate, the core second stage throttles up to full thrust and carries the payload to orbit and beyond.

    Also, if the core second stage was converted to use a a hydrolox or other high isp propellant, this would mean more payload could be ferried around while in space.

     

    ^ Now, I have no idea if that's practical in real life (probably not :P), but it's an idea.

    And, as stated, we have 5 billion dollars, right? :D 

×
×
  • Create New...