Jump to content

Pand5461

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    360

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Pand5461

  1. Pand5461
    Not the GTO ones, no http://stuffin.space/?intldes=1971-116B&search=centaur
  2. Pand5461
    @DDE Vulcan is meant to have recoverable first stage, not upper stage.
  3. Pand5461
    Hmm... This poses a lot of questions. a) Not every rocket goes to one and the same orbit, and inclination changes aren't cheap b) The "spacious bu empty" spacecraft must be very spacious to hold entire stages. Space Shuttle cargo bay was 18×4.5 meterr, roughly the size of Falcon 9 second stage, and that made the orbiter weigh more than 60 tons. c) The stages will experience higher-than-usual transverse loads at reentry, so they must be reinforced to withstand them. Probably, they also need to maintain pressurization. d) Most of the upper stages either don't make all the way to orbit or do not stay at LEO anyways. e) The whole system just resembles the Space Shuttle too much. In fact, with the number of recovered stages being 1, it is exactly the Space Shuttle. It may be somewhat viable if the collected upper stages have easily detachable engines and control units. Then astronauts can unbolt them, secure in the cargo bay and send the rest to burn in the atmosphere.
  4. Pand5461
    With all that in mind, I actually switched to SRBs for first stages. Cheap as dirt, horrible Isp, great thrust - just the right thing to haul a Terrier or Poodle upper stage to 10-15 km and take full advantage of high Isp engine from there.
  5. Pand5461
    I can't make a "real-life inspired" launcher for probes without it being insanely overpowered Time to install a rescale mod, I guess.
  6. Pand5461
    Call @The-Doctor!
  7. Pand5461
    4. Munar flyby probe.
  8. Pand5461
    @DAL59 Here. Kind of. Working on the free return trajectory.
  9. Pand5461
    If you extend SOI radius far enough, you can get orbit around, say, Mun with the same orbital period as Mun has around Kerbin. Any ship on that orbit will maintain its position relative to the Mun and Kerbin. For Mun you need to increase SOI radius just a little bit, maybe by a factor 1.2 or so, for Minmus twofold increase of SOI radius makes such orbit possible, the same for Ike. That is, if you really miss Lagrange points.
  10. Pand5461
    I don't have full understanding of n-body physics but here's what I know. Pros: Lagrange points Sun-synchronous orbits Cons: Increased computational cost More grind (station-keeping, drift of KEO satellites) Obscured basic principles of Kepler's laws - orbits of planets are still mostly elliptical, but everything near planets goes haywire: oscillating inclination of Moon, Lagrange-point satellites having different period from predicted by Kepler's law, no good orbital invariants etc. (see Principia documentation) because there is no clear defined central body and orbits are no more planar, definitions of "prograde", "normal" and "radial" become quite vague if not inapplicable Need to ensure planetary system is actually stable (meaning much less planet packs) Much more complicated mission planning Given that patched conics approximation is quite close to real-life dynamics in terms of delta-V requirements, so vehicle design stays the same. All in all, current state of the game gives players without a degree in rocket science a good taste of what spaceflight is like. Adding n-body physics is going to just slap them in the face with all that complexity, no clue what to do etc. and is more likely to turn them away than encourage to learn something.
  11. Pand5461
    @Galileo right, thanks!
  12. Pand5461
    @Three_Pounds what's the mod for mission stats overlay?
  13. Pand5461
    @Angel-125 is it possible to control separately explosive potential and failures in .cfg? E.g., I'd want tanks to never leak but have a chance to explode, and command parts to never explode but have a chance of reaction wheels malfunction.
  14. Pand5461
    @falcoon you need to open action groups page, then click on your chute.
  15. Pand5461
    Using Soyuz solar panels as your main antenna and EC source. And i18n, maybe. And I really recommend to use patches proposed in the latest posts (well, mine nerf Soyuz SM quite a bit, so you may want to remove patches involving SoySvcMod). And this patch for heat shield (fixes size and mating with the decoupler): @PART[1.875HeatShield] { %rescaleFactor = 1.09 %node_stack_top = 0.0, 0.059, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 2 } @PART[1.875HeatShield]:NEEDS[TweakScale] { %MODULE[TweakScale] { type = stack_square defaultScale = 1.875 } } Given that it only adds parts, it should not cause trouble. I have not tested things in 1.3, though.
  16. Pand5461
    That's basically "flight nominal" every 10 seconds and "staging confirmed" / "next stage ignition confirmed" messages. Some variations include "first stage engines working normally", "pressure in the combustion chambers nominal", "pitch, yaw and roll values nominal".
  17. Pand5461
    @Shpaget bubble wrap or stuff like that, I guess. It's for transportation only and is removed before launch. Look at the interstage, it's wrapped in something, too.
  18. Pand5461
    @theSpeare how do you disable notifications? I have a satellite that sends "No power" and "Relax" messages every orbit killing timewarp and this is very annoying.
  19. Pand5461
    Доделал видео о полёте на Муну в стиле Л3. Отправил на строительство в Kerbal Construction Time ракету с двумя спутниками на кеостационарную орбиту (любые совпадения с реально существующими проектами абсолютно случайны). Ракета на опорную орбиту уже умеет, осталось доделать программу для спутников. Кстати, может кто-то посоветовать схему ретрансляционной сети для RemoteTech? Сейчас думаю о двух спутниках на экваториальной орбите и трёх на полярной. Последние будут в дальнейшем всё равно нужны для сети межпланетной связи, а с экваториальной орбиты полюса не видно.
  20. Pand5461
    @Steven Mading I think mission cost is what counts. A Luna-themed probe for 10k on top of an Atlas-themed launcher for 12k is 6:5 split in favor of USA. Which rises another question: are there additional restrictions on how we can split cost between "countries"? Examples: 1. Player launches a probe. Can he/she say that probe core, antenna, battery and solar panels are provided by the USA, reaction wheels and scientific equipment by the USSR? 2. Player uses the same part in multiple designs. Must it be provided by the same country across all designs or can change its origin? 3. Is saying "Liquid fuel provided by the USSR, oxidizer by USA" considered cheating? There may be a rule that LFO and structural elements like decouplers, fairings, payload adapters etc. must be provided by the country that performs the launch (I don't feel that solid fuel should be included in those, SRBs are typically provided as a whole, fuel included).
  21. Pand5461
    Yeah, I'm basically ready to post but waiting for the other team to keep up.
  22. Pand5461
    It really made me imagine the following situation. Rocket lifts off, ten seconds or so into the flight, and some things start falling off, others exploding. Ground control: "Jeb! Can you hear me, Jeb?! Jeb, report!!!" Jebediah Kerman: "Hear you, ground control. This is Jeb, reporting. Flight status: NORMAL! "
  23. Pand5461
    We both didn't then. My point was not about kOS at all. My point was about everyone having roughly the same idea of what a good maneuver execution or a good transfer or a good docking is and everyone having their own idea of how to properly perform an interplanetary mission. So, doing an automatic mission planner + executor will be tremendous work for little appreciation and quite a bit of disapproval. And also not a big deal of improvement compared to Astrogator (and there was a Matlab tool that handled gravity assists and whatnot) + MJ as it is. I would like to refrain from the argument on what's better, MechJeb or kOS/kRPC. Just would advise anyone not happy with MJ to try the latter. That maybe helpful in terms of teaching to appreciate others' work. Like, I do know that I can make kOS scripts do things more efficiently than MJ but have no idea how to make them work for about any craft without "some assembly required".
  24. Pand5461
    Eh... Are you sure crossfeed is enabled on all decouplers?
  25. Pand5461
    @eloquentJane I was talking of "Realism" bonus, not "Extended Realism". It just so happened that I play with Kerbalism currently and not really familiar with other LS mods, but they must be similar in terms of added mass for supplies. Almost none of the Kerbalism features matter much in case of Mun program, however - the whole roundtrip is just too short (OK, still need to pack larger batteries, but c'mon...), kerbals should not die even without food or water on the ship. Agreed, that was not a well-thought suggestion. Another thing is some may want to have faster missions instead of stockpiling supplies.
×
×
  • Create New...