Jump to content

KosmoNot79

Members
  • Posts

    53
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by KosmoNot79

  1. 1 hour ago, Ol’ Musky Boi said:

    An interesting exploit of the inflatable airlock that I discovered, they make excellent re-entry vehicles!

    AUva2qA.png

    Simply de-orbit with EVA pack, then bail out and land with the EVA parachutes. As far as I'm aware this is the lightest possible stock re-entry vehicle (a command chair and small radiator masses in at about 150kg), perhaps it might have applications in extremely low mass missions? Maybe @EvermoreAlpaca can come up with something...

    you can deorbit a kerbal if you get your apoapsis extremely close to the atmosphere. Otherwise I might ty this.

  2. The KSP is developing a new extremely lightweight SSTO design. They need your help to create one! (I know this is probably a common challenge but it would be nice to revive it)

    Rules:

    1. The SSTO can take off from the runway or the launchpad, but not from anywhere else (this will be noted in your entry)

    2. The SSTO can be manned or unmanned (there will be two leaderboards for this)

    3.  The score is solely based on mass (the size of the craft doesn't matter)

    4. No Kraken drives, use of eva packs (this counts as a second stage) or other cheaty methods

    5. The apoapsis and periapsis of the orbit must be above the Karman line

    6. The SSTO doesn't have to be able to deorbit and land itself

    7. If it wasn't already extremely obvious, it is a Kerbin SSTO

    8. As evidence, you must have a video or screenshots of key events in the mission with fuel gauges left visible (leave the UI on)

    9. If there's anything you think I should add to the rules tell me (criticism and feedback will be greatly appreciated)

    Smallest Manned SSTO Smallest Unmanned SSTO
    1. TheFlyingKerman (3.687t) 1. TheFlyingKerman (0.985t)
    2. Vyznev (3.984t) 2.
    3. 3.
    4. 4.

    I will start to design a craft of my own soon!

  3. I feel like pc players don't need updates that have clouds or visual enhancers because of the plethora of mods out there. Even updates that add a more realistic drag model, make the game more realistic in other ways (real parts, real solar system, life support, etc.) or have quality of life features are available for pc players in the form of mods. Updates on pc should be focused on two things (more or less in order): 1. Bug fixes - the game has a ridiculous amount of bugs. It would be way more enjoyable if they were gone 2. More parts - this one isn't as important since you can download mods that give you more parts to choose from but it would make the game that bit more fun to play with because of variety and push add new limits to stock crafts. The people that would truly benefit from these realism or quality of life updates are console players. As one, I know that the game would be a lot more fun if we had a delta-v calc or a precise maneuver node. Even visual enhancers or clouds would be greatly appreciated on console. Honestly, if squad wants to add things on console that aren't available on pc it should be things that EVE, FAREM (FAROM?), or restock adds to pc.

    TL;DR: PC updates should focus on bugs; console is the platform that needs the quality of life and visual updates.

  4. u7c0i45.jpg

    Height: 0.7m

    Width: 1.3m

    Length: 1.3m

    Score: 3.3

    I reduced the overall width of the craft by only using only one wing piece (which surprisingly allows for level flight at around 60m/s). Used a similar principal to @Rocket In My Pocket with the structural piece being used as landing gear due to its crazy high crash tolerance. It reaches maximum speed at about 250m/s and is actually not too hard to fly. I thought using a dumpling fuel tank instead of an oscar b would reduce the length of the craft but it's about the same. I tried to avoid clipping any further than I did.

  5. 13 hours ago, Foxster said:

    Have a look at this craft: https://www.dropbox.com/s/al8kysx2eec844i/EveThree Fox 2.craft?dl=0

    I have made the 1st and 2nd stages two separate pairs and fed the fuel from the 1st stage to the 2nd stage to the centre stack. All engines fire from launch. This increases the dV as shown by MJ from 6671 to 6693. Not a huge difference but it all helps. Plus you drop the 1st stage quicker and so reduce drag losses.

    I heard that they're drag inducing unless the intakes are closed

  6. 1 minute ago, Pds314 said:

    Nice! Although keep in mind he started with a plane / giant egg with a tail and a prop that was supersonic.

    My carrier gets nearly 600 kN stationary thrust with just 20 large reaction wheels. It looks to me like his engine may use more than that, AND get sqrt(3) times more torque from each.

    His advice is a great way to add up to ~77% without adding a lot more mass

  7. On 3/30/2019 at 12:42 AM, HUG said:

    xactly what I mean. I´m sure there´s maybe some hardcore people out there who might be even happy about not being distracted by all the shiny bling bling anymore. But for me it´s an important part of the joy to have stunning coronas and sunrises in space.

    I've been told that it was purposely introduced to make the game more "realistic". I'm not sure if this is true though. 

  8. On 3/26/2019 at 12:52 AM, M_Rat13 said:

    @swjr-swis I saw a video of an SSTO that could go from the surface of Kerbin to the surface of Eve and back again.

    I fully believe at least one person will figure this out, but it could be a huge pain to figure out. You've got to make a craft that can get off Eve, that carries a vehicle capable of getting from Eve orbit to Tylo orbit, that also has to carry a Tylo lander.

    Plus you have to land all of that on Eve to start the race. Would you do that, if you were good enough?

    You could capture an asteroid around Eve to mine off of. I got this from one of Bradley Whistance's videos.

  9. A couple of days ago I was doing a mission to Duna in a science save when I noticed that whenever I time warped my trajectory changed. I noticed that doing a direct transfer from Kerbin to Duna caused the apoapsis of Duna to drop by 50km. Any comments on how to fix this or when it may be fixed will be greatly appreciated. :P

×
×
  • Create New...