Dientus
-
Posts
538 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Posts posted by Dientus
-
-
14 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:
Eventually you will run into some sort of math limitation
Depending on how its coded, I imagine that would be a real possibility. But I was thinking that the devs wouldn't just leave it at that... Game crashing at an overflow or division by zero error... that is poor design among other things.
Since the devs will have a decent idea where this may occur, I would imagine they would just have the ship disappear with all hands considered killed well before this point. I doubt they would do it 'asteroids style' and you reappear on the extreme other side. Having the ship considered 'lost' leaves open possibilities of future expansion of new systems as well.
-
For me, depends on how long it stays in beta.
I think that public participation based on a first come first in basis up to a given total amount would be ideal. The downside is public beta testers tend to get 'god-complexes' after game release with normal players as well as devs, but historically a limited public beta release seems to do very well as far as a stable final release is concerned
When beta drags out, the open beta would be a better choice, to allow exposure to the game and keep interest in it until final release. (Plus I could play it too then )
-
Very well spoken and agreed with
-
No Dres? (I can hear the noone visits dres chants now
)
Mostly Duna, because that always ends up becoming the largest site/colony/refinery in my career games.
-
8 hours ago, Single stage to ocean said:
I just want two word. EVE SUCKS.
<snip>
I call it GTFO mk1, here it is, it is a lander for my Kerbalism grand tour.
<snip>
LMAO!
That name is PERFECT! And yes, the only thing holding eve in orbit is not gravity, but the fact it sucks hard enough to stay where it is!
I do like the design, I am in the middle of planning a similar mission now.
-
Thanks to @Hotel26and his boost glider idea, as well as @swjr-swisand his additional design ideas, I decided to create my own Science Boost Glider for use on atmospheric worlds. The savings on fuel would be great and makes sense to me. I will use a standard launch vehicle to get a return pod and a boost glider to a planet with atmosphere and collect (nearly) all science that I can in what is essentially a single mission! Using the boost glider means it can easily be the same tonnage as my usual landers however the bonus is, with its ability to 'skip-hop' across the planet, I can use the same fuel and vehicle to get science from each biome in a single shot and return in the same mission instead of sending multiple missions or large refueling facilities.
My first attempt was the XP-87 Harpy (7.603 tonnes empty; 13.723 tonnes fueled)
I used a MK2 service bay, crammed all the science I could in it, and tested it. It flew pretty good and needed only a very short runway to get airborne. Quick shot of the service bay.
The problem was it kept hitting an altitude ceiling that was essentially too low for my purposes. Switching modes it still could not effectively leave the atmosphere and skim in with any fuel left. It also had an over heating problem in the RAPIER because of how hard I pushed it while it was still in the atmosphere. I didn't want to add radiators or precooler at this stage since it really wasn't performing as I would like.
So... the design was nice, but the changes would switch COM and airlift enough to require a redesign... I just started over and used twin intake and engine from a failed (for my purposes) SSTO design (XP-62) and meshed it with the science, basic wing design from the XP-87 to create a completely new Boost Glider...
XP-88 Peryton (10.840 tonnes Empty; 18.940 tonnes Fueled)
It may be larger, but the result was great! Exactly what I was looking for!
Of course there was some heating on reentry that could be worrisome, but this is it! It is actually more maneuverable than the Harpy due to better lift to COM placement and COM movement during fuel drain. I am now going to finish up the design, put on the lights, RCS, struts and this bad boy will be commissioned the KBG-001 PERYTON in time for Vals return from Mun.
Many thanx to the guys with the good ideas (Hotel26 and swjr-swis) and to the kerbals brave enough to test these theories out!
-
Ok, I actually went and finally (after many many years) got an IMGUR account so I can show you @Hotel26 and @swjr-swis my experiments thus far...
https://imgur.com/gallery/8Nmqiee
This is the XP-87 Harpy... 13.723 tonnes full, 7.603 tonnes no fuel (inc. monoprop)
The design started differently but the reason for the canards are this....
A lot of weight (relative) was added due to the addition of the MK2 service bay, and every science experiment I had available at this time in this career. The flight profile actual is really decent, doesn't use a lot of area to take off at all, even with the poor performance at ground level from the RAPIER. I WAS overall pleased until testing...
halfway through the flight (only a quarter distance of Kerbin at the equator) the Rapier began overheating! I don't want to add radiators or precoolers but it looks like I just may have to... because it seems like the ceiling altitude of this craft is below the line of space and atmosphere. I even switched modes to try to get that last "oomph" but fuel had depleted way faster than I would have liked and would have left the Harpy with no fuel. I'm sure I could have glided it in, it handles pretty good, but still would like to leave the atmosphere, and re-enter with fuel to spare for emergencies so.... not there yet.
-
Same here. Everytime I start over, Mun is target one. As everyone else has already said, I can hit it easily with low tech and inexperienced kerbals.
-
3 hours ago, Hotel26 said:
It came to my attention that RAPIERs could still breathe (at certain speeds) at altitudes upto 28-29 km. But not that I could sustain in level flight however.
So my experiments moved to suborbital speed hops. Then my focus turned to 'skip gliders':
My current version uses two RAPIERs and a small amount of LOX to boost speed at AP one time only. (That center RAPIER pictured is now a drogue. No sense loitering in the pattern when time is of the essence!)
Current testing is pole-to-pole with fuel tankers parked at each pole for refueling.
If you don't mind and it's not too much trouble, please let me know what you find out as far as distance traveled vs fuel used vs vehicle empty tonnes goes.
Why didn't I think of manned MARV style boost gliders before! Thats a great idea for flying around Eve collecting biome data cheaply! I am starting my own experiments as well!
-
I haven't downloaded it yet, but just looking at pic, I believe Vanamonde hit the big nail on the head. Great rule of thumb for off-centered thrust.
Good job! Keep on going!
-
Inside the bottom service bay, looks attached to the "top", "forward", "nose" section. Open them doors lets have a peek
-
5 minutes ago, determinationmaster said:
you mean 2022
Could be why the hype train is running low on steam.
-
2 hours ago, Gargamel said:
Here it is! I merged these for you.
And I do hope they put a bit of effort into the music.
Why not just mute the music and use a background music app?
Because immersion... Well ok lazy but still
-
Elysium is a possibility if you don't want it a kerbalized name.
-
Just as an aside... What about adding the ability that some other games have i.e. piping in external music? Maybe do it in a similar style as a game like ATS? It may not be exactly fitting per se, but I think it would be nice to play music ingame from various sources such as spotify, pandora, private mp3 lists, etc.
To add a touch of realism if this were to ever be implemented, it could depend on signal strength as to whether Jeb could jam to 'Rocket Man' or not.
-
Good job! Not long for Eve or Duna now!
My first landing was a disaster. I wasn't ready for the ultra low gravity. Lucky I got everyone back safe. Other equipment... Meh not so much.
-
1 hour ago, MR L A said:
Not sure if I already posted here or not...
But for me, simply seeing the missin through is the hard part.I build a craft, launch it... does it have enough dV left to get to Duna and back? Yes? Good. Revert without completing the mission lol.
I really should stop doing that, because there's a thousand adventures to be had when something unexpected happens and I miss out on them
For me though, I think the most enjoyment is in the VAB/SPH and constant tinkering. So I guess I'm just playing the game how I enjoy it most
Of course, always play how you feel comfortable. But maybe you could start small, to get a feel for it, like a journey to that monument near the space center and back to airport. Or to the landing strip on the island.
I tend to revert when designing planes and rockets sometimes, but for myself, I have to put my creations to the test.
-
Oh wow! Tons of information on kerbals! To start, gotta ask, are the lab coats, hard hats, overalls, etc. a choice to wear? Or aesthetic additions for VAB or videos only?
So depending on their facial expressions we can really begin to gauge a kerbals reaction to a situation it seems. Even down to if they can handle excessive g-force. Good info on launches and risky maneuvers to see if they are blacking out before it happens. Seems like when I start my test builds, I'm gonna need stupid kerbals for the flights LoL
BTW, glad you attached your license to the post, very nice touch!
-
Mine is currently piloting a tug around Mun assisting 6 others in assembling the latest space station design for refueling and conversion of resources called the KSS Shooting Star I
-
Last I checked just over 1000... Like 1062 or something.
-
I have many rebuttals but I know your stance now and can make a reasonable guess at your reaction. With that I will say thank you for taking time to answer. Regardless of beliefs at the end of the day the consumor and the almighty dollar (ruble, euro, yen) will determine what the consumor thinks.
-
So thats what... 2 years 200 some odd days for the next window then 3 years 260 some days of travel time....
Hang in there Val Bill and Bob!!!!! Help is on the way!!!!
-
D
Just now, dprostock said:I cannot comprehend the concept that if others are bad, I have the right to be mediocre and justify it.
I don't disagree on that point.
But then, let me ask, if some guy made a wedding cake, and he messed up a little bit on it, and you decided to make a bigger and better wedding cake, would you feel that being demanded to apologize for the previous guys cake, as well as handing out free pieces of cake as justified? I mean you might, I don't know thats why I am asking.
-
2 hours ago, dprostock said:
So, if so, let them make a statement acknowledging that the KSP1 is unworkable, impossible and expensive to maintain. They apologise and will dedicate to a better quality product with the KSP2, and for those who PURCHASED the KSP1 and DLC, they will be rewarded with bonuses for the toad that made them eat.
That would be sincerity.This would put an end to the problem and not continue the wear and tear.
Unless I am wrong, my understanding is that KSP (Squad) and KSP2 (Intercept Games) are actually separate entities. Sincere or not, why would a separate company apologize for something it had nothing to do with?
Besides, have you seen the gaming industry? There are far worse things other companies do than leave in bugs.
)
That name is PERFECT! And yes, the only thing holding eve in orbit is not gravity, but the fact it sucks hard enough to stay where it is!
What did you do in KSP1 today?
in KSP1 Discussion
Posted · Edited by Dientus
added comment
Getting there quickly and cheaply. See this post as to the design I settled on and the reason for wanting to make it
* I would change it to a panther if it were for Kerbin only.