TouhouTorpedo

I\'ve had this idea for a while but not had the chance to play the game recently. So far, I have acheived orbit with this idea around Kerbin using SRB only powered rockets. However, what would be really interesting, is SRB to the mun. Rules are quite simple here. No Liquid fueled rockets. RCS is allowed for the lander and orbital corrections. Ideally, get BACK from the mun as well. Obviously, this is going to be a quite a challenge, since targetting specific orbits with SRB\'s is like trying to thread a needle with a nailgun. I\'m allowing mods for now, but props to anyone who can acheive this stock. Part of the reason I\'m allowing mods is I honestly dont think they are going to help you much on this one, aside from varied SRB\'s available. Well, good luck... This is a very Jebidiah Kerman Challenge I think.... Big boosters, Big thrust, Big winnings.

Hmm a lot of people calling Estes units engines here. But they aren\'t really engines, they\'re single use motors. The SEDS society at my university launched a pretty big one, about 2.5m long nearly 3km high. Its a nice piece of kit. Think it was using a Cessaroni motor, May have been an L class if I rememeber right.

Avatar isn\'t science fact. I\'m glad they finally changed their figures. Last I heard of this they were claiming the mission would cost $16M, which is frankly impossible for what they were trying to do even using an off the shelf satellite (you would only just get a suitable COTS bus for that, with no launch or operations included). Though I am very skeptical about their claims for what it can be used for. You don\'t use the same kind of imaging techniques to take a picture of something on earth as you do in deep space, so this thing is going to be a lot more complex than your usual space telescope if they try that. Therefore, I\'m even finding their $25-$30M mission budget very unrealistic. Small low cost spacecraft, and one off multicapability system -DO- -NOT- -MIX-. So either they don\'t have any real space engineers on the team, or the marketing department is pushing some serious porkies. Someone is gonna get upset somewhere down the line on this project.

Its very doable especially using linear RCS, but it won\'t look like an ODST pod. If it does, then it\'d have to be massively oversize, and then RCS isn\'t really feasible. If I remember right about 6 linear RCS under an RCS tank under a command capsule should be capable of deaccelerating and flying. If I\'m wrong add some more. Not even sure if you\'d need the parachute but it can\'t hurt to have the extra slowdown.

Oh hell yes, and I thought the only obscure fanbase I\'d find lying around here would be the bronies. Heres my background on my computer - Nothing wrong with a big of Kagiyama Hina and the Space Shuttle.

Heres my take on the idea - Have an errant asteroid or two somewhere out there, maybe a belt? which are just free random objects of a size you could either A) land upon if you was very very careful or had a harpoon, or pick one up if small enough and take it back with you. And on that front I think it\'d be interesting to collect rocks or similar on the mun and minmus to bring back, Apollo mission style. HOWEVER, I do not think we should have mining or trade currency. It really doesnt make any sense in the game enviroment of KSP.

Lines through the screen is typically an overheating or malfunctioning graphics chip. Minecraft doing this would not suprise me as it isn\'t exactly the most effecient game ever. Are you in the UK? its been pretty hot these past few days. If its a laptop either wedge up the back of it to increase airflow, or buy a dedicated laptop cooler. On the Kepersky bit though I have no idea. But the crash sounds much more like a hardware fault to me.

Honestly thought this would be utter codswallop at first. But I\'m an engineer who only has experience in classic physics, so I wouldn\'t really know much about these 'weird' effects. The original Deadalus system Icarus is based off of wasn\'t designed to come back from the target system, and could still do the job in 50 years, fueled primarily with helium-3 fusion (as it produces a higher specific impulse due to the lack of free neutrons escaping and wasting energy) its also actually the source of the helium-3 craze, which I found out from one of the original designers of Daedalus. I\'m not sold on the using this method to fuel up part though. It would make sense to make fuel as you go this way and reduce the mass carried, but if its collected in situ there has to be more mass effecient ways of harvesting the fuel required. Aside from that, this very advanced piece of qauntum mechanics based machinery still has to actually start after being dormant for 50 years. Better off trying to aerobrake and ramscoop the upper atmosphere of a gas giant I think personally.

What do you mean by 'Dual EVA' here?

This is one of the reasons I am really pleased with the rebalancing of the game. I\'m starting to build rockets with solid 1st and 2nd stages, as you can pretty easily get into orbit with those. Infact with a 3 stage solid booster rocket, I accidently hit an escape trajectory first attempt!

Crew Tank? What mod is this?

Thing is, Aerospike engines actually are that good. The thing thats missing in the game is the fact they overheat TERRIBLY, due to the fact a regular rocket nozzle can radiate heat out of the combusting gases stream, and an aerospike can\'t. which is the main reason they\'ve never seen use beyond testing. Some small rocket concepts are considering the aerospike though.

More proof to me that Bob is the unsung true hero of the kerbal space program.

This was the first thing I did the moment I got 0.16 - find out if crew transfers were possible. I also happened to record it! only transfered one member, but then only used a single man capsule and a 3 man capsule, primarily to see what differences would occur. was a good experiment! I recommend to anyone to try. Once you work it out, Rendevous isn\'t actually that hard (I know, doesn\'t sound true, I failed my attempts in 0.15... its about the technique!)

This is a really nicely coreographed video. You obviously put a lot of thought into how you wanted it to come out before you did the mission.

The moment I realised EVA\'s were possible and crews could leave the capsules, I instantly asked the question - do they have to go back to the same one? So the very first thing I did as soon as KSP 0.16 was downloaded, was try something I\'d never successfully acomplised in KSP, a Rendevous. But not only that, to EVA from two craft, and land with different crew. This is the story of the EVA Crew Exchange Experiment... Where new heights were reached, and new heroes were born.

Funny, I was just trying this yesterday (but didn\'t know about the ability to edit rotatrons speed) so I was just piling lots of rotatrons on top of each other. ...Then span around in circles and exploded because I didn\'t put anything to counter the torque on (or counterrotate as you\'d done, but then if you use standard speed that a loooot of rotatrons)

Legendary thread response. I\'ve been thinking of using rotatrons for this kinda thing before, (dont have novapunch at the mo which is where I assume you have those big RCS tanks eerr I mean wheels from) but figured they\'d be too slow. Are you just editing the Parts/CFG files to get the speed up?

No. For multiple engines - ISP (m/s) = Total Thrust / Total mass flow rate So for multiple engines that are all the same, the ISP does not change. For some more effecient and some less effecient engines in a stage, you\'ll get something around the middle.

Very good, but the g value in ISP equations is always earth, 9.81. Doesn\'t matter if you\'re in space, on earth, on mars. Putting g(kerbin) is going to confuse people!

Well I\'m not an aircraft expert exactly, but with your 5th question I think the guy above is right. For an aircraft to fly at zero angle pitch it almost certainly has an angle of incidence on the wings even at zero degrees pitch (unless heavily cambered) However, I\'m reasonably sure no aircraft flies at 0 degrees pitch straight and level. Not even Jet airliners, though the angle they fly at is very slight to stop the carts escaping. Ever noted how it feels like a slight hill in an airliner? it is. Also for pitching all real aircraft require trimming for stable flight. Some have 'Fixed Trim' which I\'ve seen on the rudder of a small stuntplane before to deal with the prop wash. Regardless though dont worry about the pitch movement, just trim for throttle level. Far as control goes use big ones on the rudder and tail and if you must little ones for airelons. That usually works for me. It may help to reinforce your structure more, as wings flexing can really screw up the aircrafts behavior.

Was honestly what I was thinking lol. Then again wings weigh virtually nothing, and number wing panels to fuel tanks is pretty high here, so I\'d expect it to glide quite well.

Tried it out? I find its still quite hard to land. Has interesting quirks in its behavior (they can be worked around mind once you figure out what it does) The simplest way to make a better behaving one is use the smallest rocket engine instead for the better response times.

Having a look I see what you mean. Its like those two aircraft were spliced together. To be honest, I don\'t actually look at any reference building these, but just use them for inspiration. ;P (hence a-like!) Also found this image of a DC-3 looking up what it should have looked like - http://www.thedc-3network.com/images/airshows.jpg (yes i knew they had 2 engines, i just don\'t like the standard 1m cone when mated to the large cockpit!)

Because Otherwise I can see myself making a new thread every few days, so instead gonna go with just making one thread and rolling it on here. So first things already uploaded in other threads - Hoverjet2 -stock Key features - 45 degree incidence stubby wings and vertical engines. Essentially flies somewhat like a helicopter. Need to adjust throttle a second before you think you have to for landings, or you will die! video below F4U Corsair a like, (Canberrafold.craft) -damnedaerospace -damnedrobotics -fixedcameramod Key features- Flies absolutely great. Needs about half Trim toward pitch down to fly level by itself, but it is very stable and very maneuverable. Has cameras placed in really neat places, and is entirely flyable on inside view without using the HUD. video below DC-K Big, 3 prop engined -damnedaerospace -damnedrobotics Key features- Large but maneuverable and stable aircraft. Requires the trim to be adjusted at any time the throttle is adjusted due to its engines not being on the centerline. Otherwise however, flies much like the Corsair - while being 3 times the size. This is the first big plane I\'ve built with extremely dependable landing performance, it glides wonderfully. (No Video - PC would melt if I flew this thing and used Fraps, plus no time at the moment for it!) DC-K2 -damnedaerospace -damnedrobotics Key features More fuel and better looking version of DC-K, produces slightly less thrust however due to being 2 not 3 engined. Flown on 2/3rds thrust at 6500m though it can make it to KSP2 with a whole tank of fuel to spare, and was my first aircraft to make it there- Landing pictures! Not having an actual runway at KSP2 makes it a real bugger. Seemed I\'d landed perfect safely ... till I hit a bump. > I\'ve built a lot more planes, but thats my faves so far. I thought I was meant to be making spaceships in this game. Meh