Kryten
-
Posts
5,249 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Posts posted by Kryten
-
-
I meant in the sense of 'would the motion of the lander legs have an affect on the movement of the ship in space.' i was kind of thinking that if they did have any significant effect, i might be able to 'swim' a ship through space using the momentum of the legs moving in sync. not enough to, say, break an orbit, but just the ability to move in space without power would be interesting
That wouldn\'t work. You can\'t \'swim\' without something to push against-your ship would just spin.
-
Are the lander legs too short or am I scewing something up?
They\'re too short. Apparently there was a problem when the model was exported; it should be fixed in the release version.
-
Same here.
-
Yeah that\'s good, but this method, as is stated, is a way of closely following a real mission to the moon. In real life, you insert into orbit and then make a burn on the far side to break the orbit and begin going down towards the surface. Firing the engines for the final phase during landing is called the 'powered descent'.
Almost all of the real missions launched to the Mun that didn\'t have to leave something in Lunar orbit anyway (i.e. anything other than Apollo) used my technique; the surveyor landers, most Luna landers...
-
are all the parts in that pic, in the probodono (close enough) pack. my game doesnt show that brown dome part, and no sign of the sphere skeleton tank part, above the lander engine.
Those are both from the upcoming new Silisko edition version.
-
Why bother going into orbit if you\'re landing? Why not just launch the ship straight onto a collision course? That\'s usually what I do, and it avoids a lot pointless time- and fuel-consuming manoeuvring.
EDIT: If you want to do this yourself, just have your apoapsis slightly below the Mün\'s altitude (around 10,000 Km works well), then, when near the Mün, burn towards your retrograde vector (the green with with the lines) until it\'s at the top of the navball, and you\'re ready to land.
-
This may sound dumb, but do these actually interlock in any way? Where you insert the other side and twist?
No, they\'re purely cosmetic for now.
-
What if we change the rules?
Last but one person to post is the winner.
Then Skunky\'ll post twice.
-
KSP\'s getting more expensive, while BF3 should be getting cheaper. The choice seems obvious.
-
would this work with .14 ?
.14 doesn\'t break compatibility with any old parts-if they worked in 0.13, they should work now.
-
Welcome to the forum!
You can\'t currently (though it is planned for the vaguely near future) dock parts together, unfortunately, but it doesn\'t take much fuel to return from the Mun-the relative distances are a lot less than the Earth-Moon system. You don\'t need too much thrust for Munar transfer, what\'s important is timing and fuel (but, again, not that much).
No, really, you got me confused\'lo-hello, the Mrs.-wife... I can\'t see anything else in there that could be even slightly confusing...
-
I can\'t even build gigantic stuff without lagging my laptop to the point of submission, having it suddenly explode in pad and/or abnormally breaking apart in flight.
There\'s your problem.
-
As I understand, if you just put the decoupler and the engine in one stage this wouldn\'t work. I just turn on the engine and then I jettison the rocket.
It works for some engines; you can modify an engine to work like this by pasting
ActivatesEvenIfDisconnected = True
into it\'s .cfg file.
-
The moons would very likely take up the vast majority of solar system bodies y\'know =p
Consider our solar system, for example. 8 planets, 180 moons.
-
10 seconds
-
Go for launch, T-5 minutes.
-
Streaming has started.
-
For some reason, when you set it to the height of Geosynchronous Orbit, it is already travelling round at a speed not high enough for anything below, but just right for the Geosynchronous Orbit.
This is because something in geostationary orbit is where something orbits at the speed that the planet is rotating-the speed the craft is already going at just from being on the planet.
-
Please More Informations about it.
It\'s just a very, very, long (invisible) decoupler. Your rocket starts on the pad, and everything else as normal. When you decouple, the top part of the rocket will be left at geostationary orbit height, where the momentum is has from rotating with planet is enough to stay in orbit. Anywhere lower than this, the orbit isn\'t circular, and it won\'t be an orbit at all below a certain point. At something like 200km, It\'ll just drop straight to the ground.
-
Can you add Low Kerbin Orbit, that is circular, and in an altitude of 200 km.
No, he can\'t. Crafts made using this part only have the horizontal momentum from the planets rotation, which isn\'t enough for a circular orbit below geostationary orbit, or any orbit at all at the kind of altitude you\'re asking for.
-
Did you really both have to quote a full page and a half of images? Spare a thought for the poor sods trying to read this thread on a phone.
-
[gmod]*snip* Direct attack, cursing, and instigation will not be tolerated regardless of who is defending and responding and or starting. I hope I make myself clear on this one, continue on folks. -DR[/gmod]
-
5/10. Simple, creative, but I\'m not getting it.
6/10. Certainly original, but a bit too silly.
-
7/10. That \'S\' is...interesting.
6.5/10; good basic idea, but rather too small and blurry.
Whoops. This is your brain on 1e37 ejectionForce
in KSP1 Mod Development
Posted
What the hell kind of supercomputer are you running KSP on? I just tried this, and didn\'t have a single in game second after 20 minutes. Also you must have been going far faster than that; the number after the altitude actually scrolls back to metres after passing Yottametres, and I saw mine rollover 3 times in that fraction of a second.