kahlzun

Nice! 10char

yeah, but the inclination can make it harder to get an intercept. The Mun takes more fuel to land on, but is more noob-accessible for orbits..

Why is Bill handing us a tissue?

HOLY CRISPY CRACKERS, THESE ARE AMAZING. I thought the first one was a screenshot! You're really good at these!

"We consider the loss of astronauts in testing flights perfectly acceptable, they'll show up again shortly" "Due to a misplaced mouse click, our astronaut decided to EVA during re-entry, and was blown off the ladder." "He only survived the fall because he landed on his head"

Well done. The first one is always the hardest. Now, build a rescue lander, and send Bob out to collect him! (try not to crash that one )

pretty! very pretty! EDIT: also, there's nothing inherently requiring SRB's in the game to lack throttle control, it's just a factor in the .cfg I wonder if there is some way to set it so it's either FULLY ON or off, 100% thrust or 0% with no middle ground?

It would be difficult to replicate unintentionally, but with the 'lazor' plugin, you can set physics range to be up to 100km, which would allow collisions to be registered from the surface (depending on height of orbit)

Like this?

I have often wondered if there is any difference in the behavior between the Mk16 and Mk16XL, as they state the same drag value on the tooltip.. Is there any way you can expand the test to also check this?

EXPERIMENT BRIEF 1 RESEARCHER: Samuel Birchenough “Kahl'Zun†EXPERIMENT TITLE: Progressive testing on the effect of increasing TWR on atmospheric launches HYPOTHESIS: Increases in efficiency when launching with high-TWR vehicles will eventually reach a peak level of efficiency, and provide minimal benefit after this point. METHOD: A rocket has been designed with a range of engines which, while otherwise identical, have differing thrust values, allowing fine control of the TWR of the rocket while maintaining all other variables (Isp, mass, drag etc) as constants. This will allow us to isolate the true effect of changing the TWR of the rocket, and will allow us to make more informed decisions when constructing launch vehicles. The fuel for the engine is sufficient to provide approx 6000ms of dV, which should allow all designs to reach LKO, defined here as 100km. Mechjeb 1.9.8 will be used to automate the launches, with settings as follows: Turn start: 10km, Turn End: 70km, Ascent angle: 42 degrees, inclination 0) CONTROL: As Mechjeb will be used to show the dV consumed, we will need to calibrate the instrument. To do this, I have recreated the 0.17 Aerospike engine (250kN, 390Isp) to provide a stable Isp throughout the launch, and allow us to check Mechjeb's figures. Fig 1. TEST 1: Rocket from Fig 1 has been fitted with Toriodal Aerospike OS, which has 250kN thrust and an Isp consistant across both atmospheric and vacuum flight of 390. Fig 2. Rocket on launchpad Fig 3. Initiating gravity turn Fig 4. Rocket 'coasting' to apoapsis Fig 5. After circularisation, with 'stats' shown. Some troubling results begin to present themselves: Mechjebs 'Ascent Stats' gives the total dV burnt as 4559, however the dV at launch was 5966, and which means there should be only 1407 ms remaining. Vessel information clearly shows 1410 remaining. Furthermore, adding up the figures on 'Ascent Stats', we arrive at a different total: Gravity Losses: 1875 Drag Losses: 611 Steering Losses: 42 Speed Gained: 2043 Total: 4571 Also, when the numbers are calculated by hand, first using Mechjebs weight info: Launch Mass: 20.26T Final Mass: 6.16T Ratio: 3.28896 LN: 1.19057 (390*9.81): 3825.9 Result: 4555.0 Then calculating from hand: Fuel remaining = 171F 209O. Because they have the same density (0.005U/T), they can be treated as one fuel: 380U. 380*0.005= 1.9T, plus 'dry mass' of tank (2T) = 3.9T Launch Final Mk1 landercan: 0.60T 0.60T X3200 tank: 18.00T 3.90T Standard Canard (4) 0.16T 0.16T Aerospike 1.50T 1.50T Total Mass: 20.26T 6.16T These weight figures match those provided by mechjeb, so the previous calculation of 4555.0 was correct. Conclusion: Mechjeb is not accurate at providing dV information. There is a variance of almost 20dV between the 3 figures (hand, Ascent stats, Intial-remaining), which equates to an accuracy level of ~0.43%. END EXPERIMENT 1, MORE TO FOLLOW.

I have an idea that I am working on: The Progressive testing on the effect of increasing TWR on atmospheric launches I'll see if I can post something later on. Also: I created this a while ago, is it of any use? Experiment with airship parts: optimal launch assist

Hi all! I'm sure all the players who have been around a while have heard of the Infiniglider glitch, where you put a lot of control surfaces on a plane and they generate thrust. If you haven't heard of it before, here's a video from Danny2462: My challenge to the group is to build an infiniglider that lifts the largest mass. To clarify: No fuel is allowed to be burnt at any part of the flight: solid, liquid, rcs, xenon. All no-nos. You can mount engines if you wish for the extra mass, but you will need to show full fuel in your screenshots to prove it wasn't activated. Also, all wings, winglets, canards and control surfaces must be stock. Basically anything with a 'lift' value. You also can't use the Hooligan airship or anything of that sort. To class as 'flight' for the purposes of this challenge, you must exceed 5000m ASL. I'm not attaching my own attempt because a: I suck at doing these, and b: We all know this is a 'possible' challenge, I don't really need to prove it Good luck! LEADERBOARD: 1: 56.91T Mrbowdn 2: 22.57T JetPulse 3: 00.31T Tavert 4: 5:

Hang on a sec.. wasn't this originally go to moho, go to eve, go to Kerbin? Did the OP change the challenge? Whats the point of going to Eve twice? You've already proven you can..

I guess I was seeing something that wasn't there

I can do this. You just need to divide this into stages: IP travel to Moho (refuel) Land-and-return from Moho (disposable lander) IP travel to Eve (refuel) Land-and-return from Eve (Hooligan Airship) IP travel to Kerbin. IP stage needs about 8000 dV (Kerb-Moho), Eve lander is difficult stock, but with mods gets easier, especially if you can use Cirrus envelopes to loft to around 20k (combination descent and lift assistance). **also note challenge does not specify launch from Kerbin. If you're having trouble, you can launch your IP stage from Minmus, or even Gilly, using Interplanetary Launchpads (note: I won't be doing this, but might be considered a loophole)** I guess the OP saw this, and has specifically precluded this! Nicely played

Keep in mind that the 'units' of fuel in the game aren't litres. Near as we can tell, the units are about 1/5 Litre (200mL)

pareidolia is a natural and healthy human trait.

Of course, since Kerbals seem to be immune to radiation, the above are moot points for KSP..

I want to see him dock two of those together! XD

Not sure if anyone else has seen this before, but the resemblence made me lol... Thoughts? Any other celestial kerbalness out there? (and no, i don't know where it's from: a co-worker had it on his screensaver rotation as "huble.jpg")

that wasn't an answer!

My avatar approves.

I discovered the Kerbal Nebula... http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v342/ambee69/kerbal_zpsa8a1383b.jpg' alt='kerbal_zpsa8a1383b.jpg'>

Sweet! You were the first guy to ever even try this, I remeber following your progress with great excitement. as the first to try this, I don't think anyone would have been able to help you much. Also, i recall the thread as being just about as excited as this one was (though I do recall some people expressing doubts)