kahlzun

SQUAD: are you listening? Make some merchandise! Look what this guy has done on his own! Everyone on this forum would buy a Jeb plushy!

pics or gtfo. XD Pic on runway, in stable orbit, and back on the runway. If you dock, or go to the Mun or whatever, photo that. Whatever other 'glamour' shots you like.

(NOT MADE BY ME) Am I alone in thinking that these guys look a lot like Kerbals? Discuss.

yes. Would they still be lemons, or even edible? Doubtful. There are many inflammable plants in nature, take the turpentine bush for instance, of which there are several varieties. Would not want to eat it though.

That design was more-or-less my plan, I just needed a datapoint on the required IP dV. Turns out i've been over-engineering my IP stages for ages, I usually try to get about 9000 dV, so it's good that I can reduce that a little. Thanks.

I guess this doesn't really much explanation? My interpretation of what a Kerbal would look like in reality. Thoughts anyone? (RESURRECTED FROM THE KRAKEN FIRES OF THE FORUM APOCALYPSE)

he looks way too happy for such deep thoughts..

If you really want to cheat in this manner, changing the ISP values higher will work much better.

Gilly has eaten a few of my craft before. It hungers.

You need to be careful with the throttle. See the speed limits here: Altitude (m) Velocity (m/s) 0 97.3 1000 110 3000 130 5000 160 8000 215 10000 260 15000 425 32000 2250

Oddly enough, landing is easy. Using the 24-77 engines, a T200 tank is enough to land a bare-bones probe on Tylo from a 100km orbit with a bit to spare: Hyperedit, go (this is the lander I'm building the IP stage for) There isn't much wiggle room, but it has a chute and everything you need to land ANYWHERE.

So, hoiw much dV would my IP stage need to have to 'safely' reach all planets? (it's a one-way probe lander)

according to the calculator thingy, the Ejection Velocity for Moho is "3942.16 m/s" and Eeloo is "4315.23 m/s". The inclination of Moho isn't that bad, is it?

Nice! very pretty. I like the out-of-the-box thinking that gets you thinking about.. the.. inside-of-a-box... hmm. CRITICAL ANALOGY FAILURE. RETRY, ABORT, FAIL?

Sorry, but it doesnt, unless you have the smallest ship imaginable. 24-77 has amazing TWR, and makes an excellent probe lander, but here are the hard figures: As you can see, even with this small ship, the NERVA has better dV. As the 'dry mass' increases, it gets more and more significantly different: All i've done here is swapped out the T400 fuel tank for its double-size T800, and you can see how much more dV you get from the NERVA. It's only when you get the really small stuff that it starts to matter: And even then, there isn't much in it. CONCLUSION: NERVA engine is superior in almost every situation. (assuming vacuum)

Ok, so I'm building a set of omni-ships, ones that are designed to land or return from everywhere in the Kerbol system. I'm currently trying to work out the dV required of the interplanetary stage, to ensure it is capable of travelling everywhere. On that note, I am trying to calculate what dV I would require to intercept Eeloo at its worst possible position of 113,549,713,200 m, more-or-less shown here: (Yes, I know that is not the correct phase angle for Eeloo, i just need the dV) I have looked at the equations here and got this thing: v1 = SQRT((r1*(r2*v22-2*μ)+2*r2*μ)/(r1*r2)) where: r1 = parking orbit radius r2 = SOI radius v1 = ejection velocity v2 = SOI exit velocity (absolute value) µ = gravitational parameter of origin planet Unfortunately, it does not go into how to define v2, and so leaves me with bupkis. So, kerbalnauts I ask: How much extra dV would I need to increase my solar orbit from 13,599,840,256m (Kerbin) to the furthest point of intercept- 113,549,713,200m (Eeloo) (Interesting to note how close they are to exactly 100 billion m difference). I don't need the inclination burn calculations, but if you feel the need to include them, please seperate it out so it is clear which is which. Thanks.

It's a pity it doesn't allow 4X symmetry, it gets annoying trying to do it all one-at-a-time.

I have a part from the KSSS that uses the same model, the "neutrinoDetector".. it was a bit of an odd error.

This is the most Kerbal photo I have seen in a while. kudos.

can we at least see a reference picture or something?

When you say fuel is X KCU per kg... I'm assuming that is per "Tonne" of weight? Or is it per unit of liquid fuel?

Some of those missions require the commDish part, but don't give you any, and when you try to 'edit' one onto your craft, you get this: ' I seemed to have this problem for EVERY mission that needed the commDish.. And describing an orbit as "counterclockwise" isn't very helpful.. which pole are you viewing it from? Also the giant "land here" arrows (which were really cool!) disappear when you get within a km or two of the target, for the Munolith one it left me unable to find the damn thing for a while.. Good set of scenarios though, I did enjoy playing through them, would be interested in seeing more.

pix pls (I have no idea what that looks like), and lets see your own attempt.

You might want to include a: a scoring system, and b: some method of calculation the g-force on a given lever arm, especially if you have no way of calculating its length accuratly?

youd want to detonate the missile a little while ahead of the target, especially if its loaded with buckshot or something, kinetic kill, mini-impactors, hard to dodge.