tetryds

Thanks for the update! I used to only notice a small lag when using BDArmory parts on my crafts, let's see if it's gone now

No rules limiting stupidity that I can see Sorry for not releasing any crafts yet, but I will, soon. "Gary Larson - hobbes" really caught me unprepared, nice one, it will likely be among the top crafts.

Lol, those are cool entries! Will work on them tomorrow, hobbez's one is very tough. Did not try the flying block yet, let's see what happens then.

THE CHALLENGE: After the success of the first version of FAR from impossible, I decided to turn it into an ongoing project! The concept is the same, I will work on your "whatever" that flies on stock KSP and make it work on FAR. I attempt will make airplanes fly and bring rocket payloads to LKO. It's also totally okay if you just want to know if your craft would fly on FAR or what you need to change so it flies on FAR, just please follow the submission rules. I will work as much as I see fit for every craft, this challenge is less competitive and more aimed at the fun. The most challenging crafts will be rewarded and displayed here on the OP, these best crafts will then be ranked, and this time there will be actual rewards! Some tips for building your crafts: -Clipping things around is unfun, be original! -Engines on FAR are cut by 50%, so don't make underpowered crafts. -Exposed nodes facing forward are not as complicated to deal with as you imagine. -Stability is the main issue about a weirdnesscraft, unless it can point straight... -Make it clear that you know what you are doing when building your crafts, some random stuff put together in 5 minutes will not be as fun. -Impress me, I am still waiting for a craft that is untameable. RULES: For the sake of my own sanity, the craft must: 1-Fly stably in stock (include pics of stable flight or orbital insertion ascent, preferably a bit further away from the KSC). 2-Be built using stock parts ONLY. 3-Try to stay in one piece during takeoff and flight. 4-Contain minimal part clipping, nor intake spam (no more than you really need, part clipping accepted if it looks cool). 5-Have a reasonable amount of parts. 6-Not make use of ANY glitch or game engine exploit. Submission rules: 1-You must wait for your previous submission to be worked on before submiting a new one. 2-If you post more crafts or try anything too fancy about your submissions I will just ignore them. 3-The craft name must contain it's name and your forum nickname, like: E36 - tetryds 4-Your entry is the craft at the moment I download it. 5-You can either submit the craft on this topic or send me via PM, but all crafts (before and after) will be downloadable on the scoreboard when I am done with all of them. 6-Try to not spam your crafts around, one every week or two is enough. *There rules are meant to keep things sane, if your craft is cool but breaks a few of them, post it anyway! It's not like you can't post anything else later if it's not accepted.*

Edit: bem, deixa pra lá, acho que seria uma boa ideia fazer um esecífico de KSP pra brasileiros sim

​​​​​Gimme craft file then deal Nevermind, found! Wait for it... Just give a few touches to the lifter design, which was... "not good", but it looks pretty much the same. Download: Stock FAR EDIT: This challenge is closed, a new one was made on a new thread, with softer rules and ongoing, you can find it here: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/113324- Thread closed.

Not updated for 0.90, it works but some people reported it can cause lags or throw some errors. That may be the reason why this is not on CKAN.

This, kind of. That does not make me feel like a pro, but people got impressed, so...

Yep, it is.

Haha, ele é outro moderador que eu chamo pra jogar de vez em quando. Sobre ter dois servers, eu também sou contra, mas não vou jogar no modo ciência, então esse é o unico jeito. Sempre chamo o pessoal pela steam pra jogar no sandbox, quase todos os dias.

Novo servidor adicionado, no modo ciência. Abri esse server a pedidos, então se ficar muito vazio por muito tempo não haverá motivo pra continuar com ele. Verifique a lista de mods, e preste atenção nos mods obrigatórios para esse servidor.

Sim e não, Saturn V é um foguete relativamente seguro, sistema de abortagem e tudo mais, muito bem projetado. Mesmo assim, foguetes em geral são perigosos e todo astronauta sabe que pode morrer, a pesar de todas as medidas de segurança. Do mesmo jeito que alguém que pratica qualquer esporte radical ou faz rally ou qualquer coisa que involva risco também sabe. Mas sim, eles são muito corajosos, e o treinamento é bem intenso.

Yes it is very complicated, if you are going to orbit I suggest the following (totally empirical) method: Note: This is a method for "underpowered" spacecraft. Fly as fast and as low as you can, I suggest about 500m, then nose up 20 degrees and hold, note your speed and total climb time when you reach 2km (can be "nonexistent" if you can't make it that high) Do the same, but now pointing 10 degrees up. Then, reach 2km altitude, repeat above procedure and mark for 4km and 6km. If you feel like doing it, you can try that for higher altitudes, always aim for 2 or 4km climb. Tips: Always have two different angles at which the plane can reach the desired target altitude, example 20 and 10, 10 and 5, 5 and 2.5, etc. If your plane does not do it to the aimed altitude, do it for half of it, but always try to have as high climb angle as you can. Take screenshots right before you start the climb and when you reach the altitude goal (always hold the angle), you can analyze them later. Now on KSP you can quicksave while on the atmosphere, make several quicksaves and tag them with the situation so you can test more later if you want. To guesstimate a good climb, measure how fast you are climbing, and how much speed you are losing. pick the altitude difference and divide it by the time you took to reach it, and the speed before and after the climb. Do that for both different climb rates, and different altitudes. Now compare the speed loss with the time it takes to reach such altitude. Two points for each "shot" will be enough to draw two lines on a graph (you can use excel to quickly do that), from this graph you can estimate the optimal climb angle of your aircaft. Edit: cross a line speed x time, separate for horizontal and vertical speeds, remember starting vertical speed is zero and final vertical speed = altitude / time You can do a lot with it, for instance, the point where both lines cross mean your thrust is being wasted only on atmospheric drag, the point where your speed loss is zero is the one where your thrust is being equally divided between atmospheric and gravity drags. Using the different curves for the different speeds, you can guesstimate the best climb profile for your plane, always be biased towards the fastest possible climb, you will notice that sometimes its worth to suffer a bit to get a bit higher then pick up speed from there and climb again. But again, this is a lot of work, if your design is underpowered I would seriously consider boosting it to higher altitudes or adding more engines. This is also empirical and HAS FLAWS (nothing is actually linear, etc, etc.), but it's a good way to understand your aircraft. Edit: that is for gaining speed, after you are already high and want to shoot to orbit that is a whole different story, but I would recommend diving a bit to gain speed then pull up as much as you can to get as big arch as you can.

Given the way jet engines work in KSP that is about what would happen, yes, and that would be exactly the expected behavior. Not if you are using AJE, though. But remember that jet powered aircraft have some pretty high climb rates. The best climb rate is the highest speed you can be while not losing speed (or losing little) while aiming as high as you can. There are a few methods to figure it out, but wouldn't it be more fun to experiment with your plane and create your own methods rather than following a fixed methodology and moving on? Well, I think it is, but prove me wrong and I may give more tips

Esse foguete vai ser muito épico, finalmente estamos construindo algo maior que o Saturn V. Palmas pra NASA por conseguir dar conta do projeto mesmo com recursos tão limitados!

Tem sim!!! http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/88933-0-90-0-Hangar-v2-2-1 Os que o Gustavo sugeriu também são muito bons, acho que o Extraplanetary Launchpads é exatamente o que você quer (funciona igual os de Kerbin só precisam de recurso).

Pela foto não dá pra ver se a probe tem motor nem reaction wheels, como eu disse, a probe que você está usando não se gira sozinha. O que pode estar acontecendo é que o combustível não está indo para o seu motor, ao mesmo tempo em que sua nave nao tem controle SAS, aí ela fica presa. Se não for isso pode ser algum bug mesmo. Vou entrar no server agora dai vc me manda a craft. Edit: haha, era exatamente o que eu disse. E o motor precisava ser ativado manualmente. Que bom que resolveu o problema.

Hmmm, neh. goldenpeach.

Se você já verificou baterias, painel solar, SAS e tudo mais, então é um bug mesmo. Tem screenshot de como você montou esses satélites no seu lander?

Probodobodyne OCTO2 não tem reaction wheels Pode ser esse o seu problema.

Esse tópico já chegou ao fim, o Orion vai esperar o notebook dele ficar pronto.

Atualizei, mas esses dois mods aí continuam sendo por conta própria.

O server está aberto pra vc poder usar qualquer mod que quiser, menos mods que mudam o sistema solar. Só tenha certeza que está usando os mesmos mods que quem estiver jogando com você. Mas ter um mod no jogo não é um problema, o problema é lançar um foguete com partes de mods que os outros não têm. Ou seja, se for jogar sozinho, pode usar qualquer mod de partes que quiser, se quiser que os outros te vejam lançe foguetes só com os mods indicados. Mas nada de abusar, e como eu disse, nada de mods que mudam o sistema solar.

Damn I wonder who is the one you call, cus I'm tetryds you know... Specs.

Hello! Duo,, you again? Stop spamming on this topic!