tetryds

A flying asteroid??? Bring it on. "I make no promises for extracting things that are impossible in the editor" - TheClaw

Maybe "AoA% trim"? And yes, you can use it to add artificial stability to your plane, which is awesome. That means that red stability derivatives mean pretty much nothing if you (really) know what you are doing.

Great If it breaks rules slightly it can be fine, as I said it depends on how many submissions I get. About "cheating", it's not that I can't handle lots of exposed nodes, but it's too easy to abuse and I rather limit it than make people waste their crafts using it.

Go ahead, you have an exception. Same for you, Starwhip, let's see what happens.

Não é bem assim que funciona, qualquer altitude que você colocar um satélite vai ter decaimento orbital, seja por atmosfera, ventos solares ou interferência gravitacional. Outra coisa, é muito mais caro lançar um satélite tão grande a uma distância maior, e se aumentar muito a distância a gravidade da Lua desestabiliza a órbita, que precisa ser o mais estável possível principalmente pra comparação de imagens. As shuttles custaram quase 2 bilhões de dólares americanos cada, e o programa custou quase 200 bilhões. A pesar de eu concordar que esse programa foi um gasto enorme de dinheiro, não é assim que engenharia funciona, não tem como evitar o aquecimento da reentrada. E pensar que dava pra colocar "mais" de XYZ também não adianta, todos aqui sabemos que um pesinho a mais que seja já tem um impacto enorme na eficiência, além de que provavelmente não adiantaria muito... ...e na vida real não dá pra ficar colocando mais boosters desse jeito. O que eu quero dizer é que não é tão simples assim, o programa cumpriu seu objetivo muito bem, os problemas não estão nas soluções utilizadas, mas sim no design em si.

Edit: It's very awesome. Can pull some hardcore stunts, and save itself with the boosters if needed. It already flew with FAR as it was originally, then I just improved the performance and stability. That is not an easy to tame craft, but it's super fun. What I had to do was: -Add tail -Add struts -Trim wings -Replace elevators Took between 10 and 20 minutes of tweaking + flying *I also added a decoupler as a workaround to the FAR drag bug. Download I noticed that having more than one stage can be something not that bad, so I will fix that rule.

Legal, se sai do chão em Kerbin funciona em qualquer lugar, bom saber que você conseguiu resolver a sua dúvida. Mas eu acho que não se chama skycrane daí, pois skycrane é por cima, não conheço um nome pra esse tipo de lander, pode inventar um se você quiser Pode criar um tópico se quiser compartilhar mais coisas sobre o seu lander.

My own guidelines is that I will do my best to try to keep the aircraft as similar to the original submission as possible. So, as I said, the more changes I am forced to make, the better is your submission, thus I cannot limit myself here, that would mean limiting how good a submission can be The translation tool is essential for balancing, but I will not make anything float, don't worry. Sorry but rule 7 says horizontal takeoff only, so if it does not break any rules, sure. But even if it does break rules pm me with it, I am curious and will give it a try until we have official submissions.

I will just leave this here, if anyone wants to give a try. The first FAR video tutorial will come after I am satisfied with the results of this challenge: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/109480 Can't wait to see which kind of abnormalities can be made under those rules.

THE CHALLENGE: On this challenge I will work on your full stock aircraft in order to make it fly using the mod Ferram Aerospace Research (FAR v0.14.6 @KSP 0.90). This is a different kind of challenge, so, the WORSE your craft ends up, the BETTER. Many people say it's hard to make things fly with it, and that it's not fun and you cannot make silly designs on it. So, instead of getting into a debate, I will attempt to demonstrate here that anything can fly, "provided it's balanced well enough." - Harvester PLEASE DO NOT DISCUSS THE NEW AERODYNAMIC SYSTEM HERE, THAT IS NOT THE POINT OF THIS CHALLENGE. The plan is to not work more than half an hour on each craft, to avoid a "you worked more on mine than on his" issue. There will be a rank system, but I will not give explicit points, as this is a very subjective challenge, but some things to bear in mind are: The more time I take, the better for you. Bigger crafts tend to fall like bricks more than smaller crafts, so it's easier to be harder if it's big, which is obvious and would not help much. Exploiting physical effects that don't happen in stock but do in FAR is something very nice. In FAR, jet engines are cut by 50%, and you know it, trying to use that on your favour is a bit of waste of time. Something not just plain silly is something interesting, impress me. There are also super secret rewards, which I will only talk about once the submissions are closed. RULES: For the sake of my own sanity, the craft must: 1-Fly stably in stock (include pics of stable flight, at least a few km away from the KSC). 2-Be built using stock parts ONLY. 3-Not drop, stage or break any parts. 4-Contain minimal or no part clipping, nor intake spam (no more than you really need). 5-Have no offsetting of parts placed on nodes, only radially (rotating parts placed on nodes is fine, any doubts just ask). 6-Have less than 100 parts. 7-Be an horizontal take-off aircraft. 8-Not carry any payload inside bays. 9-Not contain any exposed node facing forward (AKA: use nosecones). 10-Not make use of ANY glitch or game engine exploit. Submission rules: 1-Every member can only submit ONE craft, ONCE, more than one version in a submission or multiple submissions will have all of them denied. 2-Only the first submitted craft will be a valid entry, please don't insist. 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 (if you want to update make sure to be faster than me and edit your post). 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-If your craft breaks the rules you cannot submit another, unless it's a very special case, then I will ask you to update it. Every rule is subject to my own will, I may work on crafts that break the rule slightly if I find them worth. I know that these rules sound a bit harsh, but while this goes I will not have time to review and bear with any issues related to the craft submissions, as I expect many. Hopefully, things can get a bit more flexible depending on the amount of submissions *I reserve the right of updating these rules at any moment, given prior notice. RESULTS: 1st: FarFromLikely - RedIronCrown - Craft - FAR Craft - Tweaks: Removed excessive wing spam. Replaced elevators for canards. Added more tail to minimize lateral instability. Added chines for improved lift. Drained fuel. Changed engine type and added one more. 2nd: HamSandwich - sal_vager - Craft - FAR Craft - Tweaks: Moved wings further from each other. Increased wing lateral angle. Increased wing built in AoA for easier piloting. Tweaked COL position. Decreased wing weight. 3rd: Stupid is as stupid does - regex - Craft - FAR Craft - Tweaks: Added canards for stability. Removed excessive wing spam. Angled wings for better lift characteristics. Slightly translated few parts for balance. Rotated engine to fix COT direction. 4th: far_from_flyable - Nemrav - Craft - FAR Craft - Tweaks: Added struts. Replaced control surfaces. Balanced wings position and tilt. Added tail. 5th: Boatatron - TW1 - Craft - FAR Craft - Tweaks: Overhauled hull. Replaced and tweaked wings and control surfaces. Lowered ceiling. Balanced fuel. Added more engines and tweaked thrust. 6th: Starstreaker III - Starwhip - Craft - FAR Craft - Tweaks:​ Rebuilt front intake to reduce drag. Tilted and rebalanced wings for better flight proprieties. Improved horizontal stability by adding more tail. Made more small tweaks and adjustments. Bonus: SomethingYawful - RedIronCrown - Craft - FAR Craft - Tweaks: Lost sanity. Added engine to counter drag. Added SAS and RTG modules for low speed control. Added struts. Restored sanity, partially. Being added: -Notes

I feel that you have way too much wing for that cargo: KSP 0.23.5, FAR 0.13.smth Maybe trimming the wings to make it easier to takeoff could help.

É só por o skycrane em cima do rover

Depende de como vc vai fazer, se for fazer o pouso inteiro partindo de uma órbita baixa até o solo vai precisar de bastante RCS. Dá pra fazer isso que eu falei se você usar outro módulo até chegar mais próximo de pousar e usar o RCS só pra finalizar. Se não for fazer isso e vc tiver que fazer o pouso inteiro com ela, só leva uma skycrane pequena, tipo essa: Aí vai de você se acha que dá pra continuar com ela ou joga fora.

Bem, eu acho que ficaria bom se você fizesse aquele skycrane que continua no rover, por ele ser bem leve você vai poder usar os foguetes pra viajar longas distâncias assim. Pode ser de RCS, que é mais fácil de pilotar, só que se você for colocar algo em cima dele eu recomendo que mova as rodas mais pra frente e mais pra trás pra ficarem mais longe uma das outras e evitar capotamentos

Last time I checked they are interchangeable, just make sure you don't run the game with both installed at the same time.

No espaço as coisas tem a mesma massa que na terra, e ainda sofrem atração gravitacional, então não é que é mais leve. O que esse braço fazia era manter o Hubble numa posição fixa em relação ao ônibus, assim era possível se aproximar sem perigo, e também permitia os astronautas acessarem ambos com mais facilidade. Pode perceber que no ksp se você colocar duas naves próximas elas sempre vão começar a ir uma pra cada lado, e depois de um tempo vão estar bem longe ou bater.

Check that table for different speeds, as the editor indicators do not compute at different speeds. Also calculate them again after updating COL. I guess what you should do then is what you said before, stick it on the top of a plane and check how it flies.

That will be the last of your problems, look at the stability derivates, positive Mw is the cause of several kerbal casualities. That means your COL is in front of your COM, probably because you have fuel + all engines on the back. Try putting one of those tanks right behind the cockpit, using a ballast or shifting wing. But remember that using ballasts adds even more weight and shifting wing drops your pitch authority. I believe you should get more familiar with FAR before making a shuttle, they get exponentially more complicated as you build.

Que eu saiba os ônibus espaciais já foram aposentados faz bastante tempo, por isso usam a Soyuz para levar astronautas para a ISS. O Hubble foi uma ferramenta científica única, mas como foi dito, já está ficando ultrapassado. Mal posso esperar pelo substituto. Seria muito legal se fosse possível trazerem o Hubble devolta para terra firme, mas acredito que isso não seja possível.

Pode usar o mod KAS. Ele permite que você retire e coloque algumas partes, bem legal: http://www.curse.com/ksp-mods/kerbal/223900-kerbal-attachment-system-kas Tem mais um monte de coisas, e não quebra o balanço do gameplay, recomendo dar uma olhada.

Not really: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/100793 Sometimes people just want the more simple way. And I don't see any bad bumps on the topic, so I don't think it needs closing. If anyone bumps it then it will be closed, as long as it's reported.

Intended, no, but it has a big impact. Several people think that going so high is even a bug, it's just how a normal atmosphere behaves (nerf the boosters power and you can go even higher). If you are having issues with it and want to require about the same deltav to orbit just use Isp Difficulty Scaler: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/52882-0-90-Kerbal-Isp-Difficulty-Scaler-v1-4-2-12-16-14

I will do that, no worries, but it will take a bit of time. @ksc123: nice one!

A very simple lockon system like BF4 Igla and Stinger would work fine for BDArmory missiles. It would depend on the missile kind, since the only difference is that one requires constant locking on and the other is fire and forget you would not have issues switching between them while locking on/firing at all. I like the stealth idea, but KSP heat is still too bad for that, maybe with reentry heat they get a bit of work. But yeah, it could be a thing. About the mouse guided, they are good against ground and stationary units, no reason for them to not be implemented.

Eu acho que eles são a mesma pessoa em... bem suspeito isso daí. Falando em bugs, já conhecem os bugfixes do Claw? http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/97285-0-25-Stock-Bug-Fix-Modules Recomendo que instale todos antes mesmo de começar a jogar