Jump to content

zarakon

Members
  • Posts

    905
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by zarakon

  1. Contract to put a satellite into a low orbit around the Sun one of the requirements is to be in line of sight of a location that location appears to be a dish on the surface of the sun
  2. I could swear that before, I was able to test engines for contracts by right clicking and choosing a "Test" action. Did they get rid of that for some reason? Or am I just remembering wrong? It's really dumb and annoying that I can't test an engine in orbit just because I activated it earlier. Why can't just USING it count for testing it? Or at least shutting down and reactivating?
  3. Megaman certainly isn't an easy game, but it's orders of magnitude away from the old Ninja Gaiden games
  4. When sliding across a flat surface, the deceleration will be equivalent to the acceleration due to gravity divided by the coefficient of kinetic friction. The coefficient of friction depends entirely on the materials involved, but suppose it's 0.25 for a Kerbal sliding on the Mun. Since the Mun's gravity is 1.63 m/s^2, that means the Kerbal will decelerate at about 0.41 m/s^s. If you started sliding at just 5 m/s, it would take more than 12 seconds to slow down to a stop. That 0.25 guess for the coefficient of friction might actually be pretty high, especially considering that the surface is likely covered in fine powder
  5. Powered descent allows for a much softer landing, which means less wear-and-tear for re-usability. As far as I know, all large spaceflight equipment that we've recovered by parachute (shuttle SRBs, various capsules) without propulsive assistance have needed to land in the ocean. I would presume that this is because the size of parachute needed to land safely on the ground is prohibitively large/heavy. Landing in the ocean is undesirable because then you have to deal with seawater getting into everything, again bad for re-usability. Re-checking and re-packing parachutes is probably time-consuming and expensive compared to adding a bit more fuel during refueling. Propulsive landing also gives them much more accuracy, so they can eventually land their parts right where they need to be for re-use instead of needing to haul them back from the ocean or the middle of some desert.
  6. It says at the beginning of the video: Color Scale: MWIR sensor counts so it's not any standard unit
  7. That's not really it Originally, every rocket launch had Bill, Jeb, and Bob. There was no 1-man capsule or probes, and no other kerbals, so every launch had those 3 on it. Jeb in particular is famous because when the other two showed fear or panic he just kept on smiling, sometimes maniacally, as is now depicted in the loading screen art
  8. I wouldn't include the O-10 in the "RCS" category just because it uses monopropellant
  9. Quick fix whenever you accidentally lift a part: delete, undo.
  10. What about the massless stock cubic struts, lights, or normal RCS ports? I can understand banning the massless big monopropellant engines, but I'd think everything else should be fine
  11. If you're talking about the stock LV-N, I'd say it's pretty well balanced If you're talking about a mod that gives you something like nuclear pulse propulsion, then it's probably pretty cheaty
  12. The much more fun way is to send over a ship with a CLAW to grab it and haul it back
  13. The keys to flying extremely fast with FAR while avoiding disassembly seem to be: 1. Don't use SAS 2. Use a joystick of some kind and be gentle on the controls. Using the keyboard is no good
  14. I don't remember if I've been to Dres or not, and I'm pretty sure I've never bothered with Vall or Bop
  15. I got a contract for a 5% accurate orbit around Minmus that I just can't complete. It seems like I should definitely be within 5% of it though. It's like it's looking for 0.5% or 0.05% instead Save file: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz_Zk5oTok77VGFpWW16cjE3SVE/edit?usp=sharing I actually had it matched up even better before, and it still wasn't counting
  16. Saw a post about it on another forum, back in 0.8.x
  17. The satellite missions could really use an ap/pe description and a way to target them to see the ascending/descending nodes Trying to eyeball a 3% match on a tundra orbit was a real pain in the ass
  18. I'd assume that hyperedit is not allowed And yeah, I'd probably be able to redesign for a 6-level rocket if I replaced the manned pod with a mini probe rocket, especially if I went back to asparagus nonsense BTW I edited my score calculation above to account for most of the rest of the stuff
  19. So my numbers are.. Full launcher: 6865.5 tons Payload in orbit: 1147 tons Mostly-empty second stage, which is also in orbit: ??? -- I'll try to figure this out later, either by re-flying or with calculations. I'll call it just 247.5 for now, which is just the weight of the 15 engines, plus two empty orange and one empty grey tank per engine. Launcher levels remaining in orbit: 4 (((1147 + 247.5) * 2) - (6865.5 * 0.2)) * 2^4 = (2789 - 1373.1) * 16 = 22654.4 (higher if I add in the extra fuel and structural parts in the second stage) edit: Comparing the in-orbit resources to the resources in the level-4 at launch, I can see that I have 8854 liquidfuel and 10821 oxidizer left in that second stage. That's an extra 98.4 tons of fuel. Then there are 15 XL girders and 15 large ASAS units, which are another 12 tons together. That all brings the total score up to... (((1147 + 247.5 + 98.4 + 12) * 2) - (6865.5 * 0.2)) * 2^4 = (3009.8 - 1373.1) * 16 = 26187.2
  20. You might want to re-think that. This scoring means you need a 25% payload fraction just to break even I have a gigantic 5-ception launcher-launcher-launcher-launcher-launcher from a similar challenge (http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/79229-Space-Launch-System-Launch-System), but with these rules my score would be massively negative Consider this my entry though: - 2 simple vertical stages per level - No asparagus, onion, or drop tanks - Used tweakable fuel tanks to reduce weight of upper levels (and flew them with the reduced fuel, of course) - Level 5 is about 2.5x the weight of the Saturn V and has 2.8x the first-stage thrust - I had to use DynamicWarp to slow down the game for level 5 Or this one, whichever ends up counting for more points: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/79229-Space-Launch-System-Launch-System?p=1156659&viewfull=1#post1156659
×
×
  • Create New...