Jump to content

camlost

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    514

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by camlost

  1. camlost
    Interesting, which people?
  2. camlost
    @Ferram, Is your new refactor code able to recognize part shielding as well?
  3. camlost
    Do you have the exact weight, length, wingspan and engine profile of a regular plane? If not, they certainly don't compare to anything. Yes!
  4. camlost
    This definitely needs some attention. Tweak the parameters well and many marvelous things can be done. For example, unstable aircraft
  5. camlost
    There's still engines using ModuleHybridEngines? That's weird, are you sure about that in the new RF? They should always be removed if AJE is used.
  6. camlost
    Judging from the flame you're not running B9 v5 correctly. The flames don't look like that any more. Or it could be a MM problem
  7. camlost
    I think setting maxtemp of all parts to a certain level is not so good. The best thing I can think of is to use tweakables to allow users to set the max temp. Also I think DRE should ignore engines in total. Engines have their own heating model, which is linked with visual effects. Messing with this causes too much problems
  8. camlost
    On parts exploding, that's something to be discussed about DRE. I've made a SSTO with B9 Sabre that looks like the Skylon, in RSS. The key is to use light materials for the fueslage from Procedural parts. However, PP and pWings don't have heat shield, so DRE had to be disabled. Besides, DRE's algorithm is not really 'realism'. It uses the stock raycast and was tweaked to a level not too hard, for pods. For spaceplanes however, some questions remain, for example why does the wingtip always heat up much faster than the root?
  9. camlost
    No pulsejet. Why does RF have three V-12 piston engines, with only slight difference in the model?
  10. camlost
    Have you updated AJE then?
  11. camlost
    @FreeThink, If you want to understand, check out AJETester/CustomGuide.txt That particular engine is not supported for a long time. Play with others first, that one is pretty useless believe me @jrandom, that is because of FAR dependency, update it
  12. camlost
    Modular engine won't happen until Ferram's code regarding jet engines is available. Using NASA's code is not feasible. On the idea of making engine nacelle/whatever part: feel free to do it yourself. Simply force yourself to use a Mk1 fuselage on every and each jet engine, and pretend that's whatever you want to call it. Forcing people to do something this gruesome without any change in gameplay is a bad idea.
  13. camlost
    If every single engine use that, then you cannot use other aero parts to pretend the engine body is buried in the fuselage. If you force the engine fuselage to bury, then extra drag will occur, get it? Recent FS updates changes some propellers to another engine module that is not supported by AJE
  14. camlost
    @dreadicon, the code from NASA simulates turbojets, turbofan and ramjets. There's no way to make a SCRAMJET, besides I don't think there is data of a SCRAMJET. So someone needs to show me the data, then I can think of incorporating BJE into AJE and make it. Same thing goes for propfans and turboprops. Besides, what is the BahamotoD's pack? @Dragon01, no. That would break aerodynamics, besides I don't see anything of that sort no covered by TweakScale already.
  15. camlost
    I checked there's only one engine, J57 has CoM setted wrong, all others are normal
  16. camlost
    20km/0.7=28km on Earth. The only airplane flies that high I can think of is the Blackbird, which uses 2xJ58. There are some pictures of a Blackbird replica I made in this thread
  17. camlost
    Nathan, There's something interesting you may wanna know. The plane-crash-into-terrain bug I reported also exists in stock kerbin. When I set 'terrain detail' to high it seems to happen, while if it's set to low everything seems fine. But with RSS the bug is persistent no matter what.
  18. camlost
    Find the dev version on github There's no hardcap, just as the air is thin at 15km, which corresponds to ~24km on earth, all engines are weak. But with a reasonable design and choice of engine, it's still possible Diving is realistic actually. While in stock, you are rewarded for climbing up fast and level out at 20km or sth, which is not realistic. So AJE is always harder that stock.
  19. camlost
    1. The thrust always depends on speed and altitude at the same time. They all 'lose' thrust when you climb up. I don't think the SABRE loses thrust over M2 in level flight 2. By default the engines have a 3% idle thrust
  20. camlost
    @DaMichael, I think I forgot to add inlet module to some engines, should be a quick fix @dreadicon, you should post this to DRE if it's not engines overheating. I'm also curious which engine enables Mach 4+ flight for extended period.
  21. camlost
    That error is a simple fix, however, out of hundreds of people and months of flying, you're the first one to complain that the engines are too strong. If you find the thrust/fuel consumption of a certain engine is incorrect at a certain speed and altitude, do shoot me numbers. Other than that, your plane going too fast/too slow /too high/too low is none of my business
  22. camlost
    1. That was the result of vintage cfg 2. The real engines are those sizes. You can use Procedural Parts at least 3. The historical jets are extras, and for the fun, they're not configured for the tech tree. You can totally ignore them. Or, anyone is welcome to contribute to add some tech tree config. 4. The justification is that the original parts has ~180kN thrust, which is closer to CF6 really. And also the CF6 was one of the defaults from NASA EngineSim. But, I can totally add a CF34 using MM 2.0 The stock way simply cannot be patched by adjusting curves, it needs an overhaul. There's no reason why NEARFuels is not working.
  23. camlost
    Start KSP and play it.
  24. camlost
    Reporting a bug: The Cd of Mk1-2 heatshield from DRE seems too small. Other heatshields seem normal
  25. camlost
    I see what's the problem. FAR did not correctly calculate the Cd of that particular heat shield. Should be ~0.35 but is 0.02. I used another 4m shield everything seems fine.
×
×
  • Create New...