Jump to content

Wahgineer

Members
  • Posts

    811
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Wahgineer

  1. Its REALLY simple: Get D-V from a map or something. Then: New D-V= Old D-V × sqrt (rescale factor, or how many times bigger the resacle is than stock)) Ex: 3200m/s × sqrt (5) = 7,155m/s Happy rescaling!
  2. It may be best to sacrifice accuracy for compatibility: If people really want to, they'll tinker with the Sarnus V to make it work. It's best just to make it 6.25m, since then you won't have to redo EVERYTHING in the mod to make it work. Besides, more fuel is better, and it.might help the rocket to behave more realistically.
  3. @Araym, actually, there is a stock system that would allow us to use a 6.25m Sarmus V and it's derivatives without worrying about the FAN's limits: sub-assemblies. We can build our payloads, then attach the rocket to it. Ksp auto-raises rockets on loading if they stock below the GAB floor.
  4. @Araym, this whole mod is overkill. Heck, even Cobalt said this mod should be used in a 2 or 3x rescaled system to balance it out.
  5. Meh, 6.25m is still the better option. Heck, it would probably be only a little bigger than the 5.26m one
  6. A cool mod to integrate would be Cormorant Aeronology: it adds parts specifically for building shuttles. Just look it up in Google or something, and you'll find it right away.
  7. What about porkjets rocket part overhaul?
  8. In all honesty, @MrMeeb, it would probably be best to just make the cargo bay the same size as the CRG-100. It would fit in better, and wouldn't require tweakscaled wings, special heat-tile-shield pieces, etc. Just my 2¢
  9. Will the Gemini-MOL parts be able to use the science research thing by Angel-125 for his Gemini-MOL?
  10. The idea was to stuff all of the important junk into the orbital module so that there was room for 5 crew. I just brought this up as a practical issue: most deep space missions will require, at least, 4 crew: one pilot, one engineer, two scientists (for the science lab). Currently, there is no 4+ Kerbal capsule available in stock KSP. Not to mention, you did manage to squeeze 4 Kerbals into the Big-L passenger module.
  11. Just remember, there are two versions of the Apollo capsule in ETS: the original, and the modified one, which has the extra module and can carry 5 kerbals.
  12. Benjee, you have some problems with your tanks: 1: They default to O2 only 2: You need to use a fuel switcher to change the tanks to LH/02 3: The ratio of LH to O2 is way off: you run out of O2 way before LH. It's something like 230000 odd LH to 60000 O2. So either the tanks are off, or the engines don't use fuel right.
  13. Suggestions incoming: HG-3 engine (conceptual/designed engine that was the direct precursor to the RS-25) config's that change the proper engines to run on hydrogen instead of liquid fuel when Nertea's Cryogenic Engines are installed (by proper engines I mean M-1, HG-3, RL-10, etc.) F-1B engine, so we can make the Saturn 1c from eyes turned skywards(ETS) Long 3.75m orange tank, so we can make the Saturn Multibody from ETS Stubby Service Module, properly stylized KAS/KIS compatible storage containers, 5 kerbal (stretched?) Apollo capsule (again, ETS) 6.25m Cryogenic tanks (for Cryogenic Engines), would allow us to make the Ares from Stephen Baxter's Voyage (Ares was a Mars ship built out of re-purposed Apollo/Saturn hardware)
  14. Probably because the only accepted alternative size ranges are multiples/fractions of the stock sizes, for compatibility and easier calculations.
  15. No, not really. It makes sense to "follow the crowd" for compatibility. Granted, though, Bluedog has done a good job so far (if you do some simple math's, you'll soon find out that all of his non-stock sizes are actually compatible, except 1.5 meters: it's the only one not a fraction/multiple of 0.625m). Good. While I know it's your mod, it's probably best that you keep 1.5m as the only non-compatible size range.
×
×
  • Create New...