dharak1

I want it to get above most model rocket kits (around 1.5 Km) AND look good. I hope it will steal the show especially after I send up Wyvern 1 My other designs were around 4 feet long and used 4 D12-7 engines and launched off of metal rods on three sides. The Wyvern also need to be revised because the launch system is just placing a rock under the front to angle it up.

This is pretty much extra-curricular the only related part to school is the rockets I figured I may as well have some fun on my way. Designs for the un-named rocket: http://i.imgur.com/yFp9bEeh.jpg Wyvern Pi (picture is blurry): http://i.imgur.com/HhaIEqYh.jpg Wyvern 3 (currently in the process of getting prepared to be a payload propeller plane): http://i.imgur.com/lArifZSh.jpg Wyvern 2 (A moment of silence, Wyvern 2 collided with a power line while under powered flight): http://i.imgur.com/18xbUPxh.jpg Wyvern 1 ( The second plane the first was Wyvern 0 that was a prototype based off of a partially broken plane): http://i.imgur.com/Nc6bE67h.jpg Those are all the planes, Wyvern Pi was going to be Wyvern 4 but a collision with the ground caused a damaged wing that was moved to Wyvern Pi/4 because i figured it better to have 3 fully complete planes and 1 kind of damaged one, rather than 2 working and 2 damaged.

So today I had the first day of grade 8 and found out that we need to make a rocket very soon because of the weather so I started designing my rocket and I need to know a few things and maybe some help on the design. I already have a rocket plane called the Wyvern and there are 3 of them each launch uses 2 C6-3 engines. It has amazing results for what you would expect out of strapping 2 medium level power rockets to a foam plane. I can post pictures if you want. This next one has 3 engines 2 C6-7 engines and 1 A1/2 with an undetermined fuse time (do rockets that small even use ejection charges? the smallest I have used is a . And it looks a LOT like an Ares V I think somewhere in my subconscious all of my rockets are inspired by Ares rockets. It has 6 fins 4 placed around the center as usual then 2 on the side of the C6-7 rockets opposite the center. Any problems seen here? The top is obviously pointed and all of the engines will be tightly fastened with 30 day stucko tape. The A1/2 is there for the chute only and if it doesn't have a charge I may have to go to a bigger engine. Names would also be appreciated.

I'm no pro but i think its because when it stops or maintains speed the energy goes back to the wheel not out anywhere else.

Hey guys I'm back

Well, I'm off for around 8 days starting tomorrow because it's back to BC to mine until school starts.

I meant in terms of dimensions, these people don't care how dense the thing is it's size that they care about for all they care it could be a hollow tin sphere and it would kill us. Their only purpose is to stop science at the smallest sign of any type of danger to anything.

Hmm I was watching a video from on the ISS and it looked like the laptop had windows on it. I guess I was wrong.

Bad news, idiots exist. Some crazy people think if NASA screws up this thing will fall to earth and kill everyone. Even if they don't they think this will mess up and break natural cosmic balance and, once again kill us all. It's funny because the asteroid is smaller than most satellites we have up here and is only around 10 meters across its longest face.

Oh god if that's the way it's done think of all the hardware and programming for stuff in space and to think the PCs on the ISS are running like windows 95.

The title says it all, how do spacecraft know their orbit? I'm sure calculating velocity and distance are too much work especially for something like a Jupiter transfer. Do they have some ksp like orbit paths mapped out on their screens all done by computer? How was it done before massive computing power? what about elliptical orbit? Do they need ground distance for that?

I hate windows using a series designed for desktops as an excuse to RUIN it by setting it up for people with their fad touchscreen desktop all in ones that are outperformed by a basic office phone. They should have made a new OS for touch all in 1 "computers" and kept 7 for actual desktops. I am actually going out to futureshop in a few days to get 10 copies of windows 7 so I can have an actual OS made for desktops. I hope windows 9 is normal.

If you set the nav ball to target node burn on the pink marker that's almost a circle. Then speed up to around 10 m/s until 700m then slow to 2.5m/s the speed is your relative to the target so as long as its prograde then you are fine. When you are within 20m slow to 0m/s and switch to docking mode and start docking!

I did that too, I made a save and wrote over the persistence and it worked. I have the same bug as you on two of my saves in the SPH.

He means he has things to do in is day.

I thought the original ETT was a pure straight line most of the way, even if it wasn't then it would still be able to turn just very slowly. I could see the ETT used to give rockets a HUGE boost to suborbital space.

The vacuum in the tube looked kind of needed because I see a cylinder, not the most aerodynamic thing in existence. Either way, not making the tube a vacuum is a bad idea. It slows it down crazy amounts you could travel nearly mach 10 in a vacuum tube like this one. The issue is boarding and servicing the tube.

Its ok now, lets Hope this doesn't happen again.

I don't understand how debris hundreds of kilometers away can cause lag. I have a save with 400 pieces of debris and it runs as good as one with none. I know I only left 4 in orbit. It was twice as much because decouplers always fail so I use stack separators. I have NO idea where the other 40 pieces came from. My module is under 20 parts IIRC. I also have no idea where the mun stuff came from.

I hate to say it but... He didn't think of this. Well first. I saw a video a few years ago with a transport system called ETT evacuated tube transport. It had a maglev system in a vacuum tube that sent it at hypersonic speeds. He may have bought the idea but it still wasn't his first. I wish people would stop praising him for just making rockets.

Could you use a double docking module? Maybe you will have to slide it between mine and the core?

I am really sorry, my module had no docking ports because I was in BC with no internet when the rule was posted. I will make up for it by making a module with a bunch of ports on the next mission.

My super heavy lifter can get a LOT of stuff into orbit. it has 13 mainsails and 31 orange tanks. I guess you want to use your own things though.

MY Minmus colony has around 16 people and my Mun one has around 7 that's 23 in the Kerbin system. I made sure to leave plenty of repurposeable debris around meaning that on the ground i have 23 kerbals ready to meet up around the Mun on station alpha and regroup to send missions to gather debris and reuse them. 30 kerbals alive altogether.

A docking arm would be great, Something like 4 girders long that had a few docking ports on it as it goes out.