NathanKell
-
Posts
13,406 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Everything posted by NathanKell
-
Stockalike RF Engine Configs v3.2.6 [01/20/19][RF v12]
NathanKell replied to Raptor831's topic in KSP1 Mod Releases
....because "how do I ignite the propellants" is really not the hardest part of restarting an engine. -
The problem IMO isn't that you need greater deformity, but either the frequency needs to go up or the curve PQSMods need tweaking to help make the slopes sharper.
-
Yeah, was just wondering if the 5xx series were left unpainted orange and the 4xx were painted.
-
It is, yes. However, it's very complicated. Here's one essay on the subject: http://www.astronautix.com/articles/costhing.htm Costing aerospace hardware is very hard...that's one *major* cause of difficulty in RP-0.
-
Yes/
-
Also because they're purty.
-
Also sometimes it's inside the 5m PLF (5xx), and sometimes it's not (4xx).
-
And quite an update it is!
-
@harlikwin I still say the more impressive one was Titan. It had nearly that high a fuel fraction...without balloon tanks.
-
@Reactordrone you say that, but... That's the butt of a tank, clear as day. Since it's literally modeled on one:
-
What IS cheating? - The Thread to define the age old question!
NathanKell replied to Overland's topic in KSP1 Discussion
Cheating is doing stuff I don't like. EDIT: Well, OK, serious answer: breaking the laws of physics. Short of that, not really. -
A 2m guidance ring should be sufficient, it supports the full mass of Atlas (that's what it's for, mostly). The real Atlas D had a sustainer mass at burnout of only ~2.6t, so if your dry mass is higher than that, that's the problem.
-
@stratochief66 @Sput42 the craft files are different because we rescale the parts so the old craft file won't work, and we reuse some old part models to make new parts as needed, etc. However, we don't change the actual geometry or colliders at all, and the problem was with 1.0.5 changing how it supported colliders.
-
No mods? HoneyFox's Engine Thrust Controller does this (it was *created* to simulate an SRB / RSRM after all), as does RealFuels.
-
Ah, I thought it was on the Info bit in TS/mapview when you focused on a planet. But maybe only sidereal rotation period, not orbital period, is there. If so, alt * pi / speed (alt and speed are shown when checking the planet's orbit in TS/mapview) = period, since Kerbin has a circular orbit.
-
Naw, just poking a bit at the idea that MechJeb is somehow cheating. :]
-
I well remember your excellent LV family, @Temstar!
-
Are you having this problem after having a fully up-to-date FASA install as well as RO? The exploding comes from collider issues in FASA which should be fixed now, it requires no RO changes to resolve.
-
@Lilienthal hurray! The best bugs are the bugs I don't have to fix!
-
Pretty sure you're going to reenter if it's below 130km...
-
And yes, we're well aware that the 1.25m engines can't compete with later engines in terms of efficiency/TWR/whatever. We have thoughts on that, but none of those thoughts are "let's just nerf all the NASA engines so they don't have better TWR than a Swivel, because everything has to be balanced in Sandbox, not just Career."
-
The engines "of its same class" are the other NASA engines unlocked at the end of the tree. And it has a lower TWR than the Mammoth, a much lower TWR (but higher Isp) than the Twin Boar, and a higher TWR but much lower Vac Isp than the Rhino. In KSP engine balancing, class comes from tech tree position. Not size.
-
Twin Boar has the best TWR if you discount the mass of the orange tank that's always glued to it. Then the Mammoth. Only then the Vector (it pays in mass for the extra gimbal).
-
FTFY. Well, the main reason right now is higher drag, since surface-attached parts don't get stack occlusion.
-
Or go ingame, and find out its orbital period.
