Deathsoul097

AFAIK, all of my mods are up to date, and I haven't used anything not for 0.23 (Except for the shuttle SRB and F-1, but I haven't installed those yet.): AIES Aerospace 143 KW Rocketry 2.5.6 Texture Replacer 0.12.1 FAR 0.12.5.2 KJR 1.7 Stretchy SRB 8.1 Toolbar (I didn't install this. It came with FAR) Mechjeb 2.1.1.01 Real SolarSystem 5.5 Real Fuels 4.2 ASET ALCOR 1.7 Raster Prop Monitors 0.13 ScanSat b5 Module Manager 1.5.6

Ahh! Theres one problem! Your First stage is too small! A Saturn V had a Liftoff mass of ~3500 Tonnes, and a Liftoff TWR of 1.1 to 1.15. Increase the fuel in your first stage a bit more, and you will be having a much better time.

Hmm. I don't think that an unmanned, minimalistic attempt at an orbit should be heading off to Alpha Centauri at nearly 9000 TIMES the speed of light... In all seriousness though, as my rocket increased in altitude, the camera would begin to lag behind. At 10Km the camera stopped completely, and at 12Km, this happened.

You appear to have mounted your engines incorrectly on the first stage... Other than that, this is incredibly similar to what I have made. What is the TWR on the second and third stages when they first start to burn? You also appear to be starting your gravity turn really late. You should start it at about 1km to 500m, depending on your TWR. The turn shape should also be closer to ~40 degrees. I found this to be the sweet spot for MJ in FAR and RSS. Also, it is easier to go to a lower orbit. Try about 200 instead of 300. (EDIT: I just checked out the real Saturn V's flight path, and it made orbit around earth at about 180km to 190km. Your shooting for nearly double that.) Also: There is a pretty good J2-X in Bobcat's American Pack. If you are going to release it updated for RO/RF/RSS, ask him permission first. Could you PM me a download link for the F-1? I don't know if it is supported by RF, and I cant find it anywhere.

Hi! I like your vids, but there's one thing you messed up a bit on. The FireSpitter parts don't include SAS, and that's what makes them hard to fly. They seem to be specifically designed for joystick users, and the pods don't include SAS or Gyros. It has nothing to do with not having torque. So actually, the stock biplane you made was just as realistic as the Jet, but just had SAS, which made it easier to fly. Also, making the runway wider helps quite a bit. Also, as my challenge to you: How fast can you land (No crashing. ) a VTOL of your own design on the helipad.

Ahh. We two who suck at texturing. I have to say, your work is impressive, me likey the 0.625m MACE, although it seems as though it and the shock cone could be slightly down sized. They look a tiny bit too big. Oh wait. Never mind. That's just the way the RLA tanks look. They have massive indents in them, compared to the stock 1.25m tanks. Ha! And we both use blender too! Let me guess, Paint.net and GIMP?

Hey guys. I have one thing I would like to request: The mods should include RLA stockalike, as it makes larger and smaller construction much easier. I think if we use RLA it will turn out quite well, as the extra parts fit really well with a stock and kethane game, along with adding a ridiculous amount of new design possibilities. It should also cut down significantly on part count, because the RCS ports are 5 directional, sot that you should only ever need a max of four RCS ports for proper translation, along with the girders being much longer and more modular, which will help when creating large panel trusses, or structural components.

Or how about just putting them in the unpressurized payload fairing of the Delta IV or SLS. And sending it a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG way into space. On a suborbital trajectory. Have fun re-entering at 10Km/s, stupid ass vandals.

Yeah, I know you get pretty high up, but the atmo ISP still plays a major part, because the Thrust depends on air pressure and the specific impulse of your engine.

Your SI-C is not going to be that weak. 4,400kN? That's the thrust of the S-II. IIRC, the S-IC had a thrust of 33,400kN. The ISP of the J2 is about 200 ASL, and 420 VAC. The ISP of the F-1 is about 265 ASL, and about 300 VAC. (No wonder my Saturn V was only half the mass, my engines were incredibly efficient in comparison.) Also, be careful with your ratios of fuel, especially considering the incredibly low density of LH2. You will probably want to use the documented ratios from astonautix or Wikipedia. (I personally recommend the former. Wikipedia is a bit dubious when it comes to correct info on rockets.) I believe that the F-1 used about 2.27 units of LOX for every unit of RP-1.

Hmm. Im all for 95% Real Engines: I like the whole, 1:1 scale, and rescale of RO, but I like being able to control my throttle and restarting my engines, that's just how the game works to me now. If I could have this, then I would be playing with RO, but for now just many mods, RSS, RF, and no rescale. (I do have the 1:1 soviet engines though. Those are very nice. All I want is the American engines, and I will be very happy indeed.)

I wouldn't mind sending up the remaining KH4 tank, or the power truss.

You said we are allowed to modify our designs right? What if I removed two of the rotors on mine, and then made 8 of the others rotateable for forwards propulsion? I should be able to get some pretty decent speed with that. Also, I am trying to do the jet ranger distinction and the precision award right now. Pics soon.

Crazyewok, the op said: "where should NASA go after SLS". Meaning after the SLS is finished. The SLS (If done correctly) should be in service for a VERY long time. Meaning we can still use it after it was finished. After the Space shuttle was completed, NASA didn't just go and say: "Yay, we finished it. Now to make its replacement." No. They went and kept on using it for decades. I'll admit I want Skylon to succeed, but right now there isn't much to it. Meaning that the current best HLV will be Falcon Heavy or SLS. NERVA tech should be being researched though, that is currently our best bet at manned interplanetary travel. The problem with Orion is that it is politically and socially unacceptable, so of course if it is mentioned people will start talking about the political and social issues. This is the science forum, but we have to consider everything, including that wretched bureaucratic game known as politics. The best bet we have for interplanetary travel (IMHO) would be a multi part ship such as Copernicus, but equipped with centrifuges, and with the SLS it could be much, MUCH larger.

Right. I have two more modules to prototype (Fuel storage and kethane storage/dedicated refinery). Other than that I have a science lab, core, hab module, solar powerstation (Though I am thinking of putting in the ketholectric generator.) and the mining module. -Pics soontm- Ah. Hmm. Looks like each of the modules are going to have to relocate to the new areas individually, as the clampotrons are not very strong. As soon as the "Train" of modules begins to turn, the whole thing starts to flex, and then modules begin to break away. Oh well, it shouldn't be a problem though, as each module has 8k of charge for the wheels.

Yeah. I noticed that the fuel consumption on the rotors is pretty high. I will have to add a big droptank to the bay, and remove some of the rotors to do it.

What do you think of the name? Also, now that I think about it, I made a stupid mistake doing this. I could have dropped off bill and bob, and gotten the Jet Ranger distinction as well.

Ah. But here is the thing: One, I wanted it to be the most excessive, ridiculous design I could have made, and two, the heli weighs almost as much as the payload.

Hmm. I may have gone a little bit OTT on this. I present to you, the "UberMegaWTF-Copter". The finest in in ridiculous engineering, capable of lifting a "hell of a lot" more than 40 tonnes, (About 60 tonnes most likely, considering it hovers, carrying 40 T, at 2/3 throttle. I haven't completed the 40 Tonne challenge yet, but it will be pretty easy, and with over 4000 units of fuel, at ~one unit per second, at about 150 m/s, I am pretty sure I can do a circumnavigation. NB: The resource list displayed is wrong, as that tank holds approx the same amount of LF as is in my copter, and oxidizer as well. Yes, that is twelve Russian Bear motors on there. Oddly enough, this monstrosity is the most stable and best handling heli I have ever made. Most are decent, but this, this is super smooth. It is really easy to maintain level flight, by just tilting down by about 10-15 degrees, and flying at 2/3 throttle, and a much lower throttle if your not carrying 40 tonnes at the same time. EDIT: Gallery updated. I can now lay claim to: - The Kolochenko award

I say go with the fourth.

That's fine by me. If someone beats me to it, they are probably better than me at this anyway. However, I think I will have one advantage. I will not use landing legs. Instead, I have a sub assembly pre built that will attach to the ends of the modules, which will ensure everything is at the exact height it needs to be. This also means that if the area runs out of kethane, all of the modules will be able to be repositioned into a long train, and then relocated. This also cuts out having to create a transporter, and allows the freeing up of another module for more useful purposes. I currently have the habitat working (Sorry for the dark pics): EDIT Mining module:

Hi. I would like to sign up for this, if you don't mind. I probably wont do much other than haul up and dock whatever you ask me to, at least until I have my plan up and running. I would like to propose a groundside kethane refinery on duna, and this will take me a while to complete the mock up and subsystems for it, so I am asking now. You probably won't hear about it again for a while, not until I have made some significant progress at least. (I am very pedantic, and a bit of a perfectionist when it comes to this kind of thing.) My designs will most likely be as minimalistic as possible, due to crappy hardware. Once you start getting over 100 parts on my laptop, things can begin to slow down a bit. Thanks either way.

You need to get the new firespitter.dll and the exsurgentengineering.dll, though I don't know where to find the latter, as I found it on this thread a while a go.

I can see this being implemented in many ways. I would personally wish that 1 would be implemented in the long term. I think that if you do this to transfer crew between modules, you should be able to right click on other kerbals and click on an option that made them follow you, along with the ability to actually use IVA, such as turning the science lab into an actual useable science lab for the player, with experiments etc depending on the situation, and whether or not you had certain modules or experiments on board, such as surface samples. EG: If you had a lab on the surface of duna, and you had taken some surface samples, then you could find said samples in the lab module if you had one, right click on them, and then over about a minute the kerbal would start doing his own thing, working on the sample, and analysing it on his own, while you moved over to control another kerbal, to start checking up on your bases subsystems, and monitoring a kethane refinery, etc. Taking control of another kerbal in IVA would be just as simple as using [ or ], or right clicking and getting a drop down menu with options like: "Follow me", or "Control Kerbal". Then, as you fly, or do your own thing, you would see the little portraits of kerbals doing their own thing, socializing or moving around and monitoring stuff.

Okay, here are few things I would like to say about your challenge: First of all, nice! This is a mostly well thought out challenge, and the tasks are very interesting. However: If by the alternate KSC you mean KSC2, you do realise that is on another continent, and about a quarter of the way around the planet, right? That is a long way to fly on a heli. I'd say if any do the ones involving KSC2 will use a design similar to the osprey. Also, to complete your circumnavigation, all you have to do is fly a helo or VTOL retrograde on the sunny side at around 170ms. (That will be a challenge in itself though, considering how much power and how many rotors it will need to achieve that speed with electricity.) Other than those minor discrepancies, well done! I would suggest you create a score system for each of the goals, and then divide the total score by the amount of designs used to gain said score. That should encourage the general theme of this challenge, along with pretty much forcing people to create a single reliable design for everything, but only if they want the highest score they can possibly ever get. (Of course, ATM, with the way this challenge is laid out there would be a set max score) You may also want to set up things like your score for the payload task is however much your design can carry , divided by the amount of time it took in minutes to deliver it and return.