radonek
-
Posts
662 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by radonek
-
-
27 minutes ago, TheSaint said:
… pill wrapped in a slice of ham works wonders.
That's what our vet said. Our dog had his own opinion in the matter :-)
ED:
gun? shotgun? I wonder what kind of postapocalyptic wilderness are you guys living in.
-
In my opinion, anything that features remote control is inherently unsecure. Professional hardware with dedicated control channels at least require some effort to break into, but the lowend "enter wifi password and download phone app" is worse off then key under the mat.
-
1 hour ago, paul_c said:
… I haven't done space station docking yet but will do it once my new joystick arrives (tried and failed with a keyboard many times)…
Joystick is strictly optional. Did you switch camera to "Locked"? Using freecam is a common mistake.
-
Usual way to handle this is to raise AP to something eccentric, change inclination at AP and then recilcularize down at PE. Idea behind this is that your orbital energy is very low at top of eccentric orbit, so it does not take much to alter it. Google bi-elliptic transfer. But at 63m/s it's probably not worth the fuss. Just burn retrograde until it turns prograde and you are good.
-
Well that is probably consequence of ebuild not being maintained by somebody who actually use the stuff. I am begining to think that layman and improvements in overlays keep people from working on main tree.
-
I think we already established what is emerging here
-
@kerbiloid and you know what happens to those who dare to disturb worshippers from they aeons old duty? You can cower behind those newfangled rodent driven interfaces with their holy images and rectangularly boring eclidean geometry. Until one day you learn that nice fractal screeensaver is in fact computing Dho-Nha curve and before you know it you are staring right into the Abyss.
-
On 10/31/2020 at 4:03 AM, Pds314 said:
I'm not talking about dodging a missile so much as expending thousands of Delta-V with the main engines minutes before a high speed pass, draining the missile's fuel to zero if it tries to follow that maneuver, regardless of thrust.
Outrunning a missile? I don't think that would work. Missile does not need to match target speed, it just need an interception. If you burn while missile is far away, correction would be small. If you wait for it to close in, you are essentialy trying to out-TWR it, which is a lost proposition.
-
On 9/13/2020 at 7:31 AM, kerbiloid said:
Space Engineers?
I'd say avoid that one. I got it years ago and so far it's been road to disapointment.
-
1 hour ago, king of nowhere said:
take your lander, put wheels in place of landing struts, and you have a rover.
…with a high CoM and hard to fit inside aeroshell. I mean, yes, I've done this too but I would not call such hack a "rover" any more than a plane with landing gear out can be called a car.
-
@Cavscout74 Fair enough, it's possible… yeah, not a good idea, impractical, but quite possible. Although you may be up to something here with biome hops. Waaay back (long before robotic parts) I tried this with long legged skycrane and rover with docking port on top. But redocking was tricky and krakenprone. Having a nice, flat platform would be very helpfull there. Also, skycrane like mine can only transport vehicles designed for it, while that nice big platform of yours can in theory (with lots of EVA strutting and if CoM alignment can be managed somehow) transport anything. So maybe there is some use for it.
-
On 10/25/2020 at 4:07 PM, Dr. Kerbal said:
Oh. This mybe harder than I though...
Maybe there is a reason space agencies are not using this already? Anyway, I think you are looking for this.
-
If it's really really tiny ordinary lander with a ramp may work, but for anything else I'd go with skycrane too. Just slap decouplers on sides, add engines and fuel to taste – what could be easier?
-
My bet is also on water. Maybe hunk of ice in some interresting and/or unexpected place.
-
@Okhin Digital fakes are a different thing, they manipulate information. That works on conscious level, I can decide this information is false and choose not to believe it. What OP is describing is stimulation of certain neurological pathways that could not be ignored (else is ineffective), essentially a form of medusa weapon.
-
11 hours ago, bewing said:
Where is this going to be landed? Generally when the suspension goes crazy, it's because you've got too much suspension (as in too many wheels for the local gravity). Can you remove some wheels, fill it full, then teleport it and test it on your favorite moon?
Will try. So far, I test it unladden on Kerbin, under assumption that lower gravity on Mun or Ike should be roughly balanced by fuel load.
13 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:why are the wheels attached to hinges? i cannot figure out their purpose
Hinges are unpowered and unlocked so that each wheel pair can follow terrain slope. Ruggerized wheels don't have enough suspension travel length to handle this and inner wheels would come out of grip. (You can also see terriers on each end for propulsion.)
Spoiler
-
So I wanted something on wheels to haul fuel from ISRU rig, with a decent sized tank. My problem is that big Rovemax XL wheels are awfuly heavy and TR-2L too small. After some deliberation and with a bit of help from robotic parts from Breaking Ground I came up with this:
Spoiler
My problem is that wheel suspension goes kraken-crazy in this configuration. I was able to tackle it somewhat by attaching wheel beam a bit off-center and fiddling with a spring/damper override until it became driveable (and as far as offroad capabilities go, it works great) but… it depends on vehicle weight, wheel units tend to rock like crazy and when docked to mining rig it went krakening again. When I set hinges to powered and rotate until only one wheel in pair touches ground, all problems go away, which makes me think that hinge is not the main culprit here.
I would be grateful for either advice how to make this work, or suggestions of better chassis configuration.
-
On 9/10/2020 at 11:05 AM, Linkageless said:
… Be aware that parts near the klaw could be under tremendous strain. …
Also be aware that putting struts directly onto klaw is a krakenbait.
-
Best Alien movie is the third one. Seriously.
-
I would like to remind all the wiseasses around there is something of a difference between these sets of walls
Spoiler
-
10 hours ago, razark said:
… They "drop" bombs in space because that way you only have to train the crews one method to hit both planetary and space targets.
It's the same reason x-wings bank when they turn. They don't have to, but if the pilot is trained in atmosphere, then they get used to the vehicle behaving a certain way, and then they can expect the same behavior no matter where they are operating…
In short, they are not using full capabilities of their craft. No wonder those silly rebels got their backsides kicked. In short time empire will be ruled by anyone who can train half competent space combatants.
-
16 hours ago, magnemoe said:
Antimatter, stuff you want the enemy to have on their ships.
Yes, antimatter is incredibly dangerous. So was gunpowder at times. Or steam engine. Or nuclear power… So, it depends. Civilization that laboriously manage to squeze out a limited stock of antimattert as a last resort doomsday device may be in for some fireworks. Civilization that can produce and use antimatter at scale is likely to know a thing or two about safe containment.
-
1 hour ago, Spacescifi said:
I no not what stranglet bombs are...
Theory: http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/spacegunexotic.php#id--Strangelet_Bomb
"Practice": https://eldraeverse.com/tag/burning-of-litash/ (read from bottom up).
1 hour ago, Spacescifi said:I cannot think of a reason for firing mini black holes, unless the target is the size of a small moon or planet size or greater...
That would still be stellar-size black holes. Think smaller. Think tiny, rapidly evaporating singularity. You have projectile going right through anything made of matter, making nice holes in the process via tidal forces. You have mass turning into energy, lots of energy, just as AM bomb, and if you time things right, detonating just where you want. And all of this without any containment or other delicate machinery. Yes, this would not be any easier to handle then AM, but it would be WAY harder to counter (not saying impossible) than antimatter charge (where you just damage containment and it fizzles).
In short, if you want overpowered combat with "magic" level technology (and I claim that mass production of antimatter is firmly there), you should aim for properly "magic" weaponry and not just slap bigger boom on medieval technology. Those are not overpowered nearly enough.
-
On 7/13/2020 at 10:44 PM, Spacescifi said:
Not so easy in practice... you would need a massive vessel to handlr the waste heat.
That said... missiles are a poor man's weapon and are actuallly inefficient for space war given the vast distances and speeds involved.
I would say it's quite opposite. Long range beam weapons have problem with collimation. Missiles work at any range. Beam weapons have light lag. Missiles can have terminal guidance. Beam weapons power/time is limited by cooling capacity. Missiles can be deployed in swarms of any size.
No, unless you conjure up some magic laser that can be perfectly focused at any range and travels faster then light, beam weapons will do much better as point defense or cqb.
As for antimatter weaponry, you are, as usual, wildly mixing tech levels. If you can't mass-produce antimatter easily, it's not worth it for reasons already stated - you'd be wasting resources to package energy in form that is particulary hard to handle. On the other hand if your civilization CAN produce and handle antimatter at scale (and we are talking significant Kardashev factor here), then game is singularity projectiles, strangelet bombs, stellar engineering and similar funnies. At this playground, pure antimatter warhead is crude and ineffective toy. (I say cut the violence and go for information/memetic warfare).
My Clumsy Docking Intercepts: Help me clear up the confusion?
in KSP1 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
Posted
A few observations to already good answers: