khyron42

I kind of like (what I understand as) the network idea. Land your craft at the Mun. When your next turn comes up... Instead of launching a new craft, move your first one to a different LZ! ----- For the Mod bases, I\'m going to try to get the second post on Seanoog\'s new thread once he\'s ready. I\'ll be using the original rules, with some changes depending on what stock\'s rule changes are. I might make it a rule that only one mod pack can be added per flight to keep the amount of packs people need to install under control. We can use the same locations as stock, or different ones. Last time, the two initial LZs were just on opposite sides of the same crater, and I kind of like the idea of continuing that. But they don\'t all have to be 'joint sites'. Proposed Landing Zones with difficulty ratings: Kerbin Medium - Landing Zone Kilo, the other space center on Kerbin, same as stock. This could change if people don\'t want its location spoiled. Mun Medium- Jeb\'s Crack, same as stock, but a few kilometers north or south. Minmus Hard - Pit of Despair, to-be-determined rugged valley on Minmus. Or Pinnacle of Despair, a ridge in the mountains. Minmus Easy - Lake of Broken Landers, small frozen lake just south of the main frozen ocean. Should we have an easy target for the Mun as well to start? We will add a hard one on the Mun and Kerbin later, but we can start with just those plus maybe the Munar easy. If anyone has suggestions for the Minmus Hard target - or for changes to these targets - let me know!

How badly has the Mun\'s geography (munography?) changed in this update? I was wondering if any of the existing locations there are invalid now.

Khyron\'s Appliance Repair and Rocket Engineering presents its first and only aircraft, the LORAX. The LOng RAnge eXperimental plane is capable of supersonic cruise at 16 km altitude, can easily handle transcontinental flights, and has amazingly good glide characteristics. The main drawbacks of the craft are a tendency to pitch up, and poor yaw control authority at low speeds. It can also be difficult to land until you are used to the high glide ratio. Additional images. Performance specs: [li]Liftoff speed, full fuel load: 100 m/s at 3 degree nose up.[/li] [li]Full throttle cruise: 590 m/s at 16 km altitude (3 tanks empty)[/li] [li]40% throttle cruise: 380 m/s at 15.5 km altitude (6 tanks empty)[/li] [li]Max altitude sustained flight: 18.2 km, 20 degree nose up, full throttle. 460-480 m/s airspeed. (6 tanks empty)[/li] [li]Max altitude with parabolic arc: 23.2 km[/li] [li]Engine out glide rate near the ground: 5 m/s descent at level wings, 35 m/s air speed.[/li]

Multiple candidates, so I\'ll spoiler the pictures... Possibly this one, from the Launch this Lander as fast as possible challenge - especially since it literally had to ditch the first stage while it was still burning due to fuel line issues back then, while I was watching a 1 fps slideshow: Or, this one from the deliver maximum fuel to orbit challenge - 44 tanks in the middle without any engines connected, just a fuel dump: Or this little thing... The outer engines were designed to break off on the pad, they were only used to hold up the outer tanks until liftoff. The whole ship bent like you see there but never broke apart aside from those sacrificial engines!

Are we going to reset the flight list when we open base 3.0 or carry over the current one? If we\'ll keep the list, sign me up. I meant to rename it the Triad X because it carried the equivalent of 10 full-sized tanks. That makes it smaller, mass-wise, than the 13-tank one next to it - with a wider base on landing legs, so it\'s an easier landing, too.

Togfox, there\'s a persistence file attached to that last post - all 15-20 craft are stored in it and can be viewed in the map viewer to get the lat/longs.

I decided that, since we don\'t know when 0.15 will come out, might as well keep flying. My attempt to land this thing using my laptop resulted in me falling through the Mun; trying again now on a better computer. ----- Success! Triad IX has joined the other craft at Landing Zone Bravo. Launch and other images in this gallery. Persistence file attached.

This seems to be quite a challenging concept. If trbinsc isn\'t able to maintain the Mod Community Base any more and no one else wants to manage it, I\'m willing to try to herd cats starting when 0.15 comes out. I guess it\'s my turn now on the stock base? Or should everyone just wait until 0.15 now?

Second proposed name for the area temporarily labelled Booster Bay: Malfunction Bay. It didn\'t exist until after the first few launch attempts; Jeb was particularly pleased with that explosion.

I\'m off on vacation until tomorrow evening, in case my turn comes up quickly that will mean a day at most before I can fly. The Triad IX has had a couple of test flights and almost survived the most recent one, that\'s close enough for Kerbals!

'excepting cart' is a problem. That would mean everyone else would have to download the cart plugin. Not having to download and install mods is kind of the point of having the separate 'mod' and 'stock' base projects. Now I\'m tempted to try making a stock rover...

Thanks, Rich!

A couple of things about that: First, should we try to edit the persistence files down to just the one craft and change the name of the craft to the location name, or just leave that to the merged file maintainer? I\'ve yet to bother with editing a persistence file. Second, for the already submitted place names, should we edit those older posts to include the persistence file, or make a new one? Whichever would be easier for adding them to the merged file.

Delta-v for a Perfect TMI after one orbit (with perfect circularization burn) would be the same as delta-v for a perfect TMI right when you should have begun the circularization burn. Which makes sense, if you burn the rocket the same amount at the same place in orbit it doesn\'t matter if it\'s two separate burns 30 minutes apart, or one big one. Note, however, the 'perfects' in that summary. If you assume you\'ll make slight errors with every burn, doing it as one burn might be more efficient. This is definitely what I do when the chance comes up. In fact, I take it a step further; if the Mun\'s in the right general neighborhood, I\'ll eyeball my Ap point on the suborbital to be lined up correctly for TMI.

That\'s the ISA RAM Mapping plugin-based part. Which is why it\'s a mapping sattelite. ;D

My usual approach for satellites is to have RCS as the only thrust source on the satellite itself. More than enough to adjust orbit on any craft once they\'ve been boosted as high as geosynch, and even to deorbit them if you brought enough RCS fuel. Combined with an SAS or ASAS and knowledge of orbital mechanics, it\'s the perfect tool for the job. I just wish nearly-circular orbits didn\'t jitter so much.

I\'ve had them for the last 5 flights. 4 of those went wrong, but in ways that left the crew alive. I guess Bill\'s gotten better at hitting that 'PANIC' button this lifetime! It\'s great when your rocket is so tall, the explosion that destroys the whole first and second stages (after it veers wildly off course and you try staging to improve handling, but forget to throttle down first) leaves half of the third stage intact.

You\'re right, the Nebudchan... nebbukanedz... that name wouldn\'t be known to them. However, the Kerbals are very familiar with Nebbykunidzer, a famous nit-picking spoilsport from their ancient history. Rich - not suggesting you change your suggestion - just poking a bit of fun at Zephram. Change it in honor of his nitpick if you like. I\'m not sure if the plateau is big enough to require a naming poll, but if it is, I submit the name above as a second poll option.

It\'s also the name for a really huge bottle of wine or champagne, perhaps carried on board to celebrate the successful landing.

Might as well start proposing names. Screenshots of close-up, detailed location, and orbital view with lat/long displayed (in case it\'s too small to read, it\'s 11d25\'0'S, 169d54\'40'E): Proposed name for the beach: Borgnine Beach. Would only apply to that small stretch of coast shown in screenshot two. Hopefully this is small enough to qualify for the 'Small Features' part of the naming. Proposed name for the overall peninsula that it is on: Hydra Peninsula (also known as Hydrangea.) The area referred to with that name would end at the mountains in the northeast, as the land widens past that point to no longer be a proper peninsula. Example use: Dude 1: 'Hey, let\'s head down to Hydrangea. The surf\'s really nice at the beaches this time of year, and my cousin has a place right near Borgnine Beach.' Dude 2: 'No way, man, didn\'t you hear? The whole Hydra Peninsula got whalloped by a hurricane earlier this week.' Dude 1: 'Bummer! Let me call my cousin and make sure she\'s ok.' To be clear, Hydrangea would not be a country name, just an alternate way of referring to the peninsula. It would be called Hydra Peninsula any time the two-word approach was wanted, but Hydrangea instead of Hydra in a single-word reference.

Sounds like a chance to improve your piloting skills! If you need any tips on how to hand-fly some of what the mechjeb ascent and descent autopilots do, we can definitely help. If it\'s more of a problem with designing in stock parts, we can probably help there too. If it\'s simply a distaste for stock, well, I understand where you\'re coming from. I think the current approach of having a post managed by a single person is the best we can do on these forums, but maybe it\'s time to make a new thread after 0.15 comes out? Someone else could start the mod base thread, or both could be managed by Seanoog if he feels up to it and trbinsc has moved on to other things.

Thanks for the pics, cbbp! Sorry that the drama happened in this post and distracted from the awesome pics. I live in the area but hadn\'t gone out to see it yet. I\'ve got relatives coming in July and was waiting until then. I\'d already seen Enterprise when it was there, and figured that they wouldn\'t set it up to have access to the interior, which would be the only truly awesome thing to see that would be different than seeing the various mock-ups I\'ve been in and Enterprise. I\'m just glad I got to see one (Atlantis) launch a few years back before they retired them.

Just to make sure... you\'re asking for a go at the stock base, or the mod base? The stock base only allows stock parts and the mod base hasn\'t been active lately...

Togfox, yours is already in CSV, correct? I\'m wondering if your two data formats are merge-able. In any case - Mods or Devs, do you have any objection to what\'s being proposed here? Think it\'s irrelevant? Welcome it eagerly?

Congratulations! You\'ve got the basics down. I\'d say practice more munar landings though! To me, there\'s always a new landing craft to try out or a new targetted landing to try. I had forgotten that Kerbol/the Sun is not there on the demo. In the paid version, anything that gets within about 10000 km of the Sun\'s 'surface' explodes to be at least slightly more realistic. You don\'t get the random excess acceleration at that point, so it\'s just a normal orbit or kaboom. Less exciting, but then, the paid version lets you do much more fun landing craft. Kopernicus Base. Parts from 5 different mod packs including three with paid-version-only plugins (unfolding solar panels, floodlights from a rover plugin, and an autopilot.)