lpam Posted May 3, 2013 Share Posted May 3, 2013 It also looks like the leg can fold, so the telescopic pole fits in the groove of the A-frame. I guess that is what Elton means by "nested" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommygun Posted May 3, 2013 Share Posted May 3, 2013 Good lord, that's the biggest paperclip I have ever seen! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimer4 Posted May 3, 2013 Share Posted May 3, 2013 They do seem to be standing around the leg thinking, now what do we do with this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardBoardBoxProcessor Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 It is going to be pretty epic. I am assuming that leg is for Grasshopper 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B787_300 Posted May 5, 2013 Share Posted May 5, 2013 it might be for the 1st falcon 9 R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaran Posted May 7, 2013 Share Posted May 7, 2013 Hey Borklund, I am currently playing around with re-balancing the Falcon 9 (having a 2.5+ TWR take off when "fully loaded" was a bit much) once I am done playing with it some more do you mind if I post the new config files here for people to try? If you would rather I didn't then I shall not. Trying to keep to the same base specs the F9v1 has of about 10mass to 100 km orbit with a little wiggle room. I am also thinking of adding a little monopropellant to the second stage, while the original F9 second stage didn't have this the F9R should have it and it is proving to be useful in testing to be able to throw some RCS thrusters on the second stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardBoardBoxProcessor Posted May 8, 2013 Share Posted May 8, 2013 welp with the SPA announcement and the calculations from NSF it seems that last flight of the grasshopper 1 was about all we will probably see from it for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B787_300 Posted May 8, 2013 Share Posted May 8, 2013 SPA announcement? NSF calculations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric S Posted May 8, 2013 Share Posted May 8, 2013 Yeah, I was just reading a news article where SpaceX announced TODAY that they were moving the Grasshopper testing to a New Mexico test site where they will have more room to test (higher allowed altitudes, larger ground area), so this doesn't sound like something that isn't flying again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowsutekh Posted May 13, 2013 Share Posted May 13, 2013 Im curious, I looked up the F9H, and I was wondering why we can't radially attach the F9 first stage in order to replicate the F9H considering the F9H is just a F9 with parallel F9 first stages as liquid boosters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDBenson Posted May 13, 2013 Share Posted May 13, 2013 I have a question for Borklund and CardBoardBoxProcessor - I have combined both your mods and CBBP's Dragon Rider capsule is slightly bigger than the Dragon cargo module. Is the scaling between the two correct? It took a few bits from the KW Rocketry pack to link the two Also, is there any chance of getting proper edge-connection working for the first stage tanks? Making F9H and F9SH analogues shouldn't be too hard with that turned on. I tried shanging the attachRules in the part.cfg and it doesn't want to attach edge-on, it turns the element through 90-degrees and plays stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NannerManCan Posted May 13, 2013 Share Posted May 13, 2013 Im curious, I looked up the F9H, and I was wondering why we can't radially attach the F9 first stage in order to replicate the F9H considering the F9H is just a F9 with parallel F9 first stages as liquid boosters.Isn't that what its doing already? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Netris Posted May 13, 2013 Share Posted May 13, 2013 I have a question for Borklund and CardBoardBoxProcessor - I have combined both your mods and CBBP's Dragon Rider capsule is slightly bigger than the Dragon cargo module. Is the scaling between the two correct? It took a few bits from the KW Rocketry pack to link the two Also, is there any chance of getting proper edge-connection working for the first stage tanks? Making F9H and F9SH analogues shouldn't be too hard with that turned on. I tried shanging the attachRules in the part.cfg and it doesn't want to attach edge-on, it turns the element through 90-degrees and plays stupid.cBBp think the "64% rule" is stupid so he doesn't scale his stuff down and thus it doesn't fit with anything. You have to accept that or change it yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finkmac Posted May 13, 2013 Share Posted May 13, 2013 Ask this person how to rescale the parts, they know the correct scale factors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deltac Posted May 13, 2013 Share Posted May 13, 2013 Im curious, I looked up the F9H, and I was wondering why we can't radially attach the F9 first stage in order to replicate the F9H considering the F9H is just a F9 with parallel F9 first stages as liquid boosters.In reality, the Falcon 9 Heavy will be using the Falcon 9 1.1 cores, and not the square core. In KSP, Borkland didn't add that stuff because he didn't feel like it at the time. You can edit the configs to add radial attachment, but you're going to have to some experimentation to get everything attached just right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowsutekh Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 Yeah I noticed that when I was reading about them. I consider it more of a stopgap measure until Borkland gets around to/wants to/has details to add 1.1 cores.How would I go about adding radial attachment? Just open the configs and change a "false" to "true" or is there more to it than that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deltac Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 Yeah I noticed that when I was reading about them. I consider it more of a stopgap measure until Borkland gets around to/wants to/has details to add 1.1 cores.How would I go about adding radial attachment? Just open the configs and change a "false" to "true" or is there more to it than that?Look at the attachment rules, and change a 0 to 1 (hopefully the comment about what each number stands for is still in these configs, if not, look at other configs, or go to the wiki).Then you have to add a new node for attachment. This is the node you need, but from the Big Orange stock tank node_attach = 1.25, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1I think all you need to do is mess with the first 3 numbers to get it positioned just right. Also, this is when having a second install of KSP with no other mods installed comes in handy. Load times Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowsutekh Posted May 14, 2013 Share Posted May 14, 2013 Look at the attachment rules, and change a 0 to 1 (hopefully the comment about what each number stands for is still in these configs, if not, look at other configs, or go to the wiki).Then you have to add a new node for attachment. This is the node you need, but from the Big Orange stock tank node_attach = 1.25, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 0.0, 1I think all you need to do is mess with the first 3 numbers to get it positioned just right. Also, this is when having a second install of KSP with no other mods installed comes in handy. Load times Alrighty, I'm sure I'll get around to attempting that work around eventually. However currently I'm just dealing with the fact that I've been up for over 24 hours straight with no sleep. I am what one might consider a little loopy right now as evidenced by my surprisingly compelling argument to my girlfriend about how Toy Story is related to the Original Star Wars Trilogy. Yes, that is how loopy I am right now. Finals are fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerbal01 Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 (edited) Im probably being incredibly rude by posting this* this but it appears you have some competition for a spacex replica mod http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/29388-LazTek-SpaceX-Falcon-9-v1-1-and-and-Falcon-Heavy-Launch-Pack-information*If I am I'm sorry. Edited May 16, 2013 by DarthVader Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greywind Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 Can't match Borklund's attention to detail though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B787_300 Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 and his legs and designs are a bit fanciful... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tjmick1992 Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 and his legs and designs are a bit fanciful...To be honest I fell like the whole Grasshopper idea in real life is a bit fanciful.However I'll be proud to say it works, if they can manage to pull it off. I'm just not seeing it, but I'm no Aerospace Engineer either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Good_Apollo Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 To be honest I fell like the whole Grasshopper idea in real life is a bit fanciful.However I'll be proud to say it works, if they can manage to pull it off. I'm just not seeing it, but I'm no Aerospace Engineer either.Hey when I saw that SpaceX addon posted I assumed it was a goofy 'mod' thing he did. Then I read up and find out it's not only a real proposal but is seriously being tested. It sounds about as fanciful and misguided as the Shuttle program... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B787_300 Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 It sounds about as fanciful and misguided as the Shuttle program...To be honest I fell like the whole Grasshopper idea in real life is a bit fanciful.Both of you, the idea is not fanciful at all, it is a cost reducing measure. IF they can land the main stage and reuse it (they should be able too) then they will not have to manufacture as many, reducing costs because rockets have to be built to ridiculously tight tolerances for maximum performance which dives up manufacturing costs. Now if those cost were dropped suddenly sending a pound to space instead of costing about 4000 USD (http://www.futron.com/upload/wysiwyg/Resources/Whitepapers/Space_Transportation_Costs_Trends_0902.pdf) should drop it down to more like 10 USD per pound if Musk has his way (http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/space/rockets/elon-musk-on-spacexs-reusable-rocket-plans-6653023). Also the space shuttle was originally designed to do the same thing, but to recertify each shuttle after each mission took way to long on cost too much money keeping the price per pound to high to make the shuttle reach it goals as a spacecraft.One last thing...the design is not fanciful at all, they are NOT developing any new and ground breaking tech to do this, they are using things that are already proven and tested separately... (and before anyone challenges me I am in school to be an Aerospace Engineer and am in my Junior year so I know a ton about this type of thing.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kerbal01 Posted May 20, 2013 Share Posted May 20, 2013 this video claims to be using a grasshopper from this pack but i've never seen one when i've used it.Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts