DMSP Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 I'm building a detailed stock Human Heart in KSP for Science.400+ parts. The Mac is blotting out the work site next to me.Pls.I'm about to give up.- - - Updated - - -It works! HAH!The O2 fires into the tissue membrane!This has taken 9 hours of my life.For a 3 minute video.I think it's worth it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rune Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 Swift. A one kerbal SSTO. balancing O2 and fuel is a proper pain...http://i.imgur.com/NUwkRVi.pngThat looks very cool. Did the nosecone burn? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fellow314 Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 That looks very cool. Did the nosecone burn?No, it was built without one. I know it should have one but it makes the front end look funny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rune Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 No, it was built without one. I know it should have one but it makes the front end look funny Sink it back into the cockpit with the translation gizmo on fine control. That's the only way I put it.Rune. One does pick up a trick or two over the years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fellow314 Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 Sink it back into the cockpit with the translation gizmo on fine control. That's the only way I put it.Rune. One does pick up a trick or two over the years.Thanks!! :DNow, option a or option b...On a technical note, at less than 10 tonnes, it should make orbit on one rapier? I'm having real trouble pushing through the sound barrier with it full, I have to drain a little O2 and fuel to get it into orbit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Sierra Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 B definitely Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBrisbyMouse Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 Thanks!! :DNow, option a or option b...snipOn a technical note, at less than 10 tonnes, it should make orbit on one rapier? I'm having real trouble pushing through the sound barrier with it full, I have to drain a little O2 and fuel to get it into orbit.It's your cross section. Extra stacks add a lot of drag. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fellow314 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 B definitelyI think you're right, B it is It's your cross section. Extra stacks add a lot of drag.I thought it might be something like that, thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Sierra Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 (edited) I think you're right, B it is I thought it might be something like that, thanks.You could cut down the cross section a LOT by using two structural intakes. Thats all it takes to feed even a turbojet (which is more air-hungry) to the point of velocity-flameout. Wouldnt look quite as entertaining tho.EDIT:This worked pre-1.0 (there's a 909 clipped into that turbojet). It even out-performed the rapier variant. Gonna have to try this little thing again. Edited June 14, 2015 by Captain Sierra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostbuzzer7 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Well this thing doesn't look like it will fly soon. Engine clipping causes spontaneous heating, not really spontaneous when you think about it and when you lift 80 tons in which that's its maximum carry, it rear right VTOL engine ring overheats. Our engineers solved the problem though: MOAR DUCTAPE AND STRUTS SHOULD STOP OVERHEATING Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thingymajigy Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Well this thing doesn't look like it will fly soon. Engine clipping causes spontaneous heating, not really spontaneous when you think about it and when you lift 80 tons in which that's its maximum carry, it rear right VTOL engine ring overheats. Our engineers solved the problem though: MOAR DUCTAPE AND STRUTS SHOULD STOP OVERHEATINGhttp://i.imgur.com/xvQ4oB0.pngDid you intentionally put a (lunar?) eclipse in that picture? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostbuzzer7 Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Did you intentionally put a (lunar?) eclipse in that picture?Quite possibly. Someone noticed it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VR_Dev Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 anyone wanna try out my f35? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
info600 Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 So Ever since I saw the infamous O.A.S.I.S. stardock and it's smaller brother Terminus Core. the idea of a mobile science lab was stuck onto my mind for a long time (long enough for that thread to be passed in time), so when I tried (and chickened out of) moving a Drestroid back to kerbin. the final piece of the next generation Terminus finally rolled in.Thus this monstrosity of a WIP. And the formentioned former Drestroid mover - modified already to the following:I think this needs to be assembled in 3 pieces (not even counting the 2 orange drop tanks, 2 RCS tugs and a space asteroid mining rig either). Any advice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHiftER2O Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 So Ever since I saw the infamous O.A.S.I.S. stardock and it's smaller brother Terminus Core. the idea of a mobile science lab was stuck onto my mind for a long time (long enough for that thread to be passed in time), so when I tried (and chickened out of) moving a Drestroid back to kerbin. the final piece of the next generation Terminus finally rolled in.Thus this monstrosity of a WIP. http://i.imgur.com/dnxiswg.jpgAnd the formentioned former Drestroid mover - modified already to the following:http://i.imgur.com/D1Hd2ey.jpgI think this needs to be assembled in 3 pieces (not even counting the 2 orange drop tanks, 2 RCS tugs and a space asteroid mining rig either). Any advice?Dude.....How are you launching this? Separately by modules? My advice is that, if you're ever using struts, follow the two-point rule to minimize part count and drag If you want flexibility, you could put drone cores in all orientations so that your ship can switch frame of navballs without moving the entire thing, most useful for docking Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Columbia Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 Testing the R-7 (agen).I hate launch clamps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlipNascar Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 Playing around with the Mk2 expansion parts... And wanted to use the fishead cockpit. Now got a nice little science runaround, but there's something still missing... I just don't know what. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon144 Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 I have a real surprise coming soon for everyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHiftER2O Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 I have a real surprise coming soon for everyone. http://i.imgur.com/PdK4nKR.jpgHmm, well if that's the b-52 then I would say that the main fuselage is quite short, but we'll just have to wait on performance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon144 Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Hmm, well if that's the b-52 then I would say that the main fuselage is quite short, but we'll just have to wait on performance Exactly. I have a longer version but it poops out of FPS. An authentic lookalike here is much better than a complete replica. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHiftER2O Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Exactly. I have a longer version but it poops out of FPS. An authentic lookalike here is much better than a complete replica.What makes it poop out FPS? From the looks of it, maybe you're not just attaching one fuselage bit to make it longer?Well you are correct Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon144 Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 What makes it poop out FPS? From the looks of it, maybe you're not just attaching one fuselage bit to make it longer?Well you are correct No... To keep it all in one piece is has a ton of bracing, struts, girders etc. inside. By making it longer it gets floppier which takes even more structural parts to correct. You can have it just a tiny bit longer and have hilarious floppy-plane or a fully functioning plane that's part count comes from the massive amount of bombs it carries or the needless heaps of structural bracing needed to keep the tail together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHiftER2O Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 No... To keep it all in one piece is has a ton of bracing, struts, girders etc. inside. By making it longer it gets floppier which takes even more structural parts to correct. You can have it just a tiny bit longer and have hilarious floppy-plane or a fully functioning plane that's part count comes from the massive amount of bombs it carries or the needless heaps of structural bracing needed to keep the tail together.Actually, the minimum struts required to joint-reinforce something is... two You can also use the fuel fuselages as structural parts, just empty the excess fuel Hmm, I may get the feeling that . .. But I'm not in the place to say that yet Will be waiting for this surprise of yours Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon144 Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 (edited) Trust me, I have been working very hard. And this is beyond joint reinforcement. Its keeping things not directly connected rigid. Ibeam girders, etc. Mostly stemming from my landing gear system that incorporates their own landing gear bays. You cant simply joint connect them as you would normally. I'm still working on getting it simpler. I was able to lower the part count enough to make the fuselage longer without sacrificing rigidity either. There might also be a problem with the camera angle. Edited June 17, 2015 by Jon144 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHiftER2O Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 (edited) Trust me, I have been working very hard. And this is beyond joint reinforcement. Its keeping things not directly connected rigid. Ibeam girders, etc. Mostly stemming from my landing gear system that incorporates their own landing gear bays. You cant simply joint connect them as you would normally. I'm still working on getting it simpler. I was able to lower the part count enough to make the fuselage longer without sacrificing rigidity either. There might also be a problem with the camera angle.http://i.imgur.com/hoURFE3.jpgExcellent Now, another suggestion is to make the engine mounts smaller, to reduce drag and wobbliness Closer to the wing make the engines more rigid, theoretically Now, I'm just giving opinions, but the tail part, is quite small in proportion to the craft, it kinda sets me off. That's just me opinion though I could do the tail assembly, but I'm not in that place to do so Reminds me of the B-52 I never finished .. Note to SHiftER; It would probably work if you just made it work. Edited June 17, 2015 by SHiftER2O Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.