Kethane Station Discussion

[ScriptKitt3h]

4 hours ago, Thor Wotansen said:

So I have a wee problem, I've started on building a flagship for the Asgard Industries fleet, but the part count is getting a bit high.

I have yet to add any sort of crew area, it's just hull, some fuel and engines, and the 4 reaction wheels and docking ports.  It just looks so damn good that I don't want to stop.  Should I continue or will the excessive part count be a problem?

That's a ship hovering between/around 150-200 parts, yeah? It's not too uncommon for larger warships built in stock (especially carriers/battle-cruisers) to have high part counts sometimes- I mean, look at some of my older ships, ranging anywhere from 200-something parts to well over 1k (though admittedly those are designs I made for the Naval Battle Club thread originally).

So far, so good from my POV.

[Thor Wotansen]

I finished it and it's right at 400

[Thor Wotansen]

5 hours ago, ScriptKitt3h said:

That's a ship hovering between/around 150-200 parts, yeah? It's not too uncommon for larger warships built in stock (especially carriers/battle-cruisers) to have high part counts sometimes- I mean, look at some of my older ships, ranging anywhere from 200-something parts to well over 1k (though admittedly those are designs I made for the Naval Battle Club thread originally).

So far, so good from my POV.

With all the structural support and weapons it's right at 400.  I think if someone can actually launch it legitimately they deserve many replikes.

[THIRTY9CLUES]

Does anyone want these? My only stipulation is that it is under project Neuro-Kom. 

https://kerbalx.com/THIRTY9CLUES/craft

(These planes have major problems with maneuverability)

ASTFX-101

ASTFX-101B

ASTF-007

 

ASTF-008A

ASTF-009A

8 hours ago, ScriptKitt3h said:

That's a ship hovering between/around 150-200 parts, yeah? It's not too uncommon for larger warships built in stock (especially carriers/battle-cruisers) to have high part counts sometimes- I mean, look at some of my older ships, ranging anywhere from 200-something parts to well over 1k (though admittedly those are designs I made for the Naval Battle Club thread originally).

So far, so good from my POV.

Would the easy solution to this be Tweakscale, or would that only exacerbate the problem?

Edited March 8, 2017 by THIRTY9CLUES

[ScriptKitt3h]

2 hours ago, THIRTY9CLUES said:

Does anyone want these? My only stipulation is that it is under project Neuro-Kom. 

https://kerbalx.com/THIRTY9CLUES/craft

(These planes have major problems with maneuverability)

Would the easy solution to this be Tweakscale, or would that only exacerbate the problem?

For one, you don't need quite so much wing spam- offsetting the fuselage parts somewhat more might help, as well as careful usage of medium/small radial-attach radiators to smooth out the curves of the fuselage's exterior. Tweakscale's not allowed for submissions I'm afraid, but it wouldn't really do too much either.

Sadly, sometimes you just have to accept and work around the limitations of the stock game's aero to get what you're after- and that's OK, since you'll likely have learned a lot about streamlining your craft by the time you're done. (A big tip when it comes to this- keep the aerodynamic forces overlay up when testing- look at your lifting surfaces' behavior and your sources of drag and tweak accordingly; sometimes something you thought was occluded or lifting one way isn't.)

Additionally, it looks like you've put a lot of elevons, flaps, and intakes on your planes- keep them to a functional minimum if possible, as intakes are much stronger than before in terms of air provided and drag generated, and putting excess lifting surfaces will slow you down tremendously and make your craft more unstable.

5 hours ago, Thor Wotansen said:

With all the structural support and weapons it's right at 400.  I think if someone can actually launch it legitimately they deserve many replikes.

I'll take a look at it myself when/if I have time to; shouldn't be too hard, just gotta get a decent launcher and either a fairing shell or very careful flight plan.

Edited March 8, 2017 by ScriptKitt3h

[THIRTY9CLUES]

@ScriptKitt3h The reasoning I was offering these planes was because I was unable to test. I in the position of moving and really don't have my main rig available to test these vehicles out and improve them. In addition, these planes aren't supported by 1.2.2, and that's why I'm giving anyone who wants free access.

Edited March 8, 2017 by THIRTY9CLUES

[THIRTY9CLUES]

In addition, I have designed some new planes that I will need to upload that perform a lot better than these. Furthermore these planes are based of some fictional aircraft. Also, has @ScriptKitt3h has anyone designed a functioning refueling aircraft.

[Thor Wotansen]

Updated my submission post with the AIS Gungnir.  I do not have a launcher for this ship, mainly because the outer hull lacks stability, but also because my computer would probably melt if I tried to fly this thing in an atmosphere.  I have used every tool available to reduce the wobbliness without increasing part count too much, but the way KSP building and physics work there is not much more I can do.  If someone wants to try to make a launcher for it, by all means do.  To be honest, if I ever had a save where I wanted to use this in a legitimate fashion, I would use Extraplanetary Launchpads and build it in space.  I have not included any space fighters, although the Gungnir is fully intended to be a carrier.  I could easily build a few, but if you already have a bunch of space fighter designs just use those.  The Gungnir has all the fuel types and can make everything but Xenon.

[MiffedStarfish]

Uptdated my post with 2 more ships, the EX-2 and 3:

I don't know how to link posts so I'll just say it's the second from the bottom one.

They both don't come with launching stages currently but that will probably change in the future.

[NotAnAimbot]

13 hours ago, THIRTY9CLUES said:

These planes have major problems with maneuverability)

Do they turn too much? Using less control surfaces can be useful. For example, the engine elevons and airbrakes are a bit useless, since stock thrust vectoring is present with Panthers and ramjets. Another trick I've found is moving the CoL relative to the CoM: If the plane turns too hard, moving the first further back from the latter helps dampen down the pitch movement without compromising maneuverability.

Other than that, I really like the ASTF-008.

[THIRTY9CLUES]

15 hours ago, NotAnAimbot said:

Do they turn too much

You give me too much credit, they turn too little. And thank you for the comment, though the ASTF-008 is one of the ones that suffer the most, if you want it, go straight ahead.

[NotAnAimbot]

5 hours ago, THIRTY9CLUES said:

they turn too little

Then move the CoL closer to the CoM, and check that pitch authority is correctly set.

[THIRTY9CLUES]

@NotAnAimbot Due to my current situation, I am unable to edit my aircraft, That's why I'm putting them up.

[NotAnAimbot]

On 3/10/2017 at 6:31 AM, THIRTY9CLUES said:

@NotAnAimbot Due to my current situation, I am unable to edit my aircraft, That's why I'm putting them up.

Well, I took the F-008 and modified it a bit. It's much more maneuverable now, so you can try it if you got time some day for KSP.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/z65jyd5a4esyp5a/MDL F-008a (39).craft?dl=0

[Spearka]

Hey HatBat, Just to pitch in a suggestion but as established prior some other corps like the MU have their own space centres and odds are they have their own structures?

I would therefore like to suggest at least to try out the Kerbal Konstructs mod along with Kerbinside to add in these for use on their own episodes; I think the series could be much more fun if we had things like urban combat and maybe even with a space colony or two

[NotAnAimbot]

Anyone else tried vehicle paradropping? I just got my first successful armed airlift earlier this week.

Second airdropped vehicle. The earlier one lost its side armor and one parachute, while this one and the other unarmed version went through just fine.

 

 

 

There seem to be some problems with parachutes and side armor coming off in drops, but it works most of the time.

Edited March 13, 2017 by NotAnAimbot

[linuxgurugamer]

Try using FMRS for your parachute drops.

[The Optimist]

Is there a rule against unmanned exploding ground vehicles? 

[NotAnAimbot]

7 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:

Try using FMRS for your parachute drops.

BDA has a physload distance. Since I mainly drop from 3000m, the vehicles are still within range and landed before the plane reaches that separation.

[linuxgurugamer]

Doesn't matter with FMRS.  It makes multiple saves and jumps between them as needed.

[NotAnAimbot]

Doesn't matter at all, since the vehicles don't despawn even when I drop and evac the C1 at max throttle. They hit the ground and are counted as immobile long before the plane gets outside of range.

[JTpopcorn]

If you want to have fun, ditch the chutes and add MOAR boosters

[Thor Wotansen]

Working on a new submission for Asgard Industries.

I have updated my post with the new Dvalin Planetary Miner

 

Edited March 16, 2017 by Thor Wotansen

[MiffedStarfish]

I have uptdated my post (I learnt how to use links!) with the first vessel in the new post-Siege of Kerbin F-Tech fleet, the CN Guardian Angel Assault Carrier. 

It carries 3 EX-3 fighters and has a custom interior inside the to half of the ship. Captained by F-Tech Admiral Gilad Kerman, it is a force to be reckoned on the battlegrounds of the final frontier.

[Andrew Hei]

I don't know if this thread is still active but I wonder why the kethane series is all private. I would love to see it.