Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 76 77 [78] 79 80 ... 848

Author Topic: Kerbal Space Program: Now Hiring Optimistic Astronauts for Dangerous Munission  (Read 1499603 times)

kcwong

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

There's a vertical snap settings in the configuration file, by default it's off, leading to many balancing issues when you are not (or cannot not in some cases) use symmetry to add parts. Turning it on limits placing parts next to each other (only align or half higher/lower), but that makes your parts absolutely balanced.

Avoid using too many radial couplers - they wobble under stress. Instead you can put fuel tanks directly next to each other, saving mass and trouble. If your rocket is wide - stages poking out all around, you should add some struts to fortify them, or you will find your rocket steering out of control easily.
Logged

alway

  • Bay Watcher
  • 🏳️‍⚧️
    • View Profile

I've been having a great deal of success using an entirely circular design. A system of concentric rings of purely liquid rockets works really well with the fuel pumps. Using those, you can feed all the rockets on all rings but the outermost using purely the liquid tanks on the outermost ring. This allows you to start all engines, coating the entire underside of the craft, at launch, and keep them firing until the very end. When an outer ring runs out of fuel, it gets jetisonned, leaving a craft which is still firing all its engines (aside from those which got jetisonned with their empty tanks) and which still has full fuel; the process repeats until only the central rocket with the crew module remains. I've been using a design in which the number of tanks stacked vertically increases as you go outwards, though designs with about 4 tanks per engine seem to work pretty well too. It takes struts to stabilize and some SAS modules, but I've managed to successfully land one of the craft on the Mun, and almost land a larger version which probably would have had enough fuel for the return journey.

The really nice thing about the design is it has no penalty whatsoever for scaling up. By adding another ring, you are still left with a craft with the same number of engines and the same amount of fuel after stage separation; with the only difference being the altitude. Though when you start getting lots of engines, it's best to switch to gimballed ones, as those really help stabilize the craft.
Logged

ThtblovesDF

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

I love building rockets with far to many stages, something about a skyscraper of metal that falls apart every half minute, stabbing at the sky, is just beautiful...  ~hammering spacebar~

I wish you wouldn´t spawn so close to the building though, more often then not it will happily rip off a wing of my rocket-thing and i´m stuck holding down S the whole first stage...
Logged

LoSboccacc

  • Bay Watcher
  • Σὺν Ἀθηνᾷ καὶ χεῖρα κίνει
    • View Profile

you can grow as much as you want on sides  :P
Logged

jaxy15

  • Bay Watcher
  • Adept Modder
    • View Profile

Okay, seriously guys, I don't care how good of a sorcerer you are, I need to learn that spell on how to steer ANYTHING correctly without having the rocket fly towards another freaking continent.
Logged
Dwarf Fortress: Threats of metabolism.

olemars

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

SAS modules and RCS boosters.
Logged

jaxy15

  • Bay Watcher
  • Adept Modder
    • View Profile

SAS modules and RCS boosters.
Tried them. It didn't make much of a difference.
Logged
Dwarf Fortress: Threats of metabolism.

Peewee

  • Bay Watcher
  • Watcher Of Bays
    • View Profile

Er, you're making things symmetrical right?

Criptfeind

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

I only use a SAS mod and a (six times symmetrical) wing things. My RCS are saved for twisting around in space. But yeah. Put  SAS, a RCS fuel, and some RCS boosters, then hit T and R, and you will stay super strict. Although of course you need to make all your stuff is symmetrical using the auto symmetrical thingy. Also sometimes you will need struts depending on how you made your thing to avoid a wobble that eventually ends up wobbling out of control.

SAS modules and RCS boosters.
Tried them. It didn't make much of a difference.

Are you using the option to automatically make your craft symmetrical? Even a tiny change can fuck everything up.
Logged

Fikes

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

SAS modules and RCS boosters.
Tried them. It didn't make much of a difference.

Don't stack up too much thrust at the bottom of your rocket, it makes them very tippy.

I don't know how people build giant rockets, but mine are pretty straight forward and I've been to the mun and back.

From what I understand, the closer you have your thrust to the center of gravity of your ship the more stable it will be.

jaxy15

  • Bay Watcher
  • Adept Modder
    • View Profile

I grabbed a pre-built spaceship from the forum and tried it out.
I ended up drifting in space.
Logged
Dwarf Fortress: Threats of metabolism.

kcwong

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

SAS is akin to a gyroscope for your rocket. If you have a lot of wobbly components, you will need a lot of SAS installed.

ASAS is a completely different beast. As it's description says, it's actually an autopilot. Once installed and activated (press R), it will take over your winglets, RCS thrusters and SAS modules to keep your rocket going straight. You should never installed more than one ASAS - otherwise they will fight each other for control.
Logged

Aklyon

  • Bay Watcher
  • Fate~
    • View Profile

You have an error for your avatar, kcwong.
Logged
Crystalline (SG)
Sigtext
Quote from: RedKing
It's known as the Oppai-Kaiju effect. The islands of Japan generate a sort anti-gravity field, which allows breasts to behave as if in microgravity. It's also what allows Godzilla and friends to become 50 stories tall, and lets ninjas run up the side of a skyscraper.

Peewee

  • Bay Watcher
  • Watcher Of Bays
    • View Profile

Don't stack up too much thrust at the bottom of your rocket, it makes them very tippy.

I don't know how people build giant rockets, but mine are pretty straight forward and I've been to the mun and back.

From what I understand, the closer you have your thrust to the center of gravity of your ship the more stable it will be.
That's known as the pendulum rocket fallacy. In short, your understanding is incorrect. In long, it doesn't matter where your engines are (vertically).
« Last Edit: January 13, 2012, 11:04:32 pm by Peewee »
Logged

Fikes

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile

Don't stack up too much thrust at the bottom of your rocket, it makes them very tippy.

I don't know how people build giant rockets, but mine are pretty straight forward and I've been to the mun and back.

From what I understand, the closer you have your thrust to the center of gravity of your ship the more stable it will be.
That's known as the pendulum rocket fallacy. In short, your understanding is incorrect. In long, it doesn't matter where your engines are (vertically).

Really? Damn. I don't know shit.

I had several rockets with all the thrust at the bottom that would tip over as soon as the atmosphere started getting thin. It always seemed like putting a few rockets towards the top evened things out somehow.

I really wish I understood rocket science better, but so much of it goes over my head. I had to read about the Homann Transfer orbit a dozen times before it stuck it.

I'll have to build some craft and have you guys help me make them better.
Pages: 1 ... 76 77 [78] 79 80 ... 848