Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Graknorke]

Oh.
That's pretty cool. Whether it's worthwhile is arguable, but it's definitely an impressive piece of design.

so is he docking that engine to the bottom of his stack each time?  What is the advantage over radially mounted tanks? 

Do in-line tanks not add as much air resistance now, or do parts still have a flat air resistance no matter how they are mounted?

Engines have mass. Mass creates weight. Weight makes it harder to go upwards.

[puke]

Engines have mass. Mass creates weight. Weight makes it harder to go upwards.

Thats not exactly what I meant.  Let me try to be more clear:

In what way is a single engine with a tall stack of tanks, superior to a single engine with a number of radially mounted tanks (assuming the same total number of tanks).

Component wise, the radially mounted tanks would need decouplers and fuel lines.  the in-line stack would need seperatrons and docking ports.

Assuming those things are approximately a wash, there would be a major difference in air resistance for real world rockets.

In older versions of KSP, having a fuel tank pancake was no different then having a single stack.  Has this changed?

[BigD145]

It's changed a little but not much and only really if you're also using the nosecones afaik. Tall rockets have a secondary issue that has not changed and that's balance. You'll be correcting the nose more in flight.

[BFEL]

In what way is a single engine with a tall stack of tanks, superior to a single engine with a number of radially mounted tanks (assuming the same total number of tanks).

Why not use both?

It starts asparagus and then takes up a blowtorch

[Glloyd]

KSP 0.25 is in Experimentals! This means the release can only be about 2 weeks off! Get hype!

For those who missed the post about what is in 0.25, most of it is detailed here. I'm really curious as to what the secret stuff is though.

[IronTomato]

So I tried using firespitter, B9 and MD Armory at the same time. The helicopter landing gears on Firespitter were weirdly large, and flat as paper, but only while flying.

BJ's VTOL engines fell off my fuselage without bouncing. I started the craft, and it began rolling on its own, with two struts stretching behind it like a couple of rubber bands. The craft started to violently spin in circles before the game crashed.

Mod incompatibilities, you so silly~

[BFEL]

The craft started to violently spin in circles before the game crashed.

Well I guess you got that helicopter after all

[PTTG??]

The general consensus is that it's destroyable (and possibly repairable) structures for the space center, and/or craterable terrain.

If that's the case, the next-gen feature it's tied to would presumably be constructing new bases, which would certainly be interesting.

[BFEL]

The general consensus is that it's destroyable (and possibly repairable) structures for the space center, and/or craterable terrain.

If that's the case, the next-gen feature it's tied to would presumably be constructing new bases, which would certainly be interesting.

O.O

[kaian-a-coel]

The general consensus is that it's destroyable (and possibly repairable) structures for the space center, and/or craterable terrain.

If that's the case, the next-gen feature it's tied to would presumably be constructing new bases, which would certainly be interesting.

NNNNNNNNNNNGHHHHHHHH
My energy levels rised significantly while reading this, and I consequently started to vibrate.
Thankfully there was no resonance effect.

[BigD145]

Last I heard any resources off-planet were on hold for an unknown time period.

[puke]

Destroyable and repairable space center buildings were on the planned feature list for a long time, but when was craterable terrain ever mentioned?

Based on how kerbals can fall though seams in a planets geometry, I would be surprised if this is something that is supportable without some major redesign.

[Glloyd]

Destroyable and repairable space center buildings were on the planned feature list for a long time, but when was craterable terrain ever mentioned?

Based on how kerbals can fall though seams in a planets geometry, I would be surprised if this is something that is supportable without some major redesign.

I remember an interview where they said that the one thing they would want to do, but would be impossible would be craterable terrain.

[kaian-a-coel]

Destroyable and repairable space center buildings were on the planned feature list for a long time, but when was craterable terrain ever mentioned?

Based on how kerbals can fall though seams in a planets geometry, I would be surprised if this is something that is supportable without some major redesign.

I remember an interview where they said that the one thing they would want to do, but would be impossible would be craterable terrain.

By now I'm half expecting modders to prove them wrong.
I mean, they did a half-stable multiplayer for KSP already, so what next?
(the fact that I don't know the first thing about modding probably plays in that)

[Graknorke]

The general consensus is that it's destroyable (and possibly repairable) structures for the space center, and/or craterable terrain.

If that's the case, the next-gen feature it's tied to would presumably be constructing new bases, which would certainly be interesting.

Based on what?