Print

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

[BFEL]

I don't get your dislike for KER.

I don't dislike it! I just never downloaded it
I probably should.

Anyway, anyone have any help on the USI thing? Not sure how to make it play nice with TAC.

[TheDarkStar]

I've done some testing with fairings, and it appears that the most efficient ones are pointier until the increased weight makes them less efficient.

[puke]

I've done some testing with fairings, and it appears that the most efficient ones are pointier until the increased weight makes them less efficient.

Check this out: 
http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/122595-Some-rough-test-results-with-different-nosecones

Its a 1.25 test rocket, so the 2.5 cone is not fairly treated.  But it is really great data on performance.

[miauw62]

...
Tail connector A?

woooot

also why are air intakes better than nosecones

[dennislp3]

Because they suck air in and pull it through the aircraft and out the engine. Cones are just a way to split the air around the craft like a knife as opposed to a flat surface.

[Akura]

So, since when did kerbals get super durable? It seems like going EVA in Kerbin atmosphere is almost always a viable way to survive a craft now. It's like, I don't even have to worry about my kerbals if I lose my parachutes or something. They can just jump out and bounce weirdly on the ground.

Since forever. You have to be able to get them to land right but if you do they just bounce a lot.

If I recall, it's the helmet. They land on the helmet, they survive.

(this is assuming you don't already use MechJeb and that you don't really want to start using it)

Just use MechJeb is in the vehicle editor to make sure you have sufficient dV, then delete the part before launch.

Now you'll know whether you suck at building ships or if you just suck at piloting them

I'm pretty sure the in-game statistics tab tells you your /\V

what in-game statistics tab

[nogoodnames]

The "Engineer's Report" icon in the bottom right of the screen in the VAB. It doesn't tell you the delta-V, but it does tell you the mass so you can calculate dV with the rocket equation. I've been using it instead of MechJeb or Engineer since I wanted to keep the game vanilla before going on a massive modding binge.


Well the "Solitude Mk. 1" SSTLAB is scrapped. I'm not leaving KSP running for days at a time while making ion burns. I went back to the drawing board and tried a more minimalistic design. I ended up with something about 60 tonnes and with theoretically enough fuel to get the job done but not enough TWR to make orbit. It's like one of Zeno's paradoxes. As soon as I get enough fuel mass, it needs more engines, I add more engines, it needs more fuel, etc. I know it balances out somewhere, but where?

[BFEL]

I know it balances out somewhere, but where?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tr8KOst68cQ

[Shadowlord]

I had a kerbonaut fall through Eve's atmosphere and not die when he hit the ground (but I don't remember whether he landed on his head). He wasn't using his jetpack at the time, as he ran out of fuel before reaching the ground (I tried to push him towards the nearby sea).

[forsaken1111]

I had a kerbonaut fall through Eve's atmosphere and not die when he hit the ground (but I don't remember whether he landed on his head). He wasn't using his jetpack at the time, as he ran out of fuel before reaching the ground (I tried to push him towards the nearby sea).

You can drop almost anything into eve and have it survive so long as it doesn't overheat. The atmosphere is like syrup. I had a probe land unpowered with no parachutes on EVE with no damage

[nogoodnames]

I know it balances out somewhere, but where?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tr8KOst68cQ

Two things:

1. That was back when you could get to orbital velocities with jet engines alone.

2. He didn't worry about coming back.

Jet engines now top out at about 1000 m/s, and even if you have the TWR required to break that, any faster and you start burning up.

I've ruled out ion engines since I'd need a truly absurd number of parts to get any reasonable acceleration. I could get that mod that allows engines to run in time warp, but I want this to be 100% stock. That leaves nuclear engines, which simplifies the equations somewhat since I only need to worry about one type of fuel rather than three. I just wish I had paid more attention in optimization class.

[Shadowlord]

RAPIERs can get you significantly more thrust than jet engines. I doubt it'll work with that monstrosity due to drag, but I believe I showed a small jet earlier that had one rapier, a precooler, and a nose-intake which could take off and aim straight up and reach 75km. Of course that was with no scientific equipment or means of doing anything useful once it got there.

[nogoodnames]

I had looked at the RAPIER before moving on to turbojets, but from what I saw they were not much better and less efficient. Now that I look at it again I see that, at least with high TWR craft, they can build up more speed and, more importantly, operate at higher altitudes. I'll have to see how well they work on something bigger, thanks.

[Leonon]

You may want to use plane old turbojet (not ramjet) engines to climb to 10km. They're extremely efficient compared to the other jet engines.

[nogoodnames]

You may want to use plane old turbojet (not ramjet) engines to climb to 10km. They're extremely efficient compared to the other jet engines.

I know, but they're also pretty heavy for their power output. If I did that, I would have to dedicate around an eighth of the ship to basic jets. Past the sound barrier where the RAPIER and Ramjet really start to pick up is where most of the fuel use is anyway.

I've built a 50 tonne test SSTO that can theoretically get around 7000 delta-V from its NERVA, but it keeps burning up during ascent.