no there is a bug, just put a decoupler under it, and decouple, than the rest of the rocket lunches. before it can happen that even on full thrust the whole damn thing doesnt move
|
|
|
no there is a bug, just put a decoupler under it, and decouple, than the rest of the rocket lunches. before it can happen that even on full thrust the whole damn thing doesnt move
<Kalimac>Schakal - he's the hero #art deserves... but not the one it needs right now. So we'll hunt him, set the dogs on him, because he can take it.<***>god was sitting on the swiss alps and making germans. and the ones he didn't get right, he just tossed over his shoulder...
It did for me :/
#103
With my newly acquired knowledge of SAS and liquid fuel propulsion, Discovery XII hit 300K. \o/
#104
its quite cheeky actually. sometimes it works, (0.8.3) but i havn't had it work in 8.4, instead it just blows up the whole rocket.no there is a bug, just put a decoupler under it, and decouple, than the rest of the rocket lunches. before it can happen that even on full thrust the whole damn thing doesnt move
*mildly disgusted with negative price discrimination*
#105
You can hit 6k with nothing but a pair of solid boosters and a crew module...I can't get anything about about 4k before it tips over and I lose control. I tried Elukka's design and the dumb thing just sits on the pad. >
I had the same issue with weight being a major issue with my vehicles. I'm only using the stock parts that come with the DL, not much to work with... but I find that if you make a "spine" of liquid fuel and a single rocket, and put Solid boosters on the outside with varying degrees of complexity, you can get some pretty good results. The liquid fuel and SAS modules that you attach to the center line will keep your glorified lawn dart more or less stable... if you can keep the other elements fairly balanced. (read: Symmetrical)
Don't be shy about adding stupid amounts of solid boosters... but in my experience you MUST have each set broken by decouplers or overheating will chisel your vehicle apart in no time.
Protip : You can build support structure for your masterpiece that decouples from the main vehicle by re-ordering your decouplers and boosters so that the "spine" of the vehicle that holds up an elaborate design simply sits on the launch pad while the rest of the vehicle lifts away from it... allowing you to have really complex booster configurations that won't stand on their own at the launch pad due to weight and lateral coupler limitations.
Ra Owa : AAHHHH!!!! ITS A ROCK!
Troubleshooter : Wha... oh... Pfffttt... Prove it. :}
Ra Owa : ... [sputtering] ... o.O ... Its SCIENCE!
#106
Great game! There are loads of hints of where they want to go with this (I guess sim nasa?) and that seems cool but the basic stuff right now of keeping your crazy creation pointing in the right way without killing the kerbals is so much fun already.
Got a stable orbit much like you guys (~60k ~2300ms with half a tank left) and I guess there's not much to do after that. It does seem like the 2fuel, 3way and 3x2fuel is the easiest to control while having plenty of power to get you a stable orbit or escape velocity. Every time I use SRBs things go crazy! Much easier now with symmetry though!
Running Space Marine at the same time seems to kill it though
Obviously need to optimise Space Marine better then.
My latest attempt to put a shuttle strapped to the side of a big rocket ended in less fiery death than it could have, just need some extra parts like aerodynamic nose cones (so my crew doesn't decide to move to the pod on top of the disposable boosters) and some of those in-line couplers I've seen would go a long way in keeping Jeb happy and everyone else scared but not dead. Need to find out where to get all these extra parts I've been seeing...
On the official forums, Goobers. There's a section called "Projects and Releases" and another called "Part Modelling." You'll find all custom parts released so far on there.
Look at the bright side, kid - you get to keep all the money.
Currently testing with infinite fuel if you can get faster then speed of light!
Totally didn't know about how to control the throttle.
But now that I do, I totally destroyed my previous height record by at least a order of magnitude. 15,200Km!
Those Halcyon Days...
Ok having 5000+ thrust instead of 200 is breaking my rocket hahahaha, time to mod all values and make it perfectly stable etc. For science!
1. Wake up on strange planet.
2. Build rockets.
Last edited by Stingra; 15th Jul 11 at 11:21 AM.
#113
Indeed stingra, indeed.
Now if we could only punch trees... i guess flying/crashing a dozen active rockets into the hillside counts as deforestation...
Rockets made out of wood!
#115
I smell a minecraft rocketry/fireworks mod...
NSP-9001: Forest Rocketry sim. They don't have goat-throwing Viking ships, but they have goat-throwing Viking ships.
It needs more structrual parts instead of magically connecting to surfaces, I keep ending up with either solid boosters taking a couple of stages with them and blast away while leaving command module behind, or shoving themselves straight upwards into fuel tanks.
It kinda limits you to tame designs doesn't it :P
Imagine you noticed some termites over at your neighbors house, and instead of warning him about it, you just burn down his house because of the slight possibility that those termites might someday move over to your home. That's the Eldar for you. -Aquila
"The Dragon Terror Patrol Will Prevail"
Remember the game is in Alpha phase, so they're just testing if the underlying code actually works atm :P. That said, regardless of what I do, rockets break if you push them past 1200~ thrust from a single engine. (modded values) so testing if they can go speed of light is going to take time, no shortcuts with 10.000 thrust. I'll try it eventually.
Woo, 3358K! But this is the single rocket I've been able to get work, I've added other boosters to what seem to be stable areas, but they end up either going batshit crazy during seperation or send the rocket head over heels.
I edited the config files just to see what happens when you surpass 999999k. I was wondering if the red dial would flip to another unit, but sadly the numbers just wrap around. On the other hand, these guys can really take the G's
Bill and Bob screamed the whole way of course. They grasp the gravity of the situtation far better than Jeb. But then again, sometimes none of them do:
"Gee force" = O M Geeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee force?
G force should now be known as Jeb force.
#123
that pack with new parts is increadibly broken. On the other hand, you can now send large payloads into orbit, effectively launching stations into orbit.
I've also managed to hard-crash KSP by using the above mentioned part pack.
#124
Since that SSTO really hit home to me that rockets shouldn't be overcomplicated, here's my attempt at a larger launch vehicle. Still pretty simple and will get 2 full fuel tanks to orbit.
That the full rocket structure, Elukka? No SFBs?
#126
The getting stuck on the launchpad bug is very annoying.
#127
My first successful orbit, at around 1,000 km altitude. According to some quick and dirty centripetal force calculations, this is a stable orbit. Attempts to de-orbit however failed, resulting in a gravitational slingshot around the planet.
#128
Stingra, yes. There's a bug in the game where rockets get stuck on the pad, though, so I added a set of decouplers to the bottom which enables it to lift off as soon as thrust > weight.
It occurred to me that HarvesteR mentioned the atmosphere thins exponentially the higher you go, which makes for a good approximation, but... what if it makes the first meter or so of atmosphere so thick a rocket has a hard time lifting off?
#129
well, you don't start at 0m...
and every attempt to use the decoupler trick results in catastrophic failure.
#130
Put decouplers on the bottom of your rocket.Originally Posted by JAL-18
#131
Make sure you have the order of your stacks correct.and every attempt to use the decoupler trick results in catastrophic failure.
#132
Thats not the problem trouble. :P
sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, and i'm inclined to think that the rocket's mass and timing has a large part to play.
I currently have an elukka-based rocket orbiting the planet for over an hour, highly eliptical, ranging from 40km to 120km, but i'm constantly adjusting that with the little fuel i have.
Also, can someone tell me what the HDG means at the bottom of nav ball? i have this theory but is it actually usefull for anything?
Also, i think i've stabalized my rocket into a more circular orbit. 100'775m altitude, increasing 1 m ever 10 seconds or so, 2246.9m/s, 0.1m/s ever 20-30 seconds.
values from ideal orbits
100 km, Vcirc = 2245.64 m/s,
#133
The Eagle has landed.
#134
Win.
In other news my rocket has now been orbiting the planet at 100km +/- 5km for a good 2 hours now, with manual input now and then. still have 1/4 of a fuel tank left. I wish i could leave this ship in orbit and launch another one. For two reasons:
1) possibility of orbital collisions and more spectacular explosions. (!!!IMPORTANT!!!)
2) "attempted" orbital docking (which are just failed attempts at 1)
edit: de-orbit sucessful, landed my capsule in visible range of the launch pad after 3+hours in oribt. I call this operation a grand sucess!
Last edited by Ammon Ra; 16th Jul 11 at 8:28 AM.
Heading.Also, can someone tell me what the HDG means at the bottom of nav ball? i have this theory but is it actually usefull for anything?
No, I can't see any practical use for it right now, because there aren't any destinations that you'll need to follow a heading to, but possibly in the future...
#136
Any way to clear out old/saved models? I had a spiffy Y-Wing construct going but lost it when I tried to get a screen cap and alt-tab killed the program... I had hit the save button, but all I have in there are the auto save of a later model and 5 or 6 test rockets.
Also, as I have no hope of getting a stable orbit with my piloting skills, I've been going for speed... so far I've gotten to 3400 top speed, which is pretty easy with some stupid SBR spam... now I'm going for something more elegant... but I'm curious if acceleration is easier at the upper/outer atmosphere (is it modeled for this?) My goal is to build a rocket within a rocket so to speak, essentially a low speed lifter frame and then the turbo-frame for the upper atmosphere.
Just delete them from the /ships folder in the game directory.
And yes, as you gain altitude, it becomes significantly easier to accelerate.
#138
acceleration at low speeds is mainly limited by the mass of the rocket, while at higher speeds you're limited by the drag of the air you're flying through. Ergo, as you gain higher altitude, both drag and mass decrease allowing higher velocities and acceleration.
https://gist.github.com/1073201
use the above page to get a rough idea of what velocity you need for what orbit.
For those of you desiring to build bigger rockets without the hassel of stacking 50 SRBs and god alone knows how many SAS systems, i've created the TR31 Liquid Booster Engine. It can lift an insane amount of mass, but eats fuel like there's no tommorrow. I've created a thread with linkys and pictures here:
http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/...hp?topic=570.0
I don't know what i'm talking about, ignore me.
Thousands of years ago, Egyptians worshipped what would become our ordinary housecat. The cats have never forgotten this.
Well, after a whole bunch of catastrophic explosions on the launch pad, I've flung my Kerbonaughts into a slowly decaying orbit at about 1000k, where they will die horribly because I ran out of fuel. Serves me right for trying to use my own design, and not investigating good orbit velocities before I hurled myself into space.
Poor Jeb, he still seems so excited about it all.
Edit; There seems to be a black hole in deep space, has anyone else noticed it?
In case anyone hasn't noticed 0.8.50 is out and reiss's picture is now a loading screen. Go Reiss.
Also the devs are overhualing staging for the next release, (about 3 weeks away), and are hoping to add stabaliser structural components so we can build taller multi-stack rocket setups withiout the independent components wobblign everywhere.
#142
I've finally managed to launch a winged shuttle into orbit, although by the time I deorbit it has so little fuel remaining that the center of gravity has changed and it's somewhat uncontrollable. I'm going to play with an SAS-equipped shuttle so I can put it on glide autopilot once it hits the atmosphere.
#143
I don't think wings generate lift yet, do they?
They do generate a little bit of lift, but not enough that you can sustain level flight for very long.
Maybe it's a failing on my part, but I really wish that they'd make an official update/launcher thing like Minecraft so I don't have to keep downloading the updated file and manually removing the old version.
Nice one molo, anyone tried my engine and got any feedback to give, the thread on their forums is pretty sparse unfortunatly. I'm thinking the fuel efficiency is a litile too low, that and until we get stiffners it's hard to create a multi tank setup that isn't eitheir very unstable or very tall.
Congrats on getting your artwork featured, Riess.
Managed to get my brave kermen to 6.4 km/s. Took a rocket nearly as tall as the launch platform that has trouble going straight.
Past orbiting stuff, and seeing how much or efficiently I can get stuff into orbit, there doesn't seem to be much of a game there yet. Still Plenty of fun. Most of the challenge seems to be piloting rather than actually designing the rocket for me.
Minimal size and maximum ass look, its still climbing as i speak
Sadly, the Roller Coaster Tycoon thread and my subsequent purchase from Good Old Games means that my interest has shifted from lolzy rocketry to building coasters.
A sad day for Kerman-kind.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
