BasharMilesTeg_ has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
wb99999999 has joined #RO
<wb99999999>
Afternoon gentlemen
<ProjectThoth>
howdy y'all
BasharMilesTeg_ has joined #RO
BasharMilesTeg has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<Bornholio>
seven have you eaten 3 squared meals today
<wb99999999>
where does that come from?
<Bornholio>
the long version of the seven ate nine joke
<Bornholio>
6 was afraid of 7 because 7, 8, 9, but why did 7 eat 9? Because you're supposed to eat 3 squared meals a day.
<wb99999999>
very...contrived
<Bornholio>
As a dad, i invoke the right of dad joke :)
<wb99999999>
I just noticed "kindergarten" sounds like a German word
<wb99999999>
doesn't it?
<ProjectThoth>
Kindergarten is a German word.
<wb99999999>
oh crap
<ProjectThoth>
So you're exactly right. :P
<ProjectThoth>
It comes from the pre-WWI era, when the K-12 education system was being laid out in the US. German was the second-most widely spoken language in the country.
<wb99999999>
I am recalling the first few years learning English
<wb99999999>
non-English words has always gave me hell
<ProjectThoth>
wb99999999: What's your first language, if you'll pardon my curiosity?
<wb99999999>
Mandarin Chinese it is
<wb99999999>
like "souvenir" which I still can't spell correctly
<wb99999999>
Later years I found out the reason being IT IS NOT ENGLISH WORD
<ProjectThoth>
Oh, wow, that's a hell of a leap between languages.
<wb99999999>
There were a rush in English education back then, as the nation opens itself to the international market
blowfish has joined #RO
<wb99999999>
but in my case is just the case of too much video games to miss if I can't read English and consequently Japanese
<ProjectThoth>
wb99999999: I feel that.
<wb99999999>
and lord it is easy to learn when you have a purpose...
<wb99999999>
anyway, enough bragging about myself...
<ProjectThoth>
wb99999999: For what it's worth, I had no clue English wasn't your first language.
<ProjectThoth>
So don't be so hard on yourself!
<wb99999999>
Being a nerd helps XD
B787_Work is now known as B787_300
<wb99999999>
plus I have lived in Canada for like 5 years
<wb99999999>
is there any good idea for making a LV with a single F-1 or RD270 for main engine?
<UmbralRaptor>
Зени́т clone?
aradapilot has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
aradapilot has joined #RO
<wb99999999>
neither engines throttle like RD170
<ProjectThoth>
wb99999999: What upper stage?
<wb99999999>
this is my main problem
<wb99999999>
burn out TWR is madness
<ferram4>
I believe there were plans to make the F-1 throttleable. I think the F-1A already is, actually.
<ProjectThoth>
Do you have a hydrolox upper of some kind?
<ProjectThoth>
I was gonna suggest ripping off a Saturn IB.
<wb99999999>
again, burn out TWR problem
<wb99999999>
my starting point was actually Ares I
<wb99999999>
just replace the SRB with a F-1 or something
<wb99999999>
but the hydrolox upper is too light, resulting a burn out acceleration of at least 6G
<wb99999999>
so I slapped the F9 S2 on it and got it down to 4.5G or so
<wb99999999>
but it is still very high for crews and the performance is mediocre...
BasharMilesTeg has joined #RO
BasharMilesTeg_ has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
<ProjectThoth>
wb99999999: Are you playing career mode?
BasharMilesTeg_ has joined #RO
<wb99999999>
Not with this vehicle
<ProjectThoth>
Ah, that makes life easier.
<ProjectThoth>
I'd suggest stretching the upper stage.
<wb99999999>
I would like to
BasharMilesTeg has quit [Ping timeout: 183 seconds]
<wb99999999>
but if you know about staging...
<ProjectThoth>
S2 TWR is too low?
<wb99999999>
over-stretching the upper stage is very bad for delta V
<wb99999999>
ideally you want your lower stage to have the largest portion of your total delta v
<ProjectThoth>
Well, it depends on what you're optimizing for.
<wb99999999>
Yeah you know what
<wb99999999>
I know the solution
<wb99999999>
make it a 3-stage to orbit...
<ProjectThoth>
I was gonna suggest an S1 stretch, or moar payloads.
BasharMilesTeg_ has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
<wb99999999>
stretching S1 = smaller S2 =higher burn out TWR for S1
<wb99999999>
you see the paradox here
ProjectThoth has quit [Quit: ++?????++ Out of Cheese Error. ++?????++]
<awang>
!tell SpecimenSpiff StageRecovery seems to think the Cape has latitude/longitude of ~-1.74/-75.82, respectively
<Qboid>
awang: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
<awang>
!tell SpecimenSpiff Vessel coordinates of ~28.608/-80.599
<Qboid>
awang: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
<awang>
!tell SpecimenSpiff So seems something's off with where it thinks the KSC is, since the vessel coords are bout right. Don' think it's just a degrees/radians thing, though, unfortunately
<Qboid>
awang: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
ProjectThoth has joined #RO
<awang>
!tell SpecimenSpiff And StageRecovery seems to think that Vandenburgis at 9.96/-134.5, while the vessel is at 34.58/-120.6
<Qboid>
awang: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
<awang>
!tell SpecimenSpiff Vessel coordinates are approximately right
<Qboid>
awang: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
<blowfish>
wb99999999: my recollection is that because upper stage usually has slighty higher Isp, it's optimal for it to have more delta-v
<awang>
!tell SpecimenSpiff KCT has basically the same code for calculating distance from the KSC, so it may not be just StageRecovery
<Qboid>
awang: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
<ProjectThoth>
blowfish: It's a balance between propellant mass fraction and Isp.
<blowfish>
ah yeah, if you stretch you generally make the mass fraction worse
<blowfish>
or wait no
<wb99999999>
think this way
<blowfish>
since things like engines are a fixed mass, only tank mass grows, and it's roughly proportional to fuel mass
<wb99999999>
if you're gonna throw something away anyway, better just throw away the least efficient and most massive stuff
<ProjectThoth>
I'm assuming here that you're seeking to optimize based on overall LV size.
<blowfish>
yeah, optimizing for liftoff mass
<ProjectThoth>
But generally speaking, the ideal delta-v partition is (S1 PMF * S1 Isp)/(S2 PMF * S2 Isp).
<blowfish>
I know for a fact that for two equal mass fraction, equal Isp stages, it is optimal, in terms of overall mass, to have them have equal delta-v
<wb99999999>
true
<blowfish>
(heard that a couple of times, but also did the calculation myself)
<wb99999999>
but lower stage have lower delta Isp
<wb99999999>
puff
<wb99999999>
I wasn't paying attention
<wb99999999>
Lower stages have lower Isp
<blowfish>
but what's the mass penalty of adding 1 m/s on the upper vs lower stage?
<wb99999999>
A LOT lower in a Saturn IB-like configuration
<ProjectThoth>
blowfish: Correct, that's where I refined that ratio from.
<ProjectThoth>
You want to balance based off of both, because stages with great pmf can have incredibly shit Isp.
<ProjectThoth>
(and that's generally true, assuming we're strictly talking about conventional designs)
Shoe17 has joined #RO
<wb99999999>
in a simplified case
<wb99999999>
total mass of stage 1 doesn't really matter
<wb99999999>
because you're not carrying it to anywhere
<wb99999999>
this is where "larger stage should provide more delta V" comes from
<blowfish>
eventually it slows down enough that gravity losses matter
<wb99999999>
I mean, that's why I call it "simplified"
<wb99999999>
I am assuming you can provide enough thrust
<wb99999999>
which is exactly why they built F-1 engines
<blowfish>
well, Saturn V was pretty sluggish getting off the pad
<blowfish>
going off Wikipedia's numbers, Saturn V's 2nd stage had about 5612 m/s delta-v
<blowfish>
no wait, that's wrong, sorry
<blowfish>
4745
SirKeplan has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
<blowfish>
first stage had 3907 vacuum delta-v, less overall because it spent time in the atmosphere
<ProjectThoth>
Should note that the example I listed only works for TSTOs.
<blowfish>
S-IC has 5.7% structural mass
<ProjectThoth>
The way I see it, there's three ways to optimize for delta-v - MTOW, compromise, and for S1 recovery.
<blowfish>
S-II has 8.1% structural mass
<ProjectThoth>
MTOW is what I just mentioned. Compromise is what F9 and New Glenn use (keeping S2 size down). S1 reuse is keeping S1 delta-v down below ~2.5 km/s.
SirKeplan has joined #RO
<ProjectThoth>
The problem with compromise reuse is that you generally result in a comically oversized S1 for a given mission.
<wb99999999>
is there any plan to make PEG coping with people switching off engines early?
<lamont>
huh?
<lamont>
not parsing
<lamont>
oh you mean like to thrust limit via cutting off engines?
<wb99999999>
yeah
<wb99999999>
without suddenly pitch up
<wb99999999>
you know like saturn v switching off the center engine
<wb99999999>
maybe something so I can tell the program that I am going to cut off one engine at a certain point
<wb99999999>
get ready for it
<lamont>
its possible, but its a UX problem
<lamont>
same thing with stage and a half designs where you drop engines
<lamont>
ideally someone teaches mechjeb how to stage those automatically and when they’ll trigger, and then it updates the delta-v stats with the correct stage information and PEG just slurps it from there, but that would break the correspondence of those dV stats with KSP stage numbering
<wb99999999>
hmmm...
<lamont>
just identifying how many stages a rocket needs to get to orbit is hard, and which kerbal stages correspond to those stages, when the user may shuffle them around, or agathorn may strike, the user may update the target, or it just may start to chew into the TLI stage because liftoff estimates are all approxmations
<wb99999999>
well...yes it's hard
B787_300 has quit []
<wb99999999>
nvm, there isn't even a way to switch off a pair of engines in a symmetrical cluster in the game yet
<lamont>
might be able to count stages as they happen but what you care about as UX is probably not the KSP stage, but the more normal to think about rocket stage
<wb99999999>
I understand.
<lamont>
ideally someone scraps the whole way that KSP constructs ‘stages’
<lamont>
but its designed to be a sandbox game for mouse clickers
<lamont>
anyway, yeah, i think about that stuff, its mathematically totally doable, its all just UX
<wb99999999>
I have an idea, but I'm not sure if it is sound
<lamont>
first thing i need to do though is ship the rewrite
<wb99999999>
right.
<wb99999999>
If you ever work on this, I'd suggest have a dumb and fixed "lee-way" button to have the program leave some room for an engine cut
<wb99999999>
the amount of flexibility can totally be fixed
<ProjectThoth>
I don't understand GNC at all, otherwise I'd offer help.
<ProjectThoth>
Hell, my greatest accomplishment is a spreadsheet.
<lamont>
don’t knock a good spreadsheet
fishbowl has joined #RO
<ProjectThoth>
It was an effort to reverse the rocket equation and design rockets based off of initial conditions (propellant choice and tank type), optimized for TSTOs.
<xShadowx>
we gave the nazis many presents that week :)
<ferram4>
Something something reap the whirlwind
<ferram4>
NathanKell, I have discovered something incredibly fucking weird. The RD-0120 had all its pumps and turbine on a single shaft. For a hydrolox engine. WTF mate?
<NathanKell>
That's...weird indeed
<wb99999999>
what the hell?
<ProjectThoth>
ferram4: but y tho
<ferram4>
The Russians appear to have a serious aversion to using multiple shafts for their pumps.
<ferram4>
Literally the only examples I've been able to find of multiple shafts is the RD-270 (because full-flow staged) and the RD-0146 (because it's basically a Russkie RL-10).
Guest6727 has joined #RO
<wb99999999>
does this explain their discontent about hydrolox engines?
<NathanKell>
GuestRocketsCo
<ferram4>
Possibly.
<ferram4>
Alternatively, they dislike both the extra weight of another turbine and the complications of a gearbox.
<NathanKell>
And RD-0120 was all about simplified
<ProjectThoth>
Wasn't there a startup (heh) that wanted to use an RD-0120 on LOX/LCH4?
<wb99999999>
Russians are quite a step ahead in the 90s with Methane
<wb99999999>
There are multiple proposals for redesigning existed engines to run on Methane
<wb99999999>
non came true of course
<ferram4>
Although I don't think they've actually gotten anything working.
<ProjectThoth>
wb99999999: Yeah, it's not really as simple as shoving a different prop combo in.
<wb99999999>
No, 90s in Russia is the worst time and place combination in the last 50 years
<ProjectThoth>
RL-10 was tested on methalox.
<wb99999999>
The problem is not on technology but rather funding and political will, I'd imagine
<wb99999999>
Methane is after all a "rocket friendly" propellant
<wb99999999>
If they can pull off Hydrolox then can pull off Metholox
<ProjectThoth>
Well, methane was by and large ignored until the 1980s because 1) no Mars, and 2) it's roughly similar to LOX/RP-1 with all the disadvantages of cryogenic propellants.
<wb99999999>
in the U.S., that is
<ProjectThoth>
The only thing it really excels at is reuse, because it doesn't coke the turbines.
<wb99999999>
Russians kinda wanted it since the 80s
<ProjectThoth>
Yeah, from a Russian perspective, it was a performance gain.
<ferram4>
The funny thing is that if there was a push for it, the oil companies would be thrilled.
<wb99999999>
And they're probably pretty good at handling Methane in the first place
<wb99999999>
ya know ,they do have a lot of it
<ferram4>
"What? You'll pay us for this shit and we don't need to just waste it in a flare? Sure! :D Suckers.... :P"
<wb99999999>
hell I'd run my car with methane, if they can get a better way to store the thing
<wb99999999>
it's not a bad fuel
<ferram4>
It's just volatile.
<ProjectThoth>
Methane's probably going to be the most popular prop choice for new rockets for the next decade or more.
<ProjectThoth>
Maybe not because it's the best propellant ever, but because it's hard to find new engines that run anything else.
<wb99999999>
Soyuz-5 is a much cooler (no pun intended) rocket than the Angara IMO
<wb99999999>
but now they already had the Angara, we'll never see Soyuz-5...
<ProjectThoth>
I mean, for a new rocket project in the US, what's your domestic choices? BE-3, BE-4, RL-10, RS-68, and RS-25.
<ProjectThoth>
I highly doubt that SpaceX would ever let Merlins out of the factory for someone else's product. :P
<ferram4>
I'm sure you could get Merlins for a high enough premium.
<ferram4>
Also, the AJ-10. At this point, the LR-79 is long gone, so is all the old Atlas engines.
<ProjectThoth>
AJ-10's still in production?
<ProjectThoth>
Oh, dur, Orion.
<ferram4>
Yep.
<ProjectThoth>
I guess you have NK-33/AJ-26, too.
<ferram4>
Well, yeah. But after that Antares failure, who wants to use them?
<ProjectThoth>
But they're so limited in supply and, well, that.
<ProjectThoth>
I'm sure you could get a couple at a super discounted price, but they're only really economically viable if you're talking a light-lift vehicle or an RLV.
<ProjectThoth>
And then you're gonna run out of replacement parts, in the case of the latter.
<wb99999999>
that engine is not very good at being reused
<ProjectThoth>
I wonder how Kistler planned to do it, then.
<ProjectThoth>
(since the K-1 had 3x on S1 and 1x on S2).
<soundnfury>
ProjectThoth: I suppose there's AR1 as well, if you're not in a hurry
<ProjectThoth>
soundnfury: I have more hope of F-1A flying than AR1.
<wb99999999>
I think there's another one
<wb99999999>
it's on parallel with the AR-1
<wb99999999>
same idea, American, Ox rich staged combustion
<ProjectThoth>
One approach I guess you could use, if you wanted to try and do a startup, would be to buy up the rest of the AJ-26 stock, fly maybe 10-15 vehicles (assuming a single engine here, less than 100 tons to LEO) and then swap it out for whatever Antares is using now (RD-93?)
<ProjectThoth>
That way the initial investment is fairly low.
<ProjectThoth>
wb99999999: BE-4?
<wb99999999>
No, no.
<ProjectThoth>
Actually, I guess that's not a bad plan at all. Don't know what you'd use for S2... maybe something hypergolic, probably an AJ-10?
<ProjectThoth>
That's basically a Delta II class vehicle, isn't it?
<ferram4>
Probably a tiny little bit more.
<ferram4>
Assuming no boosters.
<wb99999999>
I can't...
<wb99999999>
ferram do u remember that
<ProjectThoth>
ferram4: Assuming no boosters, and sure as hell not doing an Anagra/FH kind of deal.
qwertyy_ has joined #RO
<ProjectThoth>
(common booster cores are a lie)
<wb99999999>
there was a 2000 kN class staged combustion kerolox
<ferram4>
wb99999999, I'm not aware of which one you're thinking of.
<wb99999999>
developed in the U.S.
<wb99999999>
I think its name starts with T
<wb99999999>
or maybe I'm day dreaming
<ProjectThoth>
Hurdles to consider: The FAA would never approve of flying AJ-26s again, I don't think.
qwertyy has quit [Ping timeout: 200 seconds]
<ProjectThoth>
Just checked wiki, apparently my guess of 10-15 is way off. There's ~45 in storage, holy crap.
<wb99999999>
remember Soyuz-2-a uses it too
<ProjectThoth>
Specifically at Aerojet.
<ProjectThoth>
Unless the stockpile is held in Russia, and Aerojet just calls them to ask for a few to be shipped over.
<ferram4>
wb99999999, Can't find any. Only American kerolox staged combustion that I can find is the never-happening AR-1.
TM1978m has joined #RO
<wb99999999>
I am day dreaming then...
<ProjectThoth>
Is there a market for a Delta II-class launcher?
Wetmelon has joined #RO
<ferram4>
I dunno, tbh.
<ProjectThoth>
This is a way better business strategy than the drop tank SSTO I was working on.
<wb99999999>
delta 2...
Hypergolic_Skunk has joined #RO
<wb99999999>
there's too much competition with the Soyuz, the Long March 3 and maybe even the Indian GSLV 3
<ProjectThoth>
Maybe with augmentation, then?
<awang>
Is there a meaningful way to compare the performance of a prop engine/jet engine?
Wetmelon has quit [Ping timeout: 183 seconds]
<awang>
Trying to decide between the Derwent or Jumo 213E for a first plane
<awang>
And don't know which one would do better for a first flight
<ProjectThoth>
awang: Depends on what metric.
<ProjectThoth>
Fuel consumption, thrust...
<wb99999999>
I think you can compare them in a given altitude
<wb99999999>
fix the air density and you can do some comparison
<wb99999999>
maybe also speed...
<ProjectThoth>
wb99999999: Yeah, good point.
<awang>
ProjectThoth: Guess the main things I'm looking for are performance at altitude
<awang>
Since early game the only things you can do with planes are altitude records
<ProjectThoth>
awang: Define "altitude." Low, high, or super duper high?
<ProjectThoth>
Jet engine.
<awang>
And if you're lucky, speed
<ferram4>
awang, power = thrust * velocity
<wb99999999>
probably a jet
<ProjectThoth>
Jet engine only, pretty much, if you're talking altitude records.
<awang>
ProjectThoth: First plane, so probably < 30km
<ferram4>
To a first approximation, prop engine power = constant
<ferram4>
To a first approximation, jet engine thrust = constant
<ferram4>
So if you are going slow, or at a stop, prop engine
<ferram4>
If you are going fast, jet engine
<awang>
ferram4: Well that certainly clears things up
<awang>
But overall consensus appears to be jet engine
<awang>
So jet engine it is
<wb99999999>
from my perspective
<ferram4>
The only place where prop engines are better is efficiency at slow speeds.
<ferram4>
Jets do beat them at speed though, because they're less efficient with the fuel but they get the plane to move fast enough that the time is reduced more than enough to compensate.
<wb99999999>
a prop is really bad at high altitude because not only you have less oxygen to burn, you also have less air to push on
<awang>
I see
<wb99999999>
so you'd have a compressor, or supercharger for this purpose
<ProjectThoth>
If it's hard to breathe up there, props aren't the best choice.
<ferram4>
Ultimately though, that also works for jets.
<wb99999999>
take the supercharger and connect it to a combustion chamber
<wb99999999>
I am aware
<ProjectThoth>
Or you have asthma, in which case I still don't recommend props.
<wb99999999>
actually what kind of prop is it
<wb99999999>
is it a piston engine or is it a turbo prop
<awang>
wb99999999: I was looking at the Jumo 213E. idk whether it's a piston or turbo
<ferram4>
Jumo 213E. Really nice late war German prop engine.
<ferram4>
Powered the Fw 190 D
<wb99999999>
ohhh the one on the long nose 190s
<awang>
The description just said "intended for performance at high altitude", so I thought it might work well for a first plane engine
<awang>
Last save I went with a Ta 152 clone, but I'm thinking about being a bit more original this time around
<ferram4>
It would. It just won't be as fast as a Derwent. But it'll get off the ground and into the air a lot faster.
<ferram4>
Although I'd suggest 2 Derwents if you go for it. 1 is pushing it a little.
<awang>
ferram4: Considering what the runway is like, that is sounding better and better...
<ferram4>
You can put them out on the wings.
<awang>
Yeah, I was planning on 2 Derwents if I went that route. Under wing pods or something along those lines
<awang>
Ninja'd
<ferram4>
Make the wings straight, but relatively low AR overall.
<ferram4>
A nice cruciform tail.
<NathanKell>
If all you have is Derwents, everything looks like an F.8 ?
<ferram4>
And you can call it something like... "Moster Gleteor"
<wb99999999>
yes, if you're going for altitude
<awang>
ferram4: Is that a reference to something?
<NathanKell>
If you're going for altitude you don't want an F.8 then, you want an earlier mark.
<wb99999999>
definitely copy the...darn I forgot the name
<ProjectThoth>
awang: Nothing wrong with duplicating what works.
<NathanKell>
Buzzard and Buzzsaw
<ferram4>
I mean, it's not like you have to worry about the main downside of trijets.
<wb99999999>
man I am so happy about MJ no longer waste ignitions
<wb99999999>
who did it, who fixed it? I want to thank him to death
qwertyy__ has joined #RO
<awang>
ferram4: Which is?
<wb99999999>
cost and maintenance
<wb99999999>
I guess
<ferram4>
awang, the risk of an uncontained turbine failure severing the hydraulic lines, losing all control surface control, and needing to land using only differential throttling to control the plane
<awang>
Keep in mind that it's not anywhere close to done
<awang>
So it looks like crap
<soundnfury>
awang: CG is probably too far aft
<wb99999999>
you need to tilt the tail jet a bit
<wb99999999>
so its thrust line up with your CoG
<soundnfury>
also, rather high aspect ratio (but that might be intentional if it's a high-altitude research plane)
<wb99999999>
in current configuration you're generating downward torque
<awang>
soundnfury: .....Herp derp I'm an idiot
<awang>
Yeah, forgot to check CoG vs CoP
<wb99999999>
puff what
<awang>
wb99999999: Yeah, the idea was altitude, since speed isn't really possible for first tech node
<awang>
I think
<awang>
But my issue was a pitch up moment, actually
<awang>
But I think soundnfury smacked some sense into me
<wb99999999>
that simply means you're unstable
<wb99999999>
CoP goes back and you're godd
<wb99999999>
good*
<awang>
Oh, another thing was that I'm getting like 1% stalled percent on the ailerons
<awang>
wb99999999: Yep, trying that now
<awang>
Looks like the CoG issue was mostly because of the Aerobees + fuel :/
<soundnfury>
awang: remember, the most important number in FAR is Mw, closely followed by Lβ and Nβ.
<soundnfury>
if any of those are the wrong side of 0, you are having a very bad day and will not go to sky today.
<soundnfury>
(actually now I think about it the important thing with Lβ is that it should be _small_; the sign doesn't matter so much)
<awang>
soundnfury: Yeah, Mw was wrong
<awang>
The rest were right
<awang>
And unfortunately, the third jet doesn't realy get me much more in terms of altitude
wb99999999 has quit [Ping timeout: 180 seconds]
<awang>
Uh
<awang>
I'm getting both crewed/uncrewed records for a single vessel
<awang>
Launching a crewed rocket to break the sound barrier
<awang>
Breaking both crewed/uncrewed 350 m/s
Technicalfool is now known as TechnicallySleeping
qwertyy__ has joined #RO
qwertyy_ has quit [Ping timeout: 186 seconds]
qwertyy_ has joined #RO
Guest6727 has joined #RO
qwertyy__ has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
<soundnfury>
awang: dropped a stage at >350m/s?
qwertyy_ has quit [Ping timeout: 183 seconds]
qwertyy has joined #RO
SirKeplan is now known as SirKeplan|AFK
awang has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
darsie has joined #RO
<darsie>
Entering time warp changes my apsides and the argument of periapsis.
<darsie>
Might be useful for deorbiting without fuel.
<darsie>
Haven't noticed that on Earth, though, just on the Moon.
<darsie>
at
<darsie>
Is there an EM drive in RO?
<darsie>
How useful is ion propulsion in RO? Does it work in time warp?
<darsie>
It says 0.0 kN or so. I guess that's rounden :).
<darsie>
rounded
<soundnfury>
darsie: I found that ion drive was basically unusable, but that may be because I couldn't get the thrust-in-warp mod (I forget the name) to work
<darsie>
ahh, ok.
<Bornholio>
the Ion RCS from near future with lower ISP's are reasonable, but as drives they are not
<Maxsimal>
!tell Sarbian Is there any way to get module manager to tell me what the post-processing cfg for a particular part might look like, without trying to dump the whole database?
<Qboid>
Maxsimal: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
<Sarbian>
Maxsimal: look at the cache file ?
<Qboid>
Sarbian: Maxsimal left a message for you in #RO [02.09.2017 13:45:57]: "Is there any way to get module manager to tell me what the post-processing cfg for a particular part might look like, without trying to dump the whole database?"
<Maxsimal>
Sarbian: Thanks!
<Bornholio>
I set up a minimal install with the things i wanted to see what the do and checked the cache each time (in my case trying to figure out when and how vens stole assets away from my control
<Bornholio>
you can delete most of the other assets and then you get a faster build
<Maxsimal>
Yeah I have a minimal install now, just didn't know I could look at the cache, I thought I'd have to dump the DB through the debug option, and didn't feel like sitting through that every time I wanted to check a change.
<Qboid>
Bornholio: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
<Bornholio>
he's ate nines not nien
<soundnfury>
nein!
<Bornholio>
doh
TM1978m has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
qwertyy has joined #RO
qwertyy_ has quit [Ping timeout: 383 seconds]
<darsie>
Are procedural wings ok as rocket fins? rated for 3 mach.
<Hypergolic_Skunk>
always worked fine for me
<darsie>
ok
<Hypergolic_Skunk>
by the time you're going mach-3, you should be out of the thick soup
<darsie>
mhm
<darsie>
I wonder what it feels like on Venus floor.
<darsie>
Prolly like walking against a storm, sort of.
<Bornholio>
70atm probably doesn't feel like much, since your paste at that point :)
<darsie>
90, IIRC.
<darsie>
ohh, and you're ;).
<Bornholio>
.smirk
<Bornholio>
landing altitude varies the pressure pretty quick
<darsie>
Hmm, if Venus were <31 C the CO2 wolud liquify.
<Bornholio>
giant sheet of reflective mylar in venus orbit
<darsie>
Venus Sun L1 :)
<Bornholio>
then you have to apply thrust to keep it there
<darsie>
Hmm, but a giant sheet in orbit won't work, either. Every part has a different orbit.
<Bornholio>
but yes it could be smaller
<Bornholio>
rotating band
<darsie>
But only the center of the band is on it's orbit.
<darsie>
its
<Bornholio>
thats the highest angle of incidence and largest area, plus you don't need to cool the whole planet to get the changes you need, circulation and the slow planetary day will do a lot
Hohman has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.93 [Firefox 55.0.3/20170824053622]]
Guest6727 has joined #RO
Wetmelon has joined #RO
Guest6727 has quit [Ping timeout: 204 seconds]
Rokker has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
TM1978m has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
awang has joined #RO
BasharMilesTeg_ has joined #RO
<lamont>
fucking christ NASA, why is iy = unit(v x r) instead of iy = unit(r x v)? you couldn’t make it line up with the angular momentum vector?
* lamont
flips a table and goes to drown sorrows in pho...
BasharMilesTeg has quit [Ping timeout: 183 seconds]
<Bornholio>
lol lamont
<Bornholio>
because of some transform or register return reads or some fun reason
SirKeplan|AFK is now known as SirKeplan
ProjectThoth has joined #RO
Probus has joined #RO
<Probus>
o/
<lamont>
well it makes sense-ish now because x,y,z form a proper (right handed for NASA, left haded for KSP) coordinate system. since ix = unit(r) and iz = unit(v) it works out correctly, but why is y not the downrange v direction? i’m sure there’s a reason, but argh...
<Bornholio>
yeah i had to get used to left handed transforms for robots and right hand rule for anything sane, but then you get some designer that changes the assumption of primary direction because its easier for them to think, hey this is the +x in my system cause I installed an encoder on it backwards
<lamont>
well as long as its consistent the math should just work out
<lamont>
the problem was that i was constructing the wrong-handed coordinate system for PEG, so rockets were spinning
<Bornholio>
that sounds fun, getting close on PEGAS then?
<lamont>
maybe? its still mostly kicking my ass
Senshi has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Senshi has joined #RO
<awang>
!tell NathanKell* What is the intended R&D research rate for a new RP-0 save?
<Qboid>
awang: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
<awang>
!tell NathanKell I guess same for the intended vehicle build rates?
<Qboid>
awang: I'll redirect this as soon as they are around.
wb99999999 has joined #RO
<Qboid>
wb99999999: Bornholio left a message for you in #RO [02.09.2017 13:59:25]: "on my trend of being obnoxious http://i.imgur.com/w41vZYL.jpg :)"
<wb99999999>
click
<wb99999999>
instant regret*
<awang>
Is SpaceCenter.Instance.latitude/longtitude supposed to be the right way to get KSC coordinates with RSS/KSCSwitcher?
ProjectThoth has quit [Quit: ++?????++ Out of Cheese Error. ++?????++]
ProjectThoth has joined #RO
Hypergolic_Skunk has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
blowfish has joined #RO
<awang>
soundnfury: Forgot to answer your question from earlier, but no, the vessel that was getting both crewed and uncrewed records was a single stage
<Rokker>
OH MY GOD YES
<Rokker>
HUMBLE MONTHLY BUNDLE STRIKES AGAIN
<Rokker>
i got banner saga 2
<Rokker>
oh
<Rokker>
wrong channel
<Rokker>
ignore me
<ProjectThoth>
/ignore Rokeker
<ProjectThoth>
Rokker: I DON'T KNOW, IT'S SO OBVIOUS AND MAKES THE GAME UNPLAYABLE