"I encourage you to replicate these experiments yourself." One week later: News reporting 34 homes to have burned down due to electrical fires, investigations ongoing.
"I encourage you to replicate these experiments yourself" Me: Waits 16 weeks for the engine to load while my CPU power throttles to 4.77 MHz. Procedural Parts: **exists*
If i were to disagree with that statement it would only be because i would say it is exponentially more rediculous. Multiplication can't even scratch the surface of my disbelief.
It's actually more ridiculous by a factor of 11.1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111-*dies from lack of oxygen*
Yung Vipe A few things to keep in mind to maximize efficiency: -Solids have much lower delta-v, only use them if you’re TWR is beyond hope. -More famous rockets use only 2 stages to orbit, but up to 5 is perfectly fine. -Make sure your engines are correctly optimized. There’s very few scenarios where you should be prioritizing thrust over ISP, as you can almost always just add more. Hope at least one of these can help you out.
The thing that helped me was learning how to use fuel pipes. You can use 2 fuel tanks at the same time but make one of them empty first so that the empty tank can be dropped.
Imagine being some alien on the other side of the universe just minding your own business then your planet suddenly gets pelted by dozens of pieces of fabric traveling at speeds that are quite literally impossible to reach according to the laws of physics
We think that dropping the flags onto the boosters increases the speed for the same reason that the decreases in speed due to timesteps happen. It looks like by falling onto the booster, the engine exhaust *first* cancels out some velocity, giving the flags a few frames extra to hover on the engine before being sent off at lightspeed.
I'm wondering, if you used part welding to make all the clydesdales one part, would it be possible to add even more and thus launch a payload larger than a flag? Maybe a kerballed spacecraft of some kind?
In the future, I may look into launching larger payloads. There may be some tricks to make this faster in the stock game, such as messing with physics timewarp or adjusting the max physics delta in the settings.
@@proot. thats more cheaty imo. with welding youre still limited by stock and only get around the waiting times associated with lag. You probably wouldnt even realize if he used welding and was trying to hide it.
@@lukasstaar6860 But using welding or editing the file does the same thing. It makes it more powerful. At least for this experiment, they are the same thing.
@@nilstrieb No, no it doesn't. The exact same amount of engines will give the same amount of force with part welding, it's just that you can put more in without causing as much lag.
A thing to note is that due to the way matter density acts in KSP, the derived KSP speed of light is 10 times slower, so you've actually achieved near speed of light with the 1000 boosters and 10 times the speed of light in the second method.
4:08 my guess would be that the heavier projectile starts out slower, so it is inside the exhaust for one more frame, leading it to get more speed. Edit: I was right lol
By dropping the flag it's rigidbody is most likely activated or maybe it has collision set to dynamic so it effectively had more timesteps in the exhaust plume
btw the simulated acceleration grows faster for a simple reason:the projectile still gets accelerated for 1 frame no matter what,even if it took like 0.001 frames to actually get out of the cannon.
No, I don’t think so. I think physical time warp works by increasing the physics time step, not by multiplying all the forces and velocities by 4. So you would still only get 1 step in the thrust before you were ejected. It would be interesting to test though.
I think what KSP mass drivers need is, instead of putting multiple engines inside each other (or by using this) stack engines radially facing slightly inward, nozzle up, this way objects shot from the mass driver will continue to pick up more velocity from the engines as its altitude increases (albeit still only for a split second. but I think this should give good results)
That's an interesting idea. With the data I gathered, you could calculate the distance the part travels in each physics tick and space the boosters appropriately to maximize the final velocity.
I know its late but. Minus the centre one, 512 divides by 8 (8 way symmetry) 64 times. He's clipped 64 sets of boosters for 513, 9 is 1 set of clipped boosters.
The change in results from a moving flag is very likely due to optimizations in the physics engine. When the flag isn't moving the game applies the acceleration to the velocity immediately through a fast path in code. When an object is moving it is summing all the forces over the course of one frame, and then applying them next frame. This means that the flag is recieving thrust from more of the boosters. This makes sense in KSP's context because the aero model relies on opposing forces canceling out, such as gravity and lift. For a moving object, if those forces were immediately applied to velocity it would produce potentially non-deterministic results (For example, take a plane with two engines. If the force was applied in the order Engine, Drag, Engine, then the two engines would wind up producing different thrusts at the same speed because the speed they are moving at the time they are calculated would not be the same) summing all forces over the frame and applying next frame helps to deal with that. (Disclaimer, I have not personally taken the time to verify this in ksp's code, this is just conjecture from experience working with other physics engines in games)
I feel that for larger craft, a better design would have been to stagger the Clydesdales, like with an electromagnetic accelerator. That way you could have no clipping with ~8 boosters in a ring per stage
with all these flag projectiles being launched by fuel exhaust, aliens would probably be thinking that hes starting a war by firing gas-accelerated bullets into space
I had a similar symptoms too. When my fps was enough high, my FAR calculated my aerodynamic normally. But when i captured my screen and so on, fps was low, it seem differently it calculating its physics before.
i was able to guess why your experiments were getting such weird results despite the fact that i almost flunked math in high school. luckily for me, i have a phd in jank physics courtesy of gmod and ksp.
World: Do something nobody has done before or can even imagine in KSP, Stratzenblitz!! Stratzenblitz: Guys, you've been holding my beer so long it has gone warm...
FYI you don't necessarily NEED a lot of thrusters to increase the thrust. You can "over-throttle" by using the Breaking Ground robotics controller. What you do is set the thrust to be controlled by the controller. Then, you use the little angle-ing things on the line and it increases the curve over 100%. Then, as long as you set the controller time to the center, you'll have more thrust than should be possible.
I feel like this could be used in a "plant a flag on X" any% speedrun. Simply wait for the space center to be pointed at your desired targe- I mean, destination, and fire a salvo of flags at it. Then sit back and relax while the speed running community furiously debates about whether or not you actually completed the run.
Simple solution. Build a craft that is very big. Have the control, engine, and a tank of fuel near the bottem. Then use a bunch of structural parts that extends teh craft over the physics load distance. Then fly around with that.
Mass drivers are amazingly good when your using Daedalus engines (KSP interstellar) , I can reliably bombard the mum from the safety of low kerbin orbit
I thought about aiming this at another planet, but changed my mind once the lag kicked in. You could probably use this to eject a command pod or something onto an interplanetary trajectory though. That would be a cool thing to see, mass driver transport between planets.
What would be really impressive is developing this into a functioning interplanetary travel method with a legitimate spacecraft. I suppose slowing down to enter orbit would be tough, but perhaps with the proper alignment of Tylo, Vall, and Laythe and a massive engine burn, it might be feasible to inject into Jool orbit.
So at 145M Kelvin... you basically yeet a rougly flag shaped blob of plasma through space. I guess it exploding is as close as KSP can get to representing that.
Hmmm. It looks like either the two or three boost peak is desirable for more conventional cannons like artillery or naval guns, which sadly can't match the efficiency of hypervelocity single boost cannons. For the two boost that equates to about 120000 m/s^2. For the three boost, more like 30000. So if we want something like a 1000 kg projectile we need somewhere around 120000 kN to be applied for two frames. So the cannon itself should be something like 80 Mainsails. Alternatively, for a smaller cannon, we might be able to get away with 10 Mainsails or 15 vectors firing half tonne projectiles. The nice thing here is that the actual fuel consumption in either case should be tiny. A 60-tonne artillery piece firing 500 kg shells might drink about 120 LFO, meaning mach 2 shells for roughly 1:1 shell to propellant ratio.
