Setting The CIRCUMNAVIGATION World Record in Kerbal Space Program 2
Vložit
- čas přidán 19. 03. 2023
- How did I get mach 122? Well, 4200m/s is mach 12.2, and distances in the ksp system are 1/10 that of real life, so 122!
My Discord: / discord
KSP playlist: • Kerbal Space Program - Hry
Should I try any other records in ksp2? I was thinking of maybe even attempting the land speed record myself!
Plz do the land speed blitz and civil have me laughing too much with their designs🤣🤣
beat every record
If you break the land speed record rce will see it as a challenge
Mun speed record
Land speed record!
I like how the design went from completely reasonable to insanity
You know it's good when the strat is to burn directly into the ground
I saw your comment as the ad played before this video. This comment suggests only good things lay within. :D
😅(: “
-
That’s KSP for you
Design went from reasonable, to understandably Kerbal
My guy really out here trying to drift a rocket
A drift for thousands of miles
@@Akotski-ys9rr rocketo dorifto
DEJAVU
@@sportenapfeltorten2095 I have been in this place before 😅
@@TheLtVoss
Higher on the street
and I know its my time to go
That final trajectory was mindblowing, you could have scraped across the runway and STILL escaped Kerbins SOI you were going so damn fast.
that also happens on ksp1's land speed record, although they used wings to push the craft downwards. also, it was so fast they had to use multiple fairings to block the heat
@@NOT_A_ROBOT Land speed record might be something i try later on nice to see we watch some of the same youtubers
2:19 "For some reason it wanted to veer to the side"
Said right after he turned one engine on before the other.
ikr
I know that this comment is 1 year old and you've probably became a wiser person by now, but that veer is clearly not the result of turning on one engine before the other. The initial spin it gets as a result of that is neutralized and only after it gets going straigh again the plane starts veering to the side again. Probably something to do with the landing gear.
I bet the reason why the first plane didn't work is because the jets were blocked by the elevators.
I kinda decided to skip over the real reason that I didn't want to use jets, and it's that I can't operate them in the upper atmosphere where there is less drag, so I would be stuck around only 15-2000 m/s or so
hi there :))@@ReidCaptain
Well since there's no heat in ksp2 yet, you could do that in a lower orbit with an air and fuel mixture, you just have to make a craft that doesn't have alot of drag
Btw you should try a speed record to the moon and back for funsies lol
True, but getting up to 4000m/s under 30km might be asking a lot. Will consider a moon run!
Mun is fun!
@@ReidCaptain it’d be cool to see an intergalactic speed trial too.
Circumnavigating the galaxy speedrun
@@ShaneZickmannntergalactic? I think we'll have to wait until KSP3 for that
I like how instead of building for low drag, efficiency, and speed he just went "YEET ME AROUND THE WORLD"
I was so proud of Reid for making a plane with horizontal stabilizers.
Then he made a nuclear rocket plane that throws its reactor at the space center.
Bro whipped out the desmos calculator and said "according to my calulations"
Set friction to 0 on your nose wheel to fix the veering on takeoff problem, btw.
Been trying to figure this out for a bit now, thanks!
RC at the start: So I got this jet, a bit unstable but we're going to work on that
RC halfway through: Ok so I got some boosters strapped on my initial boosters and after that I will burn straight into the ground
it might be possible to get it quicker by doing 2 circumnavigations, the first one to build speed and get into position, and the second one to actually get the time
Time starts from liftoff 😉
@@ReidCaptain with 2 circumnavigations i think it would be reasonable to divide the end time by two, which would still be faster assuming you can get the extra fuel up there without loosing too much time
@@Roaxial But that isn't how it works, you have to start on the ground and end on the ground.
@@ChargeQM This is very true, start from the ground, end on the ground.
the whole point is to have a craft that starts and lands on the same spot to truly circumnavigate the whole planat once
You should upload the unedited full circumnavigation if you can. That way there's a good standard of comparison for people to compete with.
for sure
Martin CITO pants went so fast he went was the the atmosphere in 00.1 seconds
my dude goes up and down 3 octaves twice in one sentence.
had to mute the video to make it bearable to watch
I commented on this a while ago it really is noticable
@@solbergsindre had to put it to .75 speed. I was running out of breath listening to it.
People in the relies so desperate to complain as if they can't turn off the video.
Your engines are partially occluded which matters in KSP2. …can still angle wings behind the engines even post-patch for weird vtol-like thrust at the cost of engine power…but you can always just sepraton the deflector-wings once you are airborn until we get robotics parts.
ok but the speed of sound isn't affected by the size of the Kerbol system, so speed of sound would still be sqrt(gamma*R*T), so tho it wouldn't necessarily be the usual 340 m/s of low atmosphere it would probably not be mach 122
checking Earth standard atmosphere tables and assuming similar atmosphere composition, 60 km above Kerbin would probably be similar to ~80 km above earth bc density and pressure, so that gives us a speed of sound of ~282.5 m/s. So based on the fastest speed I saw while watching the video (~4550 m/s), we get Mach 16.1.
so pretty fast
It's higher than 12.2, because you are on the tip of the atmosphere. I'm assuming you used the sea level reading of mach 1 to get mach 12.2 from 4200/340. But remember that mach 1 is not constant, it changes depending on the density of the medium. At 70000km the speed of sound is about 290m/s and since you are pretty close to that it should be 4200/290, which is mach 14.5
I mean technicallyyy there is nearly no atmosphere at 65k in ksp, so it would probably be far slower than that anyway, making it a way higher mach number
@@ReidCaptain Speed of sound actually doesn't depend on air pressure, only the composition and temperature
that seems like a dumb way to measure the speed of an object, but I’m not a rocket scientist, and I use Fahrenheit soooo
@@Powderlover1 It's not to measure the speed of the object. It's to know how far away you are from the speed of sound. That's important because aerodynamic forces change drastically when approaching/passing the sound barrier.
Airspeed is still measured in m/s, knots, etc. People just like to show speed as X times the speed of sound sometimes to add wow effect.
That's awesome. I'm really enjoying your content. I also appreciate you leaving some of the bugs still in the game in your footage. I do want to buy the game and play with this version of KSP but I also want to have fun when I do it. These bugs would likely sour me on the experience if I played it as is... So seeing them reminds me of why I am waiting and is preventing me from jumping in too soon.
Long story short: Thanks.
Seeing this done genuinely is really impressive. If it were me I would have just made a simple kraken drive. Keep up the good work!
I love all these community challenges that are popping up!
Kerbologist here... To build a stable plane, you want the center of lift to be slightly behind center of mass. You can turn on these indicators on the bottom. Also to avoid veering off to one side on the runway, you can lower the wheel friction on the landing gears. And also something to think about is drag vs lift ratio. More drag does not necessarily mean more lift. a balance is good to have the speed to work together with the lift of your wings instead of against it. So if you have 2 big wings, they are more suited for low speeds. Because the faster you go the more drag you get. With thinner and tighter profile wings, you are more fuel efficient when going at fast speeds.
Up until the very end i thought you were going to do the record for the AMOUNT of circumnavigations and couldnt figure out how you were going to do that lol.
For some reason it wanted to veer off to the side while giving it tens of thousands of pounds of asymmetric thrust.
A better challenge imo is altitude under 20km and only one stage. Haven't been able to do it on KSP2 but my record on KSP1 was 42 minutes
Oh, I flew around Kerbin last weekend to see if I could do it.
Mission time 4 hrs (in game of course) after landing back home. ~1 hr 25 mins real time.
Nice challenge, hope some peoples will try to do it too
I tried it in ksp 1 few days ago, It took me roughly 1h30min to make it with a Concorde I made flying at Mach 2.7 at around 12 000m and landed back at the ksc
Your design process was interesting. Thats about it.
to get faster, you need as low an orbit as possible and do your reentry burn backwards enough to get an overshot of the airstrip. if you can, you need a jet engine to speed up enough that you come in fast but not too fast so you can hit parachutes at the last moment.
“Yo I heard you like planes so I put a plane on your plane”
3:06
You can override friction control to 0 on the nose landing gear to stop your craft from veering off the runway
Those frames tho, nice job ksp 2 team
“I figured that a little bit of boost off the runway probably wouldn’t be a bad way to go” *proceeds to add SPACE GRADE ROCKET BOOSTERS to wings*
All you really need is a solar plane with superlight materials and some electric motors utilizing propellers.
This is how Santa visits every house on Earth in 24 hours
The fastest circumnavigation is obviously to stand directly at the pole.
Great video!
the sudden math equation jumpscared me
Id like to see this with an actual plane design instead of a rocket
I got you.
you know reid is serious if he needs to pull out desmos calculator
I would also add to the challenge that the design must work IRL, no jank, and you must actually land on the runway then taxi to the main building.
I know this might seem silly but this video finally allowed me to intuitively understand why it's so hard to launch a rocket into the sun. It's something I've always begrudgingly accepted as fact even though it made zero sense. The amount of fuel spent pushing the rocket straight towards Kerbal so that your current relative velocity wouldn't throw you into orbit or break out of orbit made it all click.
Thank you for your crazy engineering videos!
the little lander/plane thing is realy cute
reid on his way to complete death star in ksp and get an world record
hey, noticed on some of your planes that they were kinda unstable, if you enable the center of lift/mass overlays, and make sure they are aligned (or the center of lift is slightly behind) it'll be much more stable!
This, soooo much this. If you want to make planes, do this. Making planes without it is like building rockets without symmetry enabled.
Nice
Glad to See KSP 2 Is Fun
I Like How It Just Devolves Into Orbit Missile Platform That Drops a Kerbal Piloted Glider
The Most Obvious Approach when You Think About It
The spin toss. Yes. I love this.
2:12 "For some reason it started to veer off to the side"💀😂
In ksp 1 I just used whiplash engines like two of them or 4 and it would get me to 1400m\s on like 500m of altitude after which the plane just exploded from drag so I guess doing that and keeping the speed below exploding levels would work
Your spinning move on your first successful run gave me and idea... would it be possible to get into space with just reaction wheels? If not, how high can you go?
2:23 when you start the engines hold the brakes for a moment to let the engines ramp up also start both at once to prevent it from going the wrong way.
0:13 What the hell... are those little _Kerbonaut skeletons_ floating in orbit around planet Kerbin?? 0:13
I didnt really end watching the first ad but I know this is worth my time. Also, i just learned how to do cobras in my fauvorite building game, so i dare you to make a plane that can do cobras, in KSP2 or 1, Besiege or ScrapMechanic.
i lost that acc so im using a new one
I think the booster idea is good but I think it would've been better if you used them to gain high ground speed and decouple them to lift into the air just under momentum, once you gain high enough altitude you could use a jet engine to keep yourself moving
3:48 what are you!? An SRB sandwich.
If your going fast enough in the atmosphere would you have to invert the plane to remain in the atmosphere?
Curious how long you are taking to do those equations on the side? Wild stuff.
*Turns on one engine before the other* "For some reason it wanted to veer off to the side."
When I watched this video I got an add saying become a bomb's biggest threat in a add for military bomb diffuser
This guy built something that exceeded the darkstar with a silly little green plane
you could turn off friction control on the front landing gear to stop the instability
"little bit of a boost" then proceeds to add two clydescales
could it be faster to stay low in the atmosphere, use a lot of horizontal thrust for maximum speed and use wings to do the pushing down bit?
recently saw your a-10 video and was wandering if you can make a yf-23
after 2,5k hours in KSP 1 & 2 I would have never thought of "continuously burning towards Kerbin"
truly one of the most kerbal things I have ever seen!
right as I think about a air speed record for the first time in this game series 12 year life span, I find out reid had my idea 4 weeks early. Max convenience!
This feels like it could be a legit speedrun. Speedrun style it should start the time from the moment you start the game, to the moment you click recover the vessel. Time warp should either not be allowed or the in game timer is used for launch segment.
As a student in aeronautic engineering this video in the beginning made me angry😂😂 good video keep it up tho🤌🏻
You could do an incredibly believable Linus Tech Tips impression.
When bro says I’m not allowed to go to orbit then proceeds to build a rocket and stay inches away from orbit 😅
The reason why your earlier designs kept veering off runway and unable to take off has to do with your landing leg configuration. If your nose gear is lower than main, or your gears are behind center of lift, that makes it impossible to take off. That is exactly how Space Shuttle looks like and it's ideal for the Shuttle, because they don't want to even be able to go around, but not so much for planes.
Honestly I challenge where multiple youtubers compete and post videos when they beat another, forcing everyone to try hard even more each video sounds really fun :D !
the first planes engines looked like a a-10 warthogs engine
bros got the kick sauber spaceplane
Idea: Make a spin launcher in KSP2
To prevent you're planes to go spinny on the runway, you need to turn of autofiction control on the front landing Gears, yeah, this is a bug...
*Turns only right engine first, and then adding the left one*
"For some reason it weared to one side"
great video
Nice use of Desmos graphing calculator
Can your try making a canon with a laser rangefinder in besiege
The first jet looked like the “SR-71 Blackbird”. A bit.
imagine dhl doing this in the future, and you watching them on the ground
you should make a harrier jump jet in besiege
This whole video is essentially the kerbal way - add more boosters
actually insane
1:07
Engines are typically weak when they're shooting directly into your wings, as well.
You should retry the circumnavigation record with the new heat system
I don’t know why but it was funny for me to see him using desmos
isnt the darkest blue the end of the atmosphere, and the black with stars technical "space". Because at 40,000 meters, Kerbin has an atmosphere of 0.001, and at 50,000 meters its 0.000 atm. So i think for a challenge like this to be relevant keeping it under 49,999 meters is key. As you are still fighting an atmosphere, without venturing too far into a 0 atmosphere zone and cheesing the whole thing.
Altitude (m) Pressure (Pa) Pressure (atm) Density (kg/m^3)
0 101 325 1.000 1.225
2 500 69 015 0.681 0.898
5 000 45 625 0.450 0.642
7 500 29 126 0.287 0.446
10 000 17 934 0.177 0.288
15 000 6 726 0.066 0.108
20 000 2 549 0.025 0.040
25 000 993.6 0.010 0.015
30 000 404.1 0.004 0.006
40 000 79.77 0.001 0.001
50 000 15.56 0.000 0.000
60 000 2.387 0.000 0.000
70 000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Great video, but I just have to point out I’m a little disappointed you didn’t go Mach 122 :(
YES REID POSTED!!!
Reminds me of landing on the sun station.
I tried to circumnavigate kerbin and got maybe 1/5th the way with a YF-23 design and flying high enough to lower friction but low enough to not lose air intake
Ram air intakes love high altitude like that, too
Nice Video
Move the fuel to the back when it starts to tilt forward
watched this for 7 minutes rn and I just realised that you are reidcaptain and not interndotgif
Reid going insane again
Always been
Weird rules. You should've made a ballistic missile if you are planning on getting to that altitude. A real record would use air-breathing engines.
I look away for around 5 minutes and the design has changed, a bit. I feel like I should go back.
Like it went from plane to rocket