安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文(繁体中文)
日本語(日语)
한국어(韩语)
ไทย(泰语)
български(保加利亚语)
Čeština(捷克语)
Dansk(丹麦语)
Deutsch(德语)
English(英语)
Español-España(西班牙语 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希腊语)
Français(法语)
Italiano(意大利语)
Bahasa Indonesia(印度尼西亚语)
Magyar(匈牙利语)
Nederlands(荷兰语)
Norsk(挪威语)
Polski(波兰语)
Português(葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙)
Português-Brasil(葡萄牙语 - 巴西)
Română(罗马尼亚语)
Русский(俄语)
Suomi(芬兰语)
Svenska(瑞典语)
Türkçe(土耳其语)
Tiếng Việt(越南语)
Українська(乌克兰语)
报告翻译问题









@InterstellarKev , that's really a cool ship with careful details, and nice gravity ring as well! Mine is more complicated because I want to integrate the contra-rotating rings that cancel out angular momentum, instead of having to rely on SAS. But that's just my personal wish, in game it's actually fine to just turn on SAS and let magic reaction wheels do the job - just like @Cereal Killer says.
I get (near) zero torque by experimenting. Simply cheat the whole thing into space, deactivate SAS, start rotating the main ring, and adjust the rotation speed of the counterbalancing rings until there's no rotation to be observed. Final values for this craft: main ring vs counterbalancing rings = 10 vs 295.
My own design simply uses two of the larger reaction wheels either end of the centrifuge - then let SAS do its thing. Note: SAS isn't actually that good at dealing with torque over time, its much more efficient to use MJ aircraft autopilot and set roll-hold to 0 degrees :)
My Centrifuge isn't a complete circle either unfortunately - but that's because I build the entire thing in orbit using modules that fit in "realistic" fairing sizes. I suppose you could build a complete ring like this if you used the robotic joints (send up straight then form a circle with hinges) - but my computer struggles with part counts beyond 30 lol.
Still, this is a super nice design!