|
Flagrant Abuse posted:So what would be the most dV-efficient way to match Gilly's plane here? Just one burn at the DN? Radial burn to try to shift the DN a bit further away from Eve? I've got just under 1300 left in my delivery stage. Probably best to raise your Pe at Ap, then adjust at new, higher, slower node. e: auto correct
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 02:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 13:42 |
|
|
I don't know whether this came with the latest version, or if it is something you could always do, but you can click the Ap/Pe tags in the map screen to make the ETA/altitude readout persistent as opposed to only showing when you hover your mouse cursor on the tag.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 03:18
|
|
|
Clark Nova posted:I don't know whether this came with the latest version, or if it is something you could always do, but you can click the Ap/Pe tags in the map screen to make the ETA/altitude readout persistent as opposed to only showing when you hover your mouse cursor on the tag. This Changes Everything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 03:21
|
|
|
Palicgofueniczekt posted:Probably best to raise your Pe at Ap, then adjust at new, higher, slower node. I agree. That apoapsis is way out there, so raising the periapsis should be cheap.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 03:23
|
|
|
Bucnasti posted:The next NASA collaboration should be to reproduce this things flight path. You're probably aware of this but if not, there's a kickstarter type thing to raise funds for a university to revive ISEE3 and put it back into active service, at the moment. Supposedly it was last commanded to return to earth in 2014 with plenty of spare fuel, and they have until June to issue commands to have it enter orbit. http://www.rockethub.com/projects/42228-isee-3-reboot-project-by-space-college-skycorp-and-spaceref#description-tab
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 03:28
|
|
|
Deuce posted:Updates, of course, that will break save files! Hey now, we are getting better at it! 
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 03:32
|
|
|
To be fair, it's mostly that updates break mods which breaks saves.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 03:43
|
|
|
How does the addon API work anyway? Is it actually like documented with what is a public interface you can count on and what isn't?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 03:52
|
|
|
Mr. Wynand posted:How does the addon API work anyway? Is it actually like documented with what is a public interface you can count on and what isn't? If you import the KSP game DLL into Visual Studio, you can view a whole bunch of public .NET objects, and see their public methods and properties. Then you just create your own DLL that can use those objects, and KSP will automatically link it in and run it. Occasionally devs will describe how things actually work, but for the most part, it's not that hard to figure things out just by looking at the objects. There's some community docs on the wiki and elsewhere. Squad makes no guarantees at all that the interface won't change between versions, nor should they, but for the most part, things don't change that much. It's usually some minor change that breaks mods that's pretty easy to fix.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
Maxmaps posted:Hey now, we are getting better at it! I actually wouldn't mind a big update that breaks saves to clean things up a bit. The (A)SAS parts are really bizarre now, and I'd be happy to see everything turned into reaction wheels. Maybe that'd be something to think about when you get to a point where you need to break saves anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 04:03
|
|
|
The last few versions of KSP, I've been building versions of the ATV / Orion vehicle for most of my Kerbin-system missions. Now, I've discovered something better.  Super Soyuz! Very satisfying to fly, even if it is like three times the size. Very capable machine, even if it can't land easily. Landing isn't as big a priority these days, though.   Re-entry is very satisfying. I admit, I rather enjoyed Gravity; it is at least partially responsible for this.   Pardon all the Mechjeb. I'll likely make a gif of it later. Supports RPM IVA views. HGR Dev Thread, DMagic's New Science Parts, FTmN / Kommit Nuclear Engines. Sneaky Kettle fucked around with this message at 05:00 on Apr 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 04:57
|
|
|
OK, I have a question: when would you use a Separator over a Decoupler? It seems like it would just generate an extra piece of debris with the ring.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 05:24
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:OK, I have a question: when would you use a Separator over a Decoupler? It seems like it would just generate an extra piece of debris with the ring. When you're doing a mission that stows a lander like the LEM on a Saturn V. A separator between the bottom of the service module and the docking port on the top of the lander is ideal since you would want it to float away rather than block either your engine or your docking port. My current Apollo style launcher has two decouplers back to back and triggered at the same time to replicate this, because I designed the drat thing before unlocking separators. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:OK, I have a question: when would you use a Separator over a Decoupler? It seems like it would just generate an extra piece of debris with the ring.  Or, more seriously, it works well as a Saturn V style engine shroud when used with ullage motors.  
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 05:42
|
|
|
Nth Doctor posted:My current Apollo style launcher has two decouplers back to back and triggered at the same time to replicate this, because I designed the drat thing before unlocking separators. Mine has this too, but I trigger them separately so I don't have to maneuver around a separator/engine fairing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 05:45
|
|
|
NatasDog posted:
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 05:49
|
|
|
Is there a way to reattach grappling hooks using kas so I can eject them again? I can not for the life of me figure out how to lock it back into ejectable position.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 06:23
|
|
|
Well I designed a system of lander, rover and return stage for a single vessel to duna with no assembly. Then I realized that I already have almost all of the duna science so I just shot it to laythe without redsigning.. or testing. My Rover re-entry engine was on backwards, so I had to play opposite day while landing it. The plan was just to put the rover on nice flat terrain and have mechjeb land the lander right next to it.. until I realized in orbit around laythe that I did not put mech jeb on my lander. Neat, I managed to land it a scant 40km away, I couldnt really tell exactly where I was supposed to hit the ground thanks to the clouds obscuring the entire island I was landing on. All that said, mission success! I think I even have enough dv on the return vessel to do one more moon before returning to kerbin.  Oh poo poo wheres the land  good enough
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 06:26
|
|
|
Did somebody say debris?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 07:10
|
|
|
As long as it's all suborbital 
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 08:30
|
|
|
Silver Alicorn posted:As long as it's all suborbital I think that lot was. Before the update ate my career save the skies were my rubbish dump. Minmus was also littered with defunct unmanned craft and broken stages. So lucky there are limits to the physics engine or I would have had me an ablation cascade. All, or at least most of that debris was from that rocket. If it keeps flying it's still a success.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 09:55
|
|
|
Dammit. The orbital planner thing lied to me and I crashed into the moon when returning from a passby. My first lunar visit, too. Very disheartening.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 10:07
|
|
|
Bucnasti posted:The next NASA collaboration should be to reproduce this things flight path. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 10:09
|
|
|
Is that the n-body plugin?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 10:17
|
|
|
Spookydonut posted:Is that the n-body plugin? No, that's just what happens to the game's patched conics system shits itself. Floating point errors are hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 10:24
|
|
|
Wait, there's an n-body plugin? I could not deal with SOIs and crap?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 10:27
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:Dammit. The orbital planner thing lied to me and I crashed into the moon when returning from a passby. My first lunar visit, too. Very disheartening. Usually it’s not the planner lying so much as it’s time warp screwing with your trajectory.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 10:41
|
|
|
Nth Doctor posted:When you're doing a mission that stows a lander like the LEM on a Saturn V. A separator between the bottom of the service module and the docking port on the top of the lander is ideal since you would want it to float away rather than block either your engine or your docking port. You can connect ordinary parts to the business ends of Docking Ports and undock them just fine whenever you wish. You don't /absolutely/ need to put /anything/ between the bottom of your service module and the docking port on the top of your lander. That said, not having a decoupler or stack separator means that you may have to remember to turn off fuel crossfeed across the docking port to prewvent unexpected draining, and it will them will tend to confuse delta-V calculating mods,and if you're relying on Mechjeb to autostage, it won't automatically realize that you didn't want to turn on the engine sitting atop the docking port with the stage immediately prior.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 10:48
|
|
|
I love this game! I just unlocked the mainsail and liquid fuel booster so I figured I'd give them a try just a basic rocket with one main sail 3 LFB and my basic payload just to see what it could do. I got Reentry effects and a estimated apoapsis of 650 Km before even reaching 40Km above the sea, so I figured "Hey the Mun is in a good place, let's just burn straight there for some science" . Everything worked great until I got back into Kerbins atmosphere where I noticed that I forgot the parachute and I didn't have enough dV for a powered landing , So I burnt all of it getting into any kind of orbit just so Jeb wouldn't die , which was prett hard since I didn't have any electricity and had an engine that couldn't generate any. So now Jeb is waiting in Kerbal orbit for someone to come and rescue him and his science.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 12:42
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:Dammit. The orbital planner thing lied to me and I crashed into the moon when returning from a passby. My first lunar visit, too. Very disheartening. Did you time accelerate through the SOI change? Never do that, it makes all sorts of bad things happen to your orbits. I actually use Kerbal Alarm Clock to stop timewarp a few seconds before SOI changes so they don't get hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 13:22
|
|
|
Gau posted:Wait, there's an n-body plugin? I could not deal with SOIs and crap? Yes, but no. It's also quite bad. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/70881-0-23-5-Orbit-Manipulator-Series-%28WIP%29-%28Updated-March-12-2014%29
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 13:39
|
|
|
Does anyone have a link to that one youtube channel that had all the crazy mun challenges? I'm looking for the video where the guy goes to the mun and back without steering.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 13:51
|
|
|
Just to check something - The SOI systems means theres no gradual shifting of influence from one gravitational body to the next, right? You fly a certain distance away from Kerbin and flick over to Eve (or whatever) gravity? That seems like it would jank around with the moons more than anything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 14:07
|
|
|
ShineDog posted:Just to check something - The SOI systems means theres no gradual shifting of influence from one gravitational body to the next, right? You fly a certain distance away from Kerbin and flick over to Eve (or whatever) gravity? Yup N-body physics allows for orbital perturbation. I suspect the plugin doesn't take planets and moons off rails (I haven't used it though). HOWEVER. 2 body physics with SoI is something like 99% accurate for calculating orbits. You are taking a huge performance hit in FPS and calculation accuracy for the fun of having to visit all your satellites on a regular basis to do station keeping.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 14:13
|
|
|
Fred Breakfast posted:Does anyone have a link to that one youtube channel that had all the crazy mun challenges? I'm looking for the video where the guy goes to the mun and back without steering. You must mean our resident Lord of Crazy, Abyssal Lurker: https://www.youtube.com/user/ablu444
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 14:16
|
|
|
SocketSeven posted:Yup N-body physics allows for orbital perturbation. I suspect the plugin doesn't take planets and moons off rails (I haven't used it though). So current SOI is 2 body?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
Yup. KSP uses 2 body math, and as a result, you get spheres of influence. Also a lot of other neat things Harv decided he wanted.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 14:59
|
|
|
SocketSeven posted:Yup N-body physics allows for orbital perturbation. I suspect the plugin doesn't take planets and moons off rails (I haven't used it though). quote:1. A very simple(primitive) linear limited NBody implementation. Not quite accurate but still give some challenges for mun transfer orbit or even interplanetary transfer. It will only affect the vessel you are controlling, and only by celestial bodies. default ON, toggle: RCtrl+RAlt+N. So you don't need to stationkeep your satellites. It also has atmospheric decay for orbits inside the atmosphere and the big feature, warpable ion engines. quote:3. Warpable engine for those ion thrusters. You can use "Throttle" slider to setup the thrust in time-warp, you might then notice that these thrusters do have over-powered thrust...
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 15:17
|
|
|
Fred Breakfast posted:Does anyone have a link to that one youtube channel that had all the crazy mun challenges? I'm looking for the video where the guy goes to the mun and back without steering. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NN3NMVsOZ7o
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 15:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 13:42 |
|
|
SocketSeven posted:HOWEVER. 2 body physics with SoI is something like 99% accurate for calculating orbits. You are taking a huge performance hit in FPS and calculation accuracy for the fun of having to visit all your satellites on a regular basis to do station keeping. Exactly. It's one of those things where realism for the sake of realism would be hurtful for the game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2014 15:23
|
|