|
illectro posted:It's not technically correct, by the time the US scientists got to see the engines Closed cycle engines had been flying on the space shuttle for over a decade so the technical challenges had been surmounted, but the soviet engines still had a better thrust to weight ratio than the SSME (although to be fair they used different fuels), the performance of this decades old engine still impressed them enough that they thought there must be some error in performance figures they were getting quoted. Merlin is itself an open-cycle engine, I believe. As is RS-68, the main engine on the Delta IV rocket.
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 18:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 19:12 |
|
|
Maxmaps posted:Our new modder agreement will get rid of all that, once we move to the new platform. Awesome. I hadn't really experienced any ads/nagging/begging except that Kerbal Alarm Clock will check the internet for updates, and network access in an ostensibly single player offline game is kind of a red flag for me. On a related note, is there any reason why the launcher wants to run KSP.exe with elevated privileges on Windows 8? I've been running it without admin access for as long as I've been playing, and have had zero problems. (Yes, I am a paranoid weirdo.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 18:52
|
|
|
Maxmaps posted:Our new modder agreement will get rid of all that, once we move to the new platform. Thank you! This is a bit pie-in-the-sky but are you guys considering alternate launch locations ever? It would be pretty cool if you could choose to launch from, say, Duna in freeform mode.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
Clark Nova posted:(Yes, I am a paranoid weirdo.) We're literally feeding all your datas to the Cartels 24/7. Seriouspost: No idea, I'll ask our support staff because I'm way behind on issues related to those who through no fault of their own have been afflicted with having Windows 8 as an OS.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
Well I finally landed on You guys were right, Minmus is much easier to land on (and thus escape from). The real difficulty was figuring out maneuver nodes. Now to try a return trip from Mun...I can land on it just fine (through probably horrible inefficient fuel wise) but getting back is what is really giving me trouble.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
I'm very pleased to hear that there's a new modding agreement in the works that'll quash some of the less desirable things that come along with modding.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
Away all Goats posted:Well I finally landed on Getting back is actually pretty easy! Get into a low orbit. Now, pretending that 0 degrees is the spot in your orbit that lines up with the direction of Mun's orbit around Kerbin, start a prograde burn when you're about 30 or so degrees *past* that point in your orbit around Mun, like so that you're starting to move "backwards" in that orbit. Burn prograde so that your orbit ejects Mun's SOI going opposite from the direction that Mun is orbiting around Kerbin. If you look at your new orbit in Kerbin's SOI, you'll note that it will have a fairly low periapsis. Burn prograde more until you get that periapsis for Kerbin where you want it. If you overdo it, turn around while still in Mun's SOI and burn retrograde very gently to correct. If you think about it, doing that prograde maneuver is basically the same as burning retrograde at apoapsis in Kerbin orbit. I may have done a terrible job of explaining it. Does that make any sense?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
I'm sitting over here waiting for links to tear filled rage posting from modders who are unable to pay their rent after Squad announces their new policy. It should be a fun few days.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:50
|
|
|
Away all Goats posted:Well I finally landed on I've personally found that a small burn to get on a ballistic impact trajectory, and then burning retrograde ~3-5km above the surface to cut horizontal velocity and doing a slow burn down to land uses the least fuel. Conceptually it shouldn't matter either way and the planet's accelerating you downward equally regardless of your lateral velocity, so dropping like a rock or doing like this should burn the same amount of fuel, but I'm somehow more comfortable going 500m/s on a ballistic trajectory than straight into the planet surface. v  v
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
^^^I've been trying to drop straight down onto the surface but I'll try that next time!shortspecialbus posted:Getting back is actually pretty easy! Get into a low orbit. Now, pretending that 0 degrees is the spot in your orbit that lines up with the direction of Mun's orbit around Kerbin, start a prograde burn when you're about 30 or so degrees *past* that point in your orbit around Mun, like so that you're starting to move "backwards" in that orbit. Burn prograde so that your orbit ejects Mun's SOI going opposite from the direction that Mun is orbiting around Kerbin. If you look at your new orbit in Kerbin's SOI, you'll note that it will have a fairly low periapsis. Burn prograde more until you get that periapsis for Kerbin where you want it. If you overdo it, turn around while still in Mun's SOI and burn retrograde very gently to correct. The bolded part is what gives me trouble  I usually end up burning so much fuel trying to kill horizontal velocity and slow my descent down enough that I barely have enough fuel when I land. Like I said, it's probably just me being way too liberal with fuel usage and/or my rocket design. But my Minmus mission just unlocked a whole bunch of parts including some giant rockets so I've got high hopes for my next Mun mission.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:52
|
|
|
Away all Goats posted:^^^I've been trying to drop straight down onto the surface but I'll try that next time! Extra parts will help. Another thing you can try is a bi-elliptical transfer, which can occasionally save fuel over a hohmann transfer, and will help with your velocity at periapsis on Mun. That said, as far as exiting Mun, you don't actually need a stable orbit to leave. Wait til you're right about at that 0 degree spot I referred to, blast off and immediately start turning towards 90 degrees on the navball, only getting high enough to clear mountains. Unlike Kerbin, there's no atmosphere, so there's no reason to blast straight up for anything other than terrain avoidance. Once you're pointed in the correct direction (90 degrees on the navball and horizontal so that you're neither pointed up nor down,) just continue to burn prograde watching the map view for your orbit to exit Mun's SOI. Then adjust Kerbin Periapsis as required with what I mentioned earlier. It's actually not all that much dV to get back from Mun's surface.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 20:04
|
|
|
RubberJohnny posted:OK, I was a bit premature with my bashing of the campaign in this, once you get to the Mun and Duna and start bringing in big science it works well and is fun. That whole Kerbin stage still seems spectacularly misjudged, whoever thought taking a soil sample next to the launchpad was an intuitive first step for new players should have their dev tools taken away. There are some key parts I'd move around, and it needs a balance pass, but there's a decent foundation there. There's no requirement to do the experiments on Kerbin, so ignore that stage if it bothers you so much. I think once the tutorial system is more fleshed out, it'll make more sense (if there's a tutorial to show you how to do experiments by having you do them on Kerbin). I'm sure NASA did quite a few soil samples on earth to test their equipment before doing so on the moon. And saying things like "should have their dev tools taken away" makes you a dick. It's unfinished early access software, and I think Squad is doing a fantastic job. Grow up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 20:10
|
|
|
Away all Goats posted:
I wanted to add another thing here quick - one thing often overlooked is that "less is often more, smaller is often better" when it comes to actual efficient rocket design (I'm ignoring all  aspects here.) In a lot of cases, bigger rockets will just exist to lift themselves and you'll end up with a rocket many times more complex than it needs to be. You can get to Mun and back very very easily on the 1.25mm parts if you're only sending a capsule and necessary extras/science over. There's silly extreme cases of this as well with Minmus missions involving a tiny fuel tank and the tiniest rocket and a chair done by Abyssal Lurker or whatever. Remember that larger parts weight more, and in a lot of cases, it's better to reduce weight rather than add thrust.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
That is the least answer possible, but probably also the 'correct' way to do it. One thing that helps is abusing the quicksave function. Get into orbit around Mun, then quicksave and try your approach over and over and over. Then evaluate if you have enough fuel to get home. If you don't have enough to get back and don't want to leave Jeb to an untimely and not nearly explodey-enough death, hold F9 and do some science while in Mun orbit and head home instead.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 20:31
|
|
|
RubberJohnny posted:OK, I was a bit premature with my bashing of the campaign in this, once you get to the Mun and Duna and start bringing in big science it works well and is fun. That whole Kerbin stage still seems spectacularly misjudged, whoever thought taking a soil sample next to the launchpad was an intuitive first step for new players should have their dev tools taken away. There are some key parts I'd move around, and it needs a balance pass, but there's a decent foundation there. You don't need to sample the launchpad/runway/etc necessarily to progress, it's just some free science. With no science you can already get a bunch just from getting suborbital crew/EVA reports and landing in a random biome by literally just slapping a booster/liquid rocket under your capsule and taking a surface sample at landing. With the first science parts alone you can make a Kerbin biome hopper that still feels more involved to visit some of the intuitive biomes like the polar regions or the desert. Once you get radial decouplers and the Materials bay you can do some Munar/minmus biome hopping. Once you realize that you can ditch your heavy science rocket once all data is transferred to the cockpit (Maxmaps, this better be part of the tutorial), smart/efficient rocket design goes a long way toward not having to cheesing launchpad/runway for Science. I still strongly suggest installing CustomBiomes mod so that for now there are actual biomes on all of the planets, not just Mun and minmus. I got a bit tired of constantly hopping the mun so now sending unmanned probes/rovers to further away planets that I can't handle with manned yet (I use the lifesupport plugin) is actually worthwile. Fishstick fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Apr 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 20:33
|
|
|
shortspecialbus posted:I wanted to add another thing here quick - one thing often overlooked is that "less is often more, smaller is often better" when it comes to actual efficient rocket design (I'm ignoring all This x100. You only need
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
The Green Calx posted:This x100. You only need something like 700 delta V to escape from the Mun to a a stable orbit, which can be achieved with a small white tank, 3 or 4 small white tanks attached radially and fuel fed into the main tank, and a small orange engine. Additionally: 2 stage landers are great. Once you have radial decouplers, the standard tank + 4 radial becomes a lot more interesting. Transfer your science to the return pod, transfer fuel from the radials that have all the heavy poo poo like legs and science attached, and decouple them on ascent. The only thing you should be returning in the start is your pod and a parachute. Fishstick fucked around with this message at 20:39 on Apr 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 20:37
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:That is the least Yeah, it definitely is un- . However, if you learn how this works, then it makes going all kerbal crazy all the more fun in my opinion. Plus there's times you actually want efficient rather than comical. Quicksave abuse is also useful. I'll also reiterate suggesting that you try installing mechjeb into a sandbox game, and watch it do an ascent, a mun intercept, a mun landing, and a mun return at some point. It'll clear up a lot of what you're doing wrong.The other side of the coin on that is that in some ways you *shouldn't* use mechjeb before you've managed all that youself because it'll take out some of the fun and discovery (as well as pride) but it really will teach you pretty quickly about orbital mechanics and how to actually do things.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 20:45
|
|
|
VanSandman posted:This is a bit pie-in-the-sky but are you guys considering alternate launch locations ever? It would be pretty cool if you could choose to launch from, say, Duna in freeform mode. As an aside, have the developers ever commented on the idea of pontoons, for splash downs and sea planes? That could be fun for a take off and landing option. I've been wondering about this since I saw Scott Manley's video of a sea plane made with jet intakes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
Maxmaps posted:Seriouspost: No idea, I'll ask our support staff because I'm way behind on issues related to those who through no fault of their own have been afflicted with having Windows 8 as an OS. I get this on Windows 7 too (probably in no small part because I installed KSP to the Program Files folder). I think one of the main issues is just that saves are stored in the KSP program directory instead of a user directory. That's generally bad practice, and it'd be nice to see that fixed someday...
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
Dwight Eisenhower posted:I've personally found that a small burn to get on a ballistic impact trajectory, and then burning retrograde ~3-5km above the surface to cut horizontal velocity and doing a slow burn down to land uses the least fuel. When you DO start to cut horizontal velocity, make sure your navball is set to surface mode, so that the rotation of the Mun is accounted for.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
What altitude is considered high and low orbit for collecting science?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
Never did I think I'd link to something on Newgrounds again. http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/637971
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:45
|
|
|
TescoBag posted:What altitude is considered high and low orbit for collecting science? 250km+ = high 69km to 249.9km = low
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
Maxmaps posted:Never did I think I'd link to something on Newgrounds again. http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/637971 Holy poo poo that's fantastic, even if I feel dirty for being on Newgrounds again
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:52
|
|
|
VanSandman posted:Thank you! Easy, build your own. With Blackjack. And Hookers!   In other words, there was a mod for that 3 versions ago, it works even better now if you care to take a shot at it. Edit: unrelated but I just noticed a new MechJeb build - "Ascent AP can now schedule launches at interplanetary transfer windows." Ratzap fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Apr 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:52
|
|
|
Ratzap posted:250km+ = high Thanks very much!
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 21:57
|
|
|
I'm having some trouble with KSP's borderless window mode- you know, the fullscreen-windowed option? The game won't launch after I select that option, and I'd really like it to. During long burns its nice to have the game running in the background. Is this a common problem?
illrepute fucked around with this message at 22:49 on Apr 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
illrepute posted:I'm having some trouble with KSP's borderless window mode- you know, the fullscreen-windowed option? The game won't launch after I select that option, and I'd really like it to. During long burns its nice to have the game running in the background. Is this a common problem? Are you using any texture reduction mods, specifically the active texture reduction mod? I've noticed it goes through its whole thing again if you change modes/resolutions - and as such takes a looooooooooong time to load when the game seems unresponsive. Fishstick fucked around with this message at 23:50 on Apr 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 23:46
|
|
|
Fishstick posted:Are you using any texture reduction mods, specifically the active texture reduction mod? I've noticed it goes through its whole thing again if you change modes/resolutions. Unfortunately, no. This is only really a problem because I'm in the middle of trying to maneuver a rather cumbersome asteroid into low orbit and these twenty-minute NERVA burns are killing me without the ability to alt/tab out. I'd also like to raise my concern with asteroid physics, since I've already had more than one asteroid lander freak out, phase through its asteroid, and then break apart immediately after exiting time acceleration.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 23:50
|
|
|
Dwight Eisenhower posted:I've personally found that a small burn to get on a ballistic impact trajectory, and then burning retrograde ~3-5km above the surface to cut horizontal velocity and doing a slow burn down to land uses the least fuel. Yeah, this definitely uses less fuel but it's more time consuming & takes a bit more effort. If I have extra fuel, I'll just go straight down cause it's easier. I hadn't played this for a few months until last night & I'm really happy with the improvements that have been made so far. KSP is at least in the top ten of my favorite games ever & it keeps getting better. Also, it's nice to see you getting out & posting in other threads Max. You seem to fit in pretty well around here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 01:05
|
|
|
illrepute posted:Unfortunately, no. This is only really a problem because I'm in the middle of trying to maneuver a rather cumbersome asteroid into low orbit and these twenty-minute NERVA burns are killing me without the ability to alt/tab out. I'd also like to raise my concern with asteroid physics, since I've already had more than one asteroid lander freak out, phase through its asteroid, and then break apart immediately after exiting time acceleration. I used to be able to alt-tab out of KSP and it'd run merrily in the background, but recently, on Windows, its been just holding when I tab out. I'm not sure if anything's changed, but I guess its a thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 01:24
|
|
|
MechJeb Changelog posted:#235 (Apr 23, 2014 3:58:02 AM) Well it won't outright replace Protractor, but it's nice to have.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 01:25
|
|
|
I've been using Borderless Gaming for a few months now, it works great. https://github.com/Codeusa/Borderless-Gaming
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 01:27
|
|
|
Okan170 posted:I used to be able to alt-tab out of KSP and it'd run merrily in the background, but recently, on Windows, its been just holding when I tab out. I'm not sure if anything's changed, but I guess its a thing. It's changed in 23.5 yeah because I used to do the same thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 01:27
|
|
|
Maxmaps posted:Never did I think I'd link to something on Newgrounds again. http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/637971 The end is the best part. Also, posted on the FB page http://bit.ly/1nFXl97 (Omega from Mass Effect) Freakin' awesome. My KSP can't have enough Mass Effect. Although, honestly, I will never get around to doing anything like it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
Okan170 posted:I used to be able to alt-tab out of KSP and it'd run merrily in the background, but recently, on Windows, its been just holding when I tab out. I'm not sure if anything's changed, but I guess its a thing. If you add "-popupwindow" to the launch options in steam (or append that to a desktop shortcut) and set KSP to full screen it will act as a proper, borderless window.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 01:43
|
|
|
Elder Postsman posted:When you DO start to cut horizontal velocity, make sure your navball is set to surface mode, so that the rotation of the Mun is accounted for. Or you can just suicide drop straight at the Mun. Try to tweak your intercept to pass through the center of mass of the moon, when you change to the Mun's SOI you should be on a collision course. Since you are in essence dropping straight down you have a bare minimum of angular momentum to burn, just burn like a madman near the surface and don't die. Once you do it a few times and get used to it and if you designed your lander to be light as hell you will use very little fuel to land. The only downside is you can only aim at landing sites facing you as you approach the Mun, but you can also change your inclination a hell of a lot cheaper than if you establish an orbit first so there are perks as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 01:51
|
|
|
A little late, but I came across this awesome guide (with pictures) for aircraft in KSP. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/52080-Basic-Aircraft-Design-Explained-Simply-With-Pictures Really helped me getting something to fly with ferram installed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 02:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 19:12 |
|
|
Bozonofski posted:A little late, but I came across this awesome guide (with pictures) for aircraft in KSP. With as many times as this gets posted here, it should be in the OP.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2014 02:19
|
|