|
I would love it if it were possible to be able to click on the part icons in flight and select options from them. Is this something that may be in store for the future?
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 15:34 |
|
|
Say I land on the moon and want to do some biome hopping. I can see a particular feature from map view that I want to visit, how do I determine which direction to aim when taking off to go toward that specific point? Once I switch out of map view I'm all turned around and have no idea which way the camera is facing. I can't even tell where the poles are from map view, would be cool if they poles/axis of rotation was indicated by a short line sticking our some fraction of the body's radius on the top and bottom.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 08:56
|
|
|
I look at the navball and go off of that, but I get the directions confused at least half the time. Also, when I'm biome-hopping, I've found it useful to do the "hop" almost entirely from the map view. This is also because I go in the wrong direction constantly when I try to hop.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 09:10
|
|
|
peepsalot posted:Say I land on the moon and want to do some biome hopping. I can see a particular feature from map view that I want to visit, how do I determine which direction to aim when taking off to go toward that specific point? Once I switch out of map view I'm all turned around and have no idea which way the camera is facing. In map view, you can rotate the camera around the Mün, but it will never go upside-down. Unless you're looking directly at a pole, north is up, south (180° on the navball) is down, east (90° on the navball) is right, and west (270° on the navball) is left. The Mün’s poles are easy: they correspond to Kerbin’s poles. The Mün’s north pole is “above” the plane of the Mün’s orbit just like Kerbin’s north pole.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 09:13
|
|
|
BMS posted:I should've posted a better image, showing it's orbit in relation to the Mun plane. Given the orbit that the asteroid has now, it will never come anywhere near any of the moons SOI. Under the simulation that KSP aspires to replicate, that shouldn't be possible. If you enter an SOI with a particular speed, and stay on-rails, and perform no burns and never enter another SOI, you'll leave that SOI at the same speed in a different direction, as the balance of kinetic and potential energy that define an orbit requires. Similarly, any elliptical orbit will always go through the point where the last change was made in KSP's physics simulaton. Unless and until some other object's intervenes (or the object makes a burn), the resulting orbit of an object affected by a pass through an SOI of a satellite is guaranteed to pass through the volume of space swept out by the SOI of the satellite unless and until executes a burn, it hits something, is thrown to escape, or ventures into another SOI, at which point the same constraints apply.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 12:41
|
|
|
maltesh posted:Under the simulation that KSP aspires to replicate, that shouldn't be possible. If you enter an SOI with a particular speed, and stay on-rails, and perform no burns and never enter another SOI, you'll leave that SOI at the same speed in a different direction, as the balance of kinetic and potential energy that define an orbit requires. What I think you're not considering is atmosphere breaking, what I think has happened here is the asteroid was on an intercept with Kerbin, and when it entered the atmosphere it lost enough speed to enter an orbit, but then entered either the Mun's or Minimus's SOI on the second time round which messed with it's orbit some more and made it not hit atmosphere but maintain an orbit.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 12:56
|
|
|
Bobsedgws posted:What I think you're not considering is atmosphere breaking, what I think has happened here is the asteroid was on an intercept with Kerbin, and when it entered the atmosphere it lost enough speed to enter an orbit, but then entered either the Mun's or Minimus's SOI on the second time round which messed with it's orbit some more and made it not hit atmosphere but maintain an orbit. Objects on rails don't have atmospheric drag applied.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 13:04
|
|
|
maltesh posted:Under the simulation that KSP aspires to replicate, that shouldn't be possible. If you enter an SOI with a particular speed, and stay on-rails, and perform no burns and never enter another SOI, you'll leave that SOI at the same speed in a different direction, as the balance of kinetic and potential energy that define an orbit requires. The mun gave it a gravity assist at the exact right time
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 14:39
|
|
|
Bobsedgws posted:What I think you're not considering is atmosphere breaking, what I think has happened here is the asteroid was on an intercept with Kerbin, and when it entered the atmosphere it lost enough speed to enter an orbit, but then entered either the Mun's or Minimus's SOI on the second time round which messed with it's orbit some more and made it not hit atmosphere but maintain an orbit. If an object is not within 2km of the focused vessel, entering atmosphere at speed simply deletes the object. I have definitely had my orbits perturbed by munar intersections though so it could well be that it got really lucky with the mun and ended up on escape velocity from the mun and into kerbin's orbit.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 14:44
|
|
|
It would be really cool to be able to put action groups into the staging list, so that (for example) whenever I dump the second stage, the abort tower is also decoupled and activated so it flies off.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 14:44
|
|
|
maniacdevnull posted:The mun gave it a gravity assist at the exact right time Its new orbit would still intersect the toroid swept out by the Mün’s SOI. They would eventually have another encounter.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 14:45
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Its new orbit would still intersect the toroid swept out by the Mün’s SOI. They would eventually have another encounter. I'm fairly sure I've had orbits that ended up well beyond the mun by simply intersecting it at the right time. Admittedly that was roughly coplanar with the mun, so it might not work on the orbital path shown.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 14:51
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I'm fairly sure I've had orbits that ended up well beyond the mun by simply intersecting it at the right time. It's certainly possible for the resulting orbit to take the object much farther, or much closer to Kerbin than the Mun. That's not what's being said. If you have no other influence on the orbit other than passing through the SOI of the Mun, and the object never leaves its on-rails status, however, the resulting orbit /must/ pass within the 2429 km of the orbit of the Mun at at least one point, because that's as far as SOI of the Mun stretches, and the Mun has no influence on any object that's further. That said, looking at the picture again, the object's been Renamed, and the poster said he attempted to plant a flag on it. And to take control of it, you need to bring something close enough to it to take it off-rails, and floating-point glitching from spending any reasonable amount of time off-rails near periapse can turn a marginally-escaping object into a marginally-captured object, or vice versa.' Hmm. I probably should have spent more time looking at the original post. Apologies for coming off as abrasive.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 15:30
|
|
|
maltesh posted:It's certainly possible for the resulting orbit to take the object much farther, or much closer to Kerbin than the Mun. That's not what's being said. Yeah, once it had a steady orbit, I attempted to land on it and plant a flag, as well as rename it. However, it's orbit was already established, and no grabbing device/physical push was made on my part to do so. All I can figure is the Mun or Minmus must have screwed with it's orbit. I DO remember that I was on a trip to Minmus when the little unknown object icon came into view on my map, at a much higher degree of orbit to Kerbin, I used the tracking station to take a look at it, and I can't remember it's exact peri, but it was much, MUCH less than even 1 million, let alone the 2.3 that it wound up at. For whatever it's worth, and believe it or not, I never influenced, or even interacted with the thing until it's orbit was established. Plus, actually plotting an intercept with that thing, being new to the game, and with my limited career mode tech, was a bitch and a half in itself! Plus, I actually did a "somewhat" successful landing on the thing. Didn't have the grabber, but I used my Minmus lander, and touched down...except the craft had a tendency to float away...haha. But, it taught me how to dock, as it is apparently virtually the same thing! Also, I intercepted it at it's Apo, the 77 million mark, not it's Peri. Since it's velocity at Apo is roughly 5m/s, that made that relatively easy..haha
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
Anyone have some tips for using the Rockomax HubMax Multi-Point Connector? It seems to have a mind of it's own as far as what will and won't work. edit: Specifically symmetry. Spelling Mitsake fucked around with this message at 23:19 on May 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:15
|
|
|
Only the top and bottom nodes can be connected to other nodes in the VAB, so if you want to connect one radially you need to turn it 90 degrees.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
Spelling Mitsake posted:Anyone have some tips for using the Rockomax HubMax Multi-Point Connector? It seems to have a mind of it's own as far as what will and won't work. You want to always use the node that starts on top when you initially pick up the piece as your attachment point to your rocket. If you get the fucker twisted around you will have all sorts of trouble.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
It works for most other things, too, but you have to fudge symmetry by building one side up and alt-clicking the root node of that side, rotate it, and stick it on the other side. Interestingly, symmetry then works for it for things like strutting, so long as you start the strut on the main body and have it end at whatever part on the side of the 6-way. If that makes sense. It's a weird part, but it is manageable in weird ways.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:48
|
|
|
DStecks posted:It would be really cool to be able to put action groups into the staging list, so that (for example) whenever I dump the second stage, the abort tower is also decoupled and activated so it flies off. You can do that stuff with the Klockheed Martian smart parts. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/64227-0-23-5-16-Mar-Smart-Parts-V0-5-NEW-Improved-parts-and-new-valve
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:50
|
|
|
Ratzap posted:You can do that stuff with the Klockheed Martian smart parts. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/64227-0-23-5-16-Mar-Smart-Parts-V0-5-NEW-Improved-parts-and-new-valve I really want functionality like that in the core game. Specifically when an economy is implemented, I want delay and activations on separated stages. Mainly for like parachutes on SRBs or whatever, so they can wait a bit to deploy and not get all tangled up with my poo poo. Also, it'd be great to separate and have a turn+burn go on the lower stage to deorbit it or whatever, and other stuff like that.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2014 23:51
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm a dork about cleaning up sometimes too. Occasionally if a stage has like, 50 d/v and the dry mass isn't worth hauling around and I'm only 75km up, I'll spin my ship around, give it 1 percent throttle, decouple, and RCS translate out of the way to let it hopefully deorbit itself. Oftentimes it just goes into a spin even when my ship doesn't bonk into it, though. 
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 03:28
|
|
|
Well, since 0.24 is probably landing sometime with in the next couple weeks, figured I might as well throw some Kerbals to the Joolian system to see if the standard package of spacecraft had the legs to do so. Answer: Yep.  That's Bill, Jeb, and Bob standing closest to the lander, and...three other guys standing with them as well.  Kraken photo op! They were the second spacecraft in the fleert to arrive, at this point, the DSOV Cumberland, Bop Science Station Terpsichore, the Kraken study shack, and the touchdown probes are still on their way, as are a little extra Kethane infrastructure. If I get that all in system, and still have time after mopping things up over Bop, I'll probably take the lander on a jaunt over to Pol. Vall /might/ be doable, but the Cheddar-class landers are Mun-Rated, and probably don't have the delta-V to land Vall and return without a surface refueling.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 03:48
|
|
|
Despite playing for nearly 300 hours, I've never really sent a rover to...anywhere. Besides playing around a little bit with RCS-powered hovercraft on the Mun and Duna, I haven't really done anything with wheels.      It turns out, mixing a rover with KAS can be quite fun.  
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 06:00
|
|
|
About to test this. Stackable SRBs with tunable burn profiles. Advanced SRB Seems like it will be perfect for Shuttle SRB launches.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 10:07
|
|
|
Falken posted:About to test this. Stackable SRBs with tunable burn profiles. Not sure if it has gotten any better, but it used to be unstable as heck and the boosters would just snap in half due to all the joints. I guess they will work better with the 23.5 joint fixes and Kerbal Joint Reinforcement mod installed.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 10:15
|
|
|
I just use the davon tc throttle balancer mod. Tunes thrust limiter in real time to center it around the com. Also works with vtol planes.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 10:29
|
|
|
I'm always able to just turn on debris in the tracking station and terminate the mission to remove it - how come you guys have to manually deorbit stuff?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 10:40
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:I'm always able to just turn on debris in the tracking station and terminate the mission to remove it - how come you guys have to manually deorbit stuff? ~*Immersion*~
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 11:14
|
|
|
Jack the Lad posted:I'm always able to just turn on debris in the tracking station and terminate the mission to remove it - how come you guys have to manually deorbit stuff? Because using the tracking station is reserved for kraken bait pieces that fly at significant fractions of the speed of light, or stuff that's landed on Kerbin. Might as well ask why we don't just use hyperedit or however that mod's called to change the body we're orbiting. 
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 11:32
|
|
|
Nuclear Pogostick posted:Yeah, I'm a dork about cleaning up sometimes too. Occasionally if a stage has like, 50 d/v and the dry mass isn't worth hauling around and I'm only 75km up, I'll spin my ship around, give it 1 percent throttle, decouple, and RCS translate out of the way to let it hopefully deorbit itself. Oftentimes it just goes into a spin even when my ship doesn't bonk into it, though. Depending on my current orbit trajectory, I will spin the ship and then eject the jettison part in a deorbiting direction. It takes a bit of practice to avoid snapping engines off and stuff, but what's a bit of electrical charge to generate spin when you have solar panels?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 11:35
|
|
|
I trigger SECO before my periapsis rises above the pruning altitude. Eject fairings, separate payload and have it perform an orbital insertion burn of 100-200 m/s. No Kessler syndrome 
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 16:38
|
|
|
Kessler Syndrome can’t happen in KSP because debris can’t meaningfully collide with each other to generate more debris. 
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
Falken posted:About to test this. Stackable SRBs with tunable burn profiles. I never quite understood why the stock SRBs weren't stackable, given that actual, real life SRBs are stackable. It'd certainly make it easier to get the right amount of overall thrust from your SRBs.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 16:55
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Kessler Syndrome can’t happen in KSP because debris can’t meaningfully collide with each other to generate more debris. Then I'll just have to generate some more to pick up the slack 
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Kessler Syndrome can’t happen in KSP because debris can’t meaningfully collide with each other to generate more debris. It can if it hits something big and splits it into chunks. The real inhibitor of Kessler Syndrome is that collisions can only occur with the active craft.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
That’s the point. No chain reaction; no Kessler Syndrome.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
You can jimmy-rig a half-rear end stacked SRB with stack separators and a bunch of small SRBs. Use the right-click to vary the thrust and even the fuel load to specify how long the booster stack should burn at a given thrust. Set the stage order so that staging simultaneously separates an SRB while igniting the next one in sequence. It'll take a firm hand at the helm, but then, that's just part of the game isn't it?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
There is no Kessler Syndrome. Only high velocity docking.  It's always exciting when my space station is between me and my planned intercept point.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
I completely forget to check the debris orbits for several weeks. I only remember when I'm doing a launch and see a grey marker show up with a distance measurement next to it, and am curious where it came from. So I got to the map and hit the button at the top of the screen and  Could probably build an army of Voltrons off the crap I throw away.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 18:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 15:34 |
|
|
Avenging Dentist posted:I never quite understood why the stock SRBs weren't stackable, given that actual, real life SRBs are stackable. It'd certainly make it easier to get the right amount of overall thrust from your SRBs.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2014 18:47
|
|