Kerbal Space Program: Hardware Rich Combustion

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Kerbal Space Program: Hardware Rich Combustion

«‹›390 »

Jack the Lad: Jan 20, 2009; Feed the Pubs

Psawhn posted:

(This is my favourite gravity assist so far:

What's your conic draw mode set to? This screenshot makes me feel like 3 is not enough.

# ? May 20, 2014 14:07

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 9, 2024 19:00

emf: Aug 1, 2002

Shanakin posted:

Pretty sure those are the standard manoeuvre nodes.

Mine look like this. They've always looked like this, too. I would love to change them, but I haven't seen anything in the menu or the config file to do so.

Only registered members can see post attachments!

# ? May 20, 2014 14:37

Shanakin: Mar 26, 2010; The whole point of stats are lost if you keep it a secret. Why Didn't you tell the world eh?

A guess but are you on linux/mac perhaps? I'm thinking it might be a discrepency between the DX rendering and openGL.

On the other hand I'm probably talking out of my rear end.

# ? May 20, 2014 14:40

GuardianOfAsgaard: Feb 1, 2012; Their steel shines red
With enemy blood
It sings of victory
Granted by the Gods

Looks like you're running at pretty low resolution, could be something to do with that or some other graphics settings.

# ? May 20, 2014 14:41

haveblue: Aug 15, 2005; Toilet Rascal

I'm on a Mac set to highest quality everything and it looks identical to Psawhn's screenshot.

# ? May 20, 2014 14:46

fart simpson: Jul 2, 2005; DEATH TO AMERICA

emf posted:

Mine look like this. They've always looked like this, too. I would love to change them, but I haven't seen anything in the menu or the config file to do so.

I think you're playing the MS-DOS version, am I correct?

# ? May 20, 2014 15:15

Mister Bates: Aug 4, 2010

emf posted:

Mine look like this. They've always looked like this, too. I would love to change them, but I haven't seen anything in the menu or the config file to do so.

Wow, do they still make 1024x768 monitors?

# ? May 20, 2014 16:06

Geemer: Nov 4, 2010

Mister Bates posted:

Wow, do they still make 1024x768 monitors?

I play at 1024x768 windowed, which is KSP's default setting. Mainly because spaceflight involves a lot of downtime and I like to do other things while waiting for the next node or encounter.

# ? May 20, 2014 16:10

stuart scott: Mar 9, 2007

How much delta V does it take to get to Laythe orbit from the surface of Laythe? I've got a lander powered by 2 aerospikes that has about 3100 delta v. I thought that would be plenty but I keep trying to get into a 56,000 meter orbit and running out during circularization

# ? May 20, 2014 16:16

nimper: Jun 19, 2003; livin' in a hopium den

stuart scott irl posted:

How much delta V does it take to get to Laythe orbit from the surface of Laythe? I've got a lander powered by 2 aerospikes that has about 3100 delta v. I thought that would be plenty but I keep trying to get into a 56,000 meter orbit and running out during circularization

Adjust your ascent profile because that should be enough.

# ? May 20, 2014 16:16

Ratzap: Jun 9, 2012; Let no pie go wasted; Soiled Meat

Avenging Dentist posted:

Surely there are non-game software projects that allow plugins and still let the plugin developer retain ownership of their code, while also covering the asses of the main project's developers. I don't see why it'd need to be any different for a game, except that games attract more manchildren.

But I'll stop obsessing over this now.

Avenging Dentist posted:

To be honest, I don't think there should be a distinction. Art and code are both creative things someone (probably) made for free for their mod, and which one you think is more important to protect really just depends on whether you're an artist or a programmer.

The answer to both of those is the current US legal system. Any company doing business in or with the US needs to work around that framework. Things could be a hell of a lot better but due to the powerful lobbies involved we have the current mess instead. And a public company is required to maximize it's return (ie can be sued if it fails to) which means they must toe the line and at the very least make sure they have the proper wording. Things like the DMCA impact on the reverse engineering necessary to build independent mods. Control and ownership are a big deal for a software shop - the only way to be relatively safe is set up the legal barricades in accordance with the worst conditions you'll be selling to and piles the odds in your favour right from the word go.

I wish the world was different but wishes don't stop bad things from happening and dicks from being dicks just because it doesn't say they can't.

# ? May 20, 2014 16:26

emf: Aug 1, 2002

Geemer posted:

I play at 1024x768 windowed, which is KSP's default setting. Mainly because spaceflight involves a lot of downtime and I like to do other things while waiting for the next node or encounter.

Yeah, this.

The game is running in Windows 7, I bought it off steam, and am running a copy of the game directory with a few mods, but the trajectory paths were always like this, even when I was running full screen.

# ? May 20, 2014 16:40

Mister Bates: Aug 4, 2010

I think MechJeb doesn't like me.

I needed to get some geostationary communications satellites in orbit, and had just unlocked some more MechJeb functionality with my Mun landing science, so I figured this was a perfect time to test it out. I designed the satellite, a small maneuver section, and a fairing to contain it all, then stuck the whole thing on top of the heavy lifter assembly I used for the Mun lander. Tested it once under manual control to make sure it would actually fly, then relaunched and had MechJeb plot and execute a maneuver to get the apoapsis up to 80 km - nowhere close to where the satellite actually needed to be, but I figured I would do that, circularize, then burn up to geostationary altitude. Anyway, I told MechJeb to execute the node, and so the autopilot launched, got about five hundred meters off the ground, then immediately turned on the RCS systems, used them to turn the rocket through 90 degrees, and full-throttled it straight into the ocean. I tried it three times just to make sure it wasn't a glitch, and every time, the autopilot dumped my rocket into the drink at full engine power as soon as it got off the ground. I assume I'm doing something wrong.

# ? May 20, 2014 18:01

haveblue: Aug 15, 2005; Toilet Rascal

What is the orientation of your command module? I think sometimes it can get confused if it doesn't start out pointing straight up.

# ? May 20, 2014 18:02

Edmund Honda: Sep 27, 2003

Mister Bates posted:

I assume I'm doing something wrong.

I think I had this when I put the MechJeb module on sideways. Orientate it aerial upwards and you might be alright?

# ? May 20, 2014 18:03

Ratzap: Jun 9, 2012; Let no pie go wasted; Soiled Meat

Mister Bates posted:

I think MechJeb doesn't like me.

I needed to get some geostationary communications satellites in orbit, and had just unlocked some more MechJeb functionality with my Mun landing science, so I figured this was a perfect time to test it out. I designed the satellite, a small maneuver section, and a fairing to contain it all, then stuck the whole thing on top of the heavy lifter assembly I used for the Mun lander. Tested it once under manual control to make sure it would actually fly, then relaunched and had MechJeb plot and execute a maneuver to get the apoapsis up to 80 km - nowhere close to where the satellite actually needed to be, but I figured I would do that, circularize, then burn up to geostationary altitude. Anyway, I told MechJeb to execute the node, and so the autopilot launched, got about five hundred meters off the ground, then immediately turned on the RCS systems, used them to turn the rocket through 90 degrees, and full-throttled it straight into the ocean. I tried it three times just to make sure it wasn't a glitch, and every time, the autopilot dumped my rocket into the drink at full engine power as soon as it got off the ground. I assume I'm doing something wrong.

Just to be really clear, you are using the ascent guidance right? If you are using the maneuver planner and telling it to make your AP 80km it'll go badly.

# ? May 20, 2014 18:42

LostCosmonaut: Feb 15, 2014

Edmund Honda posted:

I think I had this when I put the MechJeb module on sideways. Orientate it aerial upwards and you might be alright?

Seconding this. I put my MechJeb module on at about a 30 degree angle once, and it decided to fly my rocket at a retarded angle :downs:

. If you don't want to redesign your rocket, it might work if you select your probe core and click 'control from here' before launch. Sometimes KSP decides the MechJeb module is the primary control thing.

# ? May 20, 2014 18:46

Mister Bates: Aug 4, 2010

Ratzap posted:

Just to be really clear, you are using the ascent guidance right? If you are using the maneuver planner and telling it to make your AP 80km it'll go badly.

This was my problem. :downs:

Of course, it now turns out that my original launch plan isn't going to work anyway, because there is exactly one ground station on the entire planet, so the satellite passes out of range over the horizon before I can make my orbital insertion burn and I lose control of it. I'll try designing a heavier lift vehicle and just boosting it directly to geostationary altitude before circularizing.

I might just hire a bunch of random astronauts solely to man groundside control stations and scatter a dozen or so of them around Kerbin, but this will probably be faster.

# ? May 20, 2014 18:56

OAquinas: Jan 27, 2008; Biden has sat immobile on the Iron Throne of America. He is the Master of Malarkey by the will of the gods, and master of a million votes by the might of his inexhaustible calamari.

Well, my fuel truck SSTO is coming along nicely. Need to give it a rocket 'kick' after it flies off the runway to get airborne, but at that point it flies pretty well on jets alone. Had to clip like a mofo to get enough intakes--the Mk II looks like it has a long black bar on either side of the center tank. It was able to make it up to my 300km depot, though most of the fuel was used--still, not bad for a first attempt/Proof of Concept flight.
Of course, the real trick with an SSTO is the landing. I found out that the Mk II's center of mass moved WAY to the rear when dry...by the utter lack of anything resembling stability on hitting the lower atmosphere. RIP probe core.

On the upside, I discovered you can actually empty tanks in the construction buildings, so while the Mk III still has a CoL in front of the CoM, its only slightly in front as opposed to halfway up the fuselage. Hopefully it won't be too bad to control. I also replaced the quad-LV-T45s with a bigass kerbodyne KR-2L--only half a ton heavier, better ISP in vac, AND it's over 3x as powerful. Sticks out a bit in the back but not too terribly. Still need to work on ascent fuel efficiency, but at least I'm delivering half the orange tank now.
Guess I'll see how the re-entry goes when I get home. Bill's scheduled to get back with an asteroid and some sweet Kerbol science after it lands as well. Hopefully the Mk IV will get the benefit of drogue chutes.

# ? May 20, 2014 19:48

Gau: Nov 18, 2003; I don't think you understand, Gau.

Just out of curiosity, why is your fuel depot at 300 km?

# ? May 20, 2014 19:54

xzzy: Mar 5, 2009

Gau posted:

Just out of curiosity, why is your fuel depot at 300 km?

To avoid interfering with time acceleration, I assume.

# ? May 20, 2014 19:55

OAquinas: Jan 27, 2008; Biden has sat immobile on the Iron Throne of America. He is the Master of Malarkey by the will of the gods, and master of a million votes by the might of his inexhaustible calamari.

xzzy posted:

To avoid interfering with time acceleration, I assume.

Pretty much. Nice round number, better time accel, and the orbit is far enough out that a 75x75 can get an easy intercept without waiting too long. I mean, I can also wait on the ground until the station orbits into range, but eh.
I used to have it at 100km, but if I missed the launch window or the ship boosted too slowly it was a PITA to get caught back up with it.

# ? May 20, 2014 20:13

Psawhn: Jan 15, 2011

Jack the Lad posted:

What's your conic draw mode set to? This screenshot makes me feel like 3 is not enough.

Draw mode is 3, which is the default. But it works really well after Squad changed the behaviour so it automatically switches to drawmode 0 when focusing on another body.

CONIC_PATCH_LIMIT, however, I had to bump up to 8. Probably while I was trying to plot that very maneuver.

# ? May 20, 2014 20:43

Zemyla: Aug 6, 2008; I'll take her off your hands. Pleasure doing business with you!

Psawhn posted:

Draw mode is 3, which is the default. But it works really well after Squad changed the behaviour so it automatically switches to drawmode 0 when focusing on another body.

CONIC_PATCH_LIMIT, however, I had to bump up to 8. Probably while I was trying to plot that very maneuver.

Actually, I'm pretty sure you can see more conics if the last conic has a maneuver node on it, no matter what your CONIC_PATCH_LIMIT is.

# ? May 20, 2014 22:21

Farmer Crack-Ass: Jan 2, 2001; this is me posting irl

Met posted:

I haven't played around too much with asteroids because I'm waiting for the contract update to get back into the full swing of the game, but does anyone aerobrake their asteroids against Kerbin's atmosphere? I always see people with crazy long elliptical orbits.

Yeah I recently did an aerobrake on a bigass 2000+ ton Class E.

# ? May 20, 2014 23:05

Ratzap: Jun 9, 2012; Let no pie go wasted; Soiled Meat

Mister Bates posted:

This was my problem.

Of course, it now turns out that my original launch plan isn't going to work anyway, because there is exactly one ground station on the entire planet, so the satellite passes out of range over the horizon before I can make my orbital insertion burn and I lose control of it. I'll try designing a heavier lift vehicle and just boosting it directly to geostationary altitude before circularizing.

I might just hire a bunch of random astronauts solely to man groundside control stations and scatter a dozen or so of them around Kerbin, but this will probably be faster.

You can just edit the RT2 settings to add more ground stations too. The following is an example from an RSS GameData\RemoteTech2\RemoteTech_Settings.cfg file I use but the same applies to normal. Copy the one you have and change the lat/long for additional stations, fake a GUID 1 higher for each.

code:

GroundStations
{
	STATION
	{
		Guid = 5105f5a9-d628-41c6-ad4b-21154e8fc488
		Name = ESA Mission Control
		Latitude = 5.35
		Longitude = -52.75
		Height = 125
		Body = 1
		Antennas
		{
			ANTENNA
			{
				Omni = 7.5E+09
			}
		}
	}
	STATION
	{
		Guid = 5105f5a9-d628-41c6-ad4b-21154e8fc489
		Name = Madrid DS
		Latitude = 40.4
		Longitude = -4.2
		Height = 125
		Body = 1
		Antennas
		{
			ANTENNA
			{
				Omni = 7.5E+09
			}
		}
	}
	STATION
	{
		Guid = 5105f5a9-d628-41c6-ad4b-21154e8fc490
		Name = Canberra DS
		Latitude = -35.4
		Longitude = 148.9
		Height = 125
		Body = 1
		Antennas
		{
			ANTENNA
			{
				Omni = 7.5E+09
			}
		}
	}
}

Or you can get the maneuver node set up and use the RT2 computer to run the burn for you - it's the little calculator icon under the timewarp arrows. When it opens, click the >>> button then 'exec'. It's pretty wobbly and poo poo at steering but it does let you get your initial sats in orbit.

# ? May 20, 2014 23:11

Collateral Damage: Jun 13, 2009

I just had Jeb fly manned missions to put up my initial cluster of geostationary commsats.

# ? May 20, 2014 23:15

Ratzap: Jun 9, 2012; Let no pie go wasted; Soiled Meat

Collateral Damage posted:

I just had Jeb fly manned missions to put up my initial cluster of geostationary commsats.

True that's always the best option if the tech tree allows and because you can build a bus to take out several at a time. There are a number of trees with no manned pods for a fair while though, which the other method(s) will work with.

# ? May 21, 2014 00:12

stuart scott: Mar 9, 2007

nimper posted:

Adjust your ascent profile because that should be enough.

I've tried a few now, with gravity turns at varying heights. Best results were with a gravity turn at 10k (the highest I tried), but I was still 200 m/s or so short for the circularization burn. I checked and the exact numbers are 2985 m/s atmosphere, 3001 m/s vac. Everything I've read suggests that should be more than enough so I'm sort of at a loss. Laythe rotates the same way as every other body right? I've been doing my gravity turn towards the 90 degree heading.

I guess the obvious thing is to try some higher turns.

edit: TWR is 1.97

stuart scott fucked around with this message at 01:21 on May 21, 2014

# ? May 21, 2014 01:05

OAquinas: Jan 27, 2008; Biden has sat immobile on the Iron Throne of America. He is the Master of Malarkey by the will of the gods, and master of a million votes by the might of his inexhaustible calamari.

stuart scott irl posted:

I've tried a few now, with gravity turns at varying heights. Best results were with a gravity turn at 10k (the highest I tried), but I was still 200 m/s or so short for the circularization burn. I checked and the exact numbers are 2985 m/s atmosphere, 3001 m/s vac. Everything I've read suggests that should be more than enough so I'm sort of at a loss. Laythe rotates the same way as every other body right? I've been doing my gravity turn towards the 90 degree heading.

I guess the obvious thing is to try some higher turns.

Whats your TWR? Might be bleeding some of your dv to gravity

# ? May 21, 2014 01:18

Corky Romanovsky: Oct 1, 2006; Soiled Meat

OAquinas posted:

Whats your TWR? Might be bleeding some of your dv to gravity

Could also be not keeping it precisely at optimum velocity@air pressure. Should be greater than Kerbin's, with a lower altitude turn.

e: not sure how the delta-v figures were reached, and they could require in-human flying

ee: vvv I meant delta-v required for orbit. Also, how much monopropellant do you have? You could try dumping some before launch to reduce starting mass.

Corky Romanovsky fucked around with this message at 02:17 on May 21, 2014

# ? May 21, 2014 01:39

stuart scott: Mar 9, 2007

Delta v figures I'm just reading from MechJeb. The weird thing is I'm significantly above sea level too. Shrugs. Looks like a rescue mission is in order.

# ? May 21, 2014 02:04

stuart scott: Mar 9, 2007

Dumping the monoprop (clever!) did the trick! Thanks. Got into orbit with 53 m/s to spare. Docking with the main vessel will be interesting now.

# ? May 21, 2014 03:05

OAquinas: Jan 27, 2008; Biden has sat immobile on the Iron Throne of America. He is the Master of Malarkey by the will of the gods, and master of a million votes by the might of his inexhaustible calamari.

stuart scott irl posted:

Dumping the monoprop (clever!) did the trick! Thanks. Got into orbit with 53 m/s to spare. Docking with the main vessel will be interesting now.

Don't think of it as docking with the main vessel. Think of it as docking with the lander.

# ? May 21, 2014 03:34

Mister Bates: Aug 4, 2010

Advice from this thread helped me get my geosynchronous satellite constellation up and gave me a couple more ground stations for the sake of realism, thanks folks.

That also allowed me to begin unmanned exploration missions, beginning with a proof-of-concept just to see if I could, the Messenger lander:

The lower stage was jettisoned about three hundred meters off the ground, and then the lander's engine used for the final landing. It had almost its entire fuel stockpile left after landing and completing its initial mission, so I had an idea to try taking it biome-hopping. Unfortunately it was on a slight incline and tipped over when I tried to lift it off again, destroying half of the science experiment package and two of the solar panels. It's still technically operational, though, and still has an intact omni-antenna, so I'm going to leave it turned on and use it as a ground relay for unmanned rover missions to the dark side of the Mun.

# ? May 21, 2014 03:49

haveblue: Aug 15, 2005; Toilet Rascal

Day 8 on Vall: A mysterious structure comes into view.

Vallhenge! Where the demons dwell...

Only one thing to do here.

# ? May 21, 2014 04:06

Keiya: Aug 22, 2009; Come with me if you want to not die.

Is there a mod that adds more airstrips to Kerbin? It's rather annoying that the only marked airstrips are right next to one another, especially when you need to do the equivalent of the shuttle's TAL. Or you're stupid and run out of fuel on the other side of the planet.

# ? May 21, 2014 06:16

Ratzap: Jun 9, 2012; Let no pie go wasted; Soiled Meat

Keiya posted:

Is there a mod that adds more airstrips to Kerbin? It's rather annoying that the only marked airstrips are right next to one another, especially when you need to do the equivalent of the shuttle's TAL. Or you're stupid and run out of fuel on the other side of the planet.

ET launchpads or the other construction mod have airstrips you can take somewhere (hyperedit if you CBA) and deploy. I know in RSS there's a config file that might be where you would simply add more airstrips but I've no idea where that file is (I suspect it doesn't exist since it's all defaults) in stock.

# ? May 21, 2014 12:27

Zesty: Jan 17, 2012; The Great Twist

I got a giant envelope in the mail today. It didn't say who it was from. There was a folded up piece of cardboard inside holding something. I wasn't expecting what I saw.

It was awe inspiring, those first few seconds of realization.

It turned out to be an anniversary gift from my girlfriend. :blush:

# ? May 21, 2014 15:58

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 9, 2024 19:00

thehustler: Apr 17, 2004; I am very curious about this little crescendo

Shut the gently caress up is that an original copy? :monocle:

# ? May 21, 2014 16:02

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Kerbal Space Program: Hardware Rich Combustion

«‹›390 »