|
Concise but useful OPs, thanks Thwomp.  Have not played the new version yet, but making it have more of a feeling of ~progression~ is a huge selling point on taking another look at it.
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2014 01:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 17:33 |
|
|
mustard_tiger posted:Why are the landing wheel so high in the hierarchy when the first plane parts aren't? makes no sense to me. Well you gotta fly first before you bother worrying about landing. What, do you think Kerbal Science makes advances by playing it safe?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
Are parts detached from a vehicle tracked by default yet, or do you still need a mod for that? I used to run some parts recovery mod and put parachutes on all of my boosters for the purposes of saving money. Back then, any part that got too far from a vehicle simply stopped existing by default and there was no way to recover their cost; thus, the mod.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2015 15:59
|
|
|
haveblue posted:You still need a mod if you want them to act as though they made it safely to the ground and get recovered. That is exactly the functionality I want. Thanks, will hunt for it then. e: Followup question, is it possible to do a workaround with this sort of thing by just attaching a probe core to each booster so that each then counts as a vehicle?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2015 16:02
|
|
|
is there any way yet to pick a default pilot so that Jebediah doesn't get automatically slotted into any vehicle you forget to specify another pilot? e: Also, does anyone remember the name of a science mod whose ingame icon looked like a beaker? Its functionality was to cancel timewarp and flash its little beaker button to indicate new science was available; and, rather than clicking around on your spaceship's science doodads you could just click the buttons on the mod's interface to do your science. I looked for "Science" on curse and did not immediately recognize it in the 4 pages of results. e2: \/ \/ \/ \/ Science Alert is it, thanks Tippia. Addamere fucked around with this message at 16:57 on Jul 7, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2015 16:37
|
|
|
goose fleet posted:This is basically what I'm asking: there are a bunch of rockets grounded on a moon and they're pointed at space. You fire all the rockets at once. In real life, it is possible—though infeasible—with current technology to deliver enough power through human intervention to deorbit some celestial bodies. Many are far too e: precision of language Addamere fucked around with this message at 03:44 on Jul 8, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2015 03:38
|
|
|
I have looked on YouTube and do not see a good tutorial for the current version of KSP. It would be nice to see tutorial episodes that show low-science, few-parts vehicles with which to do the major milestones, with each of these vehicles and milestones comprising their own episode; for example, "KSP v1.0.4 Tutorial 3 - Kerbin Orbiter," "KSP v1.0.4 Tutorial 5 - Minmus Landing and Return," etc. I know that Scott Manley has his beginner's series for the new version in which many of the milestones are reached, but it is not so organized and finding any particular mission in it is a bit of a bother. Would there be any interest in making such a series from scratch?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
nope!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2015 03:58
|
|
|
revdrkevind posted:you want a StarFury. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:They're infinite, but unless you go for a good concentration vein the output will be rather small--like charging a Tesla with 9V batteries in parallel. Sure you can, but it's not a solution you'd want to do. Have you not seen Scott Manley's video where he got to Minmus in .22 with only the starting tech's capsules, solid rocket boosters, liquid fuel tanks, and explosive decoupling? Doing it with a thousand tiny things because you haven't yet invented the more efficient thing—or just to say "gently caress you, dad!" to the Cosmos—is a really satisfying experience.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
Peas and Rice posted:Nope! The lander rendezvoused with the interplanetary transport for the return trip. I have a similar story! Last night, I did four missions: First, stranded Jebediah on the Mun because opening the 1.25-meter service bay doors while landed caused the rest of his lander to explode. rip Mun One Second, launched to Minmus a refined version of the lander which does not explode when its service bay doors are opened and returned it safely to Kerbin. Minmus One was a success! Third, launched into Kerbin orbit a Mobile Processing Lab with radial Photovoltaic Panels, a terrified non-Orange Suited scientist, docking ports, a probe core, and RCS ports. Fourth, launched into Kerbin orbit a slight modification of Minmus One, whose nose-mounted parachute is replaced with a nose-mounted docking port. Today after things are done in town, Mun Two will ram into Orbital Science and push it to the Mun. I have no idea if there is enough fuel to recover Jeb with this mission, after stabilizing the lab in orbit of the Mun, but if not then a followup mission definitely will have sufficient fuel to recover all three Kerbonauts. Either that, or they will all explode in space when some errant moving part causes the entire thing to go tits up. e: Speaking of things randomly exploding, do stock rover wheels still break all the goddamned time and for no reason? Addamere fucked around with this message at 19:36 on Jul 16, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
Nth Doctor posted:For content: I've gotten back into the game for the first time since Beta, having fully abandoned my Beta career. It means I'm doing silly things like using SRBs slightly angled as a first stage so as to spin stabilize rockets for altitude records and whatnot. I'm also learning reentry is a bitch, and I need to go on very gentle slopes in order to have my parachutes survive. Soon, hopefully, I'll be out of scrub-tier. Everything you could have done in beta to game science you can still do: attach experiments to pods and roll them around the launchpad and runway; build a jet-powered car to collect experiments from all over the KSC biomes; etc. As far as reentry, the physics seem tougher now but you can always just reenter with only a capsule and you should be fine. Safe parachute deployment is anything below 270 m/s or so, which you will reach no matter how steep you're coming in so long as you can keep your capsule pointed retrograde as an aerobrake. On that note, heat shields actually have a purpose now!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
accipter posted:Same here! Just started playing again since before 0.9, and I am having trouble with parachutes melting. Can ascending too fast be an issue? Or is it that I am coming in at too steep of an angle? I have a heat shield that is pointed in the direction of travel. Heat actually matters now, yes. If they are melting while ascending then you are going too fast. Throttle down!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
Cubey posted:That seat better be really drat sturdy It has been thoroughly tested to withstand the resting weight of 0.5 Kerbals.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
All this talk about the 64-bit version makes me wonder which version I have and how to tell. I am using whichever version Steam gave me. Is this bad?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2015 22:23
|
|
|
FuSchnick posted:You can't deploy parachutes if you are too fast/hot now. In stock, you want to wait until you are below 250m/s in low Kerbin atmosphere before deploying regular chutes. You can be faster in a thinner atmosphere, like Duna. Also on the note of reentry, keep in mind that vehicle design and orientation can help a lot. As a simple example, consider a basic capsule like this:  If this is your reentry vehicle, then you effectively have an aircraft with wings when you come screaming into the atmosphere at multiple kilometers per second. If you orient it prograde and at a 90- or 270-degrees roll, then the streamlined aerodynamics of the nose and stabilization effect of vertical fins will bring it in like a lawn dart and cause it to either disintegrate in the atmosphere or plow into the surface long before you slow down enough to launch parachutes (not pictured). If on the other hand you orient it retrograde (or pitched "up" a bit) and at a 0- or 180-degrees roll, then the rear end-end of the capsule will naturally serve as an aerobrake and the Mystery Goo Containment Units will generate lift. This by itself can make all the difference! As an example, imagine you're on an orbit with a 500km apoapsis and periapsis 45km with this vessel; different orientations are enough of a difference to either crash into the ground too fast, skip off of the atmosphere for another revolution, or slow down to 270m/s at around 6km.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2015 22:32
|
|
|
I need help. I do not understand how to match orbits for contracts. In this image, I launched (with MechJeb) to a 90-degree inclination with the apoapsis specified in the contract. Pictured here is my current situation, and I have no idea what the gently caress. Mucking around with MechJeb's maneuver planner, I see no way at all to get my orbit to match anything resembling the one in the contract; I can't get it on the same plane, and I don't know how I would do that. Matching its apoapsis and periapsis is easy; matching longitude of ascending node also has a maneuver planner option; but, there is nothing to modify argument of periapsis, and as I said my orbit seems to be on the wrong plane as well. Someone hold babby's hand and explain how to do this please.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2015 09:41
|
|
|
I'm trying to launch a satellite into a specific orbit, not dock; but, all of that should work right?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2015 09:57
|
|
|
Antti posted:He's doing a satellite contract, not a rendezvous. You don't get target or encounter markers when matching orbits with a satellite. I thought it would be as simple as matching Ap/Pe, inclination of orbit, and longitude of ascending node via the MechJeb maneuver planner, but that ends up giving me an orbit that is the right size and shape but is not on the right plane.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2015 10:01
|
|
|
I am too dumb to understand terminology that I've not bothered to actually research, but I am good at pressing buttons in the proper order. Thanks again to poster Collateral Damage for figuring out satellite orbits for my dumb brain and telling me what buttons to mash my fingers at to make the pretty circles line up right. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2015 14:12
|
|
|
hi spookydonut how is post-eve life treating you
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
Quick question. I launched a payload that has 4 satellites attached to it, and have parked payload and one satellite in stable, nearly-circular equatorial kerbin orbit ~245km. I want to deploy the other three satellites, still attached to the payload, equidistant to make a commsat network. My payload had 414 units of liquid fuel and a poodle engine, the satellites each have 18 units of liquid fuel and a spark engine. What steps do I take with my payload/tug and satellites to get those 4 satellites where I want them? Final orbit of payload/tug is irrelevant.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 05:15
|
|
|
Thanks for the help, guys! I now have 4 relay satellites in slightly eccentric/inclined orbits and a space station in a circular equatorial orbit.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2017 18:12
|
|
|
Walton Simons posted:RemoteTech question: Try orbiting a couple of times. It is possible you are never at the right angle to have line-of-sight to KSC, since I notice you lack a relay swarm. Another thing to check, if this is a detached probe that has never before fired its engine — zoom in, and check that the engine is not shut off. Right-click the part, and if it has the option to activate engine click it. Another possible issue is fuel feeds or RCS could be disabled? Probably a few other fiddly things you could add to that checklist.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
a sufficiently large magnetic railgun would allow slow enough acceleration as to make g-forces tolerable and sufficient power to throw things into orbital trajectories plenty of relatively flat or flattenable places on the earth where we could build one, and we have the materials and know the theory of how to do it, but only maybe 3 economies in the world could support the effort to do it (us/eu/china)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:What are you going to do about atmospheric heating Mr. Smart Butt? cry deeply
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
Otacon posted:This is an engraving of Otacon and goons. Otacon is instructing the goons. All craftsdwarfship is of the highest quality.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2017 03:02
|
|
|
Otacon posted:First, make sure you're using the latest version. Most of the time, that's going to be the latest dev release - Sarbian usually releases a few dev versions every week, and I make it a point to update to the latest dev version everytime I boot up KSP. Hopefully by now you know about CKAN - download the latest release of ckan.exe from https://github.com/KSP-CKAN/CKAN/releases and install it anywhere. Run CKAN, let it update, and then point it to the correct KSP location if it asks. CKAN will by default only list compatible mods. You can select alternative mod versions by going into "Settings -> CKAN Settings" then click "New" and find the dev version of Mechjeb. Add it, and click "Refresh" in the main CKAN window to display and install "Mechjeb 2 - DEV RELEASE". Note: You only need the dev version - don't run both at the same time! I followed those instructions and the expected thing did not happen. I have unlocked several features by now in the tech tree, but have no MechJeb window in either the VAB, SPH, or on the launch pad.  Is there something I need to do to make things appear?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2017 03:08
|
|
|
I used no module manager, just CKAN. And it auto-detected MechJeb? I guess I could look for old installs to delete?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2017 04:04
|
|
|
Otacon posted:It sounds like CKAN thinks you're using an older version of MechJeb. Head into the /Gamedata/ folder and remove any mentions of Mechjeb. Relaunch CKAN after. Fixed it! Thanks!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2017 04:30
|
|
|
As now I've plunged into the modding rabbit hole again, is there something like Science Alert nowadays? It was a little mod that gave an alert when you entered a biome with uncollected science, and I think optionally either paused the game or automatically ran the science instruments for you.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
Pioneer42 posted:If the game would show delta-v statistics by default, I would probably not even bother with mods. Yeah, you'd think that if not in the real world then at least in a game world where every variable is known we could have an in-game conversion. You don't tell your random dude that his car has so many foot-pounds of torque or whatever, you say it has x many gallons and y many miles per gallon as a rule of thumb. You should be able to do it for spaceships!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
I have something like 300 hours clocked in this game over the years according to Steam, and to date I have never done anything more than overengineered rockets to Mun and Minmus, with basic landers using the LV-909. I tried out my first rover today. Calling it a sand crawler would be more accurate. It is a Mk 1 lander can atop a decoupler, and a FL-T200 and LV-909 as the fuselage around which are 4 radially mounted science juniors each with a S2 rover wheel. This vehicle was launched to Minmus atop a 2-stage launch vehicle consisting of 4x FL-T800 and a swivel with 4x radially mounted kickbacks. Thanks to Mechjeb and kerbal engineer, my launch and orbit vehicle was very fuel efficient: i ended up running out of my swivel's liquid fuel during my minmus landing descent, and would not have even run out with that had i not accidentally hit a button during spaceflight to minmus that required a correction burn. My crawler is just adorable. I landed in the Greater Flats, and after an initial round of science I lifted off and flew over to the lowlands, then landed again and puttered around to the midlands and highlands. The FL-T200 and LV-909 was way more fuel and engine than a minmus lander and return vehicle needs, I learned - even when weighted down by 4x sciece juniors, rover wheels, mystery goo, etc. Had a single mishap during the mission which I reverted - going up from the greater flats to the lowlands, i hit a steep enough incline that my lv-909 exploded; i was cruising along at 11 m/s and i guess it dragged the ground? easily fixed by slowing down when approaching slopes. After taking 4 rounds of science, I flew back to kerbin and had plenty of fuel leftover. due to mechjeb and ker i am able to have much smaller, more efficient rockets that get far more bang for the buck thanks for the help, kerbal thread!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2017 05:21
|
|
|
Icon Of Sin posted:I need pictures of this monstrosity  Minmus Two in the VAB  Minmus Two rover on the surface of minmus
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
Having settled in to try to do stuff other than land on Mun and Minmus, I thought I'd try out one of those satellite contracts. I already got a set of relay satellites up in low Kerbin orbit thanks to the help of this thread a while back, so I figured I would make this satellite the first in a cloud of longer-ranged relays; thus, the bigger relay antenna. The two-stage launch vehicle easily clears the atmosphere, and with the current design my satellite is left with around 1,500 dV to play with after circularizing a low orbit -- or about half that if I burn straight for a 23,611km periapsis.  And then I'm lost. MechJeb's ascent guidance claims to make launching into the correct inclination easy, but even when I wait for the AN/DN to be lined up with KSP the result is something like this second picture. Note that I am neither on the correct inclination, nor am I lined up in terms of timing. I did not take a screenshot of the final map view that made me abort this, my sixth attempt at matching orbits: one in which I have the right inclination, the right Ap and Pe, but the orbit is out of phase or whatever; i.e., my Ap and Pe are several degrees off (but not a magic-number of degrees like 45 or 90 or 180), and the orbit doesn't count for the contract. I feel like there is something I'm missing with regards to Argument of Periapsis or Longitude of Ascending Node and I don't know what to do. As said above, I can get to reasonably close orbits but I don't know the mechanics behind how I'm doing it other than eyeballing course correction nodes at places where my orbit intersects the target orbit. There seems to be no way to just enter into MechJeb the contract variables, and I don't even know what some of them are or mean. edit: I looked it up on the KSP forums and the advice there is to just do what I'm already doing - launch into correct inclination while lined up with AN/DN of desired orbit, circularize at target orbit periapsis, then just adjust for a new apoapsis. Yeah, the process falls apart somewhere before that final step. Help? Addamere fucked around with this message at 20:01 on Jul 1, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
I guess my issue here is that I've got the phasing wrong? In these pictures, of the same node planning, I have launched to 130km equatorial, then burned out to 28.5Mm circular orbit. My goal is an orbit that is 28.247Mm/23.611Mm at 18.3 inclination, LoAN 171.4, AoPe 133.7 In these pictures, I am plotting a node that's where my orbit and the target orbit visually intersect when seen side-long, and these are two images of it. The goal of this is to match inclination, but you will note my projected Ap/Pe are nowhere near the target. What do?   e: I now have it matched on orbital size and shape but it's still out of phase?? 
Addamere fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Jul 2, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
oh, radial buttons. i was only trying normal and grade thanks
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2017 03:44
|
|
|
Minmus 3 Voyage: Part 1. Liftoff: "Fairings? You mean coward containers? NONSENSE!"  Part 2. Stage separation: "By the dawn's early light (and also lots of explosions), this kerbalship WILL fly!"  Part 3. Orbital Insertion: "My space car drives just fine, thank you. IN SPACE!"  [ to be continued ] I like to think the rover can itself is perplexed by this situation, but that may be me anthropomorphizing expressions from part features.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
Zurui posted:I always cheat myself some science because the beginning science grind is just dumb as hell. I get why it's there to teach the game but gently caress. The amount of science you get from a Mun rocket, all the parts for which are available as soon as you get like any science at all, is enough to get you everything you need for a Minmus rocket — and then you're golden. At most you're saving yourself an initial like 5 minutes of throwing together a capsule, parachute, and solid rocket booster to get your first flight records and splashdown for crew and EVA reports from the launchpad, flying over kerbin, and water.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2017 21:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 17:33 |
|
|
Minmus 3 Voyage, Pt 2. Part 4. Minmus Approach: "Space car coming in hot!"  Part 5. Minmus Landing: "Space car out of gas!" SPACECAR ran out of fuel 32 meters above the surface of Minmus' lesser flats biome, which happily means it touched down softly. It's night time, so SPACECAR will soon also be out of batteries but in the interim we can collect some science. It looks like Jeb will be stranded on Minmus — though with a very stylish and not at all ridiculous SPACECAR he'll be able to drive around during daytime hours — while we spin up Minmus 4 to rescue him. [ to be continued ]
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2017 22:05
|
|