Spricigo

Members
  • Content count

    864
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

286 Excellent

1 Follower

About Spricigo

  • Rank
    Jeb's disciple

Profile Information

  • Location Not here

Recent Profile Visitors

1597 profile views
  1. [snip] As for good references: I like the videos from @NecroBones playlist at YouTube (the videos itself are from various people) a good chunk of basic and relevant info. @Kottabos mod reviews are very handy (more than once I decide to get a mod because of those reviews) and @kosmoNOT's How to Land , is a classic. Many others deserve mention, unfortunately this thread is not big enough.
  2. In his defence: he didn't said it is necessary. Didn't t even claimed to be related to the question. @CrisCopper Yes, MJ is useful. But many people prefer to not use autopilot. Also, basic understanding of orbital maneuvers and parameters are useful with or without MJ.
  3. Yes, time warp kills throtle. Notice that applies to regular time warp but not for physical time warp. If you are interested, I'd like to see the complete rocket, and know where are you going, so I (and others) may give more tailored advicebut on top of my head consider: -Removing the marked parts and adding a couple of fuel tanks instead. By my math it'll drop the deltaV budget from ~2km/s to 1.95km/s. Minimal difference. Try to focus a bit more in collecting science in kerbin different biomes -You are reaching 80km with just 350m/s. To archive orbit you need horizontal velocity, the only reason to going up is to avoid drag*. That means you should use more energy to build up horizontal velocity and less to climb while reducing losses by drag/steering**. Since Kerbin have an atmosphere a gravity turn is advisable, right after launch tip the rocket a few degrees east and let it follow prograde (the exactly time and amplitude of that initial tilt will depend on the particular rocket. Some a rule of thumbs: reach 10km at 45, maintain time to apoapsis ~1min). The main advantages are maintaining the thrust aligned to velocity and maintaining your ship mostly parallel to airflow. -You should consider to focus a bit more on collecting science around KSC to unlock a few parts that will make your attempt to orbit easier (e.g bigger fuel tanks, more optimized vacuum/atmosphere engines(terrier/reliant), stronger SRBs(thumper), radial decouples, nosecones, control surfaces). *collision with the terrain is just a particular type of drag for that purpose. **some will add gravity losses. Which in some sense is just to say that one want to go horizontal fast as quickly as possible.
  4. another possibilities: - Your staging sequence is not correct and you activated a different engine higher in the stack (which have the nozzle blocked and produce no thrust) -the game consider the engine inside a cargo bay/fairing because a clipping issue or it decoupled from an closed bay/fairing. Just for the sake of completeness, because seems you are in very early career (given the fuel tank you are using and how you are piloting)Edit, after looking at the screenshot the first one is possible. Definitely don’t sound like the start of an interplanetary mission for me. In any case, a picture* of your vessel and a description of the goals may help us to you. We may spot a problem that you didn't even notice, without delving into details that are not relevant for the task at hand. *you need to put the picture in a external host (like the popular imgur) and post the link to the image file.
  5. I just checked and actually they have the same Max temp *. Also the lower mass helps to slowdown. A bad trajectory may be a problem, but pretty safe from LKOish. Although the lower mass of the material bay may make it get hot quickly. I admit my understanding of KSP's heat is flawed at best.
  6. Those are common dependencies for several mods (often bundled together for convenience) . AFAIK nothing in your list need those, so I wonder why CKAN suggested it.
  7. I think that is what the mod Kopernicus is for.
  8. None. Parachite, probecore, antenna, solar panel, goo canister, material bay, heatshield, decoupler, fuel tank, landing legs and terrier. I guess, given or taken, 400kg he want to recover and 700kg below it. The weak point seems to be the material bay. Keeping it shielded from heat may be tricky. If it had the same heat resistance of a Mk1 Mk1 command pod it would be be easier because of higher drag and lower weight.
  9. Got it! Need to burn downward to go faster while burning outward to stay in orbit. I thought was exactly the oposite
  10. Raise your periapsis as much as needed to not burn, if that is not enough to capture just make more passes. The fuel left use for the eventual adjustments at apoapsis. You can also send a kerbal in EVA to collect the science.
  11. A basic understanding of the concept is certanly usefull, but actual number are much less important IMHO. Rocket optimization is a long ongoing discussion around there. The closest thing to a conclusion people reached is "depends" . SRB are cheap, pack a considerable punch, have a considerable dry weight and low Isp. It mostly relegate then for when a kick out off the launchpad is nedeed(/is usefull). That kick may be just to the first hundreds of meters or enough to put the rocket in the space depending on the design. Some tasks are easy done with planes. But nothing you can't do, or choose to not do, without planes. maybe a mod feature, but I use offset tool to put it out of the way when necessary. Is a good solution... If you don't mind that the pieces physical holding your rocket are visualy 5m away. You may like to know about KSC microbiomes. Those are ground only biomes in the KSC gorund, they are tied with particular buildings in the complex (e.g. VAB Round Tank; VAB tanks) , meaning that as you upgrade the facilities you will unlock new ones.
  12. Any chance the panel is clipping inside the service bay? If it goes "blocked by aero shielding" again, try to open the service bay and see if makes any difference.
  13. Nah! increase to 150% and go do some aerobatics. Seriouly, for a plane that small probably using elevon 1 shuld be enough maybe just a basic fin for vertical stabilazer (either bank to turn or just rely on reaction wheels for yaw). Interestings. Mine is a bit heavier, with have more wing area, high tail and 3 degrees of incidence. Takes off with no control at 50m/s. A bigger difference than I was expecting.
  14. That basicaly is the first step in the way to solve any problem. @Lord_Archaic https://kerbalx.com/Spricigo/KarlJatho similar to your design but with thrust aligned to CoM, wing incidence and inclined wheel base. Also 2 crew spaces for pilot & scientist. Very easy to takeoff and fly.
  15. It's that difficult to respect other people opinions and preferences? Play your game wherever you like and stop being a duck.