• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

728 Excellent

About RizzoTheRat

  • Rank
    Spacecraft Engineer

Profile Information

  • Location Array

Recent Profile Visitors

2,825 profile views
  1. Other than fact it looks so freaking cool! Interestingly landing near the KSC claims to give a 98% return on funds, but actually gives 100%. Not sure how far away you have to land before it drops below 100%
  2. After recovery. I'm doing a power only landing so need something like 400m/s at the end which will bump tbe cost up a chunk. It started as an experiment to reliably land on the pad using KOS but I landed it on the runway at the moment as getting the range alignment to drop it on the pad needs a lot of fine tuning.
  3. I must admit I hadn't thought about that as well as I should have done, I was thinking in terms of extra weight needing extra fuel, and the extra fuel needing extra fuel etc. But you're right about the rocket equation and I hadn't thought about the drag difference. I scaled up my SSTO to put 42 tonnes in to a 100km orbit last night and it worked out a bit under 800 credits per tonne. That's with 6 vectors, I guess I could squeeze a 7th on the engine plate but after that I'd need to increase diameter which will mean more drag. I could probably get the current design a bit cheaper if I used parachutes rather than saving about 600m/s for deorbit and landing, but where's the fun in that? A 2 stage recoverable system should be cheaper still but that means messing about with mods that tweak save files so you can fly them both.
  4. Not a book but this covers all the maths you need for KSP http://www.braeunig.us/space/orbmech.htm
  5. In KOS you can create a new orbit object by giving it a bunch of parameters and can then access the other parameters that KSP has calculated about that orbit https://ksp-kos.github.io/KOS/structures/orbits/orbit.html If you can do something similar in kRPC can you create a new orbit object for each timestep and let KSP do the difficult bits?
  6. I think if it was just related to speed then it would be Fibonacci, but as gravity reduces with distance it probably complicates it. I use KOS rather than kPRC, interested in similar stuff but not sure what information you get in kPRC compared to what I get in KSP. It's an interesting idea I might have to have a play with at some point, but I think it's going to need a numerical solution in small time steps rather being able to work out the formula for it with my level of maths. It gets embarrassing when I have to ask my wife (maths teacher) for help with the game However I think the biggest problem would be the change of SOI. I'm about to send a relatively heavy and low thrust vessel off to the Mun and plan to knock up some code to break it down in to several smaller burns, and knock off the period from the planned time of the ejection burn. For calculating ejection angles and excess velocity I find @OhioBob's website very useful http://www.braeunig.us/space/orbmech.htm
  7. 50 tonnes payload to LKO? That's a pretty big ask at your tech level even without trying to keep the costs down. Assuming a significant proportion of the payload mass is fuel for the follow-on mission, you might find it's cheaper to do 2 x 25 tonne launches, one with the ship and the second one with the fuel. Your biggest cost saving would be to try and reduce the weight of the payload. A 3 crew capsule and an empty hitchhiker should give you plenty of habitation to make it to Minmus, and you should only need a few minipacks of supplies. No need for recyclers and other heavy USI bits if you're only planning a single landing. Another option is multiple launches again, one for the lander/re-entry capsule and one for a module that stays in Minmus orbit with extra habitation and life support. I'm currently putting an 18 tonne payload in to LKO for about 15000 kredits (830 kredits per tonne, slightly more expensive per tonne than your launcher!) with a reusable VTOL SSTO, but using the higher tech level Vector engines as I find Mainsails and Twin Boars tend to overheat on re-entry. The trouble with VTOL SSTO's is they don't scale all that well and launch cost per tonne tends to increase with heavier loads, so I'm launching stuff in smaller modules and docking it together in orbit. HTOL SSTO's will generally be cheaper again, but are more of a design challenge and can struggle with odd shaped payloads. Not sure which engines you have available at your tech level but I'd guess it would be a major challenge to get something that big in to orbit that early in the game.
  8. My early game Mun landers go for a single landing, with the pilot taking the science from the experiments so no need to bring them back to Kerbin. So usually something like: Re-entry stage - Single seat capsule with a parachute. No need for a heatshield to re-enter kerbin from the Mun, just set a Pe of about 30-40km and you'll be fine. Return stage - Decoupler below the above with a fuel tank and engine with enough dV to launch from the mun and return to Kerbin (about 800-900m/s I think). I usually use the Terrier engine here. I usually put the science on this stage just keep the craft symmetrical. You also need a battery or solar panel on this stage or the one above. Dump this stage just before re-entry. Transfer and landing stage - 3 tanks on radial couplers with fuel pipes if you have them (or transfer fuel manually if you don't), aerodynamic nose cones for launch if you've not got faring's yet, and landing legs on the tanks. This gives a nice wide stance for landing on slopes, and lets you jettison the weight when you launch from the Mun. Needs enough dV to get from low Kerbin Orbit to landing on the Mun. Something like this (I'm also using KOS and life support so ignore the extra window and a couple of extra components). Then you just need a rocket big enough to put the whole lot in to low kerbin orbit.
  9. If it's Real Solar System you mean, its available for 1.7 https://github.com/KSP-RO/RealSolarSystem/releases/tag/v16.3
  10. Am I right in thinking this issue is if there is a probe core and a Kerbal in a capsule? So a core on it's own or a core and an empty capsule should work ok? That seems to be the behaviour I'm seeing in a fresh install of 1.7.3 with RemoteTech, but in my main 1.7.2 game, with several other mods, the pistons work with a manned capsule, but not with a remote guidance unit and no capsule, which is confusing.
  11. This afternoon I have installed 1.7.3 and restarted it over and over again installing a new mod every time to try and find out which one causes hydraulic rams to stop working when I put a probe core on the vessel. However I then found RemoteTech hadn't installed properly, so maybe OI had the wrong version. Reinstalled from scratch suing CKAN for the mods and now I seem to be missing loads of parts (eg only one capsule in sandbox mode!) AARGH Seems it'a known issue with RemoteTech now I've managed to isolate it and work out which mod threat to search on
  12. For my early game landers I eva to get the science from the experiments and then only land the capsule. A 30-40km pe from the mun or minus is fine without a heat shield. This keeps the weight, and therefore the fuel requirement, down a lot.
  13. I always do a time stamped save (yymmdd_hhmm) at the start of every ksp session. It's saved my bacon more than once
  14. KER will show info like orbital period and ap/pe altitudes so I'd say well worth having.
  15. Well KSP does use simplified physics, but someone's bound to have written a mod that incudes the heat death of the universe