Hotel26

That's a lot further than Starship 2, and I rather think that NASA (or whomever is the regulating authority) doesn't have any ground for delays based on this flight. That would mean the pace is likely to only accelerate. Probably the most impressive thing about this test is that SpaceX were ready and responsive to go as soon as the "paperwork" was ready.

40m or so...(?) Ah T+40...

So far, no "paperwork" with unplanned debris...??!!

I wish my clock in KSP advanced in strict real time like that. "1 per second", right on time.

(Update coming soon)

Well if you wanted a low pass of Jool, it looks like your Laythe assist did the job! You're just going to have to handle the exit so that you don't fly out of the system completely. But that is a cool chellenge because... ...if you're flying that close to Jool, it will be great for a fine tune to magnify another assist later. Since you will have just passed Tylo and Laythe on one side, I think Vall (depending on where it is) will be your only candidate. Any chance?

Hi Andrew, Gravity assists are a topic of interest to me at the moment. Your screen shot (in YouTube) is not super legible at that (or any) scale. Mainly, I don't see your craft's proposed trajectory. Most people use imgur to post images to the KSP forum. (If you go this route, all you need to know is to select the Direct Link for the image and then paste that into your KSP post.) Good luck! P.S. I'm looking at your video now to see if it gives me any further info... maybe at the very end in which you cross in front of Laythe with a periapsis of 400+ km? That looks definitely productive, altho closer in would work more strongly. However, it looks like you're getting a boost from a low periapsis at Jool that is slinging you out again. Note that pilots in general like using Tylo mainly because it's more massive but possibly also because it's further out from Jool. In any case, in my meager knowledge, the entry angle always seems to dictate your range of possibilities and one has to be prepared to abandon the idea if the opportunity just does not gel...

I have a theory now, that if I were to disconnect the toilet, turn it over and examine the bottom[sic] of it, I'd find the inscription "Made in China". Made for international export, it's just easier to put two buttons on all export items, but without the extra internal plumbing necessary to make it work in countries that do not require it. Because no rain ever falls on this sunburnt country, we make all our own water using solar-driven desalination plants. Thus, instead of "saving" or "conserving" water, we "sequester" it; doing our part to combat the inexorable rise of sea levels [why isn't that singular?] on behalf of the world's flood-threatened populations [ditto]. No need to thank us; you're welcome.

Might have been reported already (I cannot tell)... I've noticed that two recent deployments of the Open Hangars have a problem in that the port side hangar may not be entered. You bump into a collider(?). The only thing I think I've done differently is used World reference (rather than Self) in the Group and Decals... Is this a known problem? Else, what gives? (@Caerfinon) (This is possibly alternatively an underlying problem in Kerbal Konstructs, I'm aware.)

Here in Oz, where I live, toilets work differently. Maybe. tl;dr the difference between the Big Button and the Little Button is only psychological. Starting with the obvious, when you flush them, the water spins in a different direction. That might just be federal law, like the side of the road we drive on, although I recall long ago in a physics class something called 'coriolis'. I dunno. But we (most people) don't know much about these ingenious devices and we certainly take them for granted. For example, what should we do if the water gets shut off for any extended period of time (3 months, say)...? The modern device was invented by Sir Thomas Crapper and the Queen was so pleased with her first installation of his device that she ordered him beknighted[sic]. (The fact checkers squeal about this one; pretty much confirmatory, though, in my book. Real facts would pretty much put them out of business. (What even is their business model??)) Moving forward, I recently ran the first in a series of simple experiments (remniscent of that dude dropping projectiles off the roof of a high-rise in Pisa, Italy, for which he got arrested, after being reported by a couple of alarmed tourists in the square below, who narrowly missed being struck). We have here in Oz (and I feel very sure this is federal law) two buttons on the master console of our toilets (at least, if you're a city dweller). I pressed each, counted out 1-1000, 2-1000, 3-1000 while it irrigated... allowed the 'cistern' to refill and repeated a number of times (almost certainly in violation of federal law!?). So, guess what? 'Little button': six-1000s. 'Big button': six-1000s. Visual observation roughly indicated the same volume of water dispensed by each. Hmmm... OK, second experiment, with everything primed and ready to go: I pushed the 'little button' and let the contents completely expel. As soon as it had completely 'flushed', I then pressed the 'big button', expecting to get the second half... And guess what? OK, so my conclusion so far is that we may have a defective toilet. So, third experiment proposed will be to repeat the same on the other two toilets in my house. My wife will likely veto this due to already-mounting concern about our water bill. (She also thinks I have way too much time on my hands these days.) Open disclosure: I've always used the Big Button. Only now, under pressure (of the water bill), have I made the resolution to find out what the Little Button does. Depending upon the result, I may then have to consider a decision to "go public" with my findings. Or ask a professional "fact-checker" to investigate...

has no (non-relativistic) effect on an orbiting craft. The speed of the orbiting craft in a circular orbit at a particular altitude ("outside the altitude") is determined by the mass of the body it is orbiting and the craft's altitude (actually, orbit radius). Vorb = sqrt( G * M / r ) Elliptical orbits are similarly independent of planetary spin. See also Mean Orbital Speed in Wikipedia. Welcome to the forum!

Take a look at Buffalo 2 and also Sunkworks:

Welcome to the forum! If you're new to KSP then definitely get KSP1 and consider the DLCs (Making History and Breaking Ground) which ought to be considered 'standard' (e.g. you download craft from KerbalX.com). Reasons are: you'll play the pure game with the best experience (least aggravation from the raft of ground-zero KSP2 bugs, limitations, updates etc). KSP 1 has the depth to keep you busy for years. (By then, KSP 2 might be ready for prime time.) (In case you ever become ready to dump Windows and switch to Linux... )

So you're saying that Watson (personal pronoun 'Dr') was a figment of the imagination of a fictional detective by the fanciful name of 'Sherlock Holmes', but who in turn was another figment of this author by the pseudonym of 'Arthur Conan Doyle' (personal pronoun 'Sir'). Wouldn't one conclude from this doll-like style of nesting of figmentation that the real identity of the author was ... aha ... Russian, and most likely the contemporaneous Leo Tolstoy, whose ghost lived on, writing mysteries, for about another 20 years after Tolstoy's death (ink poisoning), before moving into another body and assuming the pseudonym of 'Agatha Christie', personal pronoun 'Dame'? As the great Hercule Poirot would later exclaim, "Aha! A very great mystery has been solved here this day! Tout est devenu soudain évident !"

Numerous conundrums that have mystified me my whole life have now been (miraculously) resolved by what you have written above -- a masterly treatment and many thanks for that! But please tell me one last thing that is still puzzling me: "who is Sherlock Holmes?". Should I have heard of him?

The browser I normally use was rendering your planet name such that it was pretty hard to read correctly.

It's in 1.11 too. Time warp shows up the bug but it creeps in and subtly effects maneuver nodes. The work-around is to f5, then Hold-f9: i.e. quick save and then quick reload. I think the issue is a discrepancy between on-rails time and live mode time. It builds up with scene changes and/or time-in-game. It can accumulate to an insidious level in which it destroys a far-distant rendez-vous with a planet. Periodic save-reloads are de riguer for me, having been hen-pecked by this one. Getting in and out of the game resets the problem, needless to say. It's a bad, bad bug.

"Pilot error." It's always listed as "pilot error", no matter what happened. (Welcome to the forum! Here's your toga...)

Question and Answer Time: In which I (from time to time) answer PMs from my letterbox... From 'Q1Anon': Q: I had no idea you could fly in IMC in KSP! I still don't think you can because e.g. there are no clouds in KSP!! Why would anyone even want to??? A: It has been famously said that "flying is 99% boredom, punctuated by 1% terror". Well, flying IFR is a kind of intensive admixture of both at the same time, but more importantly: it is engrossing and stimulating (in an admittedly unpleasant sense), but the final result (if successful) always presents an exhilarating moment! As well as being something completely different (kind of boredom), there is not much scenery at night, so a reasonable protocol for challenge is to simply self-enforce IFR at night. From 'Q2Anon': Q: Why use stock for this when there are presumably any number of flashy mods out there? A: Well, I actually agree with this! It's a question of which mod will suit you best and knowing what you want; in addition, getting some basic IFR knowledge, sufficient to know what you want to use it for. In particular, for one reason or another, it seems that no one mod yet covers the whole gamut of possibilities (but I could be wrong about this). They will universally do very little to instruct you in the Way of the Instruments. So here follows my own scanty knowledge of what is available, what it can do and what the limitations might be: NavUtilities: provides ILS approaches and permits user-definition of airports. Don't know what else. Being pop-up rather than IVA, it is light-weight (a good thing). RPM-based (Raster Prop Monitor, a base mod for numerous super-mods, providing hifi cockpit instrumentation): MAS: an authentic cockpit environment that will be as fiddly as the real-life cockpit (ergonomics for turbulence!); this mod I understand is now considered obsolete. ASET: I understand this is now the "go to" model for RPM-based cockpit IVA simulation. as I recall, it is difficult to define one's own navaids (I did succeed and do have notes) but I found that the OBS instrument did not appear to track user-defined VORs. nothing much known about enroute navigation with respect to supporting jet routes. I am certainly going to be exploring more in this area and upgrading my own mod status -- and it has always been an intention in this thread to introduce information/discussion about such mods (despite the provocative thread title, "...for stock KSP". From 'Q3Anon': Q: Do you realize Hotel26 [please call me 'h6'] that you appear to be heading miserē with this thread in that you are now setting a record for the most number of consecutive posts without any intervening response from anybody else? A: Yes, but of course! I did say up front that very few pilots find "flying blind" (and no, we never use that term!) a fun thing to do. If you want to know the whole truth: Q: "I have a follow-up question... There's a rumor making the rounds that you are simply using this thread to build your own micro-website to host your personal list of approaches (similar to what you tried with 'Truman'...). Any comment?" A: Not at this time.

SPACE NEWS GAZETTE Today, just over 6 years since inception of my Orbit world (January, 2018), the first kerbal boots landed this day on the surface of Eve. [click + arrows => slide show] I have been refueling/recycling spent Zephyr boosters from LKO to LEO for some years and they provide a low-tech method to deorbit almost any 2.5m payload (with chutes). In this case, a Milkrun occupied by the valiant Cergel Kerman. In the third shot, Cergel had baled out for a stretch and a soothing back massage (occasionally looking over his shoulder to see how close Eve was approaching!), and then para-sailed to the wreck of the Zephyr (4th shot). (Still containing fuel!) The landed Millkrun can be seen poking up over the rise in the background; a short return stroll.

VLB Approach KSC VAB Helipad: MEA (Minimum Enroute Altitude) is 2000m. You may descend to 1000m within 10km DME. Tune the V-KSC9 VOR (IAF) and navigate to it. Enter an RH Holding Pattern on holding course 093 and descend to 1000m, Depart the IAF at 1000m on course 093, descending at the standard 1:10 ratio, going no lower than 280m. Reaching 7.0 km DME from V-KSC9, switch to L-KSCVH. Descend and maintain 280m. Transition to vertical thrust and begin reducing speed. Note that your sink rate can be observed from the yellow Prograde marker above/below the horizontal on the navball; this is an aid to finding thrust for approximate TWR:1. When the L-KSCVH target marker declines to -45 degrees on the navball, switch to Vertical control reference and reduce forward speed to 5 m/s or so. Establish a small sink rate , maintaining it between 0.5-3 m/s so that the pink navball Anti-Target appears. Yaw, as desired, to keep it ahead of you. W/S on the ("standard") helo joystick will advance/retard the yellow Retrograde Anti-Target ahead and behind. A/D will send the yellow Retrograde marker in the opposite direction. Push the yellow navball marker in the direction of the pink Anti-Target marker but restrain airspeed to make gradual progress only. Use the airspeed indication to cancel horizontal motion over the beacon. Once in guided descent toward the +175m MSL heliroof target, use Airspeed to control thrust and keep the sink rate less than 3 m/s until ready for touch-down. Missed Approach: full procedure entails a return and repeat from V-KSC9. But if not pear-shaped, establish the hover returning to 250 MSL. Return to Horizontal control reference. Yaw the craft until L-KSCVH is once again directly ahead. Move toward it maintaining 250m. Restart the descent. "Good luck with this: it is sweaty work but well worth it once the gear is safely chocked!" -- Jeb Notes about Orc:

At this point, I would like to introduce a new type of (highly fictional) navaid: the Vertical Landing Beacon or VLB. (See also "NDB and VOR navaids" before, which described NDB, VOR and DME navaids.) It is quite a strange Kerbish invention as it does look like a flat (and inert) plate, somewhat resembling an "M-1x1 Structural Panel", if you can imagine that. This one is labeled: "L-KSCVH 0/76.4SW +180 KSC VAB Helipad"[1] and it was Alt-F12 Set Positioned with coordinates -0.096706 -74.618806 alt:105 If you examine the second photo (and you yourself also get lucky, as I did) you may get yours positioned just under the helipad roof, where it is not at all an obstruction. Nevertheless, it if does reappear on the VAB roof after a scene switch, it's not likely to obstruct operations since it is really just a big, flat, robust, printed-circuit board, quite impervious to aircraft tires. To use similes from RL, a VLB is like a vertically-oriented ILS, projecting a conical "descent slope" vertically upward. In addition, it has a low-power NDB side-transmitter with a range of 5km. The upshot is that the instrument pilot will make a 3-phase approach to a vertical landing in zero visibility. The phases are: navigate to a separate IAF (Initial Approach Fix), e.g. a nearby VOR; fly outbound to intercept the VLB (within its 5km horizontal range) and thence to the VLB, transitioning into hover flight; when the VLB marker on the navball declines to the 45-degree depression, switch to VERT-ref mode and commence a controlled descent to land on the marker In my next post, I will publish the VLB Approach KSC VAB Helipad. I guess that any airworthy machine capable of hover flight can be used for the VAB roof, but it would be helpful for a novice to this approach to get accustomed to what I think is a good exemplar for tackling this level of difficulty of approach. So I refer you to the Orc and do highly recommend you try it out. In particular, it is equipped with a Vernor "Instant Arrest"[2] ventral thruster that all but ensures a soft touch-down, all the time, every time. [1] I use Haystack to rename the part but you can name it in the SPH/VAB before deploying to runway/launchpad (but then you have to clean up the unwanted craft file afterward). [2] instant-on descent-arrester

My primary world, Orbit, is six earth year's old and contains that period accumulation of versions of vehicles and other flotsam, jetsam and, especailly vacsam (which can be quite hard to round up due to distances and orbital mechanics). So I'm in a very similar situation, especially as Dr Albert Kerman's 'Theory of Extreme Relativity' has been validated once more now by observation that Time itself is slowing down in Orbit (relative to Earth time, that is, of course). Advisory: schmaltz alert:

So I have a project underway to explore/define "instrument approaches" using stock KSP. No mods, no navaids. This is raw navball. Camera View pointed up. Skyward. Just after touchdown/shutdown. You'll notice the QBE "marker" sitting center on the VAB heliroof (just in front of the port engine pods). When I spawn the QBE onto the roof using Alt-F12 Set Position: -0.0968 -74.6187 +104, the device actually gets located just under the helideck, in the space below. ("104" being the magic key.) I was so thrilled to pull that off because it's center-deck but not an obstruction to landing vehicles. KSP, in all its majestic wisdom, will however promote it up onto the deck after a scene switch returning to the heliroof. Shazbat. In any case, the Orc pictured (the "Director's Cut") has a vertical control reference and a belly Vernor as well as carrying a small supply of monopropellant oxidizer in the cockpit for "instant-on" descent-arrester control. (Which is what makes the whole enterprise manageable.) Concentration level is quite intense. I 'mimed' the operation in "stop motion" in Vessel Mover to get things into my head just before this first successful 'full-dress rehearsal'. Bottom line is that a returning VTOLjet can return to KSC in fog and land on the roof in zero visibility (plus standard radar altimeter; heliroof altitude is 175m MSL).

(I knew there was a way to do it.) I've rediscovered a way to use the keyboard to set the parking brakes (you know what I mean). Wasn't sure whether I would post it in Shower Thoughts(!!) or here, but I do have a picture that almost made the cut to exhibit here in WDYDIKT -- so now I'll do a twofer. Here's the tip: hold the B key down. tap the 'Esc' key to pause Flight View release the 'B' key tap 'Esc' again to unpause Voila, your brakes are locked. And, yes, I think I prefer this to reaching for the mouse. YMMV. Not enough?? OK, here's the recent achievement: