Jump to content

Terwin

Members
  • Posts

    1,628
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Terwin

  1. My Minmus training mission landed, including a couple decoupler testing contracts. Then I had a kerbal jet ~30KM to the Highlands to get a bit of extra science. She ended up walking over half a KM to get to the biome and roughly 3 km to get back to the ship, ending with 0.03 fuel, just enough to get to the bottom of the ladders after a jump from he surface. Now a quick rendezvous with something left behind in orbit by some rich bu careless person and I'll see if I have fuel for a quick hop outside the Kerbin SOI before heading home. (hoping to have 3-5 level 3 scientists for the lab on my upcoming Duna mission) My Minmus jogger had to take a brake around 0.5KM form the lander so I could reverse thrust on my first Sol station after collecting lots of Solar data. Looks like the return trajectory will pass through the Mun SOI then settle in LKO with over 1km/s delta-v left. Should make for a nice soft landing close to the KSC. Started on the design for my Duna mission, looking like it should have nearly 8km/s once it is in LKO, but I'll need more verner engines on the nose for setting it back on it's tail if I intend to do any mining or roving on Duna. Perhaps I'll just do all the mining I need to do on Ike and make Duna just a quick-stop for science...
  2. Once I hit 35K, I try to get to 90 degrees asap(this is the point where aerodynamic stability and drag do not matter much, so I just accelerate to orbit) Then again, I usually prefer my initial orbit to be in the 70-75K range so I can get maximum oberth effect when I do my burns to elsewhere. Of course I often have difficulty getting a good gravity turn going early on, so I often have an appoaps above 60km when I hit 35km.
  3. Rescue missions do not require docking if you can EVA off Kerbin, just get within a KM or so with a similar speed and EVA the rescuee over to your vessel.(I have yet to see a pod to rescue that has a docking clamp, so you need either EVA or the Klaw to bring them back) (if you target the other vessel, you can get the relative speed by switching to Target mode, in that mode the retrograde marker will also show you which way to thrust to slow your relative velocity) Rescue missions also give you lots to rendezvous practice where close is good enough, so you can practice without putting your mission at risk.
  4. Landed in the southern part of the Farside crater on Mun only to discover that I had apparently already collected data there(without leaving a flag as I usually do to mark an area as collected). Had some extra fuel so I took a ballistic trajectory to go land in the northern part of the attached Canyon(the wider part where I hoped to find some flat ground). After several attempts I managed to get down in one piece, do science and then get onto a return trajectory to Kerbin. (made sure the Kerbal I rescued from Munar orbit in his in-line cockpit planted a flag for XP, after all his rescue paid for the mission) Then I spent a couple hours failing to design a massive LF-only space plane. (in the lunches where the nuke engines did not fall off when the landing gear hit the runway, I was unable to take off because the medium landing gear would not let me steer to stay on the runway until I reached take-off speed) In retrospect, if my launch weight is high enough that a dozen wiplash engines have a TWR of less than 1, I might want to start with a smaller design for my first attempt... (KER said my twr was 0.94 with a mass of ~218 tons)
  5. I thought I would try one of those 'retrieve component landed on the Mun' missions. I've been to the Mun enough times, so I should really challenge myself. I started with my most accurate ever landing, only 270 m away: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6JrTR4-h1jVaHdLXzVFT3c5M3c/view?usp=sharing (I was going to land on a 30 degree slope plus I had mining gear on-board in case my rover wheels did not work and I had to use the main engine for ground propulsion, so I did some up and down before landing) Then we transition to horizontal for a close approach: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6JrTR4-h1jVQUUyREx3aW9oRE0/view?usp=sharing Ready for grabbing: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6JrTR4-h1jVbzRNWlhGazdFcFU/view?usp=sharing It's a WHAT?!?! https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6JrTR4-h1jVNWN4VWVFRGdrSm8/view?usp=sharing Fine, let's lower the claw to the ground and push it into place: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6JrTR4-h1jVbm82SVkzQ3Q5VVk/view?usp=sharing Nope, too short to be grabbed: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6JrTR4-h1jVdDUybFFlV0k4TFE/view?usp=sharing Need some way to get this thing off the ground.. at least an edge... perhaps a cliff or sharp angle? Hmm, nothing down hill, but there is an d up-hill that should have some angles on it... (lots of pushing) hmm, getting nowhere... Some of those landing legs are pretty close to the ground when deployed, I wonder if I can push it that way... https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6JrTR4-h1jVUjVDY3pDQTNCYlk/view?usp=sharing Even Better, I can drag it!: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6JrTR4-h1jVRml1VFFTaXM1RmM/view?usp=sharing This is much faster than manual pushing(almost 2m/s Woo!): https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6JrTR4-h1jVb2Z3Mm1uUEQwb2M/view?usp=sharing First two terrain angle changes were insufficient, how about this one? https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6JrTR4-h1jVN0R2TTlJVEV2cEE/view?usp=sharing Woot, I got it grabbed! https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6JrTR4-h1jVbHZteE94X2pXYzQ/view?usp=sharing Now I just need to deploy the mining gear and replace that fuel I used to avoid landing on the edge of a crater, then I can head home! vehicle design notes: The Vernor engines on the nose provide ~150% of the thrust needed to lift the vehicle on the Mun and are used for righting it back to an up-right posture for launch. the rear wheels consist of 2 small gear bays and 2 RoveMax M1s (if the M1's pop, the small gear lowers beyond them and I can use the main engine for thrust. The M1's popped on Kerbin so this was a backup plan) plus a couple medium gear in the front. No front steering so I had to steer from the rear and attempting to turn at more than 5m/s leads to toppling and rapid pyrotechnic deconstruction. Engine is the largest engine from the 'Atomic Age - Nuclear Rockets' mod to keep the part count down. Also using an active heat management piece and radiators from the 'Heat Management' mod to keep my heat down to a low simmer most of the time. next time: I'll check the height of the piece before I accept a mission to fetch it from a planetary body!
  6. Landed my 4K liquid fuel mun base with a good 200m/s to spare, then I unlocked my MK3 liquid fuel and have plenty of delta-v to go rescue that stranded kerbal on the surface somewhat near by(once the engine cools a bit). The new mission that unlocked was another base landed on the mun, so I loaded up a pilot and the last of my unassigned Kerbals without mun flag XP and launched a smaller version of the same base(1 unit long fuel and 1 unit long cargo behind Mk3 cabin as I did not need a lab or 4K unburned fuel at landing, just a hitchhiker pod so I had room for 8, and experiments of course), but I added the Heat Management mod and a couple active heat systems+radiators to try and reduce the time I need to spend watching heat dissipate(I had a bit of anxiety watching them do nothing as the heat rose, but above 600K they started active cooling back to 600K so all was well, but next time I'll try putting the radiators below the active heat management system instead of on it so they can heat up and radiate more) Aside form that I mostly watched rockets cool down from previous burns, Rescued a Kerbal from retrograde Munar orbit for a rescue mission, clawed a Mk2 cockpit from retrograde munar orbit for a kerbal+pod return mission, and had my mining/ISRU base missions ship finally start producing some fuel as the sun came up on the Mun. (missions for miner ship: base orbiting mun(complete), 300 ore from Mun to Kerbin orbit, base orbiting Minmus with ISRU, 1100 ore from Minmus landed on Kerbin. Plus a rescue or two should they come up. That thing has 2 Mammoths and uses a Rino for the 'high efficiency space drive'. No to mention too many fuel tanks(and it needed just as many drop-tanks(with engine) to have the delta-V to get to the Mun. I'm glad I have Mk3 parts now so I can do more efficient nuclear designs))
  7. Thanks for confirming that I am not imaging things. It does make sense that something on rails would not dissipate heat, but that makes it much more difficult to manage multiple simultaneous nuclear powered missions. I guess I'll be spending some time baby-sitting my nukes this evening to make sure I don't blow them up during their next burns...
  8. Does heat dissipate differently when the vehicle is out of focus? For testing purposes I have tried noting down the heat shown by the debug thermal details(just over 671 in this case), switch to KSC, warp a few minutes and return, and the temp when I went back the temp had barely changed(just under 671, possibly because I was a bit slow selecting the piece to display) but while in focus it was dropping 5-6 degrees per minute. It is possible I am viewing different parts or some such, but I currently have 3 nuke powered rockets in the Kerbin SOI and they do not seem to be cooling down much when not in focus. (and one of them explodes a fuel tank if I use non-physical warp when it is in focus, not sure why. Hopefully that will stop once I get the temp low enough(hottest part below 1000k was not sufficient, but perhaps below 800 or 600K will)) Perhaps I am just impatient, but I would not expect a rocket to be almost to the Mun insertion burn and still have lots of heat bars on 2000 degree items like parachutes when the adjacent 1200 degree items like OX solar panels were not burned off(previous burn was at least 3 hours prior).
  9. right-click on the drone core/command module and change it's icon to debris(part of renaming the craft). You can also set it to just about any other non-flag designation if you like.
  10. As of yet I have only turned down 1 rescue contract, one to rescue a Kerbal and their pod landed on the mun. Considering how many attempts I usually need to make just to attach my klaw-based refueling system, I have doubts about my ability to somehow tilt my vehicle with rcs enough to pick up a pod without smashing something to pieces or running out of monoprop. (my klaw-based refueling system is actually a 'replacement drills' rover because apparently touching the ground with the tip of the drill is not enough, but it holds 9K LF, so I also used it to refuel a nuke rocket to let it hop around and collect stranded mun Kerbals) Two ships designs I have used a lot: Orbital rescue x4: room for 4 tourists/rescues and enough delta-v to collect 2 rescues from LKO Automated klaw: minimal rocket with a klaw for bringing back orbital kerbals, ship and all. Also good for part retrievals. (only ~12K) I have noticed that the description says low or high orbit if that helps(I was surprised by a couple high Kerbin orbit rescues after accepting them)
  11. I am currently fulfilling a contract like that for landed on the mun. Left a slot empty to pick up a rescue contract landed on the mun with those 4K extra liquid fuel. First time I have used the mk3 bays(got my lab in there along with all the experiments to go with it) Question: Does heat dissipate when the vehicle is out of focus? I currently have 3 nuke powered rockets in the Kerbin SOI(including the above station) and they do not seem to be cooling down much when not in focus. (and one of them explodes a fuel tank if I use non-physical warp when it is in focus, not sure why. Hopefully that will stop once I get the temp low enough(hottest part below 1000k was not sufficient, but perhaps below 800 or 600K will))
  12. ISRU Mine that thing down to the bone as a fuel depot and send the husk out of the system. Either that or just attach a drill+ISRU and plenty of electrical power and let the engine burn whatever is produced until it leaves the system. No need to have much fuel by the time you have docked with the asteroid, just be able to make fuel out of it(and at the same time reduce the mass you need to push)
  13. So long as you are touching the structure with your vehicle, you should get the science for that building's biome Also, you can only get most of that science once you have upgraded your buildings to level 3. When I am just a bit away from some new tech I want for my next mission I will often throw together a 'science rover', earliest ones include the fixed gear, the basic jet engine, one fuel tank, a pod rotated for easy access(sideways as down-facing does not always let me out), and at least one of every experiment I currently have access to. Just drive with a scientist to collect/re-set each experiment in each biome and stow it in the capsule. apply the brakes when touching the building and collect all your data. (I often had the driver get out and push the rover backwards away from the building so I could get to the next one)
  14. What does a 'revert launch' count as? Does it matter if you revert before immediate physical danger? In 0.90 I had a MIA because of recovering a kerbal outside a vessel and the vessel disappearing with another kerbal inside. There has been the occasional experimental rocket or (usually) plane lost in simulation. Aside from those, I think I had one un-revertable kerbal death in 0.90 and none so far in 1.0 On the other hand, I have had many 'I had a bad ascent profile and I will not be able to complete the mission if I use all the fuel I need to get a stable orbit, [revert]' scenarios.
  15. Some people only want vanilla ice-cream when they go to Baskin Robins. Some people only want licorice flavor jelly-belly jelly beans. Some people only want to play stock KSP. If that is what makes them happy, then that is what makes them happy. Personally, I prefer a little more variety.
  16. Perhaps those are things no one would ever(intentionally) do because that is what causes reentry heat to blow up your ship? It does kind of make sense: A) You have a game where things are made a lot easier and more enjoyable by cutting down the immense sizes and distances of space by an order of magnitude. Using real physics in A you get a lot of things automatically such as slower orbital velocities, shorter transit times and smaller atmospheres. C) A direct consequence of A+B is that you need lower energy budgets both to get places in a reasonable time and have less relative energy to dissipate on arrival. D) You are using realistic trajectories for the scaled-up world(with some adjustments to match the actual body attributes) With A+B+C+D why would you expect to be at the edge of survivability? When there is so much less energy in the system, even without more durable equipment(which is more forgiving for those of us who are not rocket-scientists), why would you expect to be at the edge of survivability? If you want to be at the edge of survivability, you EITHER need to be dealing with the full scale system with the much larger energy budgets involved with realistic trajectories, OR you need to be doing things that are not so conservative that they could actually work in the scaled up system while still working in the low energy-budget system. Personally I *LIKE* having the lower energy-budget system so that I can do fun things like space-planes using existing technologies while still having a cargo budget and rocket trajectories that need not be 100% perfect just to have enough fuel to get to low orbit with a 2.6% payload with 2 stages(Falcon 9 v1.1) or 4% payload with 3 stages(Saturn 5). (Compared to SSTO Space-planes with 30%+ cargo capacity mentioned in other threads on this forum, usually with enough extra capacity that they can still be manually flown and need not follow a 100% perfect computer generated trajectory)
  17. From what I understand, the current heating model is pretty realistic, the reason it is not more hazardous is that orbital velocity is below 2.5km/s while earth has an orbital velocity above 7km/s. Try a steep reentry at 7km/s or higher and I am sure you will encounter serious problems. A periaps above the heavy atmosphere(~20km) is hardly a steep approach and should be quite safe if you have a reasonable design. I know that I have had heating bars from LKO return on small draggy parts like the basic fin even on a shallow trajectory(~25km), not enough to cause damage but plenty to show that there is heating going on and a less reasonable ship/trajectory could be in trouble. If you want more hazardous heat, try having a steeper descent(like a periaps below -100KM) with a non-trivial velocity.
  18. Also, you might notice that the flat bit at the back of your plane where you dropped the 3rd engine also seems to have a lot of drag, I think this was mentioned in the helpful observations about 1.0 thread: you can get a lot of drag at the back of your vessel if it does not have a cone there as well(engines work too, but not as well, on the other hand, cones don't generally give thrust)
  19. No Kerbal left behind. As of yet, the *only* rescue mission I have not accepted was a 'and what is left of their ship landed on the Mun' as I have not gotten rovers to he Mun yet and I'm pretty happy with a landing that gets me close enough not to run out of jet-pack fuel before I get to the pod of the kerbal I am trying to rescue, so collecting a heavy piece of space junk that is landed is not something I am comfortable doing just yet. Usually a rescue pays for the ship and I'll take tourists along for the ride to make a nice profit. Made me much better a intercepts. (I should really add RCS to my 'Automated Claw retrieval' design though, would probably make it a lot easier)
  20. From what I can tell with stock aero, you get drag for a stack regardless of clipping, so the primary benefit is being able to hide more behind a heat-shield. That said, if you are not using a heat shield, I am not sure you get much out of clipping aside from aesthetics, and perhaps a lower center of mass. Personally, I use the off-set widget to move my lander legs out and down as far as I can to minimize the number of structural pieces I need to use to have a reasonably stable lander. (I'll probably be able to stop once I get the I-beam though) Even if there were a benefit to doing so, I would not have a problem clipping a couple of LOX fuel tanks on top of each other after draining the O2 out for a nuclear engine, after all the 02 takes up more than half the tank. (none of my nucular designs are off the drawing board though, waiting for a tank that holds more than 150 units without being more than half empty)
  21. I use the Stage Recovery mod to recover my parachute-equipped pre-orbital stages. With such a large fan base, it is easy to find a 'lot' of users (dozens or even hundreds) that want something where that 'something' would actually be detrimental to the enjoyment of a majority of those that play the game. On the plus side, Squad planned for this and made KSP very easy to mod. This means that even if the stock game is not exactly to your liking, there is probably a collection of mods that you can use to fine-tune your game to be exactly what you want it to be. And if there is not, you can either suggest or create that mod yourself. If there really are a 'lot' of users that want something, there is probably a mod for that. (not including things that Squad would really like to fix but cannot due to Unity or other issues, such as a functional 64 bit version on windows for example)
  22. As the primary memory leak that I am aware of(heat bars) was not in the 1.0 release, but in a later release, it does not seem fair to use that particular memory leak as an indicator that 1.0 was ready or not. Any time you add features, there is a risk of unforeseen problems, and as this added feature has a work-around(it can be disabled), and they had limited time before a planned code-freeze(aka the few days off to celebrate 1.0), I do not have a problem with the much-demanded feature being added, or that other, non-toggleable features might have received a greater portion of the available testing time. Sure I have had my games crash from time to time(last night just after landing for example), but this is because I consider this feature more useful than the bother of re-loading the game. (on the other hand, I have strongly considered removing a few mods, and possibly even using the 'unsupported' OpenGL flag to reduce memory usage)
  23. I would think that the most likely issue to be fixed would be the heat gauge memory leak. I also supsect that some would wish for the heating slider bar to be extended to 500% or so, but the only critical issue I can see if the heat bars one. Not that I would object to something being done about the jitteryness of service bays, but that has a work-around(open/close the bay) and it may well go away with the U5 conversion.
  24. I went to Duna once, in a sand-box game, but did not have quite enough delta-v to get home after landing on Ike then Duna. I could get a fly-thrugh of the Kerbal FOI, but not enough fuel to slow for capture. In my career games I have only really been to Mun, Minmus and peeking out into Kerbol orbit. (in 1.0.2 I have only been to Mun with a Minmus lander planning to touch-down tonight) I have had missions out for Duna and I think another planet, in 0.90 but none of my career games have passed enough time to actually get anywhere outside of the Kerbal FOI(I kept doing stations and other missions, almost never warping for more than an few hours at a time, even my asteroid intercept did not get to it's destination before 1.0) Then again, I did not start until March of 2015, so I'm still relatively new at just 2.5 months.
  25. According to https://unity3d.com/unity/whats-new/unity-5.0 under Physics: 'Better performance on multi-core processors, and especially on mobile'
×
×
  • Create New...