stelarfox

Before anything, you are not trully supposed by any mission as far as i know to land back in kerbil runway or lunchpad exactly. Also this its truly really but Really but REALLY! hard, I am kind of an expert into making almost anything and I give up a long time ago for whats needed, Why, because the reward its extremelly less than expected (lets see you land on it you get the same ship by 100% of its value), but for any real mission, you are going to arrive with what, 5% of the initial ship? of course, unless you have a one stage ship. (and if you are really near then put wheels and just push the rest of the way, i do with some crafts if i miss the runway). I do not use mods so, the only part I can answer you is without mods. First than anything this depends a LOT on how your ship is done, and how you try to make your landing, even so there are mostly 2 types of ships. 1) the easier one, will be with some sort of ship that is also a plane. (or at last have wings and some more fuel that actually works in atmosphere). If so all you have to do is aim it correctly from atmosphere, then do not use the parachutes and use the wings to aim it more properly. no matter what even so, you have to know your ship and be able to make a controlated descent (its impossible to do that from the mon or hi orbit, or at least it will work in only a few times every year (because of alignment)). 2) the harder way, just aim even better. The truly hard, how to actually "AIM" a rocket from the atmosphere all the way down. By this you want to know 2 things. 1) how much does your rocket slow downs on reentry and 2) how far does it take to make a full dessent into vertical. Lets start by saying you need to have your rocket at a 71000m on both AP and PE. then and this actually depend on the rocket, you are going to want to get the PE to something between 55k or all the way to 0. (some rockets may get burned in such condition) and the most conventional will be to set it to something between 35 and 40k. when doing that, you have to be at some point for reference (for example the "other" side of where you want to arrive, or if possible have some flag on the way) then you do the retrograde when you are exactly over it. You just land (do not use retrograde anymore, let the atmosphere slow you down, and to not change the variables, force your position to be against your direction) In other words keep your retrograde always on for the sas, if not the smallest misdirection is going to change the situation and will not land on the same spot. also do not use x2, x3, x4, because that actually changes it enough to alter your course. if you choose a correct descent for your ship, you are going to land consistently. you can try just one time and then put a flag and see the distance. But take into consideration this is needed for each ship, also take into consideration its even important to start with the same amount of fuel. and yes is hard and all needs to be done to the metter (and to the second) in order to work properly (think you are going at 2000 meters per second, and you want to land on a place that has like 50 tops), so by just normal math you have only 0.025 of a second or you are going to fall 2 km off. now with a plane thats actually a lot bettter, even if all of the above is important, if you are a bit off the place you can simply use the wings to convert vertical speed to horizontal speed, then you fall a lot less harder and you aim correctly. Of couse unless you hav some extra fuel this will not be much help, but its a lot in comparation. but what I say with the planes is practically how some of the nasa rockets works out. you can try with mods but not sure there are many for this. unless totally automatic (which kills the point of playing for my taste). unless you have enough fuel to just "stop" right above, kill your speed to cero over the place, then use the ship to not fall too fast (or not parachute or atmosphere will be able to stop you on time). Hope this helps

Also it kind of depends where your station is, an you do not want to place it exactly at 70k, because any disturbance or even a dock may push it down. I am rather good in doing recovery missions (specially near kerbin), and found out a way to do it more or less good. Even so you need a few things. 1) Be able to do a lunch to orbit without with the same rocket doing exactly the same path: in other words if you want to be able to time it, you need to actually be abel to do it in repeated ways and match it. if not you cannot time it. 2) as somoene say it before, its better to be early than late (why, because if you are earlier is easier to wait), 3) also depends on how much time you want to wait for the randevous, waiting 4 hours i manage to do it with very small dv's from the original ship (and it saves a lot that way). 4) you can do it even mathematically once you are in orbit, if you want an explanation on how to do that please pm me. although if you are looking for refueling you want to do the 1 and not the point 3. (and perhaps the type 4 to use as less fuel as possible). something i made a while ago for refueling purposes, was a terrible small ship with almost nothing but 2 hooks, really small fuel and the best engine to use at least fuel as possible. and of course unmanned. with that i sent such ship to take the fuel from any ship in orbit (even partially depletted debris with fuel left), then, docked and moved it to the space station (instead moving all the space station), after draining the fuel depot made a sling shot (rotating the station really fast and opening the hook to gain speed) and of course later remove the empty fuel depot from debris. (you can easily gain 2 to 20 depending on your station). is not much but a bigger orbit means less fuel to do maneuvers. but point one is the most important of everything. and a good ship to make it happen too.

when I said "simplifiaction" means that they cancelled out, you can measure it in Litters of fuel too. (not sure which else besides that).

To resume all that, when you use ISP, you always use 9.8 m/s^2 no matter where you are. Why they do that, is because we Engineers are a bit lazy sometimes, and in true, it is a simplification, because you can measure your rocket in very different ways. Example, If a rocket weights N Tons, and has a total DV of XX, is the same to say Your propulsion is going to last N seconds and the total DV is XX. now if you have it in seconds, is somehow easier, because with the Tons you need to do all the math. and also you may still need to know how much time you need for the maneouver. so you say it in seconds (specified for some ship with all its conditions sets), and then you only need that. so thats why this gives both the isp value and the trust. (you can use either in your math applying similar, but not the same equations).

I found out that the Reasonable deviation is quite big. cannot be expressed as you want because simply is the sum of the deviations what its compared. so you have to do it as close as possible, a good way of doing that is, when you are actually aiming for the orbit, place a node at your destination and zoom into it. you will notice that, what from your actual place looks ok, when you zoom its really way off. if you make it match visually good, it does not need to be perfect and it will work. Consideration, if you need a geosincronic orbit that is not enough as sometimes it ask that over a specific zone (but if so its marked on the planet). so yes that kind of missiones will be extra hard, but not that much. now the inclination is a very important parameter, and that is its inclined at the correct axis, but thats truly easy to do.

my main issue is, how do you do that, if you are in ksp and m_versionText.text, does not exist there. And if you are not in ksp, how you reference it? truly this has no head or tail. if (m_VersionText != null) m_VersionText.text = example.Version;

I am sorry but I am following by the letter your instructions and it just does not work. You are explaining it as if everyone here knows exactly what it should do, and thats not the case, I am an expert on c# and know my deal in Unity, but was unable to follow all you said, even reading it 10 times and doing it at the same time. Mostly because some stuff is totally out of context. And some parts are not explained at all. of course this is my first mod so i do not know much of ksp, and thats mostly the problem. Is there any truly basic UI to see this?, or can you say in which file to set each step My main problem is, after have done the Unity part, doing the rest (the hook). because from the ksp section It is unable to see what it should. Also, I need this as soon as possible. will be really gratefull for a fast answer.

I made on excell a nice formula for it (to do it automatically). you need several data: 1) VehicleAcc = your ship aceleration (and should be the minimal with the fuel you just have, in any way it will accelerate a bit eventually) but you cannot switch between them. (the next may be lower or you may even take too much time at changing the steps). 2) PlanetAcc=the landing gravity on surface (yes its not really that much above but, its better to be on the safe side). (in m/s^2 not in g) 3) StartHeight= your altitude (and with my equation you are supposed to not have horizontal velocity, too much of that and you will crash). 4) startVelocity=your vertical speed. (I take it positive when going down). 5) LandHeight= the desired altitude (because except on some Minmus zones normally is not 0) you can skip 2 and 5, if you have the distance to the surface, even so it should be exact or you will crash. because a lot of math, the speed at which you have to start the desaceleration can be found by. MaxSpeed = sqrt((startHeight + 0.5* startVelocity^2/PlanetAcc - LandHeight) / (0.5/PlanetAcc + 0.5/(VehicleAcc-PlanetAcc)) but because reasons I do not understand you cannot rely on the speed you see so you better rely on the altitude, for that. Time to free fall (before starting it). FallTime= (MaxSpeed -StartVelocity)/PlanetAcc or directly FallTime=[sqrt((startHeight + 0.5* startVelocity^2/PlanetAcc - LandHeight) / (0.5/PlanetAcc + 0.5/(VehicleAcc-PlanetAcc))-StartVelocity) ]/PlanetAcc now having the fall time. the altitude you have to start your stop is Altitude to start your rocket = StartHeight-(startVelocity*FallTime+0.5*PlanetAcc*FallTime^2) if you do correctly you will always have some small amount to fall, because the rocket aceleration is just a bit more in the end (unless your rocket does not change much). Important notice, your rocket needs to have quite a LOT more acceleration than the PlanetAcc. If its the same or lower you cannot land. and the closer it is to the same aceleration the more fuel it will expend. I recomend at least 10 times more. (not hard on mon and less hard on Minmus, may be really hard on other planets).

Truly I do not find it soo hard, of course to play it better its easier to know about math and physics, (which I enjoy), but also, try on easy at first. I am using 1.4 (that even need a direct line of view or some other means to move your rocket). and do not find it so dificult. but there are some basics you may want to read from some places like. 1) if you go straight up, you loose a lot of fuel if you are having problems like that, try adding some "wings" to it, so, you can actually use the friction in your adventage. and all you are saying kind of happen from the start with this game (except before 1.0 may be)

the only mod i have installed is the precise Node and nothing else. so i doubt thats the problem the real problem is that the ship i manage to make has about 256 bateries, and a lot of solar arrays too. i have just edited a few times the save to see which ship was causting the most lag and it was that and the harversters themselves. so no need of such there just too many ships near each other. is it possible to make some tool to "absorb" pieces inside? even if the ship becomes a box. i mean i do not want to pay less or cheat. but, for what i am seeing having 1 battery which cost equals all the other with that amount of electricity and mass, will be almost the same, except the cost of processing it for the game will be truly a lot less). i know this makes it a bit "unrealistic" but, at least will be playable ((and to do the same with all other parts as well))

well for mun its truly easy to make it practically better if you know when to make your lunch, a couple of times i manage to make it "so" exactly that i ended at the max mun altitude (refueling there as i put my station to go out of kerbin) and mun is better only because its in the same plane (no need to adjust like minmus) although its rather possible to do it to minmus but a lot more dificult (at least to do it without correction). besides, in my personal experience is not always the best to use the cheapest solution, if you use more fuel not a lot but jsut a bit, all the rest you can keep in the space station, instead of making special missions just for that. but then thats not the question here, the question was whats better if make the full orbit, or to go directly and as i stated from the start depends on the ship (i did all the math) even if thats just in theory and in the practice you may expend more due to errors (but you can do the same errors when trying to make your orbit at first too). and really to just reach mun if you know the angle its far easier to just aim up. this is sometimes even used to change the plane orbit of real satelites (even so its not done agains gravity). now sometthing funy is the following, you may never "Make" orbit, you can arrive mun using fly by stop there and get out of it with enough velocity you to fly by too. in fact i Throwed things from low moon orbit to kerbin (having a ship coupled and just stopping the coupling, then landing that ship again at the moon), the funy thing is that the ship managed to land before the capsule arrived kerbin, and the capsule actually survived all the travel without any issue. (except you cannot delay the landing).

Hello, i have been playing to KSP for truly long and, i reached the point that its unplayable. I want to make some good ore refiners, and i manage but now, with all working and near so i do not have to travel too much its imposible to focus on the place (or gather the fuel from it). At this point i managed to get steady rate (yes my stuff on minmus has enough batteries,drills, coolers, and solar panels to actually be working full time 24/7), so basically it generates a steady amount of fuel all the time. I truly do not want to cheat it. so i imagined that i can just do 1 piece that replaces all others, not to cheat just to replace and lower the amount of items (each ship has at least 200, and this are like 10 or more ships linked together). I am willing to even sacrifice them and make the place "unmovable" after this change is done. so my plan was, to make a mod that with just a basic cube do all at the same time, the problem now is, that the pannels do not receive sun and the drillers do not drill . so or what i want cannot be done or i am to new to mods. also i did not even started trying but if its so hard to just set the module of a solar pannel the rest that i want to do may be impossible. but i say never the less may be it inspires someone. The idea is after having all in just one piece, that this piece has basically 0.01, so if you use it like that its not usefull. even so anything that attaches to it, can be set inside (not sure if its posible to do this but, my idea was to scan the "attached ship" ( or rover or whatever it was, and add the resource needed and generated to it, and make the original disapear, even so to add all the mass to it as well). even if this can be done just once and after that cannot change. now i am stuck and can't play the game, because all my idea was to gather fuel and if cannot go on with that cannot continue. the problem is not that is just slow but its so slow that when i press the escape button it crashes. now, can someone tell me what to do?, do i just edit it to give it "extra powers" to this station and remove the rest? or should i wait for some mod to solve this?

what you say is true but only in part. i have done all the math and, depends truly too much on the ship itself. because it depends completely on the twr also you are not considering that in order to get in orbit you need to waste 2200 dv between 80 or 70km, if you do not do this you fall. so if your rocket has a twr of 2, yes you expend a lot more fuel that if you where in orbit but, doing all the math from the point of achieving orbit, if you actually make orbit (with no fuel loss), you need 2200 dv + 860, meanwhile if with a twr of 2 you just go directly it takes 860*2 (860 for the trust, 860 for the loose, and this is not totaly acurate, you loos that at start you start to loose less as far as you get away (not much but it counts). so, this do cross over. if your twr = 1 of course you waste all your fuel and stay there (doing it directly up). so of course for a twr of 1 will be more efective to make the orbit first (in fact the only way). now for a TWR of 1.5, your real aceleration is 0.5 so how much you really need is based on this formula, minDv*TWR/(TWR-1) this will be exactly the same when this goes to 2200+860 (as you have to expend the rest anyway) and in the case of the mun mindv =860 so, TWR for this case is 1.39, so thats the only requirement for a "straigth" up to be more efective, of course its also a matter of distance. even so with this method you can't just calculate that the needed dv is 860 but as i said before 860*TWR/(TWR-1) . and how much you do this is a matter of cost. so trully is not so good for 1.4 but, its rather good for 1.5 or higher (and how hard is to reach that its just a matter of your payload). now if you do not believe me please test it.

Well, most of you will say i am crazy but i like even the math of it. It took me quite a while, but eventually i learned all about it, I even read some physics out of it, after all, the equations are NOT that hard. i mean its true the acceleration is not constant, but, how much your mass decreases is, so, the function is NOT that hard and once you know it its easy. specially if you can use excell to help you as i did. now I can make a node transfer to the second with 2 stages in the middle if needed. and all that, without using any mod, except the conics one (and truly i only use it because sometimes its impossible to place nodes if not). even so must say that being able to easily change the position placing numbers instead of using the mouse sometimes its important, specially to change the navball that sometimes go crazy when you try to move it with the mouse. that and the fact you actually place the nodes on PE, AP, DN and AN is the best. but besides that capability, y truly enjoy setting the nodes myself and doing all the math when needed. I try to get all the missions that, i am capable at the moment and I also do all in paralell, so trying to know when a mission needs to arrive and all that , i truly use an excell to keep track and know which goes next. in fact i made missions myself to "clean up" my space, i have several debrits with fuel around moon (because i go to rescue and with the heavy tail i was unable to grab them) so, i created a catcher (just a big rocket with 6 mini rockets with 2 hooks 1 in each point and very little fuel (after all they get back to the big ship all the time) so they just reach get the debris, use the engine on them to move the debris to the main, they are detached of their fuel then discarded. in fact by rotating it as really hi speed (being at low orbit about 10k), at minmus i managed to crash the debris and gain some velocity out of it. basically i rotated my ship (the long way that has more momentum), when it was really fast and timing the point that the hook was moving "backwards" relative to orbit, just freed the hook, that caused the debris (now empty) to go at about 50 m/s relative to my ship. and a few minutes later crash (getting rid of it). in fact if anyone wants the excell sheet, i can pass it so you can use it yourself. or check how its done.

Hello, there is a way to do maneuver nodes perfectly but that means you have to do a lot of math pluss you need to copy some data as you do not have during flight. besides that all you need to do is to aply some formulas (easier if no separation is needed in the middle of course). point 1, if the node is less than 10 seconds, most of the time you can easily just do half before / after. (its kind of harder to time it exactly that what you can deal). but when its about 1 minute total, its recomended do do a better approach. how yo do it, 1, you need first to know how much your rocket fuel consumes and, the ISP of your engines (you need an extra formula if ussing different engines at the same time). after that, with the dv that you are aiming for (you can even PAUSE the game at the middle of a node and use just the remaining one if you notice, of course this way will not be that good) you do not need the aceleration, and you can get the actual mass from the game (visit ship info in the orbital view and you find the actual mass). with that you know: dv(total)=ISP*ln(Mass/FinalShipMass), even if this may feel weird, we want to know how much fuel we need to use, no matter how many engines. for this e^(dv/ISP)=mass/FinalMass -> finalMass=Ship Mass/e^(dv/ISP), and more important Fuel UsedMass = FinalMass-ShipMass this means, so the final formula is. Fuel Used to Maneuver (in KG)=Ship Mass(1-1/e^(dv/ISP)), since dv/ISP is positive, 1/e^dv/ISP will always be less than 1, so the fuel uses will always be positive (wich is impossible to be otherwise). with this you will even be able to notice if you have enough fuel for it or, if you need to go for the next stage (you can do this multiple times removing the thrown mass if you know it. now this is in KG, to pass to Liters (or whatever measured the engine shows), you have to actually divide this value by 0.0111111111111 (as far as i know thats a constant). So Fuel In Liters= Fuel Used to Maneuver (in KG)/0.011111111 now with the fuels in liters we just divide this by how much the engine uses each second ManeuverTime=Fuel In Liters / (Number of engines * Liquid Fuel used by engine each second) this last is the TRUE amount of time the node uses the best so far is using half before half after the node (even if really you may not even reach the node) but doing this way it seems to compensate acurately. now you may need to change things if you started late, or early (early is easy just cut off your engines, basically making a pasuse), late you will have to fix later or change the aiming constantly. even so in this method i always follow the pointer (except when reaching the green part). I was unable to find anything that solves this but, its almost impossible for the ship to know when you actually need to do the change so doing manually for me at least is the best.

Really i found a far better way of doing any kind of eva (in atmosphere). the only important are 3 factors. 1: should be really stable. 2: you should not have any aceleration out the vehicle. (you can actually have the oposite with no problem). 3: set the plane (or ship) in such angle that all the drag does not get in the way (so you can do it while still moving forward, just set your plane at 45 degrees with the brakes on and stable. as a bonus there is one kind of cockpit that has the hatch just after a bump, that really causes the air to not try to move the kerbal away (specially if your nose is up than your velocity which is kind of a normal situation) i have been able to do that at 250 m/s without problem and any heigh. (even so should be fast as the plane may get out of control if more than 10 seconds and then your kerbal may just be sucked by the drift)

Well the string theory, predicts the existence of the graviton, now not saying that is true but if that is, you can think of the graviton as balls that attract each other all the time but a more intuitive way of thinking them will be like balls falling, how many of them fall (and how fast) will determine the G force (taking that mol of material of hidrogen weights 1 gram) that will be 6x10^23 atoms, and each of them has mass so each of them has a graviton, so you can easily think that 6x10^23 gravitons = 1 gram. if you define a graviton like that. now if you had some way to count how many pass certain area in certain time. you will be able to know how much gravity is there in that moment. Now supose you change the name graviton to "Negative Gravioli particle", and you call the detector "Negative Gravioli Detector" and, you just have that (all theoretical of course).

Hello i just foun an easier way to get sience by "landing on water". 1: you make the space ship being extra carefull that all the big weight is below (so it does not flip when on water). 2: you put a spearator (decoupler) in the upper part where the experiments will hapen. 3: you send your ship to water being carefull to splash ok and in the right orientation. 4: you actionate the decoupler. (you can previously check that you have no new science when trying the experiments). 5: you do the experiments again and now . surprize you have data because you are "landing on water".