• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

872 Excellent


About AHHans

  • Rank
    Senior Antenna Wrangler

Profile Information

  • Location Array

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Indeed, I just did a quick comparison between 1.9.1 and 1.10.0. In the first the solar panels survived a lot longer than I expected but did break at some point, while in the latter the solar panels only failed when the whole shebang crashed into the water and everything - including the tank they were attached to - got destroyed. I wonder if this is related to bug #25744, but IMHO this is clearly a bug.
  2. I guess in this sub-forum the appropriate answer would be: because it isn't implemented (yet?) by SQUAD. If you want a more general discussion about why we don't see Kerbals blink while they are flying spaceships, then I'd suggest to ask the question in the KSP Discussion sub-forum.
  3. My 0.05€: the risk from autostruts is mostly when they flip around. Autostruts to "heaviest" will change their target e.g. when you use up the fuel in a tank that used to be the heaviest part and at some point another part becomes he heaviest. Similarly autostruts to "root" will change when you (un)dock and another part becomes the new root part of the combined/separated vessel. Such a sudden redistribution of mechanical stresses can tear the vessel apart. I usually set autostrut to "grandparent" on essentially all the parts of my vessels and didn't have a negative effect that I remember.
  4. Two comments about using the Claw: depending on your difficulty settings you cannot transfer fuel though a Claw (the "Resource Transfers Obeys Crossfeed Rules" setting). The exception to this is that freshly created fuel from an ISRU ignores these rules, so it is possible to refuel anything with an ISRU equipped rover. The other is that even though fuel doesn't flow through a Claw, tourists can crawl through one. (Don't ask me, Kerbals are apparently very malleable.)
  5. As someone who used trial & error to get to a "meh, good enough" stage of airplane design my first comment is that learning by doing can be fun, so don't be afraid of explosions. You say that you already know how to design planes in another game, so I don't repeat any basics but point out a probably not so intuitive issue about stock KSP: it doesn't actually have airflow. I.e. it doesn't simulate airflow, any lifting surface that moves through a part of space that has atmosphere will generate lift (and drag) according to it speed, angle of attack, and air density. If you attach a wing part to the fuselage and clip it into the fuselage or clip two wing parts into each other, then they will still generate lift as if they are in free air. The only exception is if they are inside a cargo bay or fairing, then they are completely shielded from airflow. This also means that all the things that make real-life wing design complicated (like wing angling, chord to width ratios, wingtip devices, etc.) are purely cosmetic in KSP. Another tip - in case you don't know it yet - is that KSP can display an overlay of the aerodynamic forces per part (default key is <F12>). Also the debug- (or cheat-)menu (default key <Alt> - <F12> on windows, <L-Shift> - <F12> on Linux) has a "Physics" section in which you can activate display of even more information. If that was an actual question: from the main menu -> settings -> Input -> Flight
  6. I personally never bothered to get the relay networks perfect. I usually just leave used probes in orbit to act as relays. Using the big survey scanner means that I have at least one relay in a polar orbit, and the different contracts and refueling stations means that I have a few relays in more or less equatorial orbits. That doesn't guarantee me 100% coverage, but it is good enough for me. On Duna you have the issue that Ike likes to kick unwary satellites out of Duna's orbit, so you have to be careful to place the satellites in a way that they never enter into Ike's SOI. IMHO the easiest way to do that is to place them into orbits that are low enough that they stay below the inner edge of Ike's SOI. But I don't know if you can get 100% coverage of Duna with three satellites in a triangle formation like that.
  7. Do you need to only get onto an orbit around the sun, or onto a specific orbit around the sun? If it is the former and you only get "fly by the sun", then you need to get onto an orbit that doesn't intersect the SOI of any planet.
  8. I guess by copying the content of the "GameData" folder into the GameData/ directory of your KSP installation. I.e. so that you have a path like: ".../path/to/your/Kerbal Space Program/GameData/Launchers Pack/" Then you can copy the *.craft files into the "Ships/VAB/" subdirectory of your safe-game and load these craft in the VAB.
  9. Hmmm... I just cheated a control station 2000m above the surface of Tylo, and it did explode upon impact. So I I guess that crashing a discarded rocket stage into them will also break the deployed science parts. (Assuming that happens within the physics bubble.) On the other hand: if my aim was that good, then I wouldn't mind to deploy another (set of) part(s).
  10. Sorry, I did work on a lander, but some RL issues came up that prevented me from actually doing the mission.
  11. Well, yes, without additional torque this just isn't controllable during reentry. I also tried this but only got it to work with an extra Mk1 reaction wheel. (And even that was pretty iffy.) My solution for an early game 5 Kerbal tourist transport was to replace the lower crew cabin with two Mk1 command capsules that are nose to nose. That gives the craft a curious waist but it works. If you have enough fuel, you could try to keep the propulsion stage and use the engine gimbal to keep the whole craft straight. I.e. run the engine during the aerobraking at just enough thrust to keep everything straight. (Set SAS to "surface", "keep retrograde", then check the control inputs in the display at the lower left: if one of them seems like it is going to max out then increase thrust, continue until the parachute deploys then ditch the engine.) But a) that is not guaranteed to work, and b) with only 41 m/s vacuum dV left in orbit (and probably a terrier engine) I don't think you have enough fuel left... So my guess is that it's time for a rescue mission: park that craft in orbit and rescue the Kerbals with another ship (or ships). If Jeb is carrying around a load of tourists, then you can also only rescue Jeb at first, and then rescue the tourists when you have the Klaw unlocked. (Yes, tourists cannot go on EVA but can crawl through a Klaw.) Or you can be nasty and only save Jeb: have him exit the craft once the danger of overheating is over and then have him land with his personal parachute. (If that are non-tourists in the crew cabins then you can try to save more than just Jeb. But that is going to be hard! You'll need to keep everyone inside the 2.5 km physics distance bubble around the currently controlled craft or Kerbal.)
  12. I noticed that you have the spring strength set very low. Is the suspension bottoming out? I recently noticed that my craft often seem "jittery" when they should be standing still. It turned out that their suspension wasn't set right and they keep jumping a tiny bit into the air all the time. This meant that the wheels didn't actually touch the ground most of the time. My craft were mostly planes, so they "only" became really hard to control on the ground, but I assume for a rover that would mean that you have very little traction on the ground because for most of the time the wheels are in the air (if only a few mm) and cannot actually propel the rover.
  13. O.K. So I take it that you are not talking about landing on the Mun(,*), and that the chutes are in the "not safe" condition all the time during your descent through the atmosphere. The latter means that the craft is too fast for the parachutes to deploy. That doesn't depend only on the speed but also on the air pressure, so a speed at which it is safe to deploy the chutes at 10'000 m is not necessarily safe at 1'000 m. My guess is that you either have too little drag in the way you go through the atmosphere - if you reenter pointy end first then don't be surprised if your craft imitates a lawn dart - or that you are reentering too steep and thus don't spend enough time in the atmosphere to slow down. Try setting your PE to something between 20 km and 30 km, if that doesn't slow you down enough to land in the first pass, then you probably also don't have enough drag to survive the landing. P.S. (*) Yes, we did have a question here why parachutes wouldn't deploy on the Mun...
  14. As already mentioned: which part is the root part should not affect the drag. So these drag values are from the extra aero data window, not the aero values in the PAW? Is the attitude of the craft the same in both cases? In particular the AoA? It would help to have screenshots of the two situations.
  15. In addition to what was already said here (O.K. @Streetwind just mentioned that): your first stage has waaay too much thrust. With the swivel at 100% thrust it has a TWR of 2.7 on the launchpad. Good values for the start at the launchpad are between 1.3 and 1.5. A TWR of larger than 2 anywhere during the ascent in the atmosphere should be avoided. That means that the rocket accelerates too fast while still deep in the atmosphere which causes lots of drag. And because most of the drag of this rocket is at the top that makes it also more flip-happy. I actually got you craft into orbit: I throttled up only to 30% on the launchpad (so that I have at least some gimbal control), pitched a few seconds after launch, throttled up to max at/just before the SRB separation, and never(!) went too far from the prograde marker in the atmosphere (well, when I did I fought the rocket back to prograde as soon as I noticed). That resulted in a very steep (read: ineffective) ascent with > 1000 m/s needed from the terrier in the circularization burn. My main issues were getting it to turn at all while the SRBs were still running, and that it really wanted to flip once the SRB were detached. I modified the craft somewhat: I changed the wings to 4-way symmetry attached to the central core, included an aerodynamic adapter between the science junior and the probe core (which meant that I had to re-arrange all that small stuff up there), and set the thrust limiter for the SRBs to 50%. No when launching at 30% throttle it is a much more well behaved craft (throttle up at SRM separation), and got me to orbit with much more dV left than the previous version (even though there is more mass in the payload). You can find my version here: Moon Satellite AH. Another comment: The science junior is very heat sensitive, and it is directly connected to the heat-shield which gets rather hot during reentry. It isn't unheard of that the science junior explodes when reentering in this configuration. But with closed doors on the science junior and careful flying (keep retrograde to "surface" during reentry) you should be fine (the craft it lightweight so it should decelerate fast). But I personally am lazy, so I stopped trying to reenter unprotected science juniors.