Jump to content

king of nowhere

Members
  • Posts

    1,881
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by king of nowhere

  1. it's certainly a bug, but i don't know anything more
  2. you got the wrong title. you are not asking about ascent profile. you are asking about inclination. and for inclination, you've got to launch when your launch site is crossing the plane of moon's orbit, and you have to keep your rocket in that plane. which is almost impossible to do without autopilot.
  3. oberth effect. yes, I was also surprised when i learned just how strong oberth effect can be
  4. really, how many people can be expected to participate in any of those categories? there's just no point to having all those leaderboards. a single one for any nonstandard setting is fine
  5. it cures stress. it reduces stress, by a tiny tiny amount. the planner in the VAB/SPH isn't always reliable. but the effect is so tiny, if you have a minimalistic ship you probably won't even notice it. the TV works if you have a luxury ship with all comforts. in those conditions, an average kerbal will accumulate roughly 3% stress per kerbal year. Which is more or less what the TV cures. individual kerbals have different levels of stress resistance, within some random variability. If a kerbal is above average, he can stay indefinitely on a ship with best comfort and TV without ever getting stress. a kerbal below average will still grow stress over time, even with TV. So, it's very unlikely to make a difference in most missions. Still, it consumes very little power and it costs nothing to leave it on, so unless you have limited fuel supply, you should still use it
  6. the mun alone is enough for science farming if you get most biomes. i got early science by farming the ksc, in less than one hour. then i got some early money with some fast contracts, like test on the launchpad or run an eva near the ksc. then i took a dozen rescue contracts for kerbals stranded in low orbit. I sent mun landers to collect them, so each kerbal collected was immediately sent to mun. this way, i had seven or eight mun missions on their way by the end of day one. by day 3 most of them were returned, each returned vehicle gave 500 science and a big cash influx for the rescue mission. by day 5 I had farmed enough science to get ion engines and rtgs, and enough money to send a xenon-heavy eeloo mission with 30 km/s deltaV.
  7. I think kraken drives being banned does not even need to be specified. it's a general assumption for any kind of competitive challenge. I started this, aiming to make it in less than 2 years. the trick is getting enough xenon to launch an eeloo mission on a high energy trajectory. actually, i've done that too - science and money farmed in 5 days, could have been as little as 3 had I optimized better -, and the main issue is that the game does not recognize intercept when you're on a kerbol escape trajectory. other potential issue is that with many missions simultaneously, some long ion engine burns may overlap. well, that just require some planning. I'm sure one and a half years would also be feasible enough, but some limits I'm just not interested in pushing
  8. I know that. as I said, there can be glitches at high warp speeds. but it's not guaranteed. the reason the vessel sometimes moves across the planet is that the game only calculates positions at every amount of time. of real time. so, at high time warp the game checks the vessel position only every few minutes of real game clock time. If the vessel moves through a planet in a few minutes, and the game does not check for position in those few minutes, then the vessel is fine. if the game checks at the wrong time, it removes the vessel. for the same reason, at high time warp one may have an intercept trajectory to a small body like gilly and skip it entirely. like, not even register that you entered a new SoI. try to set a craft on mun in a 10x5 orbit - not a fast passage from a high apoapsis, but a prolonged passage below ground, even if nominally above "sea level". you'll see how well that goes. So, sure, to hit a mountain during time warp you have to be very unlucky. you need that the game checks for position right when you are passing through the mountain. or maybe you stop the time warp to go manuever something else. regardless, it happens. P.S. yes, I am fully aware. I've been using time warp to ease some difficult docking manuevers occasionally. but it has 0 relevance to the argument discussed. you confuse the physic bubble with the workings of rails.
  9. not controlling the lost vessel. look, what's so strange about it? if you set a vessel on a collision course with a planet, and then you move away from it and time warp, the vessel is still going to hit the planet. barring potential glitches at really high time warp, but those are just that: glithces. maybe you are confused because a vessel in atmosphere, away from physical range, doesn't experience drag, but that's a different condition entirely. and it still gets eliminted if its periapsis is too low a vessel out of physical range is put on rails, but it doesn't become indestructible. if the rails hit an obstacle, the vessel is destroied off screen. and you get no notification whatsoever, which sucks heavily, because instead of reloading and fixing the problem you keep playing and waste time.
  10. nonono, absolutely not. if the vessel is on rail, and its rails happen to hit a mountain, the vessel disappear. and it's very annoying because the game does not give any message for it. i speak for direct experience
  11. was just coming to say as @Vanamonde;; it happened to me, I had vessels in a nice low orbit that I thought safe, but there were actually a few peaks on the planet reaching that high, and maybe the orbit was stable for days and days, until at some point the planet rotation managed to align one such peak exactly with my vessel, and I'd find it disappeared. or maybe your vessel is crossing the path of a mooon. if that's not your case, then i have no idea. only times i ever heard of stuff disappearing, it was beccause they hit the ground
  12. slate and ovok are the ones I completed. On Wal I recently crossed the halfway line, but it will still take months. In this continuity I'm planning to also do Hale (again, since I'm already here and it's small and it's got good sightseeing) and eventually Polta. but those will take a while, because I'm still running my main kerbalism rss grand tour, and I just couldn't resist picking up also the speedrun challenge.
  13. eh, this one is an actual, legitimate bug. one we are all aware of. how do you solve it? very simple. you save before any kind of eva construction. you reload if it goes wrong. in that specific case of a rover on minmus, you could try slamming a kerbal with jetpack on the rover in the right way to try to put the rover back into the correct position. if all fails, by pressing alt-f12 you open a cheat menu that can be used to cheat, but it is most often used for testing (for example, you test a tylo lander directly on tylo without having to go all the way there, then reload the game) and for bug fixes. like, getting a new vehicle in place if the old one gets destroied by a bug. even most challenges consider this to not be cheating. P.S. driving that rover on minmus is going to be very hard, and not because of friction or bugs, but because of gravity. gravity is so low, you slide on the ground because there is little force pushing you downward, and at the first obstacle you jump and tumble. there are three ways to drive on low gravity bodies: 1) use reaction wheels. make sure to assign them different commands from the rover wheels, or assign a key to enable/disable them as needed; use those reaction wheels to keep your rover pointing the right way. if you jump it's no problem, you can control your attitude and always land on your feet. it's the easiest way, but it's not realistic - ksp reaction wheels are overpowered and working on magic - so you may not like it. you may also use rcs for the purpose, but you're going to run out of propellant eventually 2) make sure your rover can survive tumbling, and that it can push itself back into an upright position. the most common way to "fortify" your rover is by putting landing struts on the roof. to pull yourself back into an upright position, you can use a robotic arm (with the breaking ground expansion), or an engine, or reaction wheels. 3) drive very, very slowly. like, 3 m/s tops. that's the most realistic option, it's what actual astronauts would actually do on such a mission. but it is very, very boring.
  14. the most likely option is staging. check if your staging sequence is such that it decouples the payload on launch. alternatively, it may have a weak connection that breaks easily. in this case, autostruts may help
  15. aww, it seems like a worthy challenge. i'd like to participate, but it would take weeks, and my ksp schedule is full
  16. I accidentally made an Ovok circumnavigation here Basically, I was going to Polta for a circumnagivation there, I stopped for refueling on Ovok, and I thought, since I'm there I may as well. I propose, since adding a new leaderboard for all modded planets would be highly impractical, to simply add another category, like "modded planet circumnavigators", or maybe "hexoplanet circumnavigators". My OPM submissions could go there. My Wal circumnavigation is still halfway. Wal is harsh, unforgiving, and -worst of all - monotonous and boring.
  17. Part 2: the rover that went to circumnavigate Polta and ended up circumnavigating Ovok instead Since I'm already there with a rover, and I need to get to another biome for refueling, and this moon is so small, I decided I may as well run an Elcano on Ovok too.
  18. Part 1: Pit stop amid the rings of Sarnus Dancing Porcupine doesn't have enough fuel to reach Polta in one go, so I decide to stop for refueling in the tiny moonlets of Sarnus. Turns out, Dancing Porcupine didn't have enough fuel for that either; I had to pull off some tricks to barely manage it. About to land on Ovok
  19. This is going to be my third report of this series, dedicated to rover circumnavigations. What? You've been looking, and there is no second installment? That's true, because my second rover circumnavigation - of Wal - is still halfway. It's going very slowly, because it turns out Wal is a lot uglier than I anticipated. Meanwhile, I got an idea and I wanted to at least started it. The idea was to run a circumnavigation of Polta, another OPM moon of Urlum. Back when I landed there in the A'Tuin mission (chapter 9.5), I really liked Polta. I went as far as calling it my new favourite solid body. So, perfect place to circumnavigate. But I couldn't do it in that mission because it was inside a radiation belt. Here exploring it with the rover I had for that mission, the Horseshoe For the occasion, I also wanted to bring back from retirement my old first rover, the Dancing Porcupine So called for its strut armor devised to protect it from the consequences of reckless driving in low gravity, this rover was my first major accomplishment in this game, and I did drive it for thousands of kilometers - especially in my Jool 5 science challenge. I'm still very fond of this rover, and it still offers a fun driving experience. As I adopted kerbalism to make the game more difficult, I tried to adapt this rover, but I couldn't. Dancing Porcupine is made to be self-sufficient in a long trip. Once you add in the requirements for food, decent housings for the crew, and replaceable spare parts, the whole concept couldn't hold. I would need to couple it with a mothership, but that defies the whole purpose of this rover. Also, Dancing Porcupine relies on its rockets to climb steep inclines, because it has low wheel power; and without the easy ISRU offered by stock, this function just couldn't be sustained. Now I'll get a chance to drive again on that moon I like so much, using this rover I like so much. Or at least, I will get a chance once I finish my current Wal circumnavigation (which will probably get its own report eventually).
  20. i'm not a specific expert in this, but I am an expert in using stuff with many parts. I can tell you than in stock ksp, 1000 parts lag a bit but nothing that a normal pc can't handle. mods and some modded parts can make things worse. in the stock game, my biggest, more complex ship was the navis sideralis neanderthalensis, at 800 parts, made of small modules connected by docking ports. it lagged a bit, and it took several seconds to load in physical range - but nowhere near a minute. conversely, my bigger ships made with kerbalism are in the kilopart range, they take 1 to 5 minutes to load, and they lag heavily, i can only assume life support and chemmical processes require lots of extra calculations. this should give you a good baseline. having 500 parts in physical range is ok, 1000 parts is acceptable, 2000? probably not so much
  21. first, you can make them high quality for 2 ignitions. second, an engineer can service the engines to restore their ignitions and time. this helps with some designs.
  22. yes, reaction wheels are slow, but if you only need to move a few hundred meters they could be the best option. you could also try to have a kerbal in eva push the thing with the jetpack. and yes, it won't be fast, it won''t be comfortable, it won't be pretty. but you are trying to move a rover without wheels by repurposing parts that were not supposed to move a rover; what else could you expect?
  23. check that all conditions are met. maybe the experiment requires a lot of electricity, and you don't have it, and so it goes slower. or maybe it requires some other kind of resource. for example, the stake experiment requires 27 electricity/second. that's a lot, and if you don't have it, it will go slower. it also requires that the crew be exposed to small doses of radiations. the trapped experiment produces over 5000 samples, and if it fills your sample containers, the experiment will stop - and proceed at snail pace while a scientist in a lab slowly processes those samples into actual science, making room for new samples. so check if there are issues like that. if there aren't, then it could be a legitimate bug
  24. depends. that plot is for what transfer? I've seen a lot such artifacts fro transfers to dres and eeloo, so I guess it has to do with inclination and eccentricity. but aside from that, I really have no idea. do notice it is mostly a mathematical artifact. you can make a transfer in that line of inefficiency, at the cost maybe of a small correction manuever. but that plot does not account for that.
×
×
  • Create New...