IncompetentSpacer
-
Posts
101 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by IncompetentSpacer
-
-
Continuing my latest attempt on RP-1 career, had two gaming sessions today but completed only one mission, due to engine explosion during the first attempt - few seconds after the image was taken.
The mission was to launch a bio sample and 75 units of sounding equipment over 150 km. Since I am bit low on science points I expanded this to a mission with two bio samples (different types) and setting the target to 999 km of height.
The equipment used was upgraded post-war era rocket parts - RD-103 and Isayev rocket engine U-1250/2000, all of them being designed in late 1940s.
Also the second attempt was only partial success - achieving the primary mission but failing partially at secondary target (gathering of science):
First main RD-103 engine lost power and then U-2000 engine on the last stage failed to ignite, shortening the time for science gathering.
I have committed building of another launch complex - capable of 200t heavy rocket launches. While first orbit can be achieved with far lighter rockets in RP-1 (see Juno I) , the goal is to have a design which I can use bit longer than just couple of missions, especially as one of the missions in the current project is to launch a 1000 kg satellite.
-
4500 km downrange contract completed and with that the very first project in my RP-1 career (started here) - "Early rocket development".
The funny thing is that I could have completed this contract waay earlier if I have not made the mistake with fitting the rocket with high pressure fuel tanks which RD-100 series of engines do not need. By changing type of fuel tank, I went from 7450 dV to 8800+ dV.
Yeah, I know - bit odd to add Soviet project managers to organization while using NASA insignia.
Story continues here. -
Restarted for 3rd (or was it 4th?) time my RP-1 career in KSP1.
The difference compared to prior versions of the RP-1 mod is that career mode is drastically changed with it being bit more alike the one you can find in BARIS.
My first rocket, intended for breaching Karman line is perhaps bit too heavy and I have wasted many months extra and LOT of money (almost all of it) in order to build an Launch Complex which can build the rocket. I am hoping to regain the lost time with higher flexibility of the design and having an LC which can be reused. .
Campaign continues in the next post here...
-
13 minutes ago, Superfluous J said:
I would be surprised if this went down any other way than the Youtuber emailed Nate/Intercept/whomever asking for an interview, and they accepted.
It's also possible that they watched his stuff first and decided he was together enough to justify the time.
I liked the interview. Better than some of the content from people whom I won't name who were flown to Europe for the pre-release party.
Agree on all parts and especially the last sentence.
I liked it precisely because it is a interview that is interesting for those who wonder about process behind game design and not your run of the mill youtuber game channel content creator typical interview.
Kudos (and I am not a uncritical fan of him so this does not come lightly) to Nate for taking the time to speak with the kid.
-
7 hours ago, RayneCloud said:
What you're doing is justifying something we call an "Is-Ought Gap". Just because a thing, IS, does not mean it Ought be. Just because we crunch, doesn't mean it's right, moral, ethical, or healthy. While I agree with the general statement that you should never launch before a stand-down or a weekend, because of the strain on communication and public relations, that's not an excuse to /Expect/ the team to work over the weekend.
I think we both wish for success of this project. I am merely basing myself on my experience, working on various levels of the organization, from successful projects vs the ones that failed . Not sure that this falls under IS-Ought problem in this context but OK.
-
50 minutes ago, RayneCloud said:
Did you expect them to work through the weekend? After launching on Friday? 0o
As someone who has been parts of over dozen successful software "launches" and even more importantly few failed ones - you do your damnedest to avoid launching on a Friday. And management and all parts of organization dealing with communication never "sleep" before or during initial week post launch* regardless days of the week. During last launch I was awake 36 hours straight, emptied a fridge of red bull and went temporarily blind afterwords for couple of days due to eyes drying out (I am no longer in my 20s so this ordeal was difficult for me).
Of course gaming industry is very different and there is limit on how much you can compare different industries in different countries. But anyway - I don't think devs can improve massively the game in couple of days so no point of trying but customer communication part of the org? Yeah, I expect them to be active 24/7.
BTW, liked your SWOT analyses in the thread you posted (although I do not agree with all parts of the approach but that is neither here or there).
*Because if you "sleep", you do not own the narrative and people fill in the gaps in info with their own imagination.
-
From Rock Paper Shotgun:
QuoteIf you were stranded on a desert island and had to recreate Kerbal Space Program from memory using nothing but coconuts and string, it would look something like Kerbal Space Program 2. The game is nowhere approaching finished, it barely resembles the promotional videos, and it isn’t ready, even by Early Access standards.
Source:
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/kerbal-space-program-2-early-access-review
It goes without saying that devs need to do some damage control ASAP...
-
20 minutes ago, 78stonewobble said:
I'm sorry, but I'm not gonna trust average reviews, when that is partially based on people that think that early access means what they want it to mean, as opposed to what it actually means and people that don't look before buying. I have no use for the opinions of those people and indeed nobody should listen to those people.
Plenty early access games out there have excellent ratings despite their early access state* and we have had early access games for over 10 years now so I find the claim that people rating KSP2 badly because they "don't know what early access is" a somewhat weird claim to make.
*Including KSP1 when it entered early access status on steam back in 2013 - a time when very few early games were present on Steam.
-
Exited for many things but what really impressed me so far is sound effects in the game. I know nobody will focus on these sort of thing but the sound is the one that sets the mood for the game.
PS: I never win these sort of thing but want to give shoutout to the guy recording the rocket sounds. -
On 12/24/2022 at 3:20 AM, Opus said:
RSS RO RP1 for KSP2 stat! Also all my editor mods like precise editor editor extensions etc. I would also like to see procedural wings that can do custom cord shape and curved/ sloped edges.
I wish this too but THAT will take time...
-
I have taken a short break in KSP long time now due to IRL obligations but today I managed to get an hour to do a mission in my RP-1 career. This is just a long duration mission, allowing me to harvest last bit of science from low earth orbit but also injects 600 000 credits into the budget.
I have forgotten to take screenshots of the rocket launch which showcased some of the graphic mods from their best side so I only got an image of Gemini capsule orbiting to show.
Also KSP 2 needs really to rethink how maneuvering (setting up maneuvering node, intercepting an object etc...) is being implemented. At same time as the mission above I have running mission to land probe on Mars. Setting up mid course correction to intercept mars SOI because initial intercept disappeared after reload, took loooong time.
-
Today was string of failures and one success
. My moon orbiting mission is probably delayed over 300 days or thereabout (and therefore my moon landing mission) due to two failures :
In the first launch RD-108 sustainer engine failed to ignite, which meant almost 60 days delay while rocket was rolled back and rolled out again and reserve crew ready trained (In RP-1, you need to train your crew for each mission).
Then in the second attempt one of the RD-107 boosters failed catastrophically, careening the rocket of course and disintegrating entire rocket in process when I tried to ditch the boosters prematurely.
Kerbals survived, landing safely at Arabian Peninsula so there is that at least..
Moon lander mission was a partial success, since it fulfilled the contract but landed in a already known biome (because apparently flat area of few sqm in middle of Moon highlands is counted as Midlands biome) so no science gain there.
I was never tempted to do save scumming as I was then
.
Meanwhile Venus Voyager reached the Venus SOI and therefore Venus flyby mission objective was fulfilled. By going back to Space Center and accepting Venus Orbit contract and firing remaining fuel at PE, I finished that contract too. Venus atmosphere from orbit, as seen on the image below is boring as hell, so only one picture from that mission.
-
Today my Mars flyby probe arrived in Mars SOI after 9 months of travel. As final stage, responsible for science gathering and midcourse corrections, I reused the Moon Lander probe I used earlier that year for the exploration of the moon.
I almost had the opportunity to gather science from Phobos but however much I fiddled with maneuver nodes, I could not achieve intercept. So I decided to dip into mars atmosphere in order to gather as much science as possible:
Unfortunately, I got too greedy and dropped too low, below 80 km of attitude, enough for my high speed to generate friction with thin mars atmosphere and overheat the structure of the probe. At same time planet blocked the "line of sight" for the onboard antenna with Earth ground stations, meaning that data transfer was interrupted before all data could be transferred.
Still I managed to get 20-ish science from the atmosphere and perhaps 140-150 science(not counting the Sun SOI science while traveling to Mars) in total from the Mars so definitely a "Mariner 4" aka "Mars Flyby" contract was a resounding success.
-
Used for first time a Gemini capsule today, mounted on a R-7 style rocket.
The contract was to preform EVA and report the findings from low orbit. For our Kerbals it was chance to test the new EVA pack which would be useful for the intended homemade solution for landing on the moon, using the Gemini capsule and garage made lander.
The image from above reminds me of certain smiling man meme. Maybe our astronaut is thinking that the capsule was never tested. Or for that matter the EVE pack she is using. Or that the capsule is nearing the Allen belts.
Luckily everything went well and the new Gemini capsule is proving much more safer than the Mercury which already has claimed two Kerbal lives.
-
After two successful moon orbiter missions in my RP-1 career, finally the time has arrived for landing a probe on the moon. Instead of opting for light payload which would make everything so much easier, as training for moon boots and in need of science points, I opted for 500 kg probe filled with science gear.
Game bugged out plenty of times for some reason so I had to restart KSP several times.
I used mechjeb landing autopilot for first time and I kinda regretted that. Mechjeb turned on and off probe's engines all the time, eventually triggering failure in 2 of 4 engines (thankfully symmetrically so I had control). I did not land perfectly but had to struggle looong time before managing to right the probe.
After the probe was righted, science gathering was initiated and after the first report came in, the contract was fulfilled.
-
30 minutes ago, Kerb24 said:
Continued the 4L1P Mission.
This communication session starts with the spacecraft leaving the Mun, lowering its orbit around Kerbin.
Once at periapsis, another burn is preformed, raising its orbit.
And then another course correction to get a Minmus encounter.
Once at Minmus, the spacecraft enters orbit.
And preforms lots of small burns to adjust inclination and altitude.
The lander undocks.
And de-orbits.
PDI.
Contact. The lander lands on a slope.
Doing some mining.
Re-extending the landing gear causes the lander to hop.
Of course, I didn't take any pictures of the ascent, so here it is back in orbit.
And re-docked.
The spacecraft will now wait in orbit till the next Eve transfer window.
More elegant than my brute force rocket in stock with 158 meter rocket which was at 700t (I think, not sure 100% regarding mass) with 28 engines in the first stage. I parachuted into the atmosphere and used ISRU to refuel (took ages).
And then thanks to EVE buggy surface, my entire monster rocket started sliding towards water (or whatever chemical soup the eve has for ocean) after a game restart. I took off immediately and I think it was Gilly I finished refueling on - not sure though, since this was some years ago but I knew I did not have enough dV in return section to go right home (besides having to wait for transfer window).
-----------
Anyway earlier today I was tired of KSP so I just did one launch, starting on my comsat contract in RP-1 career. On the image is the light rocket (I have one heavy and one light design) I use for missions limited to 500 kg payload and LEO orbit.
-
Finished my daily Kerbal RP-1 session with two contracts.
First geostationary satellite :
And second moon orbiter contract:
Both were delivered by my R-7 derivative rocket which I kinda use for everything (MEO, crewed missions, moon contract) beside small payload deliveries (communication, weather and navigation contracts) to LEO.
-
21 minutes ago, jimmymcgoochie said:
They're just generic small separation motors.
Oh yeah, starter sep motors would work greatly as long as you are below 400 (or thereabout) km separation from the moon.
These and decoupler boosted to the max force are (were?) bread and butter for caveman cursed rockets
14 hours ago, The Kerman said:i can never get RSS/RO/RP-1 properly working, so landing on the moon is impressive (at least in my POV)
The key is to start on totally clear install with no mods. Last versions are working on latest version of KSP so installation process got bit shorter.
Otherwise just follow github wiki and don't for moment stray from the procedure:
https://github.com/KSP-RO/RP-0/wiki/RO-&-RP-1-Express-Installation-for-1.12.3
-
12 hours ago, jimmymcgoochie said:
@IncompetentSpacerhave you considered an unguided lunar capture with solid motors? If you set up the lunar capture burn as soon as the TLI burn finishes, then point at the node, spin up and decouple (with a 0 force decoupler! otherwise the trajectory gets messed up) then the probe can use solid separation rockets to capture into orbit. If you angle the solids so they point at/near the centre of mass, the small margin of variance on each motor won’t be enough to knock it off course thanks to the spin-stabilisation.
This is how I did it:
The TLI stage also completed a lunar impactor contract, though it required a bit of cheesing the system by packing a small, locked battery so it would have some stored power at the moment of impact.
If you’re not restricting yourself to just American engines, the RD-0105 is the best upper stage out there in terms of overall delta-V, just watch out for the puny gimbal force from the verniers; the upgraded RD-0109 is even better. For early hypergolic upper stages, I’ve always favoured the Juno 6k over the AJ10-mid as its ISP is higher, propellants more dense and reliability slightly better(?) despite the limited ignitions.
I did consider solids but during current run I stick (mostly not hard house rule) SSSR tech. I speculate that I probably could have saved 20t (or thereabout) because of the savings in top stage and in prior stages. A monopropellant solution, considering the light payload, would probably work too.
And I agree - RD-0105 is insanely good engine, only reason I changed it to RD-0110 is better TWR in vacuum (I play without Mechjeb piloting - shorter burn times is then QoL improvement imho).
But ultimately I play RP-1 career with house rules where I stick to liquid boosters (sure, heavier rockets but I much more capable imho). I am no expert in solid boosters from late 50s but IRL by the time Moon Orbiter and Luna 10 flew, they did not use solid boosters for last burn as far as I know. I suspect that solid boosters back then would be far less reliable after four days in space (have no sources for this, just probably the reason they did not send orbiters around the moon before 1966).
I am not advocating how to play RP-1 "properly", it is just explanation for background for my house rules. Everyone should play a game however they want.
So I ended up with this configuration:
Spoiler
Which solids did you use in your orbiter? - I don't recognise them (you seem to have clipped them into payload so I can't se what they are).
-
Yesterday I failed to achieve orbit around the Moon in my RP-1 career due to discovering that the mod had fuel boil off implemented. Long story short, the fuel in my tanks evaporated in the travel between Earth and Moon.
I had to change to untested American AJ10 series engine in the top stage in order to fulfill moon orbiter contract - it was only restartable engine which used fuels that do not suffer from same problems as kerosine/ liqued oxygen combo that all my other engines use.Unlike yesterday's attempt, this mission went without problems. Images in the spoiler.
Spoiler
-
Continued my KSP RP-1 career. After successful manned missions around the earth, including the rendezvous between satellite and mercury capsule, I tried my luck on a moon orbiter.
And got introduced to the phenomena of certain fuels boiling off in space... From comfortable 900 ms budget, I ended up with 0 in the four days it took to come to moon...
I detached it from engine section in order to conserve more electricity and at least get some science back from the failed mission (very little since my signals don't reach beyond the moon).
So no good pictures or stories to be had today, since the orbiter slingshoted around the moon and headed in the dark space, forever to be lost to the Kerbalkind
-
Today I completed two contracts at once in my RP-1 career with first rendezvous coupled with manned orbit (not the milestone but generic contract) with nice boost in cash, finally allowing me to afford 3 mil VAB upgrade.
Rendezvous in RP-1 career (without Principia) is similar in principal to the stock except that dV budget requirements are far larger, most engines, definitely in late 50s, can only be started once (mono propellants are your friend) and Kerbalism life support implementation means that you are on the clock. So actually...it is not alike the stock at all when I think about it...
The target craft was a science probe that was no longer useful and new S1.5400 engine (engine with large black engine bell at the craft with Mercury capsule) proved indispensable since it actually CAN be relit 5 times.
Return home is always exciting since I never really figured out the re-entry profile for Mercury capsule:
Spoiler
-
1 minute ago, jimmymcgoochie said:
Are your avionics on and sufficient for the craft’s mass? Do you have the correct RCS propellants (HTP and helium I believe)? Are the thrusters actually enabled and with pitch/yaw/roll authority enabled?
If you really have no attitude control but the capsule is spinning, wait until it points vaguely retrograde and fire the retros.
Yes, yes and yes. And the last sentence is my current plan.
-
Continued my RP-1 career with a science gathering mission which entails kerbal orbiting Earth in mercury capsule for 10 hours. This may very well be first Kerbal to die in this career. For some reason RCS does not work and I can't rotate the capsule in order to orient the de-orbiting rockets the right way
. My moon orbiting mission is probably delayed over 300 days or thereabout (and therefore my moon landing mission) due to two failures 
.
What did you do in KSP1 today?
in KSP1 Discussion
Posted
It is late 1955 and first orbit in my latest RP-1 career has been achieved. I find the early phase of the RP-1 to be the most interesting when you are limited by technology but this part goes much faster now since I reuse the design ideas from previous playthroughs.
Anyways, the rocket I used to achieve orbit is bit on the heavy side with capability to place 1000 kg (ca. 2000 pounds) cargo in orbit.
This is sort of modified historic R7 configuration with two liquid boosters RD-107 boosters and RD-108 engine in sustainer section.
Took some nice pictures but putting them in spoilers. I don't like how the cloud cover is rendered below certain altitude but it is what it is.