Jump to content

purpletarget

Members
  • Posts

    407
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by purpletarget

  1. Old braking charts defintely won't work in 1.0 or later as the Aerodynamics was overhauled. As already said, lifting bodies and Airbrakes will give you a bit of control during a descent. It may take some trial an error though for now. There's some math, and I expect a new version of the charts will make the rounds eventually, but even that will be tricky since air drag has far more complex factors in the density and temp profile of planetary atmo's, and there's huge variability now based on your spaceship design...one one chart fits all solutions are probably going to be harder to come by.
  2. If you've gone through he Wiki already, there's also The Drawing Board, which lists a variety of resources, some of which include more math based type tutorials or vids which may touch on the kinds of science you're looking for.
  3. Yeah, I'm pretty sure this is one of those problems that can't be solved analytically. Rather you could play with numerical models to assist, but there's still going to be variations based on differing grav losses from TWR, and drag losses, especially in the turns, or when they're done...or what shape the rocket is in. (Tall vs wide)
  4. Part of the issue with the perception is also the change to the way fuel flow and ISP work. As of 1.0, the fuel flow rate is constant, and the ISP variance with altitude results in higher thrust as the engine climbs. So if the SRB is set (via tweakable thurst limiter and propellant) to run for 30 seconds, it will run for 30 seconds. Off the pad it will have a lower thrust, and that will increase as the SRB climbs to lower pressures, and higher ISP values. In 0.90 and prior, the thrust was fixed, and the Fuel Flow would be modified by the ISP. So, if the SRB was clamped on the ground, and forced to burn at the lower ISP, it might run for 25 seconds, where-as if it was allowed to climb, it would start using less fuel per second as it went up, so the total run time could be 35 or 45 seconds depending on where it was activated, and how quickly it climbed to near peak ISP values. The higher it went, the higher the ISP, lower fuel flow, longer burn time.
  5. That would be the problem. The M4435 is the narrow beam scanner used to examine a smaller geographic area, but it can't do anything until the full survey is done with the Clamshell M700 scanner first.
  6. You need the M700 Survey Scanner on Board, in a polar orbit. Deploy the scanner, and "perform orbital survey" to get the data. You also need a communitron of some sort on board as well, and the survey data will transmit, very similar to science reports. The data will take a while, so make sure you have plenty of batteries or solar panels/fuel cells to download the data. After that, the resource info should be available in the Map view. The M4435 can operate in orbit, or on the surface, but requires the overall orbital survey above to be done first. The surface scanning module will work anytime.
  7. If you check the release notes for 1.0, and/or the change log, you won't see it listed.
  8. An Engineer will make ISRU and Drills work better. Also extended solar panels will act as passive radiators, so if you can leave them extended, you'll be better off. Tanks on either side of the ISRU should act as heat sinks and pull the heat away, make sure you don't have any heat shields or service bays in the way. They are also power hungry...make sure you have something to power them. If not solar, then take some fuel cells to keep running in the dark.
  9. If they're not blowing up until 1km, then chances are there's residual heat in the pod (which doesn't blow up until 2000K) that is conducting into the Goo Canisters until they blow up at 1200K. The trick will be finding ways to slow down your pod enough that it doesn't heat up so much, so that it has a chance to cool below 1200K before the Goo heats up past 1200K. Try a couple things...Goo higher up, so that it is shielded from heating up from friction directly...and let the engine/tank sink the direct entry heat if you can, and dump them before they conduct all their heat into the pod. (careful that fins don't turn pod first into stream). Also, use whatever fuel you have left to decelerate before hitting the re-entry interface...lower speeds = less friction, and less mass = less intertia, which means drag should slow you down quicker.
  10. Restart steam, and/or check Library/Downloads...it may be queued up for sometime later due to server loads. Your game Library should also tell you if KSP is queued for updating.
  11. Not necessarily...heat flux is a strange beast. It's not just the heat flux in, but also the thermal mass, etc. Smaller parts can end up overheating faster than more massive parts nearby. If the tail is getting heat from multiple sources (Engines source, plus friction heat conducted from forward fuselage, then it may fail before other parts around it.
  12. Tsiolkovsky's rocket equation is your best friend. Go introduce yourself to it, get to know it, learn it, love it. If you're starting with a basic launcher, run your current design though the rocket equation (stage by stage) and find out what it's capable of with zero payload. You already know what excess dV you have, so you can recalculate the Rocket Equation the same way with larger and larger payloads until the dV answer you get is reduced by that surplus you're getting. With atmospheric ascents, the calculations are very rough estimated, because a lot of gravity and atmospheric drag losses are highly variable depending on design and flight profile. My preferred method for lifters however, is to plan on a specific payload from the beginning. That is, if I want a lifter that can put 20 tons into orbit, I add 20 tons of dry mass to the equation before I even start building the first stage! And then build up the lifter from there to have the required dV with the payload already accounted for...saves lots of tears and heartache. Anything and everything pretty much that you could want to know about the Rocket Equation and other topics, check out the Drawing Board in the tutorials section.
  13. Krash Test Kerbals, Episode 1-7: Ejection Angles and SOI? - Kerbal Space Program Tutorial Let's play/Tutorial series in Kerbal Space program, v0.90.0. In Krash Test Kerbals, we don't just play KSP, we find the parts of rocket science that aren't hard! Ejection Angles and SOI's. Getting into orbit is one thing, but what about bouncing from one planet to another?! We know how to calculate phase angles already, but what about a single burn to leave the planet we're orbiting? And what happens when we arrive? How do we make sure we end up going the right direction? Todays Topics: Sphere of Influence (SOI) Escape Velocity SOI Intercepts Ejection Angles
  14. Bandicam for recording Audacity for voice tracks and effects Cyberlink Powerdirector for editing
  15. A quick in-game way to do the same thing, is push the Ap up to the KEO altitude, and let the package travel up to it. At the Ap, raise the Pe, and keep an eye on your Time to Pe in the Map View. If you want a 4 hour period for the orbit, raise the Pe until it's 2 hours from Ap to Pe. At that point, you can release your first satellite for circulation, and the remainder can sync themselves into positions with 2 hour offsets from the original.
  16. Mostly this is probably due to the Tree Structure that KSP uses for constructing vehicles. Everything starts with a root part, and each new part attaches only at one point, and they all branch out from there. Thus, many parts can be connected to a part already on the ship, but each of those parts is only connected to one parent part. You can't have parts connecting around in a circle, or looping back on each other, since that would involve making a child trying to become a parent. The workaround would be to use struts to staple wing parts together, or reinforce the heavy parts that are loading the structure.
  17. For Class E's I will use a small ion probe with a claw to intercept the asteroid in solar orbit. Once attached, you can find out exactly what the mass of the asteroid is, as well as setup possible flight plans, which will tell you exactly how much dV you need in order to do the job. Then, you can custom build your intercept ship to with the dV reserves needed for the capture, as well as the initial oomph for a Kerbin SOI intercept just shy of the asteroids Pe. (Generally I found this required NASA sized parts, and multiple LVNs as a good combination...the burns are long (several minutes for only 1-200m/s) but most capture orbits are far enough out for that to not be an issue. The rocket equation is your friend.
  18. This is a known bug with the Win64 build. The KSC scene in career appears fully upgraded, however their capabilities remain at the Tier 1 level. Either switch back to the 32-bit version for the career games, or you can also move your save file to that version in order to access the building upgrades and play in 64 at other times.
  19. Time the launch for when KSC is just about to pass under the orbit, as was already mentioned. Then it's a matter of doing your gravity turn on the inclination heading...so if you want an inclination of 63 degrees, then you want to goto a heading that is around 63 degrees away from East for a prograde or West for a retrograde orbit. (I'm not sure how the contracts are measuring the inclination, and the picture doesn't really indicate direction, and the An/Dn don't make sense to me for a 63 prograde...) however, ...there's also the rotation of Kerbin...so you'll probably want to steer westward about 3 degrees or so from whichever you pick. (So, 63 prograde inclination, and launching notherly, you'll want East (090) minus 63 (notherly) for heading of 027, and then westerly another 3 for 024) If you time it right, you should be within a degree or two from full alignment once you hit orbital velocity at LEO. You can pretty much align yourself from a circular parking orbit (anything lower than the Pe of your final orbit), and then push out the Pe/Ap into the target shape once you're done.
  20. Suborbital rockets are perfectly capable of hitting the survey targets. It can pretty much be done entirely off the navball and surface mode, especially if you're able to choose locations that are relatively close (trying to go intercontinental might require leading the target, but anything within a couple minutes flight time can be pretty much aimed directly)
  21. The contract locations are visible in the Tracking Station prior to accepting the contract. They are only visible in the a vessels' map view after the contract has been accepted, and can be selected as a target in order for the marker to appear on the nav ball.
  22. It should also be noted that with this bug, the buildings only appear upgraded in the KSC scene, so upgrading again isn't an option. However, functionally they are still starting tier buildings, with all the limitations imposed (Mass Limit on the pad, TS Conic limitations, contract limits, etc.) If you're really keen to fly with x64, then you can functionally get there by copying your save game back and forth between the 32 bit and x64 versions. You only need to load in 32 in order to upgrade your buildings, and then swap back to 64. At any other time you should be able to play the career in x64 with minimal related issues, other than the one aesthetic difference.
  23. With only 45 degrees to change, as was already mentioned, there isn't any savings to be had by purposely raising the Ap. Also you have a circle within an ellipse, and the Major axis appears to be at approximate right angles to the An/Dn nodes. As a result, there isn't likely to be an appreciable difference between which node you use to make your inclination change. If the Major Axis was aligned closely, (Ap/Pe close to An/Dn) then you would want to do the burn at whichever was closer to the Ap for some marginal savings. Secondly, yes, control your Ap at the same time. If you do a normal/antinormal only to adjust your inclination, the nodes by default will also increase your orbital velocity vector at the end, so chances are your inclination burn location will become a new Pe, and you'll have to make up that dV a second time lowering a likely higher Ap. When you plan out your burn, use a combination of Normal/Antinormal (whichever is helping the inclination) with some retrograde. You can probably manage to get both the inclination you need plus getting your Pe down to the target altitude in a single burn, and that should save you at least some juice. ETA: Given your numbers you have enough dV in that thing to get off Kerbin almost twice (TWR notwithstanding), ~8km/s+...so it's not like saving 10m/s here and there is going to affect you too much. Also, a really quick way to be certain of you mass at any time in flight, would be to check the Info button for your spacecraft in the map view. From that, and your fuel numbers, you could get an almost exact dV very easily.
  24. Slashy, Honestly you're preaching to the choir afaic. I've seen the same thing frequently. Someone will ask "How do I calculate whapitysplash?"...and the first 3-6 answers are "get this mod to tell you!". ...as well intentioned as the advice may be, it's not really what they asked for. If they asked "How do I get the game to display whapitysplash while I'm building/flying?" then the mod answer is far more relevant. That said, that would make most of the beginning of this thread a somewhat rhetorical question itself. KSP has all the tools within it to allow the math to be take easily from the interface, and applied to a scratchpad or a spreadsheet...so if someone asks how to calculate something, the best answer will be to help them locate and understand the formula's to find their answers.
×
×
  • Create New...