Kasuha
-
Posts
4,512 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Kasuha
-
-
Of course, if getting to zero APe takes away all my eccentricity... well, then that makes the plane change harder, and its an optimization problem as you say.
Eccentricity is not a concern here. Plane change is the easier the higher the AN/DN you use is so you need to make one burn to raise the AN/DN to a suitable altitude, and another burn to fix your inclination and bring periapsis down again.
Care to share orbital parameters of your asteroid (copy/paste from persistence/quicksave)? Maybe I could implant them to some ship and check what can be done about it.
-
I'm basically wondering what the most efficient way is to set APe to 0
I thought you want to put the asteroid on equatorial orbit. Zero APe does not mean zero inclination.
In general, finding most efficient way is an optimization problem. You set up equations for your orbital parameters after certain number of burns, set the parameter you want to achieve to the desired value, and derive by dv to find local minima. Resulting burns are non-obvious.
-
First, burn at periapsis to lower its apoapsis somewhat. Not much, but make sure it won't easily exceed SOI boundary. It shouldn't be more than single units of m/s.
Second, burn at apoapsis prograde and make the orbit circular. That's going to cost you some 100 m/s.
Third, perform plane change at inclination point. You can lower the periapsis down to Kerbin with the same maneuver. That'll cost 100-200 m/s depending how is your orbit oriented.
Aerobrake to make the orbit circular.
-
From the SquadCast thread,
If it was recording/playback feature, I'm pretty sure experienced players would run into it rather soon. It's not like they don't use flight log.
Assuming all these clues are true, it's about situations which good players generally avoid - such as Kerbal deaths, destructive lithobraking, ship collisions, near misses at high speed, running out of fuel, running out of electricity.
My personal favorite is still semitransparent Kerbal spirit appearing in space where you just killed a Kerbal, and flying away towards Kerbal Heaven (or KSC). It fits all criteria but somehow I doubt I can be right about it.
-
doingh the inclination change and lowering PE without it is *only* 2330
You need to get into highly inclined transfer orbit from Jool or you'll be spending a lot of dv forming your final orbit into correct LAN and APe. Doing the change in Jool orbital altitude without Jool is going to cost at least 4000 m/s (with 2000 m/s burn from Kerbin). Still better than trying to reach that transfer orbit directly from Kerbin (>10,000 m/s) but you still lose over 3 km/s compared to using the slingshot.
But yes, it is matter of taste. Building stronger rocket might be simpler than getting the timing right.
-
I'm not really disagreeing with you, I think. The fact that nobody really cares about animated gifs is IMO nice evidence of how cheap the bandwidth today really is. There are multiple animated picture formats available providing smaller file size and greater image quality than gifs but none of them is supported by all major browsers.
-
In mathematical terms 3 is nether like nor dislike. If we allow N/A's then 1 person who cares a lot and 9 who vote N/A gives a vote 5 as if it is a strong vote. If you force a 3 from those who do not care you get 3.2. This (in my opinion) much better represents the community opinion (positive but not in any major way)
That's what I was talking about. Sorry but you just can't calculate simple averages out of these. Different people react differently, one person will mark "strongly agree" and another "somewhat agree" even though their feelings about the question are on exactly the same level. By making averages you give greater weight to those who exaggerate their responses. If you don't plan to compensate for that, you should run a poll with simple yes/no questions.
-
For short clips, .gif is superior IMO as loading a player would likely take longer than the whole video length. For anything longer than a handful of seconds you have my agreement.
It's not about seconds. Majority of videogifs take way more space than a simple player would.
I just tried to find a web video player and it takes up about 300 kB. Few animated gifs are smaller than that.
-
@Kasuha: Nether like nor Dislike means roughly the same as no opinion. I also didn't feel the need to have 7 options of like or dislike as I felt 5 was enough.
There's great difference between "I don't care" and "I don't know". I'm not playing with mods so I can't tell if I'd like them or not if I have no experience with them. But if I used them, I would sure make up my opinion and it would be most likely different from "I don't care".
Polls and their evaluation are as simple business as gyroscopes in physics. If you don't set it up right, you'll end up with biased results and you'll even have no idea which way they are biased.
-
PNG forever! Jpeg needs to die as a screenshot format, IMO.
Now, if we could press a key to make a five- or ten-second animated .gif automagically...
Jpeg needs to die but it has damn long roots. Pity jpeg2000 did not spread enough, much better format IMO.
People who make animated gifs from videos should be prosecuted.
-
I didn't get past the first page. I'm missing answers "somewhat like", "somewhat dislike", and "no opinion".
-
EDIT: However, as for using "chase" camera having the Kerbal as the frame of reference, I think that could get quite sickening if you're maneuvering quickly and/or around a lot of structure such as a space station. Personally I would still like a "free" mode which has a steady camera view.
That has a lot to do with flying model airplanes and doing aerobatics with them. If you're not experienced with it, it gets confusing very fast because if you tell the plane to turn right, it turns to its right, not to your right.
Currently available navigation methods in default settings are 3rd person view with restricted movement in certain directions.
If you allow EVA rotation, it gains complexity of riding a model boat. Not much more complex but some people may be rather uncomfortable with it.
If you completely decouple them, it gains complexity of model plane aerobatics, although in slow motion (at least as slow as slow do you manage to keep your Kerbal).
-
You shouldn't need fuel lines then, fuel will automatically flow to the center stack.
No it won't. It could flow from parent to child but not the other way. I.e. from central tank to the toroid yes, from toroid to central tank no.
How are people side mounting those fuel cellsPick a cubic octagonal strut (that little girder) and move it on the side of the tank. Press W twice and it will turn inside, leaving just its bottom attach point sticking out. Then you can attach the tank to that point. Note that it might be hard to get the strut out of there, you may need to clip your camera inside the tank to do that.
and getting the game to consistently have the fuel line actually connected to the main trunk of the craft.sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't and there doesn't seem to be a way to make it work right 100% of the time. sometimes in the VAB it says it's hooked up, sometimes I goto launch and it stays hooked up. Othertimes not. How do you guys make it work for your landers?
Pictures would probably help here.
-
Hardware-Assisted Lithocapture from a hyperbolic trajectory is probably impossible in all or most locales, but I could be wrong about that.
Might be safe on Gilly and perhaps even Bop using small set of safe hyperbolic trajectories.
-
I agree that adding an option to save the screenshot as jpg would not hurt anyone. I don't see it as a high priority for developers, though.
Saving the Earth is really no concern here, saving your own upload time and perhaps data transfer fees definitely are.
Till there is such option, I suggest to use one of batch image format converters. They're all reasonably simple to use, you can even choose level of compresion/image quality loss and you can do it for entire albums. It is also possible to set up a batch/shell script that will convert your images using set quality settings through simple drag&drop.
-
There are two major modes in which you need to navigate Kerbals - floating in space, and walking on planet surface. Methods of their navigation are vastly different in these two contexts.
My opinion is, current "Free" and "Orbital" views (and controls) should stay as they are. Free is optimal for any surface movement, orbital is sometimes beneficial for orientation in space. The "Chase" camera mode should put the Kerbal as the frame of reference and change the control into standard RCS (WASDQE/HNIJKL), allowing all rotations and translations the same way as with spaceship.
-
I rarely post unless I have something relevant to say.
Honestly, if you have something relevant to say, then say (or write) it. The only thing you wrote so far in this thread is "it doesn't work for me". And then you complain how unhelpful we are. If you want specific help, be specific with describing your problems.
It would be nice to have a camera view (eg, "Free") in which there is no frame of reference.Yes, we're definitely missing a "Free EVA" mode. But to not totally lose control, I believe the Chase camera mode should be used for that, using the Kerbal as frame of reference. Then you can have complete control like with a spaceship without getting completely lost.
-
Having to manually convert everything to jpeg is a major pain in the arse.
You don't have to. If you upload your images to imgur, all scaled versions come out as jpg.
Besides, there are powerful batch convertors such as irfan view or FastStone.
-
jpg format introduces blocky artifacts to the image. png images preserve much more detail.
Here's a detail from Rowsdower's picture
png:
jpg:
Besides, a single YouTube video takes up more internet bandwidth than whole album of these pictures.
-
I like to call it "forced landing"
Lithocapture.
-
When you're getting a contract, read the description. Besides the story which you can safely skip, and parameters which you can always check during the test, it also contains description how the test is performed. Engines are usually tested either by activating them through staging, or by clicking on Run test button in their right-click menu.
-
But how do you do this so that you get the required LAN and APe upon arrival in solar orbit? If those aren't correct when you get there, then you have a potentially large burn to drag your AN around the sun's equator to the correct longitude, which is itself a type of plane change, just not the type we usually do.
In fact, how is LAN for Kerbol even defined in KSP? Here, the sun's longitude is defined counterclockwise from the "First Point of Aries" but that's not in the KSP sky. Is there any external reference point you can use at all to determine this or can you only find out once you're in Kerbol orbit and then use MJ or whatever to show all the orbital elements that KSP doesn't show you by default?
You're right, I forgot about these numbers. I guess the mod relies on the player using a tool calculating it the same way as the mod does, perhaps MechJeb or KER.
I guess in such case the best approach is probably about this: Slingshot off Jool to the correct inclination and slightly elliptic orbit. That unfortunately requires rather strong impulse or (preferably) powered slingshot low above Jool's atmosphere (strongest Oberth effect). Then brake at high apoapsis (about 2500 m/s) and then brake again at periapsis (about 3500 m/s). I did not simulate how much would the slingshot cost but I guess it will also be quite high number, that target orbit is kind of insane.
In images below I took it backwards - set up a ship in target orbit using Hyperedit, then drew maneuvers as if I wanted to return back (to Jool):
-
-
Unity has support of HDR rendering, so maybe in future we might get it. Rendering is not the KSP's weak point anyway.
lowest dV way to get to circular equatorial orbit from highly eliptical - non 0 APe
in KSP1 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
Posted · Edited by Kasuha
That will IMO come out even worse than if you coasted to the inclination point further from Kerbin and fixed the inclination there. By burning normal at apoapsis you're not changing inclination of your major axis, and you're moving the more distant inclination point towards the planet where it'll take more dv to align it.
I suggest you at least to "simulate" those scenarios in map view using maneuvers. You can see dv of (second, third, ...) maneuver if you collapse it (to the "star" shape) and hover you mouse above it. That will tell you how much dv will your maneuvers use in total without actually making them. Then you can try a different scenario and compare the dv. I really believe raising the periapsis, and fixing the inclination from high inclination point together with lowering the periapsis again will be the more economical approach.