Best way to land on kerbin?

[subzerocro]

What is the best way to land back on kerbin without burning to a crisp and the least amount of time burning to it? 

[Wjolcz]

None

[Hodari]

Come in at a reasonably shallow angle, not straight down.  Set your periapsis to the right height(probably 30-35km is good to start with, adjust as needed for your specific craft) so you slow down reasonably quickly but don't overheat.  If you have fuel left over at the end of your mission, do a final burn just before reentry to lower your apoapsis as much as possible as well(retrograde, possibly combined with radial out to keep your Pe from getting too low) before dropping your final engine stage.  Keep your reentry stage as light as possible and properly balanced so that the heatshield stays facing forward and protecting everything.

[Goody1981]

1 hour ago, subzerocro said:

What is the best way to land back on kerbin without burning to a crisp and the least amount of time burning to it? 

Set Pe to around 30-35km, point retrograde and have a heat shield

[Firemetal]

And turn off SAS. If you are not pointing exactly in the right direction, you'll burn up.

Edited July 2, 2016 by Firemetal

[Rocket In My Pocket]

2 hours ago, subzerocro said:

What is the best way to land back on kerbin without burning to a crisp and the least amount of time burning to it? 

You know what they say; any landing you can walk away from...

But seriously, @Hodari and @Goody1981 already pretty much nailed it.

5 minutes ago, Firemetal said:

And turn off SAS. If you are not pointing exactly in the right direction, you'll burn up.

I always have SAS on when I re-enter, but only on stability assistance mode.

I definitely do not recommend using the SAS retrograde option as the craft will wiggle and jerk about like a barrel of monkeys (especially when you are timewarping), wasting electricity and possibly screwing up the re entry entirely.

I'm not sure why you wouldn't want stability assistance on, all it does is help keep the craft pointed in the direction you want it.

[Firemetal]

9 minutes ago, Rocket In My Pocket said:

You know what they say; any landing you can walk away from...

But seriously, @Hodari and @Goody1981 already pretty much nailed it.

I always have SAS on when I re-enter, but only on stability assistance mode.

I definitely do not recommend using the SAS retrograde option as the craft will wiggle and jerk about like a barrel of monkeys (especially when you are timewarping), wasting electricity and possibly screwing up the re entry entirely.

I'm not sure why you wouldn't want stability assistance on, all it does is help keep the craft pointed in the direction you want it.

Well that's the only way I can re-enter safely.

[Rocket In My Pocket]

2 minutes ago, Firemetal said:

Well that's the only way I can re-enter safely.

Hey, whatever works for you.

The end result is all that matters in my book, if your Kerbals get back to solid ground alive and well, you must be doing something right.

I'll have to try leaving the SAS off next time, I'm curious about the reasoning behind this now.

[Kerbart]

26 minutes ago, Firemetal said:

Well that's the only way I can re-enter safely.

Reentry should be capsule only .If you add more junk (utility bay, for instance) underneath the capsule you will likely move the center of mass (COM) too far to the rear end, resulting in an aerodynamically unstable configuration. Just a capsule (heatshield, chutes, etc) will stabilize itself into flying in the right direction, even if you reenter “pointy end first”

If you reenter with a Mk-1 and a Mk-1 Crew cabin mounted underneath, attach an LV-909 underneath the crew cabin (and then a heat shield, it's always a toss-up for me if the LV-909 can survive re-entry). Yes, it's a waste carrying the damn thing around, but it lowers your COM sufficiently to keep the craft flying heatshield-first during reentry.

[Firemetal]

I do capsule only but I still need to turn off SAS to survive even coming back from the Mun.

[subzerocro]

Thank you everyone!

[magnemoe]

56 minutes ago, Goody1981 said:

Set Pe to around 30-35km, point retrograde and have a heat shield

Do not point retrograde if heat shield is in front. 

An tanker docks with an old core stage who is used as LKO fuel depot. 
Standard operation is sett Pe to 29 then dropping from Minmus. Leave 1500 fuel for the return. 

Other ships using the large heat shield can not dive so deep but the tanker is heavy. 

[DualDesertEagle]

I don't know wether it's still a problem in the newer versions as I'm still restricted to 1.0.2 for some reason but the reaction wheels aboard the pods are mostly OP for the pod only and in some cases even small vessels. Having SAS turned on when only the pod is left often makes it wiggle like crazy. Same goes for RCS on small vessels.

[magnemoe]

5 minutes ago, DualDesertEagle said:

I don't know wether it's still a problem in the newer versions as I'm still restricted to 1.0.2 for some reason but the reaction wheels aboard the pods are mostly OP for the pod only and in some cases even small vessels. Having SAS turned on when only the pod is left often makes it wiggle like crazy. Same goes for RCS on small vessels.

Has had this problem with small probes, using the small octo2 probe and reaction wheel is lighter than the larger octo probe but will shake small probes a lot. 
Note that keep prograde or target SAS tend to eat battery compared to mechjeb smartass

[DualDesertEagle]

1 minute ago, magnemoe said:

mechjeb smartass

Was that supposed to go together or did u just call me smartass? Just to prevent misunderstanding.

[magnemoe]

22 minutes ago, DualDesertEagle said:

Was that supposed to go together or did u just call me smartass? Just to prevent misunderstanding.

Mechjeb has an function called smartass who is advanced sas functionality. Same as an advanced probe core or high end pilot and has additional features. 
Main benefit for me is that it use far less power holding direction, retrograde with an MK1 pod and one small battery tend to run out of power during an aerobrake in shadow. 

[septemberWaves]

There's rarely need to have any stability assist as long as your centre of mass is close to the heat shield and is centred well on the craft. Keeping the COM there is enough to stabilise most vessels. But if you do feel the need to keep it turned on during the descent, or if you're trying to re-enter something which is challenging to keep properly orientated, then just make sure your re-entry module has plenty of power capacity.

 

On capsules it's good to integrate sepratrons as a LAS rather than using a tower. My reasoning for this is as follows:

• Sepratrons are very effective for escaping if the launch does goes wrong (and you have reverting flight turned off)
• You can use a lower periapsis for re-entry and use the sepratrons to slow down before reaching a dangerous velocity (precision landing like this takes some practice but is definitely doable)
• If you're the sort of person who sends your return capsules on your interplanetary journeys, you can use the sepratrons to make a re-entry safer from much higher velocities (in some testing I've been able to safely re-enter the three-kerbal capsule from about double Kerbin's escape velocity by staging the sepratrons in several pairs).

 

For vessels larger than standard capsules - such as >50t mass crew transports - it's good to use aerospike engines at the sides and have a heat shield at the base. The aerospikes can help to control the descent, and reduce the need for parachutes on landing (though I personally have yet to create a design of that mass range which can do a powered-only landing on Kerbin). You will still have to be careful that the aerospikes themselves don't overheat, but that shouldn't be too much of an issue provided you're careful with your re-entry velocity and/or use them to slow down gradually in the upper atmosphere. This is another situation where precise landing is challenging at first, but it's certainly possible, and also far more controllable than the previously mentioned system with the SRBs.

[Waxing_Kibbous]

I think the wiggly hold retrograde thing only happens when you have a barebones craft coming back in- try it with a capsule+landercan+appropriate chutes and sheilding and you will see it works much better (I do use Claw's stock bug fix which may or may not be included in the releases now). Just a capsule by itself gets pretty wonky, it *seems* like the more you try to bring in the less EC is used.

Anyhow, I like a good aggressive Pe around 20-25km or so (for Kerbin's moons), there have been threads here discussing that there is less danger of overheating with a lower Pe.

[Jetski]

If I have a lot of tourists to bring home, I put a heat shield then a nose cone at the top of the ship, and a service bay at the bottom.  Service bay deployed works perfectly as fins for any 1.25m stack (ie 4 crew cabins for 8x tourist contract), and keeps the heat shield pointed forward with no SAS needed. Nose cone gives you good aero on launch, and burna up harmlessly on reentry exposing the heat shield. Put chutes and a probe core in the service bay while you are at it and it's the perfect multi kerbal reentry craft with super low tech. Also 40 ablation is plenty for LKO, 60 enough for minmus return. 

 

Edit: if using this design for EVA rescue, be sure to have a capsule in the stack somewhere so kerbals can board crew cabins

Edited July 4, 2016 by Jetski

[Bigbootie]

Also, If your bringing a space plane in a heat shield is not necessary. Shallow entry, nose up around 30 degrees, let the maximum area feel the burn until you are through the danger zone and flying. Don't try to maneuver too much until you slow down a bit or crazy things happen.

Edited July 4, 2016 by Bigbootie

[Jestersage]

On 7/3/2016 at 7:26 PM, Bigbootie said:

Also, If your bringing a space plane in a heat shield is not necessary. Shallow entry, nose up around 30 degrees, let the maximum area feel the burn until you are through the danger zone and flying. Don't try to maneuver too much until you slow down a bit or crazy things happen.

Around what PE and AP?

[teag2]

keep trying until it doesn't explode

[Xyphos]

Watch the first half of this, and I hope you can learn from it. the second half is optional and irrelevant.

 

 

Edited July 5, 2016 by Xyphos

[Madrias]

Shallow descent angle, heat shields if they're necessary, and drogue chutes help for early deceleration.  Main chutes to slow down, and I like to configure mine for sequential deployment (groups of two, firing at 1000, 600, 400, and 100 meters above ground level) to ease deceleration forces so I don't break stuff quite as easily.  Shed as much weight as you can early, especially if you can do so while shedding speed (burning off your fuel on reentry approach) because the more mass you carry with you, the more heat you'll experience, which puts you in more danger.  Now is the perfect time to dump any unnecessary stages you're carrying, because you're coming down for a landing.

 

On a less serious note, I prefer landing probes with aggressive lithobraking after they've served their usefulness, beamed their useful data across, been undocked from their science package, which was placed onboard a crewed lander, and been docked back to their main drive unit.  (Yes, a lot of my probes actually have 3 probe cores.  What can I say, I like having the knowledge that if something terrible happens to the lead core, I've got two chances more to make it back with the precious data.  That, and transferring a probe-cored science package around just seems much cooler than trying to stow an entire probe onboard a ship, and this way I get to watch at least one thing explode per mission.)

 

As for spaceplanes, keep your nose high, face your underside into the heat, and hope for the best.  Remember, there is no shame in using high-altitude drogue chutes and an action group to cut them free.  There's also no shame in having emergency parachutes in the event you're trying to land somewhere that otherwise looks like it might break your plane.

[Guest]

On 02/07/2016 at 6:12 AM, Rocket In My Pocket said:

Hey, whatever works for you.

The end result is all that matters in my book, if your Kerbals get back to solid ground alive and well, you must be doing something right.

I'll have to try leaving the SAS off next time, I'm curious about the reasoning behind this now.

Aw dude you've been missing out. The pod shape (Assuming you're using a pod/heat shield combo with nothing crazy hanging off of it!) Points you softly in the right direction the whole way down. SAS makes you stiff as a board. Good for stable flight, but SAS isn't very useful on the way back down unless your aerodynamic shape prevents you from pointing in the right direction in the first place.

 

What I want to know is how much influence the lifting body effect still has in these last few updates since they came out. Been a while since I really fell headfirst into KSP's all-encompassing abyss.

 

EDIT (Don't know how to multi-quote!):

Kerbart said:

Reentry should be capsule only .If you add more junk (utility bay, for instance) underneath the capsule you will likely move the center of mass (COM) too far to the rear end, resulting in an aerodynamically unstable configuration. Just a capsule (heatshield, chutes, etc) will stabilize itself into flying in the right direction, even if you reenter “pointy end first”

---------end quote-------

This is true, but I find the service bay (Even filled with goodies.) has never given me a problem. (1.25m or otherwise, paired with an equal diameter pod. I like recovering my science gear.) If it does, worst case scenario: you'll have to turn on SAS. I haven't had to yet though.

Edited July 5, 2016 by JHadden123