Jump to content

What did you do in KSP today?


Xeldrak
 Share

Recommended Posts

Because of Cosmonautics Day, I did a Vostok 1 replica in KSP.

Spoiler

?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Lett

On the pad

?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Lett

Liftoff

?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Lett

In flight

?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Lett

Higher up

?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Lett

Korolev Cross 

?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Lett

Almost in orbit

?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Lett

Faring away

?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Lett

Orbital insertion

?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Lett

In orbit

?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Lett

Preparing for descent

?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Lett

Capsule detached

?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Lett

Parachute deployed

?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Lett

Lower

?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Lett

Landing

?imw=5000&imh=5000&ima=fit&impolicy=Lett

Landed

Mission complete

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, stephensmat said:

What did I do, today; you ask? Took one small step, for the first time.

Congrats. First orbit and first Mun landing is the best moments in KSP. After that, stuff becomes just dV calculation.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Continuing my KSP  RP-1 career which had to be restarted due to latest updates of the mod re-balancing much of the early era hardware so it is bit more historically accurate. Since historically, I did not progress that far in the career, it was not that much of revert so here we go again.

Early on, the mod got couple of X-1, X-2 etc missions which involve airplane design (this type of contracts can be turned off but I forgot) which I am usually not that big fan of.

That being said when asked to produce plane that can reach 30 km up, I had fun with the contract:

FFAR analyses tool says the airplane on image below is a death trap for Kerbals and making this design a "safe plane" gives a maximum speed of around 500 m/s.

So how about an unsafe airplane design you may ask? You don't ask? Well, I am gonna tell you anyway - 912 m/s or 3283 km/h before engines melt and explode:

fw8ibyc.png

It is basically 3 Tumansky RD-11 engines with wings attached. Same engines were used by  SSSR's MiG-21PF and Su-15 (initially) but never as triplets. Huge canards give better control and shorten the take off distance by half.  Engines of the airplane on the images have died because I used up all fuel after 6 min.

iNHzFkm.png

 

And since this game is (mainly) about rockets here is one of the early morning launch:

 

DGn09zZ.png

Edited by IncompetentSpacer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I started work on a series of KerbalX escape pods and even a monolithic (no pun intended) Laythe-anomaly-exploring station

Expect the first few escape pods today and the station as soon as I learn how to make a gravity ring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After my previous 30k tons launch, I need to send up the second part of my mothership. It's a bit lighter maybe, but the other one got nuclear engines to squeeze more deltaV out of it. Whatever the reason, I needed a 40k ton launcher this time.

The lag is staggering. it takes over 10 minutes to load the rocket on the launchpad. And once i press space, it takes another minute or two to do something.

Afterwards....

Do notice how, in the whole video, the game timer only moves 2 seconds.

ddl1q7P.png

8n99MFm.png

T1ifCEW.png

the first time I tried to launch it, game crashed on the launchpad.

The second time, it crashed upon second stage separation.

The third time, it crashed upon first stage separation.

I did manage to launch to the end with one less group of boosters. I missed orbit by some 200 m/s.

you've seen the time it takes. that's all I did this afternoon.

 

By the way, the game gets bugged by the very act of launching those rockets. After I launch them, I cannot save the game, or go back to the space center, or really do anything except stay with the ship. Closing the game requires ctrl-alt-canc and deletes all progress. But after I reach orbit normally, I can send the ship in orbit with alt-f12 and call it a fair game, and so far it seems to be working. Of course, once I put the various ships together, I have no idea how the game will perform. There's a good chance my next grand tour will stop before even beginning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

After my previous 30k tons launch, I need to send up the second part of my mothership. It's a bit lighter maybe, but the other one got nuclear engines to squeeze more deltaV out of it. Whatever the reason, I needed a 40k ton launcher this time.

The lag is staggering. it takes over 10 minutes to load the rocket on the launchpad. And once i press space, it takes another minute or two to do something.

How many parts?

What are the specs of your computer?

What mods (if any) do you have installed ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:

How many parts?

What are the specs of your computer?

What mods (if any) do you have installed ?

1520 parts.

main mods are kerbalism, rss, near future parts.

pc specs... i don't remember them, and i don't remember where to check out. it's a lenovo legion y540 laptop, though. not that it matters. i'm not going to buy a new pc if this one turns out to not be powerful enough.

 

it's nothing unusual anyway. ever since i started running kerbalism grand tours 16 months ago, i've been pushing for more and more complex objectives, tied to more mods, requiring bigger ships, and causing more lag. the main culprit is mods and kerbalism life support; a ship with lots of parts made entirely by fuel tanks does not lag much. and an 800 parts ship in stock had barely noticeable lag, while 800 parts with A'Tuin was the worst I've experienced before now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, king of nowhere said:

1520 parts.

main mods are kerbalism, rss, near future parts.

pc specs... i don't remember them, and i don't remember where to check out. it's a lenovo legion y540 laptop, though. not that it matters. i'm not going to buy a new pc if this one turns out to not be powerful enough.

 

it's nothing unusual anyway. ever since i started running kerbalism grand tours 16 months ago, i've been pushing for more and more complex objectives, tied to more mods, requiring bigger ships, and causing more lag. the main culprit is mods and kerbalism life support; a ship with lots of parts made entirely by fuel tanks does not lag much. and an 800 parts ship in stock had barely noticeable lag, while 800 parts with A'Tuin was the worst I've experienced before now.

It's not just the parts.  How many engines do you have, and how many tanks?  There is a problem where, for example, if you have 10 tanks and 10 engines, that will have 100x the performance impact of 1 engine and 1 tank; 10 tanks and 1 engine  is fairly low.  That picture showed a lot of tanks and engines.

It also depends on mods, and how many part modules are added to each part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, linuxgurugamer said:

It's not just the parts.  How many engines do you have, and how many tanks?  There is a problem where, for example, if you have 10 tanks and 10 engines, that will have 100x the performance impact of 1 engine and 1 tank; 10 tanks and 1 engine  is fairly low.  That picture showed a lot of tanks and engines.

It's not that. Yes, I've seen that video of the megaton ship, where fuel transfer was the cause of lag, but it's not the issue here. I've been using a lot of big ships, some with a lot more fuel tanks. I guarantee, the main factor is mods. Second main factor is complex parts like life support and modules parts. sheer part count is a distant third in determining lag. Number of fuel tanks starts to matter only when they become hundreds.

Which, ok, I may be getting close to that. And I have over 400 vector engines, and that's surely contributing, but it's not the main deal. Anyway, I can't optimize tanks and engines any better. I need the vectors because they have the highest thrust per space occupied. Only with vectors I can lift those giant tanks and get decent TWR. As for the giant tanks, well, can't use anything bigger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, linuxgurugamer said:

It's not just the parts.  How many engines do you have, and how many tanks?  There is a problem where, for example, if you have 10 tanks and 10 engines, that will have 100x the performance impact of 1 engine and 1 tank; 10 tanks and 1 engine  is fairly low.  That picture showed a lot of tanks and engines.

It also depends on mods, and how many part modules are added to each part.

The classic linuxgurugamer (Trying not to be rude) being very technical but a very good mod rescuer/creator.

Yesterday managed to land on Duna but smashing the main engine in the process and the main mothership having a kraken attack so I start to design a rescue mission to rescue the 7 stuck kerbals but I designed a interstellar ship on a laptop (An apple that has 8gb of ram and apple M1) that has a lot of antimatter which if I have no electric charge it would implode but designed a smaller ship that would go to duna and rescue them and do other planets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, linuxgurugamer said:

It's not just the parts.  How many engines do you have, and how many tanks?  There is a problem where, for example, if you have 10 tanks and 10 engines, that will have 100x the performance impact of 1 engine and 1 tank; 10 tanks and 1 engine  is fairly low.  That picture showed a lot of tanks and engines.

It also depends on mods, and how many part modules are added to each part.

Where is the thread for this kind of discussion?  I for one continually wonder why my i5-9600K/RTX2080 starts to lag closer to 100-150 parts.  Interesting about the 10 tanks 10 engines.  I have never heard that before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Joker58th said:

Where is the thread for this kind of discussion?  I for one continually wonder why my i5-9600K/RTX2080 starts to lag closer to 100-150 parts.  Interesting about the 10 tanks 10 engines.  I have never heard that before.

It was a YouTube video

37 minutes ago, king of nowhere said:

It's not that. Yes, I've seen that video of the megaton ship, where fuel transfer was the cause of lag, but it's not the issue here. I've been using a lot of big ships, some with a lot more fuel tanks. I guarantee, the main factor is mods. Second main factor is complex parts like life support and modules parts. sheer part count is a distant third in determining lag. Number of fuel tanks starts to matter only when they become hundreds.

Which, ok, I may be getting close to that. And I have over 400 vector engines, and that's surely contributing, but it's not the main deal. Anyway, I can't optimize tanks and engines any better. I need the vectors because they have the highest thrust per space occupied. Only with vectors I can lift those giant tanks and get decent TWR. As for the giant tanks, well, can't use anything bigger.

400 engines, and if you have 400 tanks,, then that is 16,000 timescas much overhead as a single tank/engine combo.    Add mods, and the lag becomes understandable. 

It's not just the tanks, it's the tanks multiplied  by the number of engines

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like they sorta fixed space combat after all these years of stagnation.  Its still buggy, but it at least CAN be done when you orbit close to geostationary orbits unlike the last couple of years. 

dfFEwO2.png

Guess i know what ill be doing for the next few weeks in KSP, derping around with BDA...

wCrFJ2q.png

Now to find that old mod that added all the railguns and bring out my old expanse style ships, 100% worthless in stock combat, but they are so nice for BDA and low on parts too...

NkZ1PJf.png

And yeah, the Broadsword while being very good in stock combat, it utterly WORTHLESS against BDA weapons, it melts INSTANTLY from a couple of 20mm guns.  The Nebula isnt spectacular, but at least it holds up at longer ranges.  The stock metal panels seem to be utterly useless for some reason...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, ColdJ said:

Got distracted while I was building an internal for Thunderbird 2 and ended up building a Cyber Quad Bike.

This is hilarious. It reminds me of the time I got fixated on building a little paramotor. Kerbals can actually deploy their parachutes from a command seat, which leads to some interesting possibilities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, uscespc said:

Just another sub mod but with a twist, it can also function as a hydrofoil.

Are there any mods required for the hydrofoil effect to work?  I'd like to try that approach on Eve and Laythe.  Maybe some kind of rover with a foil that can be lowered or something

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...