RocketBlam

I just don't get why people have a problem with the new aero. It's actually easier to make a spaceplane now, unless you were one of those guys that spammed air intakes so you could get almost into orbit on jets alone.

Awesome. Love to hear this. Now we also need a really BIG jet engine.

What is this, btw? I noticed on one flight, launch clamps were spawning next to my ship and falling behind. Is that what you're talking about?

At this point, sometimes I just don't feel like going through the difficulty of landing. That's why on all my planes, I include enough chutes to bring them down safely on their wheels.

Hardest to land on, Tylo. Hardest to return from, Eve. Landing on Eve is pretty easy if you have sufficient heat management.

1. Forgetting to deploy solar panels. 2. Getting to the destination and realizing you gave no antenna.

OK, now I have another question. I launched a space station with seating for 15, like it said in the contract, but it does not recognize it as having a 15-Kerbal capacity. It has 2 Hitchhikers (4 each), a Mk 1-2 command module (4), a lab (2) and a single Mk1 Lander can, attached via a docking port. But the "crew capacity" part is still unfulfilled. Is having the pod attached with a docking port the reason? Does it not count if it is attached with a port? Edit: D'oh! I thought the Mk1-2 held 4, it only holds three! Now I have to send another mission up there. Hopefully I can dock something that holds 2 kerbals (in place of the ship with 1) and it will work.

Because that came with a mod (FASA) and it is apparently impossible to complete.

I noticed that too. Well, you have to be rich to get a trip to Eve. God knows it's cost me a bundle. - - - Updated - - - It's like you read my mind...

It is done...

Oh, the *alliance party* *campers* are in the *now space*. It is *happy spices*. Why are you there? I am *squeezing* the *juice*!

They're pretty specialized, but I've found uses for them. One is for my Eve lander. Most of the engines are aerospikes, which have no gimbaling, so I stick a couple on there just so I have some directional control before the fins start to work.

I don't know why they just didn't program it in Integer BASIC.

The argument that landing doesn't take as much fuel doesn't really work for me though. Since you can make fuel once you land, your tanks can be bone dry and it doesn't really matter. Being able to use efficient air breathing engines is a bonus though.

Also, once I enter the atmosphere (such as I can), I can't time warp any more. It says my vehicle is under acceleration, even with no thrust, outside of the atmosphere.

It's not that they want more precise values, it's that they want values they can use. Simple, easy to understand values that reliably work.

I try to aerobrake at Jool now, and it is essentially impossible. I set my periapsis at, say, 197,000 meters, and the ship just explodes when it gets down to that level. It's weird. It's like the atmosphere is at almost full density right at the top. Am I doing something wrong here? The lowest I can put my periapsis is about 198,000 meters, and at that level, the braking effect is nearly non-existent.

I crash pretty often. It really depends on the aerodynamics though. If I don't put tail fins on it, look out below! In seriousness (if I must), if I play the game for a few hours, it pretty much always crashes. It has a limited life span per session, it seems.

The problem, I hope you can see, is that people have no idea what "mix" you are using, so they can't rely on the numbers. I mean, the chart says 6k d/V, but then you say you need a vessel with 4-5k of atmospheric D/V. Nobody can tell how you came up with the numbers, or what the mix is supposed to be, so the numbers aren't useful for predicting how much D/V you will need, which is the point in the first place.

It is more drag sensitive, for sure. Two of the landing legs/girders are gone within 11 seconds though, before drag really might become an issue, since they're connected to an asparagus stage that gets jettisoned. I may try it with a more steamlined vessel for giggles.

For example, I've been trying to get this off of Eve. It has 6500 D/V, and a solid TWR ratio through the flight, and yet it still cannot achieve orbit even from 3,700 meters. My guess is it would take at least 7,500 D/V from 3,700 meters, and probably more like 9,000-10,000 from sea level.

Can you post a vessel that can do this? Because my experience is that even with a vessel taking off from above sea level, 6K D/V doesn't get you out of the atmosphere, let alone into orbit.

Also keep in mind, it's not consistent. Which is to say, it's exponential. If the needle is right in the middle, you are neither descending nor ascending, you're maintaining your altitude. If the needle goes up, you're ascending. If it goes down, you're descending. But the further it goes, the more extreme you ascent or descent rate is. The first number is 10, but the number right next to it is 100. So if the needle is half way through the 0 and 10 ascent lines, you're ascending at 5 meters per second. If it is half way through the 10 and 100 lines, you're ascending at 50 meters per second.

THIS! I appreciate the effort to put the icons in, but Squad is really quite lax in explaining a lot of these things. So It's a different icon... what does each icon mean? No idea, and I haven't seen any kind of "guide" to explain it to me. This game desperately needs a manual. And that's coming from a guy who's spent 1600 hours playing it.

That seems like an odd assumption to me. I don't know anyone who would land on a planet with an atmosphere, let alone Eve, using engines. The measurement for what D/V it takes to get to orbit from the surface seems much more useful.