davidpsummers

I will note; -Realism does matter, even to those who claim not to care about it. Otherwise one would have slapped together a game based on "space invader" physics and graphics and called it a day. -Nobody wants to have to spend two weeks on full time research for every flight they do, and then have to spend days and days just watching it. -Everyone thinks the balance should match what they like. -Everyone thinks the game should be set up for them and the "others" can do things to play it differently. "Set it up may way, everyone else can [do this or that]." Where this or that is time warp, lets things run longer, don't exploit weakness, use infinite fuel, yada, yada, yada.

Thanks, I appreciate the replies except for the condescending one. I guess my problem is that I don't see the point. Has anyone ever had anything go wrong because their parachutes open too fast?

I suspect people use time differently. When I send a probe to Jool, I don't just time warp until it gets there. After all, I don't want my space program to be going on for 100 years. I do other things until it gets there. I'm sure some don't care about this and just warp ahead.

The title say sit all. What the heck are the settings "Deploy Time" and "Semi-Time" for?

I think the current time is OK. OTOH, time warping ahead (or letting it run in the background) would give a better sense of time and is easy enough to do.

What a quick reply, this forum is hopping! If I set the struts a bit in from the edge, do they still create drag. And I am having a problem putting in an interstage fairing. I have figured out that you have to come out sharply for it to work. But how do you get it to attach to a part above? I can set a section that lines up (at least by eye), but it doesn't "finish" it.

So to do a "real" gravity turn, you pitch over a bit and let gravity turn your rocket as you ascend. OK. The question I have is why? Are we doing it to simulate real life (which is a perfectly good reason) or does it give some advantage? I means, It seems to me that in a lower part of the atmosphere, you want to go as straight up as possible to get out of it, and _then_ start to pitch over when the air is thin.

To have a decoupler attachement, I have a strutted thin section. (See below.) In 0.90 this worked fine. I'm wondering if it works with 1.0's aerodynamic mode? It is, after all, not directly exposed to the slip stream. I did try putting a fairing around it. I did learn the trick that the fairing has to some out pretty steeply as the start or it is seen as clipping the part above. However, since I'm not bringing it to a point, can I attach it to a part above? How? It didn't seem to want to.

I use KER. I've never been able to figure out what "atmospheric efficiency", was. (All my atmosphere were quite efficient at being an atmosphere!)

"We should test the experiment going really fast!" "Why?" "SCIENCE!"

Well, I was going to do the calculation in a spreadsheet (mostly so I don't have to keep looking up the equaiton). But someone even makes up a nice formatted spreadsheet? :-)

How do you calculate the dV needed to change orbits? I'm OK with assuming circular, but obviously a more general solution would be great. I mean, once I'm in orbit, I can use maneuver nodes to see what it will take. But I would find it useful to calculate them while I'm designing my rocket.

Actually, what I want is the number for a "perfect" launch. I can add in my own safety margins.

I just unlocked the new M700 Survey Scanner. It sticks out so you can't use a fairing? I did figure it was "fin like" enough that that I just had to cover the "square bits" (and I had other bits on the same body to cover). But the fairings won't cover parts if they stick out? So I guess you just have to stick them on and live with the ugliness and drag?

I had a plane I had made up in the SPH and then opened in the VAB. I was planning on attaching boosters and launching it vertically. The only choices I got for symmetry were single attachement and 2-fold symmetry? Is there a way to get to the others?

Yeah, that's what I was looking for. I'll make do until such time as you might be able to make one for 1.0.

Thanks. The SHIFT key sounds like my problem. To my other questions, is someone keeping a compilation of known issue for 1.0 someplace? Your thread here is the only one I know about and it is focused on bugs you think you can fix....

I might consider holding off an saving your science until later. I don't by technologies until I need them. I do my missions. As I have problems with them, I will look back now and then and see if any technologies will help me. For example, I just can't build a rocket with enough power that doesn't wobble all over the place? Time to look at new motors/tanks. I'm building my first unmanned probes but have gotten to the point where manual control of the pointing is too much? By the technology for the probe bodies that have SAS.

I have a problem where my Kerbals get "stuck" with a direction turned on. The reason I post here is a bit off topic, but I'm not sure where to go. Normally I would first look up the known issues first and see if it is listed, but I just can't seem to find the thread for 1.0. I can find the old one for 0.90 but I just can't seem to find the new one. Can anyone point me to it? But it seems dumb do say I have a problem without mentioning it, so.... Kerbals get "stuck" in a mode where they act as if you are holding down the key that makes them move in a certain direction. On EVA they keep thrusting in one direction. On the surface, they walk continuously in one direction. On a ladder they keep climbing. If you hold down the key for the opposite direction, it stops. But only while you hold down the key. If you release it, they go back to walking/climbing/thrusting continuously in the "stuck direction". You can't switch away (they are under acceleration). If you board a ship, things I don't understand happen (the ship starts to tilt, as if the stuck control is transfered to the ship? Or the Kerbal inside is still pushing"). If you quick and restart things seem OK. I am using KSP 1.0.2 on a Macbook Pro running OS 10.7.5

Looking over the comments, the video by GoSlash27 may be too ambitions (trying to launch directly into docking with the target) for beginners. Here is how I do it.... As to your problem (which is getting close) I agree there are some good videos out there. But I'll run through it once... Part one, getting kinda close.... 1) Get into an orbit that is similar, but not identical to the target. a) You want the orbits to touch at one point (or one crosses the other a bit). Usually, for low Kerbal rendezvous, I set the periapsis of the ship to touch the orbit of the target and the apoapsis to be maybe 100 km higher than the target orbit. c) The orbit have to line up (have the same inclination). In the map, click on the target and choose "select as target". Then you will see "AN" (ascending node) and "DN" (descending node) labeled on your orbit with a number (the number of degrees by which the planes of the orbits don't match). d) These points are the places where your obit plane crosses the plane of the target orbit. At one of these you have to burn to make them match. Burn straight north (if the number is negative) or straight south (if the number is positive) until the number is zero. (Closer to zero you get, the easier the next steps will be). e) At, or near, the point where the orbits touch, you will see the indicator(s) of closest approach. (If you can't see them, the orbits don't line up or they don't cross"). f) You will also see where the target will be when you reach the closest approach (and hovering over the closes approach indicator will show how far you will be from the target you will be at closes approach). (the intercept.) e) If you put a maneuver node just past the closest approach, it will show you the next closest approach after the maneuver node (ie on the next orbit). f) Your keep clicking on the maneuver node to set it ahead one orbit, you will see the next closest approach on the next orbit(s). g) As you do this, you will see the indicator of where the target is move showing its position on the different closest approaches. h) Do this until you get a close approach. i) then use the node to adjust that approach (burning prograde or retrograde) until it is as close you are can get it. (A few km's or less, hopefully). j) make sure you don't adjust the orbit so you hit the atmosphere or ground, if that happens, try the orbit before or after instead. k) For me, with an orbit bigger than the target one, I usually can see the position at closest approach get closer and closer as I advance orbit by orbit. I do this until it passes the intercept. Then burning retrograde moves it back to match up. This has the advantage that I'm bringing the orbits closer together (with will make final approach easier). l) Once done, you wait until you reach this closes appoach and then match speeds. Step two, getting close. a) When you are within 25-50km of the target, use your nave ball (set on "target" rather than "orbit") to turn your ship so that if points away from the relative direction of motion (the yellow circle with three lines sticking out and a cross inside). This is the direction that you will need to be pointing to kill the relative velocities (and match orbits). as you get close to the intercept setup above, switch out of map mode. When you are within 25-50km of the target, you should be able to see the target indicated on your screen with the distance listed. c) You intercept indicators will be telling you how close you can expect to get. d) At that point, the target will be off to the side moving laterally. e) Just before this point (allowing time for a burn, you will have to play with this until you get a feel). Do a burn away from the direction of relative velocity (as above) until the relative speed (as indicated on the nave ball) is as close to zero as possible. f) If you burn too much, flip around and burn again to get to zero. g) Now point your ship toward the target. h) Do a gentle burn to move slowing toward it. i) If you have RCS thrusters, you can use them to try and line up the relative velocity indicator with the direction the target is in. (Making you move more directly right toward) j) When you get as close as you are going to (or before you run into it), flip away from the relative velocity and do a burn as with "e & f" above. (Or use your RCS thruster to kill you relative velocity.) k) You are now relatively motionless with respect to the target, but closer than you were with step e & f) l) repeat steps g-k again until you close enough for the stranded Kerbal to EVA and fly to your ship.

I think you hare having problems with the rendez-vous rather than the final docking? As an aside, I will say that if you want to dock two docking ports (and you will), the final approach is the hardest thing (mostly because you are working on a 3-dimensional problem on a 2-dimensional screen). For that, the Docking Port Alignment Indicator that was previously mentioned will be important (and, I think, is probably closer to the tools that NASA used?) Without it, it is quick difficult. That said, I'm a big believer in doing the docking manually a few times first.

I will echo the others that you main problem may be you choice of rocket engine. The LV-909 won't produce much thrust and waste in the atmosphere (look at the ISP number listed). At some point you will need to be able to calculate delta-v's. I liked playing around on getting to orbit by feel. If you goto the moons, it will become more important to know the delta-v's. And for planetary missions, it becomes very important. I like to do this by hand (very instructional, I don't where the link to how to do this is, maybe someone else does) before going to the Kerbal Engineer Redux add-on.

Hunh! Live and learn. I assume it was reporting "current" thrust. That would explain why my ships don't seem to be following the same height-speed curve with the same TWR. - - - Updated - - - Well, both KER and the VAB were reporting the same TWR. But I guess both are reduced by the atm. I'll take a look at the atmosphere button.

Since I haven't heard anything, I assume you were able to get it OK. I mentioned it because I am new to drop box so just making sure I am doing it right.

Try this.... https://www.dropbox.com/s/vd911bl3b02fhi7/Materials%20I%20Doesn%27t%20work.craft?dl=0