[KSC Buildings Lock Up / Can't Click on Anything / Firing Kerbal Crashes Game]

Thanks you Claw, it seems to be fixed now. I would really appreciate if Squad could release more daily updates to fix bugs or improve performance than releasing huge ones every few months

[BROKEN [0.90] TextureReplacer 2.1.2 (20.12.2014)]

I'ts not all about graphic power,did you check your nvidia GeForce experience for optimal settings?Most power this game needs is from CPU!

P.S. As long you see green time at upper left corner don't bother with FPS it's not fps.

Thank you very much for your suggestion!

However, after applying GeForce Experience optimal settings and adding the HotRocket Mod I still have a very low amount of FPS. Next time I will check my CPU usage, maybe my i5 2500K ist too low?

[HotRockets! Particle FX Replacement + Tutorial]

It's very beautiful to watch, but also kills my FPS from already a low amount of ~ 40 to about 14, which makes the launch into orbit very hard. Having 3 variants (Low, Middle, High Quality) would be awesome!

[BROKEN [0.90] TextureReplacer 2.1.2 (20.12.2014)]

I am unable to edit my posts due to a bug, so I have to repost it to fix the broken link.

Thank you! I guess these mods will require even more power, so I will first try to play without those. After removing HotRockets my FPS doubled, I already guessed that it is it's fault, but I'm not happy about removing it really. You see engines all the time, seeing prettier engines is even better.

[BROKEN [0.90] TextureReplacer 2.1.2 (20.12.2014)]

Why you no use volumetric clouds, though?

Hm, what are volumetric clouds exactly and how to enable them? First I have to find out how to optimize the performance. With my GTX 660 I'm getting 20 FPS when launching. Even when I disabled AA and set every graphics settings to low I have a bad amount of FPS. In fact less than before, ~ 14.

Any suggestions though?

[BROKEN [0.90] TextureReplacer 2.1.2 (20.12.2014)]

@Metro

It's... so beautiful :'(

http://picload.org/image/lpdrgrc/unbenannt.png

Thanks a bunch! Awesome developer.

[BROKEN [0.90] TextureReplacer 2.1.2 (20.12.2014)]

Hello Kerbonauts,

I have a little problem. Either I'm too stupid, or my game installation doesn't want to load the mods. I would like to have PimpMyClouds and PimpMyKerbals. My \GameData looks like this

and the TextureReplacer like this

When loading the game I can read a few TextureReplacer lines, but InGame nothing is shown

Click Here for Picture

Could anybody please tell me what I'm doing wrong?

Thanks in advance!

[Allowing it to change the color of the nav ball]

Here is the mod

Thank you, but of course it still would be great if it'll be included into the final game, as SaplingPick said

[Allowing it to change the color of the nav ball]

Hi Kids,

I sometimes, when I have to do some very precise maneuvers I sometimes can't see the purple maneuver notes on the brown hemisphere very well, so a small suggestion would be to allow it to change the color of the navball (of course with a small "Reset colors" button next to it in case somebody's confused.

On my quick search I didn't found anything like this, or did I search wrong?

Thanks for reading

[How to make this rocket more efficient]

Hrmm, I don't know why it says the parts are invalid, I tried to use only parts I saw you use in the screenshot you posted.

Try opening it in a sandbox game? if not, I wonder if I modded one of the parts and forgot about it.

I'll show a screenshot later today

Alright, even after unlocking some new stuff it still says bad parts. I'll see what's in it in sandbox and edit it in this post

I'll help you redesign it here.

Very nice, thank you!

[How to calculate how long a engine can run with a specific amount of fuel]

In the parentheses after deltaV for each stage the time is shown. It is the time it will take to get displayed dV (by burning all fuel available at that stage) (1001 m/s for current S2) at full throttle, (41.2 seconds in current S2 stage). Is this what you are looking for?

Yes, exactly. How much time it takes to get displayed dV. How would you calculate that manually?

It is 204/11.01 ~= 18.5 s, if you got that from the appropriate source. I'd check to make sure you're counting all tanks.

I am not familiar enough with KER or your craft to know where KER is getting its numbers from. Pics?

Oh, well. Here is how my rocket looks like now

[How to calculate how long a engine can run with a specific amount of fuel]

I'm not sure whether it's because I have some strong migraine now, but I don't manage to calculate the time a engine needs to use a specific amount of fuel.

My rocket is in orbit around Kerbin and has 204.000 l of fuel in that stage left. The engine is the LV-T45 which has a fuel consumption of 11.01 l/s in vacuum.

To get the time in seconds the engine needs to "empty the tank", don't I simply have to calculate 204000 l / 11.01 l ?

I'm feeling like I'm doing a idiotic mistake there

[How to make this rocket more efficient]

It is not clear why this is the value, rather than 9.81 (typo in the source code?). But nonetheless...

I've found out why. If we look closly, it says that the gravity of Earth is used, not Kerbin's (makes it a bit more confusing though, because the name of the rocket is Mun Lander, not Moon Lander)

"Following is a quick example, where the surface gravity of Earth is used:"

Link: http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Tutorial:Advanced_Rocket_Design

[[1.3.0] Kerbal Engineer Redux 1.1.3.0 (2017-05-28)]

How does this calculate the time a engine can run with the fuel left?

[How to make this rocket more efficient]

Not true, you can make room for another kerbal by adding a second command pod (make sure no one is sitting in it at launch). Of course, later, you can just slap a probe core on it, and launch with 1 empty pod, but for now a rescue means you must take two pods

Here you go:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ra3r08huizh01ab/Mun%20Rescue.craft this should get you there.

I had a smaller craft, it was a bit more complex with action groups, and required a pretty optimal ascent ot orbit.

You're right with the second command pod, I sometimes really should open my mind more.

Thank you for your aircraft as well! Could you tell me what parts you're using which I don't have yet or make a ScreenShot of the craft, please? I'm currently trying to get some science points

[How to make this rocket more efficient]

The rocket equation

For KSP purposes, you want Isp*9.82*ln(Initial_mass/final_mass). You can find the initial (well, current) mass of the craft in map view. For final mass, I would subtract the fuel and oxidizer masses (mass being fuel units/200)

I'd lean towards just radially connecting the tanks to get larger lower stages. (Pic is of a craft with demo parts, but you effectively have all the tech. Shame it runs critically low on ÃŽâ€V if you start hanging goo pods or material bays off of it...)

Ahh, sorry. I failed. However, under Terminology about Isp it says following

"To avoid confusion which unit of speed is used, the physical correct I_sp (in distance/time) is divided by the surface gravity of Earth (9.81 m/s²). This results in a value given in seconds. To use this I_sp in formulas it must to be converted back into distance per time which requires multiplying with the surface gravity of Earth again."

While under the Advanced Rocket Design page it's says something else

"If the specific impulse is given in seconds it is necessary to multiply this value by "

As far I understand I, even though I'm on the mun, still have to use 9.82?

@SRV Ron Amazing!!!

[How to make this rocket more efficient]

You should move those 2nd stage radial tanks down to the first stage, they are just extra weight up there. Also, your lander doesn't need that much fuel either.

This rocket will get you there and back

To answer your second question you can drop the 180 since you are simply aerobraking to landing (I am assuming)

Great tips, thank you!

Hi Metro, welcome to the forums. I'd give you the following advice:

1. Change the engine on the upper stage to the LV 909
   
2. Increase the fuel in the lowest stage
   
3. Lose the radial tanks and engines on the upper stage. Without fuel ducts, they're aren't giving you much.
   

Also, you may want consider "tweaking" the max throttle on the SRBs. Tweaking is done by right clicking on the part and adjusting the slider.

If you're mission is to rescue a stranded kerbal on the Mun, you'll need extra crew space in your return rocket. As it stands, you only have room for one Kerbal. I'd recommend unlocking the probe core and attaching to the top of this rocket. That way, you can fly the rocket to the Mun unmanned, and back with the kerbal in the pod.

8 km/s of dV is a LOT, and should be sufficient to get the Mun's surface and back. Instead of modifying your craft to be more efficient, it may make more sense to discuss what's happening at various stages of your mission, first.

Thanks for your welcome first. I will try to implement your tips as well. I was pretty happy to reach 8 km/s of dV, but after trying to optimize my rocket I killed it. My new rocket which I'm currently working on (the one I posted above) is based on another with just enough dV to get to the moon. I'm not sure if the fuel which I left will be enough to go home, is there a formula for calculating that again?

http://picload.org/image/lllwcrp/unbenannt.png

That's an excellent rocket you've linked, but I don't think the OP has the tech to construct it (I don't think he has the tri-coupler structural part). However, four SRB's around a liquid fuel core like he has may be enough to get him there.

Overall, Metro, looking at your tech tree, it may be a little early for you to attempt a Mun landing. Have you tried a Minmus fly-by? The good news is, in stock KSP (no mods) you're Kerbals won't run out of oxygen, so you can recover him at your leisure.

You're right, I don't have the tri-coupler structural part yet. Since my rocket doesn't have enough room for another Kerbal it's impossible to do the rescue anyway, so you're right. I will try to get some science points first.

We have a great community here

[Rendezvous and Docking made easy!]

The tutorial per se is not bad, but there were a few things you should do better next time.

1. Keep the sound, better your voice but at least the in game sound (makes it more interesting, and not "boring" to watch)

2. Always place the text on a even line, it made my head hurt to tend it all the time to read the text

3. Display the text for a longer time, I couldn't read the half of it

4. It makes your videos bigger and takes longer to finally have them up, but a tutorial should always be 1080p, at least 720p especially when it's about such accurate things as docking in a dark enviroment

5. Keep the videos short and specific, but at the same time stay calm and explain precise. There was much stuff in this video what doesn't directly belong to the title

By the way, you don't say "Please launch into the right direction" you say "Launch East".

I hope my feedback will help you to improve your further videos.

[How to make this rocket more efficient]

Hello KSP Community,

I, as an beginner, want to go for another mün landing to rescue my Kerbal which is stranded out there. For this, I managed to build a rocket with a Delta-V of 8161. After changing the order of the used engines and a few fuel tanks the total Delta-V decreased rapidly. Here's how my rocket looks like

Pretty ineffective because I just started

Saving of the rocket can be downloaded from here

http://en.file-upload.net/download-8881449/M1.7z.html

Bonus Question - to find out how much Delta-V I need to fly back to Kerbin do I have to calculate 580+230+80+180?

https://i.imgur.com/UUU8yCk.png

Thanks in advance!