Brainlord Mesomorph

I found that having my firewall app in "training mode" slows KSP down (framerate-wise). "Safe mode" was better.

Granted, KSP is a ludicrous over simplification. But when I launch to rendezvous with something in LKO, I wait until my target vehicle is rising in the west of the KSC (just like the Sun rises but in the other direction) and when my target is just over the western horizon, I launch the rocket. My suborbital apogee is usually a very close intercept my target vehicle, and if I plot might orbital insertion burn carefully, I can usually put my second encounter on the opposite side of Kerbin. And with that, I’m usually a launched, and docked, within half an orbit. Why does it take SpaceX three days to get to the ISS? What are they doing up there?

Actually I think it’s the other way around. Coming down on landing struts you can land up to 10 m/s because that is the impact tolerance of the strut and nothing else touches the ground. Coming down the water, everything touches the water! So crash tolerance has to be for the weakest component usually below 5 m/s. So I usually aim for land. If I’m building a a reusable vehicle that’s going to be coming in ballisticly (no wings or control services) then I’ll try to give enough parachutes it hits the ground below 5m/s.Just in case. I think the only reason the United States used splash downs IRL is that we don’t have large empty tracts of land to bring spacecraft down safely. We didn’t want a Mercury capsule landing on some farmer’s head. EDIT: just saw that video in the OP. Seems like a lot of work to go through to not use parachutes!* AAMOF, he had to use hyper edit to get that contraption into orbit. I don't see any practical application there. *Speaking of a lot of work to not use chutes, I cannot understand why Elon Musk is so determined to land a rocket using LFO when wings and parachutes already exist.

I have a screenshot somewhere: I was in interplanetary space, I checked flight status (F3), and there is a single event listed: "Jebidiah Kerman was killed." He wasn't even on the flight! I'm thinking, "Did somebody shoot him?" It was like a strange message from home in an A.C, Clarke novel. "Oh, by the way Haywood, Jeb was killed." Never found out why, it was a sandbox game so he came right back,

As a progress through career mode, I come up with a series of stock lifters for various payload weights and technology levels. Once I have a rocket capable of hauling 50 tons to orbit, or hundred tons to the Mun, I save that as a sub assembly. I also name these rockets in reverse alphabetical order, the first ones being the Z series, so my newest best lifters are always the top of the list. I’m also still in my quest to build a totally reusable land-anywhere in the solar system lander. So I guess that means yes. Pro.

I disagree with this statement ... Why? ... well because of this: Dres Love Missions My 2¢: Sending a large fleet may be easier on the game engine, but it’s not as much fun. KSP is fun with a relatively short cycle of design, test, launch, fly in space, attempt the mission (fail, send a recovery ship) accomplish the mission, repeat. Too much of any one thing becomes boring. I tried to send 12 ships to Jool, and it just became too much. Too much design, too much orbital construction, 12 long-burn departure maneuvers (which took two consecutive weekends of gametime), 12 midcourse correction maneuvers, more than 12 orbital insertion maneuvers attempts to get into orbit of the right moon. It became no fun. Along the way, I missed three upgrades to KSP. I finally abandoned the whole thing well after 1.0 came out. This time, I’m going to build one Enterprise-style interplanetary exploration ship, and send it on grand tour mission rendezvousing with several resupply and colonial ships along the way.

is there one? Attn Mod: pls move this thread. TY

yes

I play a stock game. One thing I do with oddly shaped payloads (i.e. carrying spaceplanes or boats to Laythe or Eve): JUST CARRY TWO OF THEM! then you can mount them on the sides and you CoM is stable. (no center payload bay required) hth EDIT also works on rockets hauling the stuff to orbit

I just accidentally did this: 1. Have a rescue contact (a Kerbal in a ship you don’t own yet) 2. View the ship in Tracking Station 3. Set an alarm for that ship (at any time) 4. Click on the alarm in KAC 5. Click “jump to ship” 6. Suddenly your Rescue Contract is completed. (He’s not home yet, but you do have command of the Kerbal) I had a rescue contract and the guy flung past the Moon out into interplanetary space. I was trying to set an alarm for when he’d swing past Kerbin again, and I accidentally completed the contract. Thought you guys should know. (KAC should fix this bug) Roger and Out, Brainlord Mesomorph

snark: I don't do mods. and I have the skillz to dock rovers, as long as I have rover tech. plusck: I actually thought of a boom. then I realized how much fuel I have, No one answered my question about taking the base back to orbit, docking with an expansion module IN ORBIT and then landing the base again. Would that satisfy the contract? (oops actualy plusk, you did.- buts does anyone know for sure?) EDIT: Ok I designed this thing. It looks like one those hats with two beer cans that guys wear to football games! he two hitchhikers hang on both sides of the Lab unit, I'm going to knock off several non-retractable solar panels in the operation, so the new module has a much larger solar array, and the original base was short of battery power so I can fix that too.

FYI: "Minmus Base Alpha" (like Mun Base Alpha) is a skyscraper. from the bottom up: a 2.5 m fuel tank, 2-Man landercan, hitchhiker, lab,then reduce to 1.25m: materials lab and science and a clampotron on the very top. (i wasn't expecting to use it) OK OK OK The base has plenty of fuel, its should be able to make minmus orbit. Can I make orbit, dock to 2 more hitchhikers,(refuel) and land again? (I know, maybe not!) But would that fulfill the contact?

I landed a surface base on minmus (under contract) for 5 kebals, now I have a contact to expand that base and have room for 13. Does that mean landing a base with room for 8 nearby? How close? Do I have to connect them? (I don't even have rover tech yet,) or do I build another base for 13? the contract is confusing:

Actually they're Simoleans

Just a heads up. The forum upgrade seems to have broken tables in old posts. If you used tables in a tutorial (or anything you want ppl to read in the future) you'll want to go fix them.

I don't think the Kerbals care! They carry "Mystery Goo" to other planets! They expose it unknown environments, and then splash down the open container in their oceans. And that's when things go well! Its surprising the entire species hasn't Darwined by now. EDIT: I try to keep debris to a minimum.

[quote name='Red Iron Crown']My method works with a protractor on the screen too, no mods required. My method also doesn't take a significant part of a year to complete. :P [/QUOTE] A protractor?! hadn't thought of that. Do i still HAVE one?... yes, its in my collection of antique drafting tools(with my slide-rule! Literally!) oh, and yes, my method can take tree quarters of a Kerbal year. Actually it works BETTER on Eve and Moho. ... and not very well at al; at Jool and Eloo. Where Alignment can be years before departure. :P

How many times to I have to post this: Long Burns? pls see the tutorial in my sig. (RIC's method requires mods. Mine works in a stock game :D)

Perigee kicking, and read the tutorial on long burns in my sig.

Stick on a rocket and parachute it down.

There is a new (to me) tweak for the antenna: "Require complete." I have to turn that off.

[quote name='Alshain']Direct burns are not always best, New Horizons used gravity assists to get where it was going at a fraction of the cost in a fraction of the time. However, that is interplanetary travel. In the case of returning from a moon to it's parent planet, I'm not sure gravity assists are really all the useful (maybe at Jool).[/QUOTE] New Horizons : IRL! I know it works IRL. I’m frustrated by not being able to make it work in this game. That, and I’m embarrassed that I keep thinking that I’ve made gravity assists work in this game.

I knew "Holman" wasn't right. And neither am I about this whole idea. While the spoon-out maneuver is very dramatic and is canceling out a huge amount of forward velocity, it’s a huge amount of forward velocity I didn’t need to give myself in the first place. So the answer is no, I did not figure out a better way home from the Mun Time and time again in this game I think I’ve figured out some little bit of interplanetary billiards that does something, and time and time again I’m shown that direct burns and doing everything at perigee is best. But if that is the case, how did NASA get Voyager where it was going? And why can’t I seem to make that work for me in this game?

What you describe is, I believe, a Holman Transfer (if I have the name right). And I am expecting someone to explain to me whythat’s better. OTOH: the two burns I show in that screenshotare 126 m/s and 10 m/s. And I *think*that I’ve gotten closer to home with less fuel. Now that I look at that screen shot, while my Pe is halfway home, my Ap is still almost in lunar orbit. I wonder if I could plot another lunar encounter that would slow my ship even more.

[quote name='KSK']I don't see myself using this personally - with the size of Mun ships that I normally use, I really don't need much fuel to get them home using Cantab's approach. With that said, it does sound like a very cool bit of navigation![/QUOTE] Thanks. I'm in early career game. So delta V is my major issue right now. (usually my dual engine nuclear lander can go from LKO to Munar surface and back one tank of gas, the high delta V way) EDIT: Cantab's approach?? Link pls.