GoSlash27

WaxingKibbous, I can't say for certain how facility upgrades affect the contracts that are offered. I end my Caveman runs when all the facility zero tech has been unlocked. My first 1.05 run was done caveman- style, and it was offering rescues and satellites before I had upgraded any of the facilities. Mid-game, those are the only contracts I really care about, so they're the only ones I paid attention to. 5thHorseman would probably know the answer to that one. He usually upgrades his facilities earlier in the career. Best, -Slashy

tater, From my last career demo (normal difficulty)... The first science collection on the pad yields $6,400, 13.2 science, and 2 Rep. The first suborbital hop yields $115,200, 44.2 science, and 22 Rep. The first orbit yields $78,400, 53 science, and 19 Rep The first Munar flyby yields $86,080, 98 science, and 16 Rep I didn't include the interim "pure science" missions and I stopped there because after the second Munar flyby I had unlocked all the necessary tech, but at that point I had $287,388 in the bank, 6% reputation, and was being offered satellite contracts. (aside, this is the first time I've crunched the numbers. I spent $23,692 total on my missions in this period) There are a lot of other milestones I hadn't hit in that demo that would've paid rewards. My first 1.05 "Caveman" left me with $488,520 in the bank and I hadn't taken any contracts yet or sent a probe to the Munar surface, so it gives you an idea of how well milestones pay. If you just plug along collecting science, unlocking stuff, and breaking records, you don't need contracts. At least not in the early career. Best, -Slashy

Temstar, I'm sure a lot of the savings you're seeing are due to economy of scale. Asparagus staging becomes cost effective when you have no choice but to use clustered engines. In the case where single boosters are sufficient, My "cheep 38" can put 38 tonnes into orbit without bothering to recover anything for $842/ tonne. With upper stage recovery, the price would drop to $557/tonne. Asparagus can't compete with that in that scale. Best, -Slashy

Snark, Likewise, I'll take your word for the single burn solution. You've already verified it. Just out of curiosity, how were you able to derive the correct parking orbit for the burn? Happy New Year, -Slashy

Ultimately, asparagus staging is overrated in KSP anyway. At least for the purpose of cheaply putting payloads into LKO. a simple 2 stage lifter can do the job cheaper and is much easier to design. The Asparagus has too many staging events for the DV need and uses clusters of engines that wind up costing more in total than the single engine they replace. Plus the cost of decouplers, fuel lines, nose cones, possibly struts and sepratrons... Fiscally it's just not worth it. I suppose that's why nobody uses them anymore... Best, -Slashy

Uhh... what on Earth does .18 Demo have to do with 1.05 career? In 1.05 career, you cannot "orbit Minmus at tier zero with no upgrades" as you claimed. You can't even make Kerbin orbit. If you think you can, have at it: If you had spent more time following your own advice and less time belittling others, you would know this. Happy New Year, -Slashy

Snark, After running the math both ways, it looks like the single burn may be slightly better in this case. Your math was considerably off in both cases by my reckoning, but I'd definitely suggest having OhioBob look it over. I have a lot more confidence in his orbital mechanics skillz. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here's my numbers for the 2 burn solution: Assuming a LKO velocity of 2300 and therefore escape velocity of 3250... Kerbin's orbital velocity is 9290 and we need our apoapsis velocity to be 7590. Therefore we need to reduce that by 1700. sqrt(17002+32502)-2300= 1370 m/sec. That's our first burn. When we exit Kerbin's SoI we will have a velocity of 7590. Our DV for the inclination change is 2sin(45°/2)*7590= 5,810 m/sec. That's our second burn. Total DV is 7,180 m/sec. *edit* I have confirmed this one in- game. Total DV 1307+5766= 7,073. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The single burn solution is a bit stickier.... You need to create a solution that will result in an x component of 5,370 m/sec and a y component of 5,370. x plane: Vexc=3920 m/sec Vesc=3250. We cannot subtract our orbital velocity because it's not oriented in a direction that will help us. Our x- plane DV is therefore 5090 m/sec. y plane: Here we have the opposite problem: Our orbital velocity is aligned to help us, but Kerbin's orbital velocity is perpendicular. Vexc=5,370 Vesc=3250 Vorb=2300 Our y-plane DV is therefore 3,980 m/sec. Since they are combined in a single burn, the total DV is 6,460 m/sec *edit* This one is "plausible", but not confirmed. I was able to get a broadly similar orbit for 6,521 m/sec, but it wasn't an exact fit. Finding the launch window that gives a precise fit with no wasted energy is beyond my ability. ----------------------------------------------------------- So it's 7,180 (really 7,000 flat due to sidereal assistance during launch) vs 6,460. The single burn could save about 500 m/sec in that instance unless my math is off. Like you, I'll have to test that and see if it holds up. *edit* Tested and it looks good from my house. Best, -Slashy

The music is awesome

Sirine, I agree with the reasoning that exploring pays better than contracts, but if you seriously believe that you can get to Minmus orbit without unlocking parts or upgrading facilities, then you are sadly mistaken and perhaps it is *you* who needs more practice. Happy New Year, -Slashy

Snark, Apologies, I should've looked closer. I'll parallel your numbers this weekend (probably tomorrow) and get back to you. Best, -Slashy

Just a silly notion that occurred to me: Suppose KSP had an option for a "Part reliability failure" slider. Maybe one of your engines fails to ignite. Maybe a reaction wheel seizes up. It would certainly add complexity and difficulty to the game. Not saying it should be enabled in the stock game, just thinkin' out loud. Best, -Slashy

Pasukaru, I've heard that there is a hidden blob of "tundra" biome over there somewhere. I never tried to find it myself... just what I heard. If true, that would be pretty useful. Maybe not so much in Easy mode where space happens so quickly, but it might be worth investigating. Congrats, -Slashy

Nah. Just me being stupid Happy New Year -Slashy

The problem of whether asparagus staging would actually induce a roll IRL is fascinating, but off- topic. I think it's like an airplane taking off from a treadmill. Maybe we should send it in to MythBusters? Best, -Slashy

Grenartia, It's a nerdy "Star Wars" reference. Apologies -Slashy

Snark, Your math is not including the Oberth effect. In your first example, "The X-axis dV would be 9284 - 5360 = 3924 m/s" these values are not algebraically added, but rather vector added. sqrt(92842-53602)= 7580 m/sec, not 3294. The math is actually a hair more complicated than that. You take the excess velocity (that is, the difference between Kerbin's velocity and your desired Ap velocity) and square it. Then you take your velocity to escape Kerbin's SoI (which is the sqrt(2) times whatever your orbital velocity happens to be at the start of the maneuver) and square that. Then add or subtract as appropriate and take the square root Pythagorean style. Finally, you subtract your orbital velocity. That's how transfers that occur in- plane are calculated when they cross a SoI. They are not added algebraically due to the Oberth effect. Inclination changes are simply twice the sine of half the desired change times your instantaneous velocity at the moment. For example, a 60° inclination change costs whatever your velocity happens to be at the moment. So as you can see, doing a Pe change pays off at high instantaneous velocity, but an inclination change pays off at low instantaneous velocity. That's why it saves you DV to split up the burn; you have high velocity in LKO, and low velocity when you've exited Kerbin's SoI. HTHs, -Slashy

Gojira, Absolutely outstanding!! And that's an actual *airplane* !! O_o My hat is off to you! -Slashy

Sorry, I'm still not understanding what you're trying to say. Are you suggesting that you can get to Minmus orbit at career Tier zero? Or that the OP should be able to? Or that the OP should know that he cannot? How does this relate to the original question?

Those were the good old days. You could hit near- orbit on jets alone and circularize with a puff of the RCS... I once made the trip to Eve surface and back in 8 days with no engines or fuel whatsoever. Never could get the hang of the Kessel run, tho'... Best, -Slashy

"The LV-T45 is an excellent spaceplane engine because Scott Manley".

Uhh... yeah, actually it is. That's what challenges are. In this case, "how fast can you go using stock parts and air breathing". For the moment, the winning entry is 1,687.6 m/sec. If you can somehow recreate your alleged "3 km/ sec" super- plane, feel free to join in. I'm sure we'd all love to see it. Best, -Slashy

Grenartia, What you did was flying. What I did was merely "falling with style" Best, -Slashy

*Most* importantly, this is not a "challenge". It's just a declaration of whatever impossible thing you are going to try to do. A challenge is something that you want to encourage others to try to do. It should have proof to suggest that it is indeed possible, rules, possibly a leaderboard. A challenge is a game, not "hey everybody, look at what I'm doing". Best, -Slashy

Snark, Intuitively it would seem so, but the Oberth Effect mucks it up. Your orbital velocity is vector added to Kerbin's velocity about the sun. Changing your periapsis under those circumstances is good, but changing your inclination is bad. By choosing a different orbital inclination about Kerbin, you are not only losing the free DV from launching East, but also losing the benefit of Kerbin's orbital velocity in proportion to the cosine of your inclination. Your inclination change faces the opposite problem; you're doing it at a moment when your velocity relative the sun is 2,300 m/sec higher than it would otherwise be. Waiting until you have "climbed the gravity well" (so to speak) will soak up some of your speed, making the inclination change cheaper. Firing retrograde in- plane and then doing the plane change gets you the best of both; full Oberth assistance in lowering your Pe and a lower velocity for the inclination change. Best, -Slashy

This one was quick and dirty. I just gave it a couple drop tanks and launched it vertically. 1687.6 m/sec. Your concept is sound. Best, -Slashy