Th3F3aR

Well the stock souposphere is not good atmo model if you want to know the exact values go here: -> wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Atmosphere or the wiki sites for the different planets.

Happend twice to me, was kinda hot

Revert Flight is still to easy... Once you pushed launch, it's dead or working, that's how the world works Same goes for quickloading But to the OP: Changes on Realism can be done with various Mods like FAR, RemoteTech, ProceduralFairings and TAC LifeSupport.

Sepratrons should face outwards, with 4 you can put 2 on the topsides 2 on the bottomsides, should work perfectly, sepratrons should fire on decoupling and it will be fine. Don't understand that 5 secs delay btw

Well as far as i can read your problem i would suggest to use separatrons. With that (i guess 4 each tank would be sufficient) you blow the tanks away from the craft. I have that "Bug" also and therefore always use separatrons for crafts like this, and i think its not a bug, its gravity

I'll be back then too, my saturdays in february look quite relaxing till now

As many other already have stated, it's the tail lenght that causes the swinging. Therefore, try to cope with that by strutting the tail to your payload. That might help a bit. Other suggetions are: -Raise your TWR by adding moar thrust about 1.6 should be sufficient -> You will end up faster in space, reducing deltaV requirements by gravitational drag and atmospheric drag -Reduce your weight by removing one or two fuel tanks at your middle engine (just to reduce length and weight for your last stage) -> result is higher TWR and less overfuel ^- I assume you have a good part of fuel to spare as your g-Turn/circularization were not that efficient and you still had plenty o fuel left -Try to pack your lift-off stage more, separate it into flatter (no pancake sh**) and not that long rocket --> I think if you'd split one long fuel tank line into 2 you might reduce swing a lot, i think of something like this : ../\/\ .| | | .| | | .\.../ ..| | ../..\ .| | | You might get the idea But nevertheless, pretty good idea with the srbs and nicely done putting that beast into orbit

I know you said that but i thought on asking if anybody will be online on those 2 days where my girl is away you said that you would be online to play and chat, seems like a complete missunderstanding

Nah it was yesterday -> Tuesday 16th. you were totally right Maybe you forgott my skype name

You could "simply" calculate your Drag by v0/APg where v0 is the m/s on your desired orbit ~2300m/s at 70km and APg is your a/g | a is calculated by g*(TWR-1) then you'll see at least how much dV you'll lose on fighting gravity. Remember it's a simple calculation not a 100% correct one This is another Drag equation : Sqrt(GM*(1/r2-1/r1)) where r1 is the 600km on Kerbin (sea level) and r2 your desired orbit Please don't ask why this works, for a 70km orbit this basically gives 4555m/s(but actually you can't combine them :-). I am a little confused by those 2 equations cause they should both display gravitationalDrag according to the parameters but they spit out different results. But i think the main reason why they spit out different results is cause the 1st displays gDrag according to your ascent speed and the 2nd does it by the planets gravitational field not regarding how fast you ascend. Nevertheless, as the others have said, drag costs you a lot of dV, that is why some genius said that "if you get to Orbit you are half way to everywhere".

I was online Had skype open but minimized, and steam also i think, did you call me? Okay i see where the problem could be... UTC-5 (7pm) meh time (01:00am) so you were not at your computer while i was on ?

Arr, that sounds good Maybe we can play some games then and chat. Well thats okay, i dunno how much time i'll have the next week till christmas cause my dissertation is crying for me... And btw. wish you best luck for your finals

Is anyone of you guys online these days? My girl is out the next 3 days so i got some time

I encountered that problem already That is why i want this network set up first before going into deeper space. The KR-7 needs to be activated...

Thanks for the replies, will try that out and see if im still going to fast, mostly i throttle to 50% or less. I mostly used the Commu 32, and mounted the Reflectron KR-7 on it. Outside means also outside the fairing box? I think i just forgott to activate them on launch ^^ If that works that would be perfect, cause im currently building up a satellite network and using a manned flight everytime is annoying

Its in my sig, 6 years old but yeah i cut of the long hair XD one can't see me i see ...

Hi everybody, i stepped to the next level of KSP by using several mods now. -FAR -TAC LS -RemoteTech2 -KAC -Fairings Mod (can't remember the name) -ScanSat Most of those Mods don't affect gameplay in terms of "flying" the ship, that is why i chose them. But they offer a lot more to do I now got 2 major problems: 1st Flying with FAR is a little bit complicated, i tried doing a real gravity turn like its often proposed on the forums here, ascend to 500-1000m and turn slightly sideways on 70m/s. This step works quite good, but on releasing SAS to let the rocket perform the turn just nothing happens. Most times the rocket bounces back to vertical and the AoA causes it sooner or later to flip uncontrollable. On performing it handways, by pointing into the prograde marker and slightly turn it to 45 degree on the ascent to 20km it works most times. After the 27km mark it seems that AoA doesn't affect the rocket anymore and i can start to tip over to vertical and perform the circular burn and wait till ap encounter and then finish circularization. Is that the way how to do it? I thought the rocket will perform the turn by it self after slightly tipping over. Or am i going to fast ? (Will post screenshot when home) 2nd RemoteTech fooled me the first time I thought it is possible to shove a sat into orbit unmanned, but after some km think 8, i lose mission control. Do i have to extend one of the antennas to regain the signal or is it completely impossible to fly unmanned in atmosphere? Btw. where do i change the delay settings? Don't want to wait 30 min to see the results of throtteling up or down. Thanks in advance

i really like the flags Nice work you put in there cho! The intro will be everyone placing his flag i assume? Good idea, short but showing whats it up for

Klar kann man auch KER nehmen persönliche präferenz einfach. Er wollte ja absichtlich ohne richtiges Startfenster rüber so wie ich das verstanden habe. Aber klar mit dem richtigen Fenster kostet es weniger.

Ah okay dann ist das was anderes Du brauchst also quasi einfach nen Transporter der dir den Lander durch die gegend fliegt und wieder neu betankt wird fürs nächste mal. Ah verlesen okay XD Ja das glaube ich dir, deshalb die LV-N Antriebe, ich weiß sie sind echt lahm und man braucht gefühlt Jahre um von a nach b zu kommen aber die 800(s) Isp sind unschlagbar. Ich hab ejtzt mal ein bisschen in meinem Excel KSP sheet rumgerechnet und hab ein Schiffchen zusammen, es ist Lahmarschig muss ich zugeben aber optimierungen sind ja immer drin Im moment hat es jedenfalls ~100T Masse, ist allerdings auch nackt, also nur Verbindungen, Tanks und Antriebe. Es kann mit einem theoretischen dV output von 10339,07 m/s ganze 12T Nutzlast mitnehmen. Wie viel dir das für den lander bringt weiß ich leider nicht, kenne Bops gravity nicht :/ Ich sage mal das man 150T ohne Probleme mit einem größeren SLS hochbeamen kann, also wäre bei meiner Konstruktion noch platz für 52700Kg für Zusatztanks und 3-6 weitere LVN's um die 10-12k zu erreichen und nen adequaten Lander mit zu nehmen, allerdings wird die beschleunigung vermutlich weit unter 5m/s liegen und daher muss man den klotz etwas wacher fliegen als sonst. Du solltest dir vielleicht mal alles zusammenkramen und etwas rumspielen in einem excelsheet um zu schauen wie sich was auf dein a / TWR / dV auswirkt. Werde mir aber auch nochmal was Überlegen, wollte mal wieder nach Jool

Also wenn du direkt und nur auf Bop willst ist es Fraglich was du mit so einem Lander anstellen willst Aber erstmal zum Thema : - Deine Rechnung ist mir etwas zu ungenau, ehrlich gesagt war mein letzter Jool Flug auch schon ne weile her aber ich nahm mir zur Vorkalkulation das hier zur Hand -> Wenn ich richtig gerechnet habe komme ich somit auf über 7000 m/s dV die du bis zum Bop intercept brauchst. Wenn dein Lander tatsächlich nur auf Bop Landen soll dann wäre die Überlegung den Tank des landers nach den ca 1000m/s (je nach orbit, vom leo ca 552 m/s) in dein Transfermodul umzuladen, da bleiben dir dann mal knappe 2000 m/s dV übrig. Dann ist es eigentlich so das hin und Rückflug ähnliches dV benötigen, klar wechselt je nachdem wie man da reinfliegt und optimalen weg nimmt etc. etc. aber prinzipiell würde ich eine Rakete empfehlen die mal selbst mindestens 10k - 12k dV mitbringt um echt auf der sicheren Seite zu sein. Die Idee mit den LVN's ist gut und solltest du auch beibehalten. Zur langen Brennzeit bleibt mir nur zu sagen, ja ich warte so lange, entweder tatsächlich mit 5 minuten vor brennpunkt bis 5 minuten nach brennpunkt oder in 2 bis 3 manneuvern stückweise. Wie du das machst bleibt dir überlassen. Ein SLS für 100T Payload habe ich gerade in mache, also es geht. 100 T für Transferstage und Lander mögen vielleicht recht wenig wirken aber von 100T auf 200T erweitern ist sicher auch machbar Trotzdem bin ich überzeugt das man mit 100T Payload eine Transferstage mit 10-12k m/s dV und einen Lander mit 3k m/s dV in bekommen sollte.

I recently put a lot of stuff together (approx 1 month ago or so) cause i got the same feelings like you. I won't post everything agoain cause it's a whole lot of stuff and i recognized my calc of the dvDrag is not acceptable correct. But if you want to get a little bit into it check out this thread http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/97801-I-need-help-making-a-delta-v-map There might be stuff you can use. To your questions, as many mentioned -> Tutorials, Wiki page! Use Asparagus Staging -> efficient and good controllable On staging keep in mind that every lower stage gets the upper stages as payload e.g. Stage 1 : (Lander 5T / 0T Payload) | Stage 2: (Upper Atmosphere to Orbit and Transfer 39T / 5 T Payload) ships 41T | Stage 3 : (Lift Stage 84T / 41T Payload) ships 123T and so on... TWR : Thrust/(Massfull*Gravity) TWR lowers on less Thrust, rises on less mass (basically) Hope some of that helps you

Looks good Gonna post my carriers soon, need to work a little bit on them. By the way, for all of you that didn't know or forgott, i sadly can not be online tomorrow cause i am not at home.

Well it might not be the best setup for this task but it should work with acceptable framerates. I expect your graphics card to be the major issue. But im afraid you need to tune some settings down and stick to rockets with less parts. The code is "possibly" not optimized but the loads of stuff KSP itself got to render, calculate etc. is performance hungry. I wont say KSP is coded inefficent. Turn down graphics and try again if it gets better. another thing is, fraps recording on the hdd that your game is on seems kinda unpretty. Fraps writes and game reads, doesnt work so perfectly

Specs of your system would probably help :/ 1.KSP is indeed a performance hungry game but with a very good system you should be able to do it with 30+ frames 2.Your harddrive might be slow (in combination with fraps), do you have 2 harddrives ? 3.What program do you use, fraps is known for intense performance needs