Deutherius

Fellow universally intelligent lions never emerge. plsurntb

I could be wrong, but AFAIK the game calculates your velocity from your orbital trajectory at all times (even when your Pe is at the planet's core), so what you want to change would be under the ORBIT part. I'd be lying to say I know what and how, though. I presume you have insufficient lift to remain in level flight to bleed off velocity, so I present a different solution (cheaty as well, but you don't seem to have a problem with that ): press alt+F12 to bring up the debug menu and hack gravity (you can do that when the game is paused for convenience). Let your spaceplane cruise in the atmosphere to lose velocity. When you feel confident enough to land, unhack gravity and go for it.

Gilly's escape velocity is 35.71 m/s - out of reach of just rover wheel propulsion. (Or is it... I would love to be proven wrong on this one)

Bodacious indeed, lovably unique electric lever. zttretd

You probably meant √0.04 per kg of oxidizer Otherwise I agree

Watch me 72 - 1 = 71

I don't mind the way AUTO camera works, in fact I'm used to it. It's just the slow transition between modes locking me out of camera control that bugs me. But thanks for the suggestion, I should install improved chase cam again for jet flying

The wrong idea that Jebediah has had is going very awkwardly because of control loss to bananas and sheep. That has pickles between the onion and the boosters during Kraken holidays murder, It causes weird's elbow to protrude none of those new SRBs after sleeping through death wishes. Invariably, control surfaces break windows made of physics

Looks like quite a +1 chain you got there guys... It would be a shame if someone was to... ...negate it. -1 to 71

Andy donated Kerbals for head jettisoning. opfnrb

It's a black hole. EDIT: Oh... it's not. Already suggested.

KSP Wiki - see the part about "Crew transfer" at the bottom of the article.

I did a quick search and couldn't find anything related. Sorry if this question has been asked before. Everyone knows how the AUTO camera flips when you transition into/from a good enough sub/orbital trajectory. Or how the camera flips when you manually change the mode. And how the right click + drag option gets disabled for the transition. Which is infuriating. Granted, it's just a pet peeve (even though I can easily imagine a situation where it could become dangerous), and it can be bypassed by choosing a camera mode manually and sticking to it... ...But it would be nice if the camera flip happened faster or left you in control during the transition. Is there a mod that does this, or even better a simple cfg edit I can make? Or is it just ingrained in the engine/game and cannot be changed?

Granted. It was a friendly big red button, which would have granted you any wish (non-corrupted). Shame it's broken. I wish for a batch of delicious pancakes.

You could use mediafire or dropbox to upload the .craft file. Your buggy looks neat, I'd like it Also, just how kerbal can we go?

I am trying to build a Colonial Viper MkII from Battlestar Galactica (the reimagined series). There's still a lot of work to do, but I feel it's at least taking shape I'd like to rebuild the nose next, because mk2 fuselages are just too wide. Any ideas as to which parts might be suitable? (Can't use too many lift generating parts, this design is horribly backside heavy)

Cosmic microwave background radiation?

Interesting method. I usually jump straight at every contract offered, so there's very rarely more than 3 satellite jobs at once - and each one gets it's own sat en route immediately. The price is below 10k per launch, so not really all that horrible. I don't know if I would have the patience to wait for one sat to get to it's orbit, redirect to a different orbit and so on (and just sitting in time warp waiting for one thing feels kinda wasteful). Also, I like leaving the probes where the companies wanted them Having all the different satellites, stations etc up there makes the space around Kerbin feel so much more alive and real

This. But I'd add one thing - force the game to keep your velocity in surface mode for landing. Nothing worse than finishing a successful mission and crashing because you thought you're still going at 200 m/s. EDIT: You can also use the fact that half of Kerbin is always illuminated to estimate the position of KSC in map mode based on continents you can see. This became my favorite way of doing it, because I always forget to mark KSC with a flag or a probe.

What I recall from learning the game some time ago, the Standard Non-FAR Kerbal Rocket Gravity TurnTM is just: "Go straight up to 10-12 km, turn into a 45° climb and burn until you get whatever Ap you want." This works pretty much every time you have a decent TWR (~2) after the turn. If you have less than that, turn initially toward 60°-70° and continue slowly turning toward 45° - as your craft burns fuel, it's TWR will increase, making it easier to not start falling down again. If you have much more TWR, throttle down a bit (or get a smaller engine) - if you get your desired Ap (and shut off engines) but you're still at 25 km altitude, the atmosphere is going to drag you back down to Kerbin. You can do two things for extra points: - don't go too much above terminal velocity in atmo (generally when you start getting reentry flames/mach effects, you are going too fast... Or you can get a mod that tells you the terminal velocity for your current atmo pressure, like KER). This one is for efficiency. - during the 45° climb, try to keep Ap about a minute in front of you - if it gets under one minute, nose up a little. If it's rising too fast, throttle down a bit (or nose down... but only if your nose is up by a lot, DO NOT put your nose below the prograde marker). This will ensure that you can easily inject into a nice orbit. I know what you meant, but it might be better to say 60°, 30° and 0° to avoid confusion.

Now you have my attention... Nothing against your shuttle, I just prefer to fly my own crafts Also, how about a Rescue mission? There was a slight mishap in the very early development of my shuttle (I forgot RTGs and to top off the OMS fuel tanks)... And one test flight got stranded in orbit without fuel and electricity. Second orbiter was launched with extra crew cabins to dock and save the stranded guys. Jeb also volunteered to stay behind with a bit of fuel the second orbiter could spare, deorbited and landed the first orbiter intact on KSC runway. (I know it's not much, but I felt like a badass ) (I can't keep a straight face just imagining Zekes trying to dock two of his shuttles )

You can set a custom resolution in the settings.cfg manually (for example I am running at 1280x720), look for these two lines: SCREEN_RESOLUTION_WIDTH = 1280 SCREEN_RESOLUTION_HEIGHT = 720 Just be aware that any accepted changes in the in-game settings will revert you to one of the standard resolutions. There is probably a way to force your favorite resolution choice into the in-game settings, but I don't know how EDIT: It's just a temporary workaround, though. I would love resizable window as a native feature.

Yes, I get that. I understand why you would do more smaller burns at Periapse. But you always burned at Pe, circularized at Ap, burned at Pe, circularized again... You can just burn at Pe mutiple times and keep the orbit eccentric, there's no need to circularize after every burn And so you can! I learn new stuff everyday. I was under the impression that you can't, for some reason (probably because of career habits).

Alright, let's try out these peer reviews. Long version with tips'n'tricks, questions and stuff: 1st part - Orbital assembly Ok, first off - I have a lot of free time on my hands, but someone else might feel a little burdened by 7 minutes of video content. The beauty of a screenshot album is that everyone can go through it at their own pace. I also find it harder to concentrate on a video, but that is just me. Second, if your fps goes too low for a video recording, but you still want to make a video - record it anyway, speed up the footage and do a voiceover. As to the design and flying, pretty straightforward and without many complications. I like how your ship looks, especially after bringing in the droptanks. I am not sure about your choice of simple jet engines for the Laythe lander - unless you need the takeoff thrust, turbojets are (imho) better (I am open for discussion). 2nd part - Transfer Burn If your craft tends to wobble, try controlling it from somewhere closer towards CoM - the SAS will register less wobbling and will not overcorrect as much. Is there any reason for multiple orbit boosts and circularizations? I mean whatever does the job, but it takes a big chunk of extra deltaV to transfer like this, and it also diminishes any gains from the Oberth effect. Just building your orbit at Pe is much more efficient. Other than that, I don't have any objections. 3rd part - Course corrections If you want to establish an orbit around Laythe first, it might be better to just go straight for Laythe from interplanetary space and aerobrake there. It might not always be possible, and if you play with DRE or something like that it would be a suicide... But with a bit of playing around with manuever nodes (and ignoring the G-forces), you can save some (in your case the ~600 m/s to raise Jool Pe and get Laythe encounter) deltaV. Not that it's terribly relevant, as you have tons of fuel left. 4th part - Laythe Congrats on your first Laythe landing! I have a question regarding the orbit - why polar? Easier to pick a landing location? Is it worth the extra deltaV needed for inclination corrections before and after? <fanboy> The reason why it was so hard is probably the simple jet engines. Looking at your lander, you would have had enough takeoff TWR with just two turbojet engines... Leave the four shock intakes on and you can ride those beauties all the way to space! They would probably have enough oomph to get your Ap all the way up to randezvous altitude just on liquid fuel, with circularization and randezvous taking less than 500 m/s rocket deltaV. </fanboy> Anyway, interesting approach and situation well handled. 5th part - Vall Wow... So much deltaV on that lander. Maybe even excessive (Vall shouldn't take more than 3k from low orbit), I think you could easily do with less. Nevertheless, very nice design and flying. You seem to fly without SAS a lot - do you use keyboard or a joystick? 6th part - The Destroyer of Landers Tylo Judging from THIS picture, your Tylo lander stage must've had over 6k deltaV and surface TWR of about 3.0 on it's own. That seems reasonable and landable enough to me - what went wrong with it? I can't figure it out from provided screenshots. I also think that using the Trial lander as ascent stage only would have provided you with more deltaV to work with (it would make the landing harder though). Also, why did you tug the empty Tylo lander stage all the way to the randezvous? You were leaving it behind anyway. Landing on Tylo (and living to tell the tale) is no joke though, so congrats, nice work. Also, I think there's a mistake in the description of the third picture - either that or Vall has put on a few kilograms 7th part - Bop and Pol This part was pretty straightforward. You could've probably saved some fuel by not filling the lander so much, but that's about it. I have one question though, as Bill doesn't know how to SAS, you gotta have a probe core on the Trial lander. I cannot seem to locate it just by looking at pictures/videos (and I'm too lazy I don't have enough time to test your craft), mind helping me out? 8th part - Return Again, you could've probably made a more efficient return burn by using Tylo or Jool for a slingshot, but with 3k3 m/s deltaV remaining... Who cares I have no real questions or objections regarding the return. TL;DR version: I have reviewed this mission as part of the experimental peer review judging program and found NO traces of cheating or suspicious stuff. The report itself is well made and clear in most parts. I give it a POSITIVE review and nominate it for completing the Jool 5 challenge on 1st level

Neat idea. Peer reviews can be great and I'll gladly participate. I just dunno about this: What if I post my mission and nobody reviews? Or just 1 person, or 2? Sure, it might be my own fault (bad formatting, over 2k screenshots, 5 hours worth of videos, unreadable sentences...), but sometimes folks are just lazy. I understand that without a new system, this challenge might die completely (I hope it won't!), but there should be a fallback system, imho. Maybe set a time after which two positive reviews are enough, and one positive review? Or appoint a few trustworthy people to judge how many reviews are necessary? (Imagine that an epic mission was posted and the first judge writes the perfect review. Nobody has anything to add, so they just don't. The mission should still get into the Hall of Fame (because it was epic), but it only has one review, so it can't. Sad.) Or maybe I am being too skeptical? And yes, I get that the judge badge is there to motivate people to actually review, but... But who is going to review the reviews?! It doesn't seem that hard to exploit this just to get the badge (reusing a generic review, rewording of someone else's review...) Not that anyone would be petty enough to cheat for a badge (oh wait)