Gaarst

While messing around in a new career mode in 1.0.4, I had some contract asking for suborbital flights, and also orbits around Kerbin. After having accomplished a few, I came to realise something rather counter-intuitive concerning aerodynamics and reentry: For the same reentering capsule, an reentry from LKO will be slowed down enough to deploy chutes and land safely; while for some obscure reason, reentry from a suborbital flight (~75km apoapsis), even though going slower initially, will lose less speed and end up too fast too low, leading to unavoidable crash, even when using chutes as soon as possible. I haven't conducted methodical tests with different flight profiles to determine the exact circumstances of this event, but I have had a few suborbital flights that ended up crashing, even in the sea, at alt 0, due to being too fast too low. I thought a some time about it, and have come up with two possibilities explaining this: 1- (the most plausible to me) Vertical velocity issues: The craft does not slow down much as it is slower when coming back from suborbital flight, but the reentry being steeper, the vertical velocity ends up being higher than for an orbital reentry. This would explain this issue, and the fact that going "faster" (with higher horizontal velocity) in a suborbital flight prevents it. The thing is, when getting down to under 10km after reentry, whether you come back from LKO or suborbital flight, your ship has basically the same trajectory, almost vertical, so there would be no reason why speeds are different between the two. 2- KSP aerodynamics being inaccurate: The title speaks for itself: for some reason, aerodynamics is inaccurate and creates this issue inevitably. I know that KSP stock aerodynamics is not an exact model of the Earth's atmosphere, but even when considering approximations, the drag induced by the reentry should make the two profiles end up the same way. What could also cause this, is the fact that drag in 1.0.4 was reduced, and for some aerodynamic reason, this creates the issue discussed. I made this thread to see if anyone else has encountered this, or would like to discuss it, or even come up with a solution to it. (I may add screenshots if anyone asks for some.)

Not necessarily, you can right click on the chutes and open them when "safe" is displayed instead of "unsafe" or "risky". Though for some type of flights, waiting for the chute to be "safe" will inevitably cause your demise...

I do also have noticed more lag since 1.0, but I don't think it is linked to heat calculations, at least for me. My PC is quite slow and I struggle having solid fps with most game. So, basically, I will notice anything using more CPU/creating lag. I don't see any difference when hanging around in interplanetary space, even when burning (when heat calculations are more important) as long as I do not look directly at a planet too close. Also, during reentry, even with convection/radiation/conduction calculations, I do not notice more lag than pre-1.0. On the other hand, looking (eg) at Kerbin or the ground while in LKO or flying at any altitude will give me lag, same goes for smoke effects at launch (the latter just kills my fps down to 5 even for smaller rockets), and this happens keeping the same graphic settings as Beta and even Alpha. I did had similar lag spikes in Beta, but not as strong as in 1.0.x; so, IMO, yes 1.0 is more laggy than Beta, but no it is not due to heat calculations.

Just checked, and it works, at least for me, I can download the game on the website without any problem. Maybe try again now that a few hours have passed ?

No, unfortunately, there are no actuators in stock KSP; and unless proven otherwise, you can't attach anything to rover wheels (at least the moving part) that will move with the wheels. Apart from the mods that have been suggested above, I guess you could build something using the Klaw in free pivot mode and RCS or reaction wheels, though I'm not sure the result would be very convincing.

Maybe try using ladders Anyway, neko is right, you can't activate your jetpack while holding a ladder or pod; then again, I don't see what's wrong with your first step on another planet being a bit... firmer

Did you at least read my message ?

I'm not familiar with Linux, so I'm not going to be really helpful there, but just a quick question: are you sure you downloaded the Linux version on the KSP website (just checking) ? And, also, KSP.exe launches the game directly, while Launcher.exe launches the launcher (yo dawg) which gives you news about KSP, the possibility to check for updates and a few other things. I personnaly do not use the Launcher.exe since I had a bug in 1.0.2 which made that I had infinite "checking for updates" and was not able to launch the game. I don't know if this has been fixed, but anyway, if you have a doubt, use KSP.[whatever you have]

The game is not unplayable. >< Right click on your chute in the VAB or in flight and increase the "altitude" bar to 1000m or even 1500m and it will work fine. Also don't reenter to steep.

I'm using a ~25t ship with a single LV-N as an interplanetary ship. A few days ago in 1.0.4 I did a 25 min full throttle insertion burn at Moho (3600 m/s) and it didn't overheat at all (60% max heat capability according to KER). If you're using several LV-N then your radiator use will depend on the heat sinking capabilities of your ship. If you have parts with a large thermal mass, then they will absorb heat slowly but surely and your ship will have time to cool down after the burn. The heat is stored and won't make any problem. On the other hand, if your ship does not absorb heat well, you might consider using radiators to help dissipate heat during the burn. I'd suggest 1 extendable medium per 2 LV-N (I have no, a single LV-N, and it works fine at Moho). What you can also do is launch some test vehicles with different amouts of radiators and see how they behave. FYI, non-extendable radiators take heat from the part they're attached to, but extendable radiators take heat from the whole ship equally, you may want to consider this while building your ship.

I am not really imaginative, if I need two Kerbonauts, I just stack two Mk1 Command Pods, it is the easiest, lightest way to "store" two kerbals.

Hell no, even when launching a single engine rocket I get down to 5 fps at launch due to the smoke, unless I un-zoom to a few kms. So not for me thanks (Another thing I would like to see fixed, BTW)

There are already mods adding clouds, Avg's Cloud Pack for example. There are also a lot of other visual enhancement mods which add clouds, but also other features. IMO, clouds in KSP are about as important as 4K grass textures (understand: not at all), I would appreciate that the devs focus on developing the gameplay, fixing bugs, etc instead of adding clouds which do not change the game at all. KSP is a game where gameplay is a thousand times more important than graphics, I'm happy about the devs enhancing the gameplay rather than adding clouds. Same goes for the PS4 port, first make a stable, polished game before losing time on releasing it on PS4 (and before releasing 1.0, but that's another debate).

Voted other: I usually don't bother putting heat shields, I just hit the atmosphere and brake with drag. Trial and error for different altitudes if it does not work the first time I don't do aerocaptures that often though, so it is not that of a problem for me.

Do not do your gravity turn at 10km Start turning a few degrees at ~50 m/s depending on your TWR, and gradually follow prograde marker until 45° at 10km and 15° at 30km. Then atmosphere is thin enough and you can basically do what you want. This has been the easiest ascent profile since 1.0 aero. Welcome to the forums BTW EDIT: V V - Kaos is right, a TWR of 2 at launch is a bit high, try going down to 1.5-1.7 TWR ASL (click atmospheric on your KER display)

[jokethathasbeendone1000times] But it worked in KSP... [/jokethathasbeendone1000times]

Today, I sent Jadine to Moho: Now I'm waiting for the transfer window...

What do you mean by "burning up" ? If it's reentry effects, then it's normal and isn't necessarily linked to the craft overheating. Reentry effects happen much higher in 1.0.4 than in 1.0.2 (at 55km at Kerbin). If it's the ship overheating, try aerobraking higher in the atmosphere for less drag and heat. Trial and error is almost vital in KSP. Edit: added some things.

Today I landed on Moho with a Kerbal, first time in 1.0.4, and decided to plant a flag to celebrate this. Everything goes fine until I try to load any type of save (quicksave or persistant), then the flag simply disappears as if taken down or destroyed. F5-F9-ing while in EVA show that the flag actually sinks about 2m into the ground after each save loading and eventually explodes due to colliding with Moho (guessing). I did a quick search on the forums and haven't found a recent thread about this problem. If anyone knows one, thank you to redirect me there I run KSP 1.0.4 with only KER and KAC installed. If it might be of any consequence, the flag was planted on a >10° slope And I remember having a similar problem at Vall in 1.0.2. I did my mission there fine and everything, but then, after returning to Kerbin I noticed the flag was missing and assumed I forgot it, and simply HyperEditted another one to Vall. I now think the two might be the same issue. Does anyone has had the same problem or is it a known glitch ? Any possible explanation or way to fix it would be greatly appreciated. No screenshots this time, I didn't take any and I'm not going back down there Hopefully, they won't be needed for this issue.

9. Realizing you forgot chutes: Priceless Sorry, couldn't resist

Look at devnote Tuesdays posts here for info on Squad's work and game development. You can also check the devs' Twitters, there is sometimes info about the game there.

Changing flag using the flag pole only changes the flag for future missions. If you want to change the flag of your already-launched vessels, you'll still have to edit your persistant.sfs file and replace all lines: flag = Squad/Flags/[name of your current flag] by: flag = Squad/Flags/[name of your new flag]

Sun doesn't have an influence on its own on a probe at Moho but I can guarantee from experience a LV-N powered ship will not at all cool at Moho as well as it does at Kerbin. Although getting too close to the Sun can overheat your probe (duh), while discovering 1.0, I had that a probe that intsa-exploded due to the Sun's heat (it was at 300,000,000 m)

First, welcome to the forums A few more details about your problem would be helpful. What angle do you mean: angle relative to horizon or prograde ? Are you sure you don't mean altitude ? Does this happen while in atmosphere or vacuum ? What type of engine are you using ? If you are very specific about your problem, it will be easier to solve it. Screenshots also help a lot. But anyway, if you're using a jet engine (in air-breathing more if RAPIER) it could be because of intakes not receiving enough air due to the angle of attack of your plane (air flow is then not directly aimed at the intake and it is less efficient). Jet engines stop if they do not receive enough air; and if you have several jet engines, they may not get all the same amount of air, resulting in some engines switching on and off, and not others. If you're too high, atmosphere gets thinner and engines receive less air, it may be linked to your issue. Hope this helps a little, but please add screenshots, they are really helpful

First question: I do not know which part is the most resistant to heat but there are 3 factors which, for a single part, can be used to determine this: 1: heat tolerance, given in part description in the VAB or SPH 2: Area: highly radiative parts evacuate heat better and overheat less (wing parts are the best radiators). You can have an idea of which part is better by using the debug menu (Alt + F12), enabling thermal info in part menus (don't remember the exact name of the option) then right click on a part in flight and compare radiative flux with others. 3: Thermal mass: the higher it is, the more energy a part will need to heat. Fuel tanks are usually the best at these. Thermal mass is displayed the same way as radiative flux above. Second: I think all 1.25 m parts have the same explosion size, if not I guess the biggest 1.25 m part which is the Kickback SRB. Not sure on that one. Third: All parts in KSP are rigid, it is the links between two parts that actually bend. The larger the parts linked are, the more rigid the link; although, larger parts are more massive and exert more forces on the links, making them bend more, so that will depend on your rocket layout and the use of these parts. If you want to have a more rigid rocket, use struts (this is easily in the Top 5 golden rules in KSP). You may also want to look at impact tolerance, shown in the VAB/SPH which tells you how hard a part can hit the ground without breaking.