WuphonsReach

- Fuel purity. Early in the technology tree, your production methods are not the best, so maybe you only get 80-85% purity (so less then the expected ISP out of the fuel). Maybe you spend Tech points to try and research improvements in a particular fuel type so you slowly approach 100% purity. - Engine designs when initially unlocked are only 85% efficient. You have to spend funds / resources on testing and improving a particular engine. - Surface weather related pressure systems? How much does it matter to launch velocity if the atmospheric pressure varies between 950mb and 1050mb on earth? - Maybe variable wind speeds at different altitudes. And localized weather on Kerbin. You have to have a weather satellite up and a weather station or weather balloons to get a read on weather conditions at launch time in order to decide "go / no-go". - Randomized moonlets / planetoids / comets / asteroids - along with missions to go visit comet X.

When doing game design - critical upgrades that are cheaply unlocked right at the start raise the question of - why the heck are you locking them in the first place? Alternate methods for doing Tracking Center: - At low levels, your orbits are only accurate to +/- 10% along with the conics, Ap/Pe, orbital period, etc. Make it so that the API reports consistently inaccurate information to all addons (i.e. for this ship, the error is 5% Y, -5% X, and -7% Z, etc.). The next launch would have different error bars. So you can still put things into orbit, you still see the Ap/Pe numbers, but they're inaccurate. The orbit line is a fuzzy circle instead of a tight line. Then, maybe you get a contract to launch a GPS sat network (6 sats?) which improves your accuracy to down to 1%. And upgrading the tracking station also increases your accuracy of information.

For early game, I think you might be over-thinking those first satellites. Four sats with only the omni-directional Comm-16 antenna in 700km altitude orbits around the equator can handle all communications inside of the ~3000km altitude orbits. With only (1) DTS-10 and (1) Comm-16 onboard, you only need 0.14/s of power and about 110 reserve battery power. That means (2) Z-100 batteries will provide plenty of buffer. For the solar panels, you only need a handful of OX-STAT PVs. I put (3) on top of the Stayputnik sphere to point forward, then (3) around the bottom just above the LV-909 engine. The three at the bottom can be angled 10-20 degrees (shift-W?) so that they can pick up sunlight coming from directly behind the engine. Launch costs for the 700km orbit sats can be as low as 14k (if I recall). The geo-sync orbit sats are definitely more expensive launches.

Yeah, the Fine Print contracts for sat-launches are extremely lucrative. That's how I manage to fund the experimental stuff in Career mode. Once every 2-3 kerbin days I will check for new orbit contracts. From what I've seen, if you have multiple outstanding orbit contracts -- you can use a single satellite to service multiple contracts. Which makes it even more lucrative! (Probably a bit of an exploit -- and maybe it should be patched so that once you finalize an orbit contract you give up rights to controlling the satellite.) I've settled on (4) equatorials at 700km and (2) polar orbits at 700km around Kerbin to form my "low-ish" network mesh with the Comm-16s (1h20m orbit period). Then I park (2) at geo-sync about 30 degrees ahead/behind of KSC's latitude. The geo-sync sats have (1) link back to KSC and (1) link to "active vessel". And now I have (2) at the Mun in identical orbits but 180 degrees opposed to each other - they link back to the (2) geo-sync sats and provide omnidirectional control in the local Mun area. I had two orbit contracts to put sats around Mun. Future probes to Mun will depend on linking back to my GEO-A and GEO-B sats over Kerbin, the (2) local relays around Mun will handle comms on the dark side of the Mun. It seems to be pretty efficient and effective. The other trick that I'm using is that once a sat is in position, with the proper orbit inclination, eccentricity and orbital period - I rename it and classify it as "debris". That lets me hide it from map view.

Looks very ..... Hopefully 64-bit KSP is going to see some love and attention on Windows for stability (and hopefully with the goal to kill off the 32-bit version). Gameplay things that I'd like to see: - The option for a random start time with an upper limit. So if you give an upper limit of +3y, you will start somewhere between day zero and 3 years from the base start. - Randomized comets with orbital periods of anything from 3y to 300+ years, along with contracts to go do science near one. - Biomes that slowly refill their science pool. Maybe the Kerbin Grasslands biome doesn't, but some of the more "active" and "dynamic" biomes on places like Eve or something equivalent to real-life Io might need to be visited multiple times in order to fully tap the value. You can't just get 99.9% of the science by batch firing four sets of experiments. Instead you might have to wait a minimum amount of time for it to recover after the first experiment before doing the second. And after being tapped out, maybe it recharges after 3-6 months (or 3-6 years). - Part cost rebalance, especially early on in the game. - Part differentiation. For example the 2x3 solar panel design should be sturdier then the 1x6 design. The one with the cover should be better in atmosphere then the one without the cover. - Funding drive. Offer a way to trade in excess reputation or science points for funding, without having to complete one of the existing types of contracts. Right now it's possible to run out of funds early on if you have a few launch failures, with no way really to gain more funds. Being able to trade science points for funds might also give a reason to keep doing science missions in order to fund other personal side projects like putting up an orbital space station. - Add a few more ship categories and icons (i.e. Debris, Probes, Rovers, etc.) to the Space Tracking Station / Map Mode. Suggestions would be: "Satellites" (i.e. geo-sync sats), "Depot" or "Fueling", "Construction Parts" (i.e. ships that you are working on assembling), "Mothership" (a bigger then normal ship), "Colony" (a big base). - Sub-folders in the Load menu for loading in ship/plane designs. - Give a way to associate a particular ship with the contracts that you are trying to fulfill with that ship. So if you have a dozen active contracts, you should only see orbits / icons that are associated with the ship that you are currently controlling. After tossing up (10) sats in low-Kerbin orbit the map around Kerbin starts to get really crowded and it gets difficult to figure out how to incline an orbit on a maneuver in order to hit the target orbit.

ooooohhhhh - there's an interesting concept, using the "cone of reception" That would give me a way to easily setup (2) satellites around planet X and have them link back to (2) sats around Kerbin, while using only a single antenna dedicated to that link? Just set the sats around planet X to point at Kerbin, and the relays at Kerbin to point at Planet X?

Another wish list item: - Being able to put a dot on the navball or along the navball edge at launch. Sometimes I want to climb to a specific heading on the launch and I have to jot it down on a piece of paper.

Started with stock, switched to FAR because I got unhappy with how easy it was to get rockets without any nosecones or fairings into orbit. Now the fairing mod that I have installed has a purpose. I have about a 10% launch failure now due to over-controlling, or exceeding terminal velocity, or having something burn off the side of the craft. Nonetheless, it didn't take too long to get used to it. I just have to put a nosecone / fairing on, add fins on the tail, then just use tiny control movements until above 15-20k altitude. I like it because the breakups are more realistic when you screw up and start corkscrewing on the ascent.

I'm starting a new game with Remote Tech + FAR + Deadly Reentry + Stage Recovery. My method for Remote Tech is that I don't even consider starting my orbital constellation of communication relay satellites until I have 100k in the bank (and 150k would be better for tackling geosynchronous orbit). Step #1 - LKO mesh network (700km altitude orbits) Lightweight Stayputnik payloads with just the Comm-16 (2.5Mm range, omnidirectional) and DTS-10 (500km range) sats. A pair of Z-100 batteries mounted radially towards the bottom of the Stayputnik sphere provide plenty of reserve power for the dark period of the orbit. I put one inline reaction wheel, a T100 fuel tank and a LV-909 engine. Around the top of the Stayputnik sphere I put three or four OX-STAT PV panels, tilted inward until they just barely touch at the top. That handles gathering power from the front. I also put 3-4 OX-STAT PV panels mounted on the LV-909 and angled to gather power from the rear. Another 2 or three OX-STAT PV panels can be put around the middle section to gather power from the sides. Power demands with just the Comm-16 and DTS-10 is only 0.14/s. Very lightweight power draw. I put my first (4) up at 700km altitude orbits. The goal is to get them spread evenly around the planet. Orbital period for these should be 1h20m. If they are spread properly, one or two will always be within range of KSC and they can relay to the others in the 700km orbit. Payload cost should be around 5000-6000 per satellite. Launch cost is around 12-14k (and you get 2-5k back with the Stage Recovery mod). Figure 45-70k in funds to get those 3-5 satellites up and running in the 700km orbit. If I have funds to waste then I might put 2-3 in polar orbits, also on a 1h20m orbital period. That gives a bit of redundancy in case the orbits drift out of alignment over time. Step #2 - Geosync orbit (at 2868.75 km with a period of exactly 6h). Satellites with the Comm-16 in the 700km orbit can reach Geosync orbit through about 30% of their orbit path. That means with 4 Comm-16 sats in 700km orbits that your KEO satellite over KSC will be controllable most of the time even if the DTS-M1 or KR-7 directionals are not yet connected or KSC is below the horizon. My first two KEO satellite only have (2) DTS-M1 or KR-7 directional links. One for connecting back to KSC and one for connecting to the "active vessel". Because they can always see KSC once their orbits are stable, they do not need to link to each other via directionals. I try to park them in KEO at about 30 degrees ahead of KSC and 30 degrees behind KSC on the equatorial orbit plane. They should be about 2.2Mm away from each other in a straight line so that the Comm-16 links them (as a backup plan). Power requirements for the KEO sats is much higher. You need 1.78/s and the dark period of the orbit lasts for up to 20 minutes. That requires 2200 battery reserve power (which is a lot of Z-100 batteries). You will also need about 12-18 OX-STAT PV panels. Figure 1/4 of the panels facing forward, 1/4 facing towards the rear and the rest around the middle. I'll have to play with this tonight to fine down the numbers on the KEO angles. You want them far enough apart that it is extremely rare that both will be eclipsed by Kerbin for any probe out past 2800km altitude above Kerbin. Probes inside of the 2800km boundary can be handled by the LKO mesh network using Comm-16s.

Is there a place in the stock UI that will display orbital period? Or with Kerbal Engineer or MechJeb?

Some tricks with the Remote Tech mod and that first constellation of satellites. Trying to do it with just (3) at 770km is really hard. You'll spend way too much time trying to get them all equidistant and in circular orbits. I suggest planning on a minimum of (4) equatorial satellites, and possibly putting them all at 700km altitude orbits instead. The first (4) launches should be small and light and only use the DP-10 and Communotron-16. No directionals like the DTS-M1 or KR-7, they consume too much power and require too many batteries to get through the dark period of the orbit. The goal of the first (4) launches is to get omni-directional Comm-16s up with their 2.5Mm range. The advantage here is that they will automatically form a mesh network without any manual intervention. Shoot for a payload weight of 2250kg and a cost of 4100 for those first few launches. If you have the Stage Recovery mod, you might spend as little as 6300 per launch (net cost, gross cost is 14000). You only need enough Delta-V to get into low orbit, then a bit of DV to get to 700-750km and stabilize the orbit. If you can get into orbit (Ap and Pe both above 75km) with 500 DV left, then you are doing okay. I like to toss up (4) in equatorial orbits at 700km altitude and another (2-4) in polar orbits (also at 700km). Those form the basic mesh and safety net for anything with a Pe under 1500km. With (6) or (8) satellites orbiting in LKO in various orbits, it will be extremely rare that there are gaps in coverage anywhere within 1500km of Kerbin. What about the longer-distance stuff? One method is to put up (3) satellites with lots of batteries and PV panels along with (2) active directional link (DTS-M1 or KR-7). Put those in synchronous orbit (KEO) at 2868.75km above the KSC hemisphere. Assuming that your LKO network mesh is working fine, the KEO satellites will often be within 2.5Mm of at least one of your LKOs. So you could get by without needing the 2nd directional link. Alternately, take advantage of your KLO satellite mesh network and put your long-range comms on satellites orbiting at around 1500km altitude. They can use the 2.5Mm range on the Comm-16 to talk to the LKO mesh and they will only need to keep (1) active directional link to the "active vessel". Note: The bigger the orbit radius, the easier it is to station-keep. If you have (3) satellites sitting in synchronous orbits you can put one directly overhead of KSC and the others about 2Mm to either side (within range of the Comm-16). Just check on their positions every 30-60 days and fine tune their orbits to stay in place.

- Better filtering of "things in orbits" in the flight planner window (not the Tracking Center at KSC) where you plan maneuvers. When you get a crowded sky above Kerbin it can be difficult to find the orbital plane that you need to insert a satellite into. - Flight replay is not obvious of where to find it, if it exists. It would be nice to see a flight record of everything that has happened so far in the flight - not just when you crash. - More moons, more planets. - Randomized comets that are on multi-year (or dozens/hundreds of Kerbal years) cycles and are different from one game to another. - Cost balancing. - Automatic stage recovery, if it has enough parachutes and enters at less then X m/s.