NASAHireMe

Thanks Geschosskopf, I read that thread. It seems that the RT players and their threads on the forums are few and far between My goal is to obtain full coverage with as few satellites as possible, without the Comm32 omni (which I haven't unlocked yet). Costs are a secondary matter since funds (even on Hard) are relatively plentiful, so this was more of an intellectual exercise than a practical one. My main complaint with a KEO system is that crafts in LKO (say, an unmanned emergency rescue pod at 100km) need DTS M-1s to reach the KEO satellites. This means they have to have lots of solar panels (right now, I haven't unlocked anything more advanced than the basic single panel). A second annoyance is that although you can set the DTS M-1 on the KEO satellite to 'active vessel', you can't do the same thing with the LKO craft. As the LKO craft flies around Kerbin, it will eventually lose contact with the KEO satellite that its DTS M-1 is pointing at. This means that you have to either (1): retarget the DTS M-1 every third of an orbit around Kerbin (annoying), or (2): put multiple DTS M-1s on your LKO craft, meaning you have to add even MORE solar panels and batteries. ^This problem could be solved if RT could be set to automatically re-route signals to Mission Control. For example, when the LKO craft's connection to KEO1 is blocked by Kerbin, the antenna automatically retargets KEO2 to reestablish connection with Mission Control. For those reasons, I was curious about the minimum constellations needed to provide full coverage, with maximum future extensability. I'm sure NASA went through this exercise themselves in the 1960s. It's actually pretty simple geometry, so here goes: 1. Minimum altitude for a 3-satellite system with full coverage of Kerbin, assuming the sats are spaced in an equilateral triangle = 600km. Any system lower than 600km needs four satellites in a square; lower than 248.6km needs five satellites in a pentagon. 2. Maximum altitude for an equilateral 3-satellite system with a maximum distance of 2500km to KSC on the ground = 2145km. Any 3-sat system placed higher than 2145km altitude will occasionally be unable to reach KSC with the Comm16 omni. 3. Minimum altitude for an equilateral 3-sat system with a maximum distance of 2500km to a KEO sat = impossible! With a 3-sat system, it is impossible to maintain a continuous omnidirectional connection with a KEO sat. For approximately 83.4 degrees of orbit (or roughly 23% of each orbit), the connection will be lost. 4. Maximum altitude for an equilateral 3-sat system with a maximum distance of 2500km to the other two satellites in the system: 843.38km. If you system is placed at an altitude higher than 843.38km, at least one of the three satellites in the system will always be connected to KSC, but your link to your other two satellites are broken. 5. Maximum altitude for a second 3-satellite system with a maximum distance of 2500km to one of your lower satellites at the maximum altitude of 843.38km: 2286.8km. If your second satellite system is above this height, it won't have a continuous connection with one of the lower three satellites. Therefore, the magic range for a 3-sat system with full coverage is 600-843.38km. Within this range, your system will be fully connected both to itself, to KSC, and to any satellites up to 2286.8km altitude with 0% downtime. No need to go KEO anymore! Best practice would be to launch your three-sat system with docking ports so that new antennas, panels, and batteries can be added as the tech tree is unlocked.

Recently began playing with RemoteTech2 after a new career on 1.0.2. I haven't unlocked enough of the tech tree yet to get to the longest-range omnidirectional antenna, the Communotron 32. So I'm stuck with the Communotron 16 (omnidirectional, range: 2500 km) and the Comms DTS-M1 (directional antenna, range: 50,000 km). Keosynchronous orbit (KEO) is at 2868 km altitude, beyond the range of the Communotron 16, but well within the range of the DTS-M1. Question is, is it worth it to build a constellation of 3 KEO satellites at this stage of the tech tree? I lack the communication systems to go interplanetary, so the 3 KEO satellites would have to be replaced or augmented once I unlocked the more powerful directional dishes. I think it'd be better to build a constellation of 5 or 6 LKO satellites with omnis instead, since most launches and orbital assemblies/rendezvous occur at the 70-150km altitudes, which place them beyond the range of the KEO omnidirectional Communotron 16s.

It looks like you have plenty of dV to go interplanetary. And the fact that you have already done a Moho flyby is impressive. Even without capturing at Moho (which requires a boatload of dV), getting to Moho, with its inclination and distance, is still an accomplishment. TWR does not really matter in vacuum, although in practice having a TWR lower than 0.2 tends to be agonizing since burns take 5+ minutes of time. If your TWR is lower than 0.2 (or whatever you're comfortable with), slap on a few more engines in the VAB. And no, your dV is your dV. It is, by definition, the end result of the change in your velocity. Usually, because nukes are so efficient, most medium-to-large interplanetary crafts will have low TWR, typically around 0.2 (again, see above on why going below 0.2 starts to get annoying).

If you're worried about reentry heat on Minmus, you're in luck. Since Minmus has no atmosphere, you don't have to worry about reentry heating at all. If you're talking about recovering your lander to Kerbin intact, your only options are to: 1. Quicksave, then try reentry without any heat shields. I reckon all your big parts (tank, crew capsule, LV-Ns) will survive reentry just fine even without a heat shield. Engines have high heat tolerances. 2. If the above strategy fails, reload your quicksave, then use a Claw or some sort of docking arrangement to attach a heatshield/parachute craft onto your lander in orbit, then reenter with that arrangement.

On a related note, does anyone know to disable the new 'trench flame/smoke' effect? I don't need that extra hit on my performance during liftoff.

You're not alone. I'm experiencing the same thing. Either it's as TheXRuler suggested, that Squad turned down reentry heating, or it's a bug. I'm playing 1.0.2 on Hard. It's a clean install + RemoteTech2 and Kerbal Alarm Clock. I haven't fiddled with any of my settings, although I DID turn down aero graphics fx and other graphics settings so my computer would run a little faster. Don't know if that was it, but I assume that the graphics settings shouldn't be affecting the gameplay mechanics. I've had 25+ ships reentries so far in this new install, and I think I've lost a grand total of one part to reentry heating. I haven't used heatshields on anything because, well, why use them if nothing is exploding? I just point my ship prograde (usually have a parachute or something at the tip) and let it reenter. A lot of the external components will heat up, some even getting close to the tops of their heating bars. But very rarely do they explode before my ship has decelerated to a safe speed.

These two sites are an absolute must. Every player that goes interplanetary plans their journeys with either Alex Moon's Planner or Olex's planner.

Congratulations on your progress thus far! Going interplanetary is your next big step, and once you master it, you're well on your way to conquering KSP (well, as much as one can 'conquer' this game). If you don't already understand delta-V, I'd start there. Designing interplanetary rockets pretty much starts and ends with knowledge of your delta-v budgets and thrust-to-weight ratios. Next, good piloting and maneuver preparation (e.g. using maneuver nodes, timing your interplanetary burn using an interplanetary window calculator-- Google it) can drastically reduce the delta-v (and thus, the complexity, size, cost, and weight) requirements of your rocket. Old tutorials should still mostly apply. Take your Minmus rocket and scale it up a bit. Assuming you get the interplanetary window correct, a flight from LKO to Duna will take around 400 dV more than a flight from LKO to Minmus, assuming you aerocapture/aerobrake to get into a Duna orbit. Then another 400 dV to return from Duna orbit to Kerbin, again assuming you aerocapture/aerobrake to Kerbin. Going interplanetary is the point in which I would strongly recommend installing either MechJeb or Kerbal Engineer Redux so that you can know your delta-V during construction. Not absolutely necessary (of course, you can do anything in Kerbal without mods), but very, very helpful.

Has anyone already published a revised delta-V map or atmospheric charts for 1.0? Or for that matter, any of the following (h/t Kerbalproof): CuriousMetaphor's Delta-V map TriggerAu's Keyboard mapping AlterBaron's KSC Landing Chart AlterBaron's Multi-Planet Atmospheric Landing Chart AlterBaron's Jool Aerocapture Chart PseudoMonkey's Parachute Mass-Fraction Chart I'd be happy to update this post as the new versions come in. Thanks to all the community members doing all the math and calculating so the rest of us can fly easier! New resource to the list: Meithan's Engine Charts for 1.0.2

Just downloaded 1.0.2 after a long hiatus from KSP (ok, 3 months. Not 'long' by any means...) waiting for the Beta to be released. Started a brand-new career. Couple questions (should be easy to answer): 1. How can I disable the launch smoke effects? I see a 'surface effects' slider or something like that in the Settings. Is this it, or is this slider only for the scorch marks on the launchpad? I'm running KSP on a laptop so getting rid of as many extra graphics is important to me. 2. How do I disable the green and red fuel/heating bars on engines and SRBs? I find them unnecessary when the staging section on the left of the screen shows the same information.

I love linking this, because it shows how cheaply you can get to Moho, IF you're really, really proficient at gravity assists. Gravity assists are the key to advanced gameplay-- they save loads of delta-v, are fun to plot and fly, and makes ridiculous multi-planet missions feasible. In short, by using 8+ gravity assists off of Eve and Moho, metaphor was able to land on Moho with only 2900 dV from LKO. So even with this uber-piloting (well beyond the level of me or you), getting from LKO to Moho took half of your 6500 dV. - - - Updated - - - And eddiew, your question is one I've been wondering about, too. It seems to me that where KERBIN is relative to Moho's plane is way more important than what plane you orbit in LKO. But here's an explanation from the link I shared: "Yeah, so first I sent a test probe into equatorial low Kerbin orbit, then made a maneuver node from that probe to get to Eve. I had to cross Eve's orbit at an ascending/descending node (so that I would actually intersect Eve's orbit instead of going below/above it). So I added a liberal amount of inclination change to the maneuver node to make sure that happened. As you can see from the picture, it's going about 30 degrees towards the south (that node had about 1200 m/s prograde component and 1600 m/s southward component, for a total of 2000 m/s (Pythagorean theorem)). But it's inefficient to do such a huge inclination change when you're already in orbit. Much more efficient to do it during launch. So I waited until the KSC was right under the maneuver node and I launched the ship into an orbit inclined 30 degrees to the south of an equatorial orbit. It doesn't cost much delta-v to launch into an inclined orbit rather than an equatorial one, you lose maybe 50 m/s from not taking full advantage of Kerbin's rotation. But now, if you remake that same maneuver node in the new orbit, you don't have to add any inclination change, you can burn straight prograde to get the same effect, for only ~1200 m/s. Ships do this all the time in reality, when they need to go to an interplanetary destination where they need an inclination change, they first launch into an inclined orbit around Earth to save delta-v."

I'll be honest, this mission won't work. Even with 4 nukes, your TWR is too low. Unless you pull off a crazy number of Moho gravity assists to 'slow' you down, you won't be able to decelerate enough to capture into a Moho orbit. Even if you begin burning retrograde at max thrust from the moment you enter Moho's SOI, you won't be able to decelerate before you zip out of Moho's SOI again. I'd recommend building another Moho craft that has a higher TWR for the Moho capture burn. Use an Eve gravity-assist (or several) to sling you into an orbit that crosses, and is in the same plane as, Moho.

Sometimes not having enough structural integrity can cause weird harmonics and oscillations in the physics engine. I'd be interested if you landed a copy, except with some more struts added. Also check your graphics settings. Sometimes, playing the game on low graphics settings (like terrain meshing) can mess with the physics engine as well-- wheels start slipping through the surface and getting stuck, Kerbals flying through small hills, etc. As ^^ noted, this may be a mod problem, too. All in all, sounds like a bug.

Just out of curiosity, has anyone completed a mid-air refueling? Imagine deorbiting a tank, sticking a gajillion parachutes on it so the descent rate is very slow, then flying another plane, rendezvous, docking, and refueling, all before the tank crashes into the ground. Then take that plane into orbit. If there's enough interest I might make this into a Challenge.

Curious, what was the empty weight of the lander that you ferried to Eve? Presumably, you launched the lander empty, then fueled it in Kerbin or Eve orbit before landing on Eve, right? I've got my standard lifter that can take up 30t. Is that enough?

It ultimately doesn't matter all that much. Not for what you intend. You've got so many parts and so much fuel that the fuel savings from a slightly higher or lower orbit are not that much. I'd personally pick an altitude that allows a higher timewarp and reduces Laythe surface rendering. This boosts framerate, reduces the load on your CPU and computer (a major problem for me because I play on a laptop that can overheat), and makes life more convenient when you can access 100x acceleration. That altitude is 120km. Like Warzouz, I'd also prefer a circular rather than an elliptical orbit for my station. The additional dV you have to expend to leave Laythe's orbit when starting from a circular rather than elliptical is more than compensated by the frustration you avoid by not having to worry about aligning arguments of periapsis. Note: you still have to worry about launch windows from LAYTHE to whichever moon of Jool you wish to visit. Of course, the time between launch windows are not nearly as long as the Kerbin-->Jool window.

Next step is definitely to build a Minmus-capable ship. Don't worry about the Mun for now. You can get basically all of the science you need to unlock the rest of the Tech Tree from Minmus alone. You don't even need to build a craft that can land on Minmus. Just one with enough fuel to orbit at about ~12km above the surface, then return back to Kerbin. Then EVA down to the surface, pick up surface samples, and EVA back to the orbiting craft. You may need to get some EVA practice under your belt before you try to do this-- it's definitely feasible, but if you don't have enough practice you can easily get stranded. In my experience, it takes about a 2/3 - 3/4 of a jetpack to de-orbit, land, then re-orbit and rendezvous. Alternatively, refine your Minmus craft into a Minmus lander. Should be pretty simple since Minmus's gravity is so low. A few landing legs, some extra fuel, and a Mystery Goo and a Materials Science bay should make a pretty decent lander. Maybe even consider a station in Minmus orbit with a Science Lab (to reset the Goo and Mat.Sci. bay, and store lots of science data) and some fuel, if you have the rendezvous and docking skills down <-- Rendezvous and docking is essential to later stages of gameplay, so get good at it now. Like I said, science from Minmus should be able to unlock most, if not all, of the Tech Tree. In order to go interplanetary (the next stage of your career), you really should: 1) unlock the nuclear engine, 2) perfect your Rendezvous and Docking techniques, 3) get decent at EVAs, 4) understand the concept of Delta-V and use a dV chart, 5) learn how to use an interplanetary calculator like AlexMoon or Olex's, 6) get decent at landing your spacecrafts on other bodies (Minmus and Mun are good practice), 7) master inclination changes. There are plenty of resources and tutorials in the forums for all of the above. By the time you go interplanetary, you pretty much NEED either MechJeb or Kerbal Engineer Redux, and Kerbal Alarm Clock. As to some of your other questions: 1. Getting to the Mun and Minmus without mods involves understanding and using phase angles. Google or search these forums for an explanation and the appropriate phase angles to reach these targets. Usually Minmus is about 115 degrees, and to get to the Mun, burn when the Mun is rising above the horizon. 2. The Kerbal Space Center is located on the equator, on the east shore of the Africa-shaped continent. 3. It's true that in the real world, launch windows are calculated to minimize fuel expenditure. In Kerbal, this is far less important, since Kerbals can survive in orbit indefinitely. Don't worry about launch windows for now. Launch eastwards and establish a cicular orbit around Kerbin (some people prefer 80km orbital altitude; I prefer 100km). Then let the spacecraft orbit Kerbin as you time-accelerate to the right phase angle and burn point for either Mun or Minmus-- the Kerbonaut inside won't care! Later on, even in interplanetary missions, you don't really have to worry about launch windows. I tend to launch a craft whenever I finish building it, stick it in a 100km orbit, then time-accelerate until the planets line up for an interplanetary burn. When you reach advanced gameplay or play with Kerbal Life support or something, then launch windows will matter: for setting up a satellite network, or launching to rendezvous with an asteroid, or something like that. But for now, don't worry about launch windows.

Because only 6 humans have ever driven one on an extraterrestrial world, that's why! And surely Kerbals can do more and drive further.

How about a Panopticon? One of my favorite parts. Next, try launching payloads into orbit... from other planets! Laythe and Duna are fun.

The easiest advice I have is to revert to an earlier savefile if you can. Otherwise, you're in for a boatload of trouble and effort. It's tough to rendezvous with an elliptical orbit. Best bet is to wait a Kerbin year until the major axis is back in line again. Or else use lots of Eve assists. 2K delta-V isn't going to cut it, obviously. Either strip and relaunch your previous vehicle (as the above posters have mentioned), or build a refueling craft so you can complete your original mission (my suggestion; no one likes to abandon a mission). Using several launches, you can build an enormous refueling craft in LKO with tons of fuel and either 3-4 nukes or a Mainsail (my preference; I hate long burns) and use it to rendezvous and refuel your original mission ship. I once shipped 25,000 units of fuel out to Jool in one gigantic ship. For some tips on getting to Moho, here's a good guide, using multiple Eve and 8 Moho assists. It's basically god-status, but you can still glean some tips. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/74375-Lowest-Delta-v-to-Moho

Root part selection

For really light rovers, you can use the 1x6 extendable panel to flip yourself if your rover is flipped accidentally.

I don't think many people care that it's not astronomically correct. I certainly don't. I was just offering a physics lesson to demonstrate an example of scale so that non-astronomical players would get a sense. Scales of magnitude are, somehow, an intrinsically fun concept, probably because they make you rethink relationships between objects. Like Neil DeGrasse Tyson's representation of all time as a calendar year or a football field-- "The time since the birth of humanity to now spans less than the thickness of a blade of grass." Here's another: If we take Eeloo's apoapsis and turn it into a perfectly circular orbit at that point, it would have a semi-major axis (that is, a height/distance above Kerbol) of 113,549,713.2 km. This orbit would just barely be able to contain the star Eta Carinae A, one of the most massive stars in the Milky Way. In comparison, the largest known star, UY Scuti, has a radius of 1.2 billion km, or over 10 time larger than Eeloo's orbit! - - - Updated - - - Here's another: Dres was supposed to be another gas giant like Jool. Why Squad never eventually turned it into one, we do not know.

I like it. Funds: Kredit, Kapital, Koins, Kash, Kosh, Kubits, Kuid, Kroner Reputation: Kredibility

If we're going for suggestions, mine would be Kapital. While we're at it, what's a more Kerbally name for 'reputation'?