RCgothic

Amongst others. I'm using Deadly Reentry too, though my understanding is that's basically been reduced to a parts mod. But I was using FAR and Realchutes before I made the switch from 0.9 to 1.02 without issue, so I figure it has something to do with the new version.

Ok, I had another mission go south and got a few pics. This is from a Mun return mission, but it survived the first two passes alright. I suspect the third pass came in too steep, but there wasn't a huge amount I could do about that. In any case I don't think a parachute should be blowing up under these circumstances.

No, the parachutes are very last in the staging and are not deployed when they explode. To clarify, it's the casings that blow up with the chutes still in their boxes. And I am flying heat shield prograde. I'm currently tier 1 science with only all the 45 Science unlocked.

Since coming to 1.02 after a bit of a break from 0.9, I've been having a problem with my parachutes exploding BEFORE deployment (ie at around 30km whereas I'd usually deploy around 10km and <500m/s.) I first noticed that the radial chutes were exploding no matter where I put them, but recently nose cone chutes have been exploding as well. Atmospheric heating is turned up to 1.2x. I figure what's happening is that the pod is heating up to above the endurance limit of the chutes, but I'm at a loss as to how to prevent it. I've got a heat shield, and in other respects it seems to be doing its job. Pod is correctly oriented with heat shield prograde. Any ideas? Luckily Jeb and Val have both survived bailing out several times, but I'd quite like to be able to land properly. Set up is: Mk1 Pod, nose chute, heat shield. Re-entry from 80km apoapsis to 30km periapsis.

Exactly!

Jeb will not come back from space today. And the battery powering his life support has a shelf life of two hours. At least that's how I thought it would go! I'm on an early career mode game (FAR - TAC LS) with no respawns or reverts, and within the 30 part limit I thought 3,900m/s DV should have been enough to get into LKO and back. Turns out my ascent profile on this occasion was... a little less than optimal. I got Jeb into a 150km/71km orbit. It was at this point that I realised that I had zero left in the tank and the game had just auto-saved on achieving orbit. And I hadn't attached any additional batteries because I wasn't expecting to stay up for even one complete orbit. I couldn't even EVA and hope to survive the re-entry and freefall as I haven't yet upgraded the astronaut complex! After thinking things through for a few moments I realised Jeb DID have one remaining source of propulsion! By orientating retrograde and jettisoning his second stage engines at apoapsis I managed to get his periapsis down to 67km! It was now a race against time between aerobraking and hypothermic death! Three orbits later, apoapsis dropped below 70km. Simultaneously the battery expired and I lost manoeuvring control (no RCS). Unsure whether the parachutes would deploy without power,or even whether I'd survive re-entry without having the ability to orient my heat-shield, I armed two of three parachutes in the upper atmosphere just before the battery expired. They were promptly ripped off by Mach 6 winds. Luckily the capsule did manage to orient itself correctly without them. Jeb survived re-entry, even if by now he was twenty minutes without power and getting a little frosty. In any case the manual main chute release must have been working today, and after a fiery re-entry it deployed correctly. Onto a 30' mountainside. After rolling down the mountainside for what felt like 5km and having both radial parachutes detonate under him, Jeb finally climbed from the pod and used his mobile phone to let the recovery crews know he was okay. I don't think I've ever had such a touch and go situation resolve itself positively!

You don't need geostationary sats. You just need at least one visible from KSC at all times, which you get with a 3-sat constellation in equatorial orbit above minimum altitude for line of sight pretty much by default. The other approach you could take is 'How do I enclose maximum volume', which you get by finding the altitude at which the sats are at maximum range from each other, and then minus a small bit.

Yup, if you insert into 600 km altitude you will need to get the spacing and orbital period exactly right or your satellites will drift behind the planet with respect each other and even then you'll often get obscured by mountains. This is a mistake I first made when starting out with remote tech. I put too much trust into the solution of the equations without adjusting for practical experience. 700 km altitude gives you much more phase error to work with, and allows you to spot angular drift over time and correct it before you lose contact between sats.

Ok, the preparations for the Duna mission continue! Some pics from the launch pad: Tallest rocket I've ever launched! Luckily the mk2 cargo bays are quite rigid. Just enough space to fit in an Ike lander and two remote sats. Also contains the main solar arrays and the expedition's primary RCS tankage and all the life support supplies for the mission. And a mobile lab for good measure. I'll be sending six kerbals, so Jeb is currently sitting on more than 5000 days of life support! Two of these! An orange tank and a half to LKO plus docking attachments. The first stage boosters are rescaled S-1Bs to give enough boost. Then a poodle engine to position in accurate LKO. The first one ran out of power before it could dock, but I did manage to align it north before that happened. The second version included a solar pannel and docked successfully: Unfortunately the were orbiting about 120' behind the service module and exhausted their RCS catching up. The service module piloted by Jeb from the Ike lander completed the docking manoeuvre: And so just one more launch to make: This contains the engines and attaches to the front of the service module. It'll also be ferrying Bill, Bob, Merfield, and two others who I forget the names of to the mothership. Merfield's the pilot on this one. Probably a little under-engined, so it may take several burns on successive orbits to complete the transfer burn!

Who needs n-body physics to use the Mün's SoI for a trajectory change? I think that's very clever!

I built a training bus to take six Kerbals to Minmus for a flag planting. It had enough DV to easily escape Kerbin afterwards, so I thought I'd just poke into a solar orbit for the xp and return, never having done so before. I couldn't get back and my Kerbals died after 50 days when their life support ran out. My last save was in LKO.

Today I went to space, collected a whole load of useful science, and forgot to plant the flag that was the purpose of the trip in the first place.

I prefer Rapid Unplanned Disassembly, but that's just a mater of taste.

Today I built a plane that can cruise at mach 4 and 25-30km to do temperature scans on the other side of Kerbin and return. (Using FAR). I also used the mission to attempt my first suborbital flight, but the single LV909 didn't have enough thrust to get me past 52km. Ended up being slower than cruising at mach 4. On the plus side, this is the first mission where I didn't lose control at high speed/ altitude. I accepted a load more münar/minmar temperature scan/ Sat contracts, and my first Kerbin space station contract. This makes me nervous, because I'll need to learn a whole bunch of stuff about docking, and life support for that many Kerbals is easily screwed up...

A compass would still be nice. There's no good reason you couldn't have one of those!

Oscillation is caused by an under-damped response. Basically your feedback is too great for the desired input. For the winglets, try placing them closer to the centre of mass as this will reduce their torque. If placed directly over the CoM they should basically have minimal effect. Another cause of oscillation is the rocket flexing. If your control surfaces are pointing at a different direction to your SAS module, that's not good either. That can also be mitigated by placing control surfaces and reaction wheels closer to the CoM, or by using more struts. I try and aim for one or two calibre stability with my rocket designs - CoL 1-2 diameters behind the CoM.

The last few days I completed a couple of Mün flybys in preparation for a landing. I set up a pair of long-range comms relays targeting the Mün, figuring that if they're in 180' phase, one will always be able to see the Mün. Somehow in testing I failed to notice that they only had enough battery for 75% of an umbral transit, and as they were in an equatorial orbit this meant they'd only have a 95% up-time. So I put an identical pair of sats in Münar orbit, intended to provide a surface relay link to the majority of the surface. Because they were in a higher orbit, the umbral transit takes longer, so those only have a 90% up time. I also forgot that a Sat behind the Mün from kerbin's perspective would be completely ineffective. But as a craft on the surface would still only have to wait 20 mins or so to transmit, I let all these errors go. Then I launched Mün-goer 3, which Jeb landed perfectly in the target zone. However, he forgot to turn the engine off and it fell over as I fumbled it. But no worries, because he was pointing up towards the lip of a crater, and I managed to get space borne again. But then I tried to by-eye the controls rather than use the nav ball. The pointy bit did not point upwards and Jeb did not go to space again. And it wouldn't let me revert, so I quickloaded. To before I'd put up the long-range relays. Drat. On the plus side, Jeb is alive, and I get to fix the issues with my Sat networks. (3 in inclined orbits with 2x the batteries on a triple-launcher using an inverted tri-adaptor).

So I've been thinking of a potential fix for this. The sats have enough dv to incline their orbits to make the eclipse a few times per month rather than once per orbit. Other than that, it's either replacement or some other means. Would the Kerbal Attachment System allow me to ship up a few extra batteries and attach them if I could make a rendezvous? Is that how that works?

Today I created a Mün uplink with two Sats in kerbin orbit targeting the Mün which itself had two Sats targetting Kerbin. Unfortunately turns out it only has a 90% up-time because 2x z-200s wasn't enough battery power by half for the umbral passages.

I'm unsure what your question is? Your mod works. It should not take 300 days to go to the Mun.

My issue isn't coming down gently- it's staying upright once I'm there!

Mün-goer 2 successfully completed my first flyover of a target zone, but I burnt too much fuel manoeuvring to try and line up the target EVA zones with the flyover. I was foiled by the Mün's rotation. A first landing will need to be left to Mün-goer 3 I think. I think before Mün-goer 3 I'll expand my satellite network so I can hit all four EVA sites in one go by transmitting back. I also think Mün-goer 3 will be my first test run of Tac Life Support, which sounds like it's on the verge of .90 release.

I'd always been doing the violent disintegration technique. Being able to do it from the tracker will save me a lot of dv from not having to loft the fuel required for a 're-entry!

I was a little tight on funds, so Mün-goer 1 tried to get too much done and didn't have enough dv for a landing and return. Rather than strand Jeb on the Mün, I turned it into a flyby which still recovered a lot of science and funds.

Remote Tech is one of my favourite mods, and I rarely play without it. But it is a level of difficulty that's not for everyone. Deadly re-entry on the other hand... I find it hard to believe that would be too difficult for newbies to grasp. Just about EVERYONE knows that re-entry requires a heatshield. And the thing is - even unshielded parts can survive re-entry if the angle is shallow enough.