Terwin

Meh, RCS is optional for docking/Klaw maneuvers. Just make sure you do not approach so fast that your reaction wheels cannot turn you in time for your braking burn. Half the time I send up a rescue-probe(tiny rocket with a Klaw and chutes, just enough fuel to Klaw and deorbit), I don't even use RCS if it is installed(the other half it seems to malfunction and some or all of my thrusters do not work)

Yep, no one would ever pay to go one-way to places that professional astronauts have not yet gotten to... I have yet to see a contract mission that I could not easily explain as reasonable scientific curiosity(if perhaps a bit short-sighted or overly-enthusiastic some times). Sub-oribtal Kerbol: We want to do some Kerbol observations, but we need to be going slower than a sustainable orbit to make them Ore from eve to Gilly: we want to do some material comparisons to determine the origin of Gilly, (large volumes of ore): we also want to test long term storage/out-gassing/low-pressure weathering/etc Components in odd/specific places: testing design tweaks in specific environments that should highlight the effects of the changes that were made(and where the analysis tools are set up to observe them) Components in places where they 'can't' work: Testing adaptation technologies in hopes of designing more effective rockets or some sort of material science experiments Remember: Rocket science is not the *only* type of science out there, and not even the only type of science done by NASA. I think the only ones that really need to be avoided are the non-possible ones(stability enhancer in orbit), and those seem much less frequent than they were in 0.90 (I saw some in 0.90 but none since 1.0)

Sounds great, it is not like those 20 deployed drogue parachutes, 4 tail small fins, 4 small control surfaces, small nose cone, small tail cone, or 50 basic fins(for lift) should have any impact on how that 80t tank flies...

How difficult is it to make automatic missions like the altitude and orbit ones? I think it would be nice to have a comprehensive Flyby then Explore script starting from the current 'Achieve orbit' auto-mission. Basically add a Fly-by mission any time you enter a SOI that touches a new SOI, and add an Explore mission any time you complete the fly-by mission. Ideally, any ore/tourists/test at location/etc missions would only become available for a location after the 'Explore' mission is completed, but that would probably take a lot more work than just adding the above missions with their pre-conditions. The only exploit I see coming from this is sending out a probe to visit as many SOI as possible, except that this 'exploit' sounds an awful lot like most NASA interplanetary missions... Even if the payout is low, it is still an encouragement to all career players to go and visit all the planets and moons.

My main quirk is that I don't let Kerbals die/stay dead. Any deaths must be reverted or have a previous save loaded, even when it has bee a long time since I saved. (loss of bits and pieces of hardware don't matter much, just the Kerbals)

I find that I am quite happy with my 30+ rescued Kerbals, most of which are level 3(mun flag, Minmus flag, pop out to Kerbol). The only thing I am less than happy about is that I now have 3 extra scientists on their way to Duna above and beyond what can be of use in the lab. Fortunately I have plenty to spare now that the Kerbin SOI has been pretty much science-depleted. May need to send out an expedition to Gilly, or even Moho to keep them occupied... they seem to be getting bored with all the tourist and rescue missions... (I wonder if it would be more time-efficient to top off at Gilly or go straight to Moho)

In that case it sounds like the complete re-work of the UI for 1.1 should solve the stuttering problem. Performance on the other hand is a much harder problem. Especially when so many are complaining about/asking for better aerodynamics. Any time you ad more detail/precision to a physics engine you will be slowing it down as there is more work do be done. While almost any code can be optimized to a certain degree, you get diminishing returns. You also tend to get harder to maintain code as well as often being buggier.(Example: when you saftey-check everything in each function it can take much longer to process but you will get fewer unhandled exceptions, if you remove all the checking that is 'not currently needed' then any tweak/improvement you make in the future can easily break your system because you forgot to check something that can now be an unexpected value) As optimization and stability are often an either/or proposition, I would suggest that any performance optimization beyond the low-hanging fruit variety should probably wait until the stability is a little better(unless you happen to think that the current stability of KSP is good enough that it can afford to be reduced by Squad doing an optimization pass) While a project that as been built up with an iterative process over a long period will often get both speed and stability improvements from a through code-refactoring, this is something that Squad already said they were doing for 1.1, so asking for speed optimizations beyond what is already being done is not likely to be good for stability.

Just as an FIY: Using the second beta you provided, the radiators are keeping the lighbulb from heating as quickly as it did before, and are helping it cool off more quickly afterwards. (I have seen it over to 1200 degrees but I don't think it has gotten close to 2000 as of yet, even for burns over 2 minutes) I am not 100% sure, but it looks like if a radiator is active but not extended, it continues to work as well as it did when extended. It also seems that for most burns inside the Kerbin SOI 4 large radiators are enough to keep the AHMS from using coolant except near the tail end of the burn. (not sure where you want that balance point, but in the past the AHMS used a lot more coolant in the same configuration) Not sure if this is related but I tried to insta-cool at 1000x warp a couple times last night and it did not work(I do not remember trying this since I upgraded to 1.0.4, and I later noticed that I had a couple small nuclear generators running and producing heat in a different part of the ship, so there are several possible sources of this behaving differently, but I thought I would mention it just for the sake of completeness) Thanks for your work, I am now much more confident that the upgrade to 1.0.4 will not cost me my Duna mission(I just hope I finish it before 1.1 is released...)

On the other end, I have lots of rep and keep getting missions for other planets(tourists, ore from one to another, etc), whereas my first interplanetary mission is still a good 150 days away from entering my first SOI outside the Kerbin SOI aside from Kerbol. It is nice that they have confidence in me, but being good at bringing tourists along on rescue missions does not mean I am prepared to take them to Eve...

After finishing an orbital Mun Station contract needing 6K liquid fuel and 1.5K monoprop(used ISRU to refill from the Mun), Landed ~2.5km from a stranded Kerbal and their pod near the south pole of the Mun. the pod was inside a crater and on a significant tilt, so I lowered my lander to mining mode(using the large landing gear on the front and a rugedized pair of wheels added to landing struts in the back for propulsion). Ended up needing to use the main engine on low to get over the 30 degree portion of the lip of the crater, then made several slow approach attempts and finally grabbed the Mk2 pod(not sure how may replacement tires I had to use though, and now Bill is trying to revoke my AAA card) Then when returning to Kerbal I managed to get a 120x75 orbit only to burn up when I tried to de-orbit close to KSC. Thanks to mining, I had ~2.4km/s left and as I hit ~2.2km/s at periaps, it should be possible to get this thing safely to the ground(originally launched under 1.0.2 where this ship design was quite capable of making safe landings without even losing the side-mounted gigantors) Second attempt was better, as only the bottom half of the ship was destroyed. Unfortunately I forgot I had 2 tourists down there, so tonight I'll make another attempt to get down intact(after I move those tourists to empty slots higher up, just in case). I don't like losing Kerbals, but I am willing to sacrifice ship components to the aerodynamic upgrades, so even if I lose half the ship again, this next attempt should be a keeper. (I plan on starting my maneuver burn earlier, which, thanks to being at a tangent to a point on my orbit should mean I burn longer before I get to the atmosphere due to the higher angle. It seems likely that 200m/s over and above my orbital velocity should allow me to get slow enough in-atmosphere to deploy my chutes before I get too low to slow down properly)

I have a science lab on my mission to Duna. On the launch pad I re-did all my experiments and manually loaded them into the lab for later study, just after launch I flicked the bay doors open long enough to hit the 'all research' hot-key and processed all of those during ascent so I could do it again just before leaving the atmosphere. In orbit I manually collected the high atmosphere and low orbit data then went off to Minmus for refuel and to load up on ore, but also collected lots of science data while there as well. Currently in solar orbit and roughly 200 days to Duna(I did not use a window), but with over 1000 science sitting in the lab waiting to be processed, I do not expect to run out before getting home. Admittendly I have already researched the stock science tree, but the community science tree still has lots of nodes for me to purchase(even if most of them are empty) Also, it seems that while in 1.0.2 the resarch/day was actually data consumed/day(giving 5x research), in 1.0.4 that number was perhaps doubled but now refers to science, not data(cutting the rate of conversion by ~2.5) I do not think that the MPL is intended for Kerbin SOI missions, more for permanent space stations and interplanetary missions.(most of my base contracts these days do not have anyone operating the lab if one is present) Perhaps they intend to expand the tech tree at some point or want to be sure you can complete even the most extensive custom tech trees with enough time and effort.

The design I was talking about has 2 large and 8 medium radiators. When they got above 1600 degrees they were radiating at almost 100% of their transfer rate which seems to max out at a flux of ~200K total (50K each for large, 12.5K each for medium, I suspect they hit their max temp at ~1700 degrees, after which they are radiating heat out as fast as they can suck it in) The lightbulb was still heating up while over 1800 degrees, but the radiators were pulling out a good sized chunk of the heat that was being produced, greatly extending the time to get to dangerous temps. On the plus side, the new radiators do not seem to collide with each other when extended, so I can probably put on more if they turn out to be needed.

Hmm, once the radiators get down to 4 degrees K they do seem to suck quite a bit of heat from the non-runnning engine...

Originally I was using the 1.0.2 version. I moved the ksp\Game Data\Heat Management folder to ksp\hide\Heat Managment and copied the folder from drop-box in it's place. after restarting (and saving with alt-F5) I re-deployed the radiators (may have become undeployed due to changing versions), topped off amonia, and fired up the engine (already around 1500k with 3500 fuel left to burn) @ 2550K engine temp: (skin temp 503.0!! this looks like the problem, Atomic Age engine needs conduction to skin, only 1.0.2 version is available at the moment) Radiators: 419.1 temp, 419.4 skin temp AHMS: 388.1 temp 385.7 skin temp, 550 ammonia, pump still off At Engine temp 2904 (skin temp 548.5, skin to int flux: still 1.39!) Radiator temp: 460.5 skin: 460.8 AHMS: 415.0 Skin: 412.1 Apparently the engine actually goes over 3300K before exploding(if not smashed into the Mun), but I was not watching my altitude and it was smashed to bits around that time (still 550 unused ammonia with the pump off and the engine skin temp finally topped 600, but only by a degree or two before the crash) Design notes: 4x Large Radiator Pannels attached near the top of the engine and engine attached to 2.5M AHMS with 550 ammonia Also, landing struts consisting of Long I-beams are attached to engines, everything else is above the AHMS Summary: Looks like the (version 1.0.2) engine would have melted internally and exploded with the skin temp barely getting up to a point where the heat management systems would even notice it. - - - Updated - - - Just noticed the 'Activate' button on the radiators. Re-running the test with the radiators both extended and activated(Burning prograde this time): @2500 engine temp(less than 350 skin temp) radiators are at 208.8 and 209.0 skin temp Others about the same @2900 engien temp(366.3 skin temp) Radiators @ 192 and 193.2 skin temp AHMS: 402.6 with 396.9 skin temp @3300 engien temp(381.6 skin temp, Skin to Int Flux still 1.39) Radiators: 185.1 and 186.5 AHMS: 436.1 and 429.4 @3500 and engine failure(skin temp still under 400): Radiator temp: 175.3 and 175.7 skin AHMS: 453.0 and 444.2 skin Summary: looks like activating the radiators cause them to cool off but not to suck any additional heat form anything but the skin they are attached to. note: apparently you can still get heat info off something not still touching your craft, and when detached form anything, active radiator panels cool off quickly Final note: The stock radiators(on a different ship) would quickly heat up to the same temp as the engine(same engine) when activated(and the engine gets over a certain temp), presumably pulling heat from the interior of the engine as the engine slows it's heat gain and the skin to Int flux stays at 1.39. (hmm, stock panels seem to stop keeping up around 1600 and looks like they would stop gaining heat around 1700 due to intake and radiation balancing out, even though the engine continues to heat up)

I brought home some 1.0.2 moon missions in 1.0.4. The first one was not too bad, all the externally mounted Gigantors and ladders burned off but I was able to use the engines to slow me down enough for an otherwise safe landing. The second one ended up somewhat less intact. Apparently my Atomic age engines are not losing much accumulated heat and the Heat Manager radiators/heat exchanger are not providing any benefit at all under the new model, so when I accidentally dipped into the atmosphere during my circulation burn, I ended up doing a shallow descent to Kerbin with an engine with an already half-full heat warning bar in the staging area. I nursed the engine along at a few percent to help atmospheric slowing while the engine was within 5% of exploding for a while, but after the landing gear burned off around 6km I gunned the engine to get me slow enough to open my chutes before hitting the ground. When I hit, the heat dissipation module that the engine had been mounted on was the only thing that came loose, and I managed to recover all my Kerbals intact. As that completed some contracts, I designed a new version of the vehicle using the new radiator parts. I sure hope the Atmoic age engines get updated before my Duna mission arrives, it is using that same design and there is no longer a way for that Lightbulb to dissipate heat without hitting 1000x time warp... (note: the new design gets parts connected to the stock radiators heating up but not parts attached to the engine, so it looks mostly like the heat changes broke my existing heat-control setup until the engines get an update)

I suspect you are aware of this already, but in case you are not, the Heat Management AHMS and large radiators attached to my Atomic Age lightbulb engine did not heat up or use any coolant before the engine burned up at 3000 kelvin when I updated to 1.0.4. I suspect that it is related to the engine not transferring heat properly with the new model and thought it might be useful for you to be aware of this. (note: in a newer design the parts connected to the stock active radiators are heating up more than the heat sink attached directly to the engine, so that also points to a heat-transfer failure in the engine) Love the engines, hope they get updated to the new heat transfer model soon!

I suspect you are aware of this already, but in case you are not, the AHMS and large radiators attached to my Atomic Age lightbulb engine did not heat up or use any ammonia before the engine burned up at 3000 kelvin when I updated to 1.0.4. I suspect that it is more related to the engine not transferring heat properly then the radiator parts, but though it might be useful for you to be aware of. (note: in a newer design the parts connecting the stock active radiators are heating up more than the heat sink attached directly to the engine, so that also points to a heat-transfer failure in the engine itself)

I started my weekend by discovering that my 'recover 1100 ore from Minmus landed on Kerbin' mission did not end with Recovery, but instead required 10 seconds of stability. First landing: Splash!/Recover! huh, only 550 ore... something must have broken... F9 Second landing: reverse thrust around 44km to put landing on land, then successfully got this very tall and narrow vessel stable on the ground! Recover! Yep, over 1100 ore... why did the mission not complete? AARG! F9 Third & fourth landings: Almost... tip/crash/boom/F9 Fifth: landed, waiting, complete! recover! My first Duna mission since a sandbox attempt in 0.90 launched from Minmus with full fuel and 1500 ore, after getting orbit then a ~1800 m/s retrograde burn(retrograde to both Minmus and Kerbin as I did not want to wait for the Minmus orbit to get to the right spot and Duna is in a position that requires swinging in close to Eve's orbit to catch up, this being only day 60 after all), I finished refining all the ore and had roughly 7km/s delta-v left(full fuel with no ore is ~8km/s, so I probably got more than 1km/s from the ore). A bit of node twiddling has me on a trajectory to get to Duna in ~230 days and to get into orbit of Ike with nearly 1km/s delta-v left for a landing. Then I went back and checked my Duna resource scanner probe and the route that one was on. Turns out it would have reached Duna orbit with ~-1km/s delta-v so that required some fixing. Now it should be in a roughly polar orbit of Duna performing Aerocatpure/braking with (hopefully) several hundred m/s delta-v left, and perhaps enough fuel to get into a polar Ike orbit in the 30 days it has before the manned mission is scheduled to arrive. (worst case scenario: the Duna mission needs to land and refuel on Ike so it can Klaw the scanner and refuel it so it can properly scan Ike and Duna) Expecting to leave the scan-sat equipped probe in orbit after the mission is complete. I'll probably end up refueling it before the manned mission leaves, but I'm not sure where it will go after it finishes scanning Ike and Duna. I did notice however, that if you have a vehicle or maneuver node in the SOI, you can no longer target the planet(you can't target the planet from inside it's SOI, and if you have a node or vehicle in the SOI, you select that instead of getting the option of targeting the planet). I should probably take a look at the key-bindings to see if I missed something, but this might be a bug... I also landed a base on Minmus, rescuing 2 pilots(drat!), but it turns out that I forgot the docking port, so I launched a new vessel to complete that part of the mission... On the plus side my 2nd and 3rd Minmus/Sol training missions have returned so now I have lots of level 3 Kerbals available for other missions... Wonder if I should launch for Gilly or Moho...

Mine bought me my KSP(she knew it was a bad idea for her, but apparently I am hard to shop for). Then again, even without KSP I would probably still be on my computer most hours I am at awake and at home. (my computer would probably be suffering mysterious failures on a regular basis if she could not come in and requisition my presence any time she wanted)

I had a mountain landing where a couple hitch-hiker containers in a cargo bay were not included when I recovered the vessel When I went to the tracking station it had the same vessel name I had just recovered as well as a debris. I went to check what was going on and it was the hitchhiker containers(with my soon to be level 3 scientists and engineers) starting to roll down the side of a mountain. As such I suspect that occupied vehicles do not count as debris, at least in some cases.(the actual debris was a reaction wheel part that was also in the cargo bay)

The self-starting and started/stopped 10 times is really impressive, from what I understand that is one of the more technically challenging issues with using the same engine for multiple parts of a mission. I wonder how well and how fast it could be throttled... It's a shame it is no longer politically feasible to use nuclear rocket engines(Even RTGs are a political challenge, apart from not having much fuel left)

Something else to consider for missions outside the Kerbin SOI: ISRU I have an up-coming Duna/Ike mission and I intend to land the whole thing on Ike to refill the fuel tank.(fully fueled the Transfer/Ike refinery stage can do ~8km/s, which is good as I am not using a transfer window, in fact I'll probably leave Minmus with an additional 1500 ore to refine in-flight, just in case. The only time I made it to Duna before was in the sandbox and there was not enough fuel to do more than pass through the edge of the Kerbin SOI on the return[0.90]) (If I can also lift off from Duna with enough fuel to get to Ike, I may not need to bring a lander at all)

That is not their only usage, but that is where they shine. The isp of 800 seconds is more than double the second best(poodle at 350 seconds) non-electric engine. The only stock engine with better space ISP is the ion engine which has 1/30 the thrust of the nuke, an isp of 4200 seconds, but requires a lot of electrical power to run. I don't have any problem running nukes with MK3 parts, and that size even allows things like drills and ISRU in the cargo bay.

Finally brought home my first Minmus/Kerbol training mission. Burned at periapps down to an orbit below 80x80, Realized that i was orbiting retrograde but with 1km/d delta-v left I figured I could slow down enough that the extra speed would not be an issue. Was off in my landing and hit the mountains, slid for a bit and stopped. But when I recovered the vessel, I only got 3 pilots, no engineers or scientists. I checked and no dead Kerbals, but apparently some debris and another Minmus training ship landed on Kerbin. Went to look at it and it was the pair of hitchhiker containers that were in the Mk3 cargo bay, and they started rolling down the mountain. Fortunately the goo canister on the side provided enough of a bump to give me a moment to recover the vessel after a couple of revolutions. So now I have my 5 level 3 scientists and 1 level 3 engineer for my Duna/Ike mission(with a lab for a station mission and ISRU refueling on Ike). Fortunately I have the community science tree installed(with lots and lots of empty nodes, many of the quite expensive), or else I would have nothing to spend all that research on that I will be getting from the lab. (Still not sure if topping off the fuel and ore canister on Minmus on the way out will give me more or less of a safety buffer, but as my current launching system will probably leave me about 500m/s short of LKO, I am guessing more, I might even go back to the smaller launcher which was even shorter of LKO as I could empty half my fuel tanks and still make Minmus with a huge reserve, with 4 drills and a level 3 engineer I should be able to produce >1K LF/hour if I can find a 5% concentration (the converter could handle roughly 3 times that, so it is not a bottleneck))

Some times I wonder just how many hours I have on this game. My wife bought it for me back in March as a present, so she got it from the website instead of Steam. A rough calculation says 1000 hours in the last 3 months is a pretty conservative estimate...