mrklaw

Nice. Have to experiment with that. Does the decoupler not knock things over with the ejection force?

Pics? I'm often curious how to get a nice wide base for my landing legs (your original pic using radial tanks+engines is my usual approach) but then have a service bay low down. Service bays should have sliding doors.. also I never thought you could squeeze a rover into a 2.5m service bay. Got pics of that?

Games like little big planet and minecraft show that you can do complex games on a controller. And arguably KSP VAB/SPH would be easier than LBP for many builds, as everything attaches to a common node. It would no doubt be less straightforward than a mouse, but doable. and flying ships should be fine on a controller. Hopefully that will also feed back into the PC version giving us better default controller support - there are times when I'd like to play KSP via steam home streaming on the TV in the living room, but can't because controller support isn't comprehensive. my biggest concern is the physics and mods. The PS4 has a relatively weak CPU so would that mean restrictive part count limits or bad performance? And I don't olay with lots of mods, but at least some are important and I assume they won't be supported on console. Overall I think it is a good thing to bring KSP to a wider audience. - - - Updated - - - Not an official app, but there is a mod that lets you display a map and other data on a web page - I use that on an iPad quite a lot. - - - Updated - - - Minecraft ft on console is like that - no mod support, no support for servers (only basic multiplayer) but it is massive on console. Maybe some of those people come to the PC version eventually, maybe they don't. But it increases awareness of the product, and brings more money in so the developer can continue to develop the game. If you play on a different platform and the developer delivers on their promise that it will be not be affected by this version, then it should only impact you in a positive way.

I'd appreciate an update too. I was all happy with performance until I built my first space station. 370 parts and approaching it gets quite laggy. Still playable but not great. Turned AA off, dropped shadows and lights down to 4 and it is better again, but doesn't look nearly as nice. Would give good to have info on which items have the most imoact on performance, maybe with some benchmarks.

Everyone keeps saying how the ejection angle is the most important (phase less so because you're doing it by date if you use the online tools). But does stock KSP have any way to show you what angle you're setting a node at? Can you approximate by rotating the camera in map view so the orbit line is vertical and then eyeball it? Although if the angle really needs to be in single or even fractions of a degree that would be almost impossible.

I have quite a few of these, and thought it'd be interesting to hear others. I just sent a small mun lander up to dock with my mun station in orbit. I got in a nice rendezvous orbit before realising I was going in the wrong direction. doh. So I did a quickload (rather than a revert, not sure why), which took me back ages, to the middle of the previous rescue mission which I then had to do again. Doh 2. Determined to get it right this time, I launched again, got the correct orbital direction and rendezvoused. Brought it in to about 40m, switched over to RCS and prepared for docking. Selected my docking jnr port and did 'control from here', then looked over the target station to pick somewhere to dock...at which point I realised I only had standard sized docking ports on there. Damn. I've been using standard sizes because the game said you can't transfer crew through a junior. But then watched a Scott Manley video where he did - so I was trying it out and it bit me on the backside. Third time lucky I hope. So lets hear your less auspicious moments

I just watched the recent Scott Manley beginners episodes where he is docking in kerbin orbit for a contract. He put a junior docking adapter on, and I was chuckling to myself because then his crew would be stuck in the lander. 'why did he do that?' I thought to myself. Well he did that, it turns out, because you can transfer crew just fine through the teeny tiny junior docking port. The one that has a description in game of 'its usable for transferring resources, but not crew'. The main reason I've been building unnecessarily large landers because you can't really put the normal docking adapter on the small mk1 pods or lander cans. So what other examples are there where the game says one thing, but does another?

what point in your kerbin orbit do you burn prograde though? Some one of you are talking about matching inclination mid-way to minmus to save dv. But how do you know you're on an intercept with minmus in the first place? The map won't show an intercept if your inclination isn't already correct. Do you just know based on experience?

Get into LKO then target minmus and adjust inclination at the AN/DN points. then I zoom the map out, turning the camera so minmus is at around 4 o'clock (with kerbin at the centre) then I put a manouevre node at the bottom of the kerbin orbit and drag prograde to overlap with minmus orbit. I overlap it so the AP is a short distance outside of minmus orbit. If at doesn't give me a minmus encounter and periapsis, I'll drag the node circle a little in each direction to see if that helps (adjusting the amount of prograde so that the orbit always crosses minmus orbit)

As far as I know, that setup was only for glide testing, and possibly transportation between sites - never a powered launch

don't you hate it when you have low torque and it takes ages to stop on your target marker on the navball. Or when the autopilot overshoots the mark massively because it is stupid. Makes you feel like this >< Which is a coincidence, because if you press ><, it'll pop into warp for a split second, which will remove the momentum from your spinning. So spin full speed towards your target marker, tap >< and you'll stop without overshooting

I've had the opposite situation. I landed on a terrier engine (it didn't detach properly when I decoupled it), and it registered my landing for the contract. But when I took off to try and return home, the game kept reporting me as landed.

Oops. Ignore.

Sorry, my question was maybe worded badly. By 'raising periapsis' I meant relative to the equatorial plane.,mint raising it as in making it further out from the planet. My fault for using the wrong term. I.e. If you're leaving minmus while its orbit is above kerbin's, then your apoapsis will likely also be above kerbin's orbit, and your periapsis will be below kerbin's orbit. that was the situation I was talking about with my confusion. I didn't think you could bring your periapsis point above the plane of kerbin's orbit by burning at an apoapsis which is also above kerbin's orbit. Laie's post got what I meant and although I have no idea how to do the things suggested, I get the concept.

I'm confused - how can you adjust inclination at apoapsis if your position is above/below the kerbin Equatorial orbit? Surely you have to be at the AN/DN to do it? Also so what direction would you burn at apoapsis to raise periapsis? Burning normal/anti-normal would keep periapsis where it is and raise the AN/DN wouldn't it?

My guess would be that your two 2.5m boosters would have way more fuel than the 8 1.25m boosters, so the main enter engine ca go higher before it needs to rely solely on its own tank, therefore lasts longer. edit: hmm - same amount of fuel? 4xX32 tanks or 16xT800. I assume the engines are the same on both boosters? In in that case my guess would be the asparagus stages would lose you thrust more quickly because you'd drop those first few tanks really fast so would be down to 4/6 T30 very quickly, whereas the larger boosters you have more thrust early on for longer?

Is it KAS that has the umbilical hoses for connecting elements together? Seems like that should be very useful if you want larger bases on the ground. A better system for connecting multiple buildings/vehicles in the ground should definitely be added to the stock game.

I think you need a pilot too (or is a probe core enough?) I'm getting around 0.95 science a day wih two 1* scientists and a full 500 points of data to process. most annoying thing for me is data overflow. I landed my lab on minmus and filled it up really quickly - you get big bonuses from many of the experiments - 170 on one. So it doesn't take much to fill it up to 500. At that point you can't preprocess any more experiments and therefore can't get them back for instant science. and you can get science on minmus really quickly with biome hopping. i think I'm going to do two trips - one to just bring minmus biome science home for instant unlocks, and then another trip to stockpile tons of data in the science lab (which will then take years to process)

part two of my first space station around the mun. After some fussing in the VAB trying to get my OKTO2 probe recognised, I finally launched. Then realised I only had 5 battery charge - when I was changing things around I forgot to put the battery packs back on! Still, I persevered, carefully adjusting the mun orbit so I avoided any manouvers in the shadow of the mun. Finally got to rendevous with the space station, decoupled the engine to approach on RCS...then realised I'd also forgotten to put my RCS tanks back on. Back to square one. Doh.

Thanks - and that stickied thread at least shows it can be done

I got it there in the end. Barely. I switched to an X32 + Skipper for the transfer stage, and a jumbo 64+32+mainsail for the launch stage. Went up slow and steady and inefficiently. Just as I got into orbit around the mun, I noticed my orbit was the opposite direction to my space station. Doh. (really, that seems difficult to see what your approach is like using manouvre nodes). Used up all my fuel switching orbits, but managed to rendevous and dock using just RCS thrusters - lucky I had lots of fuel on board. Is there a rocket based cargo bay, or are they only for spaceplanes? Something like a tall version of the 2.5m service bay would be great - it forms the structure of the rocket so you can put long/light/flimsy items inside.

this worked, as long as I kept my speed below 200-250m/s, but seems very inefficient. I strutted it up so it wasn't quite so wobbly, but I guess it is too light? Although with the fairing it is about 14t (only 8.5t without a fairing). How do you guys get light structural elements like this into orbit? Do you use cargo bays? If I used a 2.5m fairing, would that be structurally more sound, or is it still relying on the internal structure and the fairing is just protecting it aerodynamically?

pic of overall craft I'm trying to use.

I had a fairing on it, didn't seem to make much difference. Also I had a terrier/FT400 fuel tank on the end as a pusher so the overall load was longer.

I'm trying to get a connecting piece for my first space station into orbit but the rocket keeps spinning out of control. I thought I'd gotten the knack but this is stumping me. It does tend to bend a lot at the docking port joints mainly, also the centre of mass is very low because it is so light. I've tried putting a hitchhiker on top to raise the centre of mass but it doesn't help. I've even tried pulling - putting the load below a bunch of rockets, but that doesn't work either. any tips?