Tatonf

You need to upload the folder, not only the save file.

Good news is, if you still have fuel, you can correct your mistake. For 1000 m/s, just point your spacecraft retrograde, and burn. And for only 500 m/s, you can do the same thing but with a bi-elliptical transfer (but it takes longer).

I don't really like this video where he states that Mun gravity assist should never be done, which is false. Plus, gravity assist from Duna is far from ideal. A good way to go to Eeloo using gravity assist is something like Eve-Kerbin-Kerbin-Jool. The return trip is even easier, just use Jool gravity assist (but you might arriving too fast at Kerbin). But of course it takes more time and you can forget about transfer windows.

This is a very bad idea. The Oberth effect on Mun is very small compared to Kerbin's one, and the benefit of the gravity assist is quite small too. You'll end up using more delta-V this way than doing it in LKO. The only way a Mun gravity assist could be profitable is to do almost the entire burn in LKO, and end up with a trajectory that will pass in Mun's SOI so you can grab a bit of velocity. But as ineon stated, this is very difficult, and the faster you go, the less profitable it is (I would be surprised if you gain more than 20 m/s). Finally, the true only way to make Mun gravity assist interesting for going to Jool is to use it for going to Eve, then gravity assist there, then make two gravity assist at Kerbin. But this is only for expert players.

This plane is so cute !

Well the words "most efficient" and "best way" let me thought he was looking for delta-V efficiency, but I could have misinterpreted his question.

Oh God. Not this again... This is the most inneficient way of doing it. Each second you pass burning strictly vertical, you lose 9.81 m/s. Which is quite a lot. Here's the best theoretical way of doing it : Get an orbit where, at some point, you would graze the ground, then immediately cancel all of your velocity above it, and land. The idea is that you would not gain any speed due to Mun's gravity, and therefore you would consume the strict minimum for landing. However there's a slight problem here : it would require an infinit TWR. Plus, you never clearly know where to put your orbit and there's a high probability that you would crash on the ground instead of grazing it. The only thing you can do is to get as close to this theoretical landing as possible. Via a Hohmann transfer, lower your periapsis as low as you dare, and when you visually see that you're not very far above the ground, burn with the highest TWR you can get. Of course, as Mastikator stated, getting an high TWR means you need powerfull engines, which are heavy, and therefore the rest of the mission might require bigger rocket to be accomplished. You're the judge. Finally I link you to a video where I performed an efficient landing with 599 m/s (strict minimum is 580 m/s according to the delta-V map). It starts at 16 minutes. Note : It is possible to save even more delta-V by lithobreaking. Certain legs have a crash tolerance of 12 or 14 m/s. Hell, the Mark 1-2 Pod have a crash tolerance of 45 m/s, so you could land on it if you dare.

Hello, The correct way to set up a proper reentry is to put your periapsis at around 30 km. If you go for a "crash trajectory" where your periapsis is under 0 m, like I suspect you to do, your spacecraft will not spend enough time in the atmosphere and thus will not slow down enough to let you open the parachute. EDIT : You should do the tutorials. It's explained there.

It depends of what's your goal... Judging from this post and previous posts you've made, it looks like you think everyone want and should have a playstyle similar to yours. You just want to throw your stuff in space, and if it doesn't work, just add moar booster. It's your playstyle, and I'm ok with it. But if people want to precisely dimension their rocket and get a perfect launch NASA style, what's the problem ? This tutorial is perfect for that. When you say something like "it's not worth the hassle", I'd like to say "It's not worth the hassle for you". It might be worth for other people. Please quit disregarding other players playstyle.

Sue, if you want to go mad because there's no tool for calculating such a thing, you could even do : Mun, Kerbin, Eve twice and Moho 10 times. PLAD did something like this, but without Kerbin and less Moho flyby.

Sorry but I'm myself very noobie actually. What is actually behind this video is a lot of empiric testing with Hyperedit, and I just reproduced what I actually found to be working. What I know is : if you exit a body's SOI starting from an equatorial orbit and with only a prograde component on your node, then once you exited this body you will have the exact same inclination than it. However, if you start from an inclined orbit, once you exit the body's SOI, your orbit will also be inclined relatively to this body. So I just tested different inclinations, and found out that 60° would give me a 0.1° inclination relative to Minmus. For Minmus I didn't find any suitable inclination actually (probably because it's too small), but a polar orbit gave me an inclination relative to the Mun of something like 2.2°, which is better than 6°. But the only reason for doing this is to get an easier encounter with the Mun, because the more you're inclined the harder it is to get an encounter. The cool trajectory that got me back to Kerbin is called a "Gravity Assist", basically you can steel a bit of energy from a celestial body and give it to your spacecraft to accelerate, or, in this case, the reverse. It depends of your trajectory. But once again I am no expert, and you should look at other topics about it.

Actually it was 56°. The thing is that Minmus is inclined by 6° relatively to the Mun. By launching directly into an inclined orbit around the Mun, you can get an orbit that is correctly inclined relatively to Minmus once you escape the Mun. Starting at 21:45, you can see me adjusting the position of the node in order to minimize this inclination, and I ended up with 0.2°. Having a low relative inclination is important because it's much easier to get an encounter, and it diminishes the cost of the insertion burn. While it's quite marginal here, it's a very valuable thing to know when you aim for Moho.

Cheap transfer window are pretty rare. The sooner is at Year 43 Day 365, and should cost ~470 m/s. However, I tried it and no matter what I put in my Prograde and Normal components, I always end up in a very inclined orbit (almost polar). And no mid-course correction seems to be able to correct that. I guess that your only option is to launch directly in an inclined orbit. Clearly, no. Going to Kerbin is more expensive than getting to Jool.

Well, just make the node earlier. It won't disapear and it will actually be more efficient. http://imgur.com/fvDgta5 You can see that I will crash on Minmus, but it's really a matter of 0.01 m/s for getting a 10 km periapsis. I actually got one, but it turned into a crash as soon as I returned to the Tracking Station. Related to that, you claimed to have a 250 km periapsis, but I got a 330 km periapsis with your save. I think there's a bug/feature (delete as appropriate) here. I tried to actually make it but I didn't get the exact same Mun encounter, and the correction burn cost me 20 m/s instead. You also have to account for the Minmus inserstion burn, because it will change depending of how similar your orbit is to the orbit of Minmus. I planned for 90 m/s in my 2b) route, but got 100 m/s instead. But still, you proved that this route is indeed valid and possible, thanks for sharing your save file.

Well it might be ok but I swear I got very afraid of ruining the mission because of that. Check the end of the video I posted on my first message, it's very close !

Well thank you you for taking your time testing this. I was doing it at a 10 km Mun orbit, but I guess the results would be very similar at 20 km. If you can't get a perfect Mun gravity assist to Minmus then you'd better take the route with a Mun gravity assist to Kerbin ! For your blurriness problem, are you talking of the orbit lines ? You can change that in the parameters. For Eve gravity assist I would recommand you the PLAD route, so you already have the parameters for doing it : Someone even did 8 Moho gravity assist ! Finally, if you want to see the results of this topic, you can take a look at my video, featuring the Mun then Minmus route :

Well, let's try to do it. I have some empiric results. We'll ignore landings and ascendings, because the values are the same, no matter which route is taken. 1a) Mun then Minmus Kerbin to Mun : 860 m/s Mun insertion burn : 275 m/s Mun to Minmus : 210 m/s Minmus insertion burn : 90 m/s Minmus to Kerbin : 165 m/s TOTAL : 1600 m/s 2a) Minmus then Mun Kerbin to Minmus : 930 m/s Minmus insertion burn : 155 m/s Minmus to Mun : 85 m/s Mun insertion burn : 205 m/s Mun to Kerbin : 275 m/s TOTAL : 1650 m/s So the Mun then Minmus route still wins with a small advantage. But also note that I did not take into account the low Kerbin orbit, which is more expensive for the "Minmus then Mun" route, since you have to launch in an inclined orbit. This loss is however accounted in the Mun to Minmus burn, but it's almost negligible due to the Mun's rotation speed being low (~10 m/s). You can't benefit from both gravity assist, because you have to stop at Mun at some point. But you can still get one, and I mentioned it earlier. Problem is, I'm really bad at gravity assist, despite having read a lot of topics about this. While getting a Mun gravity assist back to Kerbin is quite easy (it cost about 90 m/s), getting a Mun gravity assist that kicks you to a 10 km Minmus encounter AND correct your inclination (from 0° to 6°) is not something I'm able to do. If someone can do it, please send pictures and parameters. Despite that, I can easily simulate it by placing a ship at Minmus's inclination, periapsis at Mun's orbit and apoapsis at Minmus's orbit. This would result in a Minmus capture of about 80 m/s. So let's rebuild our two roads : 1b) Mun then Minmus Kerbin to Mun : 860 m/s Mun insertion burn : 275 m/s Mun to Minmus : 210 m/s Minmus insertion burn : 90 m/s Minmus to Mun gravity assist : 90 m/s TOTAL : 1525 m/s 2b) Minmus then Mun Kerbin to Mun gravity assist : 860 m/s Minmus insertion burn : 90 m/s Minmus to Mun : 85 m/s Mun insertion burn : 205 m/s Mun to Kerbin : 275 m/s TOTAL : 1515 m/s So, in this particular case, the Minmus then Mun route wins, by almost nothing. However, please note that all those results are empiric results. It means that I had lot of fun with Hyperedit, created a lot of maneuver node and look at them. I would say that each result have an uncertainty of 5 m/s, and therefore each total have an uncertainty of 25 m/s. So, while in the no gravity assist case, the Mun then Minmus road wins ; if you start playing with gravity assist, you can't really say which route is better. (but maybe Slashy could come with his awesome math skills and clear this out for us ). Oh yeah, Moho is on my to-do list, but I intend to try the route of PLAD who made an awesome double Eve gravity assist. You still have to launch in an inclined orbit though.

No. Once you're in orbit around the Mun, you need a minimum of 275 m/s, not 800.

This is what I said. The Mk1-2 pod is capable of surviving without heatshield, but the author wanted to change the capsule for the Mk-1 one, so I warned him about the heating.

KSP seems indeed to be using my nvidia card. I'm trying to reproduce the lag to get a log to send you, but even though my fan still run crazy I've not been able to reproduce it yet. It happened 3 times in a single day so this is why I've posted a topic.

Hello. I played KSP for 3 years, and had no problem at all with performances (except when trying to make a 500 parts ship, but that was expected). Until now. The very infamous long awaited 1.1 version is a huge pain for me. Now I can barely play it for half an hour, and then my fan goes crazy like if I were asking him to run The Witcher 3 in ultra, I experiment freezes and big frame drop. I tried to lower the graphic settings (which I SOULD NOT HAVE TO DO with a GTX 970M), but the results are the same. I don't know what's going on, but PLEASE do something ASAP. I can't play my game anymore. Thanks for reading.

No. First, this map is pre 1.0, and the atmospheric numbers are not correct. Please refer to this map for up to date numbers : A journey to Mun would more be like : 3400 - Going to LKO 860 - Intercept Mun And that would be it if you only intend to do a fly-by because of the free-return trajectory. Now if you want to make a low orbit and then come back to Kerbin, it would be : 3400 - Going to LKO 860 - Intercept Mun 310 - Be captured in LMO 275 - Going back to a 30 km Kerbin periapsis The last number is unfortunately not displayed on the map and is the result of testing. But if you haven't done any testing, 310 would be a good approximation.

Sorry but I don't think so. I know how to make an efficient retro burn, and going back from Minmus is costing around 100 m/s less than from Mun (and this is not accounting for the possibility of a Mun gravity assist). I think it's for the same reason that bi-elliptical transfers are more efficient than Hohmann transfers in certain conditions. If you can make a return from Mun that cost less than a return from Minmus, please send pictures and explain how you do it.

Because of efficiency, as I said. It's cheaper to get back to Kerbin from Minmus than it is from Mun. And yes, I can get a gravity assist quite easily, which is cool. Hmmm ok, that's good to know.

Hi ! Sorry for not posting sooner. I appreciated your help, but as I said I'm trying to be very efficient on delta-V. Your technique unfortunately didn't work for me, as the orbit of my ship is going beyond Minmus's orbit before I can get an encounter. I've found a much better (= more efficient, not easier) method : I directly launch my ship into an inclined orbit around Mun (about 60°), and when I perform the transfer my inclination relative to Minmus is like 0.1°, which make it super easier to have an encounter. I've been able to transfer and capture my ship into a 10x10 km orbit with 285 m/s. I think you're closer to 400 m/s with your method. The main problem with doing Minmus and then Mun is that it is less efficient if you have to go back to Kerbin after (which I do). Going from low Mun orbit to a kerbin periapsis of ~30 km cost around 275 m/s ; while the same thing from Minmus is more like 170 m/s. And you can even reduce the cost to less than 100 m/s by performing a Mun gravity assist. As for the Launch window planner, I think it knows where your ship is, because it tells you both your departure time and your angle of ejection. Since you provided the altitude of your orbit (assumed to be equatorial, prograde and circular), the node can only be at a very specific point in space. Well, I think. I think the planner struggle because the window form a Mun to Minmus transfer is super small. I've found the correct window to be at Year 1 Day 22 Hour 4. The planner told me it was almost 2 hours later, and it is too late to get your encounter by then.