Weywot8

Commiserations on your exploding situation. Have played on and off since just before 1.0. Maxed out multiple stations at over 300 parts. Never had your situation happen to me. The game just crashes after a few scene switches back in the day. Perhaps others might have a different take?

I assume that means fly parallel to the ground to get into orbit but keep going until you are out of the SOI, correct? I think I read that your elliptical orbit should turn into a straight line, right? I keep having problems of running out of fuel, I am wondering if I am doing something fundamentally wrong since I have almost 4k of delta V and barely get into orbit. Other have helped me to get into orbit but they told me I should be able to do it with 3.4k delta V. Hmm, in theory yes but people forget about all the inefficiencies getting to orbit on an atmospheric body to begin with, as you've already noticed from practical experience. It is possible to actually get into orbit for 2800-3100dV when you get really good at things. That's ~900dV gone in your case. Perhaps go semi-ballistic instead. Launch, tip 5-10 degrees east. Proceed at full thrust. Set SAS prograde. The higher TWR you have, the more aggresive you can let it tip till well past 45% at 20 km. Past 30 km, you might consider actively forcing the nose down. Total dV to escape trajectory ~4000-4200dV. It can be done before getting the BACC Solid Rocket Boosters (SRBs) but using the BACCs and a Reliant or two (depends on your payload) will get you there. High TWR is your friend.

Couldn't tell from the pictures but try entering Kerbin SOI, and then first enter into a pure orbit first that doesn't touch Kerbin or it's atmosphere. Only then try lowering periapsis all the way into the ground. KSP can be picky on what it considers as fulfilling sub-orbital. Hyperbolic-->Orbit--->Sub-Orbital If that doesn't work then Alt-F12 is your only hope. ah, so you solved it already as posted. Ninja'd

Very true - had never seen this particular thread, having worked out a theoretical profile from first principles and being pleasantly surprised when it actually worked in real KSP. Great to know from well done Kerbal Science that the practical minimum dV isn't too far off - I couldn't be bothered to find further efficiency because I reckoned the fast launch criteria would limit any gains. Not a fan of long ascents. I only went down this particular rabbit hole because I also dislike docking and wobbly docked-together-structures/having to EVA strut & end up sending very, VERY heavy payloads to orbit later in career mode. At this extreme, a few hundred dV savings to ascent simplifies rocket design: weight, cost and most importantly, part number! Not so much an issue in 64-bit KSP. Not yet anyway .

Hmm, had a go at it. Am assuming the 15t lander lets you get home from Duna but a bit of it's fuel can be used for the final landing (and it has chutes). So, mock payload at about 15t. Interplanetary (1350dv), aerobreak+retrograde burn to orbit Duna (700dV) + initial landing deorbit (700dv) - the tanks are only filled with liquid fuel Ascent and circularization stage ~3500dv on mechjeb but in reality ~3750dV. I launch at full throttle and then pull back at Mach 2.2ish down to 2TWR so the SRBs burnout and get staged first, followed by the radial tanks. I can get to a 100X100km parking orbit with 3150dV on this setup with ~600dV spare (aggresive tilting on launch). That's alot of extra dV to muck around with. Parachute spam on the initial stages from force of habit - I use the Stage Recover mod. An added plus, the ~600dV from a higher TWR engine for the initial part of the interplanetary transfer before switching to LV-N's means less course correction later on. Play around with the design to fit your launch preferences/handling ability. Everyone's advice on having a lighter lander is a really good one to follow if possible - notice how Pecan's total mass was only 45t vs 270t for this chunky contraption.

You can test it now actually. If it works, all that means is that on the actual day, you will have some extra dV when you get to Duna. The launch "window" can be very large, depending on how much extra dV you are willing to accept outside of the minimum. See graph below - assuming you are already at a 100x100km orbit around Kerbin (~3600-3800dV to get to to orbit to begin with, dump the early ascent stages). Then a minimum of 1290dV to get to Duna in this transfer window, launching from this orbital height. Then 1300dV to break - but we can ignore most of this with aerobreaking The point being that with 140dV more (~10 % extra), you can leave anytime within the black zone and still make it to Duna. Thats about 25 Kerbin days on either side of the ideal departure date. So with some spare tankage, that's going to be 1500dV on your interplanetary transfer stage + probably 600-700dV Duna orbital insertion stage with aerobreaking (you've experimented, so what works best for you, probably use the same engines as interplanetary transfer - dump the empty tanks from before though) + ~1500dV landing stage (your lander) Work backwards to pick the best engines for each stage to minimse weight and overall tankage. Very impressed you got this far without understanding maneuver nodes but on the other hand, perhaps now is a good time to figure them out along with some orbital mechanics. Or just save the game under a new file name and reload when you are satisfied after experimenting. Share some pretty pics (zoomed in by stage if possible) of your craft. If it's as big as it sounds we can probably point things out without too much hassle. Some intrepid soul might also build you a new rocket design for the lander with the craft files.

Parts can stop working sometimes. Try the debug menu (Alt-F12), search for the "control locks - clear all" button. Maybe that will help. Also works when all KSC buildings disappear/can't be accessed and a few other weird edge cases Going back to KSC and using the tracking station to get back to your flight sometimes works to.

In general, both the TL;DR answer and the suggested very horizontal burn with long coast to circularizing works well once you get out of the 'draggy' part of any atmosphere. To figure that out, check the atmospheric pressure. For example: 0.01 atm on Kerbin is ~25km. I'm usually at Mach 3.5 speeding up to Mach 5 at this point. Drag for any given speed is ~100x less than at launch and dropping rapidly. On Eve, 0.01atm is at ~45km (KSPWiki) Working backwards, the real problem fun is figuring out how to get to 45km on Eve. The initial ascent profile and rocket design is where all the KABOOMS tend to occur . Gravity losses vs drag vs overheating. A longer walkthrough on initial launch speed and angles if you have time. KSP aerodynamics kinda models real life drag effects at trans-to-supersonic speeds, so: optimal speed is terminal velocity(Vt). That changes with air pressure. The higher you go, the faster your optimal speed. So getting up high, fast is a good idea. And really burning from 20-25km onwards if your angle of ascent permits looks good to. Kerbin Terminal Velocity Table Altitude (m) Velocity (m/s) 75 100.9 (vs ~340m/s, speed of sound) 1000 110.5 2000 121.9 3000 134.5 4000 148.4 5000 163.7 6000 180.6 7000 199.3 8000 219.9 9000 242.6 10000 267.7 12500 342.4 15000 437.8 (vs ~295m/s, speed of sound) 20000 716 32000 2332 but terminal velocity also depends of the drag coefficient (Cd) and Cd changes dynamically with speed. IRL example : KSP's debug menu used to let you see their version of the curve but it's not an option anymore. Since I'm not that patient with launches, on goes the cheap, high thrust SRBs for a high TWR that naturally increases further as they burn. This gets over the trans-sonic hump ASAP, before 15km (and dumping the SRBs). The speed of sound drops by ~15% at 15 km so for the same speed, I'm travelling at a higher Mach number & experiencing relatively less drag . Which means for the same TWR, I'm accelerating MOAR. I'm still experiencing higher drag but over much smaller time. The only reason why it works out OKish dV-wise is that while drag increases exponentially with velocity, KSP and real life atmo has density decreasing exponentially with altitude. And for a fixed acceleration, distance is exponential with time. Within the 25-30km range, I'm already at optimum velocity and burning here gets the most out of the Oberth effect - I can use a lighter rocket engine with lower TWR and pack more fuel/payload. Only using up to ~3100dV but not as hands free as other methods. And that works out well with a high initial TWR setup because the rocket can tilt at a much steeper angle instantly after launch and keep tilting under gravity as we climb and drag drops. How low can we go? Because the rocket is already moving rather fast at 20-25km up rather than starting cold, try getting to that altitude with the rocket slowly tilting (gradual active tilting helps, doesn't incur much dV loss at this point) from launch to as much as the angles suggested for various TWR's in the post below. Quite possibly much more if you are up to it... Have fun! P.S. As long as it doesn't blow up, overheating is fine. Push through the flaming atmo effects . P.S.S. very cool severedsolo. very cool indeed. My over-engineered launches are for >>20 ton payloads using BACCs and LV-T30s, sending 10 tourists to orbit in one ship early in career. Your way is much more impressive.

I'm assuming that if you have to point below the horizon, you have a pretty good TWR to begin with (at max throttle). TL;DR answer: set your SAS to prograde continuously manage your throttle up/down so that you are always maintaining a comfortable amount of time* before hitting Ap - Ap will continue to climb continue until you hit the Ap you want (as visible in map mode) kill throttle, coast set up circularisation node burn as appropriate. *comfortable = enough time to set up the node and burn (presumably 40-45 sec for the average kerbalnaut). Longer answer with explanation: Burning prograde during ascent makes the most of the dV used, converting it into both vertical and horizontal velocity while gravity changes your direction (ignoring drag). Pointing in other directions leads to "steering losses" although others might disagree, depending on how they define the term. Anyhows, smarter minds have proven somewhere in the forums that for any given orbit, (one of?) the best ascent profiles dV-wise would be to provide just enough thrust all the way throughout ascent such that at Ap, you can shut down the engines in a circularised orbit, the wonders of a well executed pure gravity turn. The "burn prograde, 40-45 sec to Ap" rule of thumb tries to capture most of that while maintaining room for kebal/human limitations. I suspect that the current launch profile with 45 degrees at 10km could be better - sounds like there is alot of active pointing away from prograde - too steep or too fast at initial launch? Depending on ship size/drag, I can get to 75-80km orbit with 2900-3100dV. With my smallest ships, directly launching at a 15-30 degree angle, I've used ~2750dV before. Of course, all this only matters if you want an efficient launch - otherwise, MOAR boosters can always do the trick! Seriously though, SRBs are cheap and you can dump them at 3-20km after they've gotten you off the ground and past the draggy atmosphere. (which means you can use a lighter engine, have more fuel) See the discussion below.

Ah, but it's probably so hot and rarified in space that the ionised hydrogen spectra applies - that's kinda pink.

Seems to happen when there is more than 1 active antenna on the ship. Can be fixed by shutting down all but 1 antenna ( trial and error as to which one to leave active - it can differ by experiment, no idea why). Better yet, avoid by shutting down before send any science. Bit of a pain if the probe cores are involved though.

Small note - if the Medusa doesn't work, try flipping it 180 degrees ("A" twice) and attaching it on the other end of the ship so it's facing 'up'. Didn't realize that would make a difference but haven't checked on a fresh, clean install to see if it's a mod interaction thing or by design.

Maybe one of the reasons MechJeb is giving a different answer is because it just gives lowest delta-V to arrive and ignores insertion costs. And it typically aims you directly at the center of the target. Also, did you click on Lowest deltaV instead of ASAP? From the MJ pockchop plot, the lowest deltaV window seems to be one Mun-Kerbin orbital period in the future based on intense blueness to the right vs the "leave anytime now", steep trajectory and short transit time based on the screenshot. The MJ plot is 'wonky' because there is a relative inclination difference. In these circumstances, the lowest burn to get somewhere for a given departure date and transit time can be highly inclined - especially as MJ ignore insertion costs. Some of those points on the porkchop probably sends you out of plane, arcing at high latitudes over the gas giant to get to the Mun while it's somewhere on the other side.

That's what they teach in school, but IRL aeronautical engineers get the real shebang. The relative contributions of lift from air-pressure differential and airflow redirect depends on circumstance but airflow redirect plays a larger role in many, many more scenarios like at cruising height for most commercial airlines where air pressure is a fifth of sea level. This is a nice link http://www.aviation-history.com/theory/lift.htm

It's a pretty good one! My own two pence of rocketry - the Munar Orbit Assist vehicle. Basically the rocket equivalent of training wheels and MOAR boosters that solve a number problems. The solid boosters provide stability in themselves and act as a larger base for more lateral attachment of fins. Also, the wedge shape tends to maintain your heading at 90 degrees although it's not perfect. At one point, it is horizontal at about 30-40km up, in my hands at least. But there is more than enough rocket power to get you into orbit and then to the Mun and back. central rocket that get's to the Mun, orbit and back Command pod 8 TL-200's LV-30 [*]2 liquid fuel side boosters nose cone 7 TL-200's LV-30 radial decoupler attached as in picture use the offset tool to push things up and down [*]2 Hammers that fire at the same time as the LF side boosters, capped with nose cones attached to the central rocket these run out before the LF side booster and decouple earlier [*]6 Hammers that are ignited first, capped with nose cones attached 3 each to the two side boosters [*]stick the fins on as seen in picture It fumbles a bit but below is the shot of what it should look like getting into Kerbin orbit. This manuever uses up the side boosters and is finished by the central rocket. Enough remaining fuel to get you to the Mun and back. (2500m/s deltaV for those who like numbers). It's been a while since I built something without MechJeb and flew something completely by hand with no manuever nodes. Keep everything in the central rocket for reentry, enter the atmo tail/engine first. Then decouple while 2-5km above ground level, open parachutes and Robert is your mother's brother. Feel free to slap on a few solar panels and batteries, I run the LV-30 at low thrust to get some charge as required.

Nice! Is there potential to make it 'auto-scale" with distance from Kerbin. That would obviate the need for specific configs for any/all planetary mods:D

Rent! Yessssss! :sticktongue::sticktongue: Download link missing! Nooooooo.......

I stand corrected! Didn't notice the Terrier:sticktongue: as the joy of looking at a potential answer embedded in a fully fledged tutorial monetarily blinded me:cool:

I've done the Apollo one-skip a number of times in-game. But its actually a reentry that lowers apoposis to 0-20km above the atmo followed by another reentry a few minutes later that does the final capture.

Nice, I'll play round and see what will work for you but from just looking at the list - there are winglets, decouplers, an LF engine and parachutes! definitely doable. EDIT : Some one else has already done an incredibly good job with almost all the parts listed. His design gets to teh Mun and back. swap out the central LF engine for the one you do have, add two side solid fuel boosters (Hammers) and that should work just fine See image 6 onwards in this guys album

@ FreeThinker - noticed the double Thermal Nozzle entry on the OP. Presumably the second one was meant to be Thermal Turbojet?

You could try using the appropriate MKS/OKS drill part in the meantime. I think they use the same CRP uranium resource but happy to be corrected.

The kerbal way is to use MOAR boosters! Although to be fair, there used to be a trick called explosive decoupling that might not work anymore in the latest version. https://youtu.be/ZNXTFj3ozNY Have a go and see if the video helps. Maybe list out the parts that are available to you because I'm guessing anyone who can really help here doesn't actually remember what is/isn't available in the demo version. EDIT: ninja'd and if it's version 0.9, explosive decoupling should still work! EDIT2: Buy the full game - cause you're worth it! (and it's worth it too!)

Glad everyone came with some proper rebuttals of this! Although to be fair... I built the monster below before restarting in 1.03/4 and it worked out to be free with the proper base and ore/fuel contracts along with it's refueling station. Bonus contract - test Rhino in Munar orbit . The improved 'fuel spike' enroute to Minimus works (and lands!) better than the version on the Mun. 24 drills, one engineer, capable of relifting and getting to Minimus/Duna if I wanted to. Makes a crazy amount of LF-Ox so I don't bother until just before launching stuff to start it up. The Rhino thruster doubles up as a refueling station to assist draining the Mun and Minimus of science. I prefer to send fuel from Minimus and ships with extra empty tanks to the Mun for refueling, assisted by MKS/OKS's Orbital Logistics part but docking/KIS-KAS works too. Then I fiddle about with maneuver nodes and a bit of timing to return the ship to Kerbin with the right inclination and do the interplanetary burn in-atmosphere at 60-65km: recover the 800m/s deltaV used to get to the Mun, now vectored to the right trajectory, also inclination change essentially "free" MOAR Oberth effect This lets me send really heavy payloads out to distant places (and the really distant OPM planets) without worrying about 'optimal launch windows'. 100 days to Duna leaving 18 hours after launching NOW for cheaper vs 200 days to optimal window and 200 days optimal transit from Kerbin? No probs.

NavHUD mod and/or Docking Port Alignment indicator helps a great deal too until you get good enough to eyeball it.