Termonikov

Having the same problem. Re-installed, removed the PD Launcher from everywhere and tried from KSP2_64, checked every driver and changed several options from AMD program. Still not working. Playing on a system with RX6600 and i3 12100f

Earth itself with moon. There are some space centers on it and once you go those centers, you will be given access to new parts and technologies. Maybe meet jebediah's long lost twin. Located between jool and eelo.

Hello dear community, As kerbal being mostly a sandbox game, i believe the career mode should be improved much more (although i think it is still good at current state). I am more of a progress type of player and i believe there are a lot more like me. The lack of achievments in the career mode bothers me. Ofcourse the satisfaction of landing on an interplanet etc. is great on its own, but the lack of reward after a great misson is something to be worked on. Here are my suggestions; 1. Funds are pointless after some point. After completing some big contracts with efficient spacecrafts like interplanet explore, and you reach lets say 3m funds, you pretty much wont run out of money unless you have a fantasy of crashing all your vessels into somewhere without any reason. Solution: Periodic astronaut/engineer/scientist applications to your facility when you reach certain reputation tresholds; whom are higher level, have specific skills but require HIGH salary. Specific skills might be for example a pilot specialized landing, ascending(more efficient launch), interplanet node master etc. 2. Science tree being the only progress. Solution: Some exoplanets can be added but locked at first. A requirement of a small tracking station should be landed on a moon or another planet to track them. Because we dont have enough technology to observe outermost planets or the alignment of planets do not allow us to observe them(this sounds dumb i know), we need to set up an observatory on another planet or moon to serve as a bridge and gather more information before planning a trip there. After we have done it, more planets unlock. So far i have came up with these ideas. I would appriciate any type of comment, suggestion or criticism. Happy monday if you can call a monday happy :).

Hello guys, i have downloaded OPM(outer planets mod), but i couldnt see any extra planets. After a little googling, i have learned that i shouldve installed Kopernicus core(stella expansion or something like that) aswell. But, i couldnt load any extra planets even if i installed both mods. Could use your help. Thanks

Thanks alot my friend

) - your stages #2 & #3 could be merged into a single one - your stages #5-#7 could be merged into a single one - you could try, if a poodle instead of the LV-T45 in the centerstack behaves better. - for maximal effect of the wings, put them as far down as possible Regarding your ascent, method 2 is usually the best. It costs in the neighbourhood of 3200-3500 m/s of DV to reach orbit. According to the MJ-readout, you shold reach orbit shortly before dumping the three LV-T45 side boosters, which also fits with the description in your second option, so your ascent looks fine. One thing you could try is: 1. Do your usual launch until your apoapsis is near 75-80km 2. Then stop the engines and coast out of the atmosphere 3. Do a circularization burn at your apoapsis Thanks for your effort and answer. I said 3 stages just to simplify it and considered as the rocket has 3 different engine types. 1. Adding nose cones slightly REDUCE the DV. Is it still better using them? I mean IRL it certainly is but in most of the guide videos, people say that more DV is always good. 2. If i stop my engines at 75-80 AP, i won't be over 50km and will still be under the effect of gravitational pull, so the AP drops few kms. Probably lower than 70km band. I tried that and i think due to low strength of my LV-45 engines(related to huge mass), burnout at AP ends up my rocket trying to node when its descending. 3. "you could try, if a poodle instead of the LV-T45 in the centerstack behaves better." other than this, is my build and selection of engines good?

Hello dear KSP community, I have recently started kerbal and made it up to Ike round trip without any casualties and a bunch of minmus, mun missions. But there is one thing that i haven't quite figured out yet; how do i achieve an orbit with a min PE of 50km at launch? I can burn it up to 70 km afterwards, its fine. But most of my missions goes with spending 2 of my 3 stages just for getting into a circular/eliptical orbit around kerbin. My latest mission was ike landing and returning. But i have done it pretty luckily i suppose, because on my way back, when i manuevered for kerbin and made my PE around 20km, i had only 6 litres of fuel left. Even tho i have used 10000x time acceleration for 1.5 years to have lowest deltaV during kerbin escape(using mechjeb). So i wouldn't call it an efficient run. My most efficient rocket contains 3 main stages with the following build up; -Stage 3: 3x LFB KR twin boar. -Stage 2: 4x LV-45. 720lt tank for middle engine, 3x360lt for symmetry engines with pipes going from side tanks to middle tank. -Stage 1: Rockomax 720lt tank with terrier engine. This is what my rocket looks like. The following things happen according to my launch types, 1. If i tilt my rocket too much to get circular orbit earlier, it mostly ends up not being able to lift the vehicle. 2. If i tilt it medium, i will have an AP of 100km when the 3rd stage runs out of fuel, then i burn around %90 of my second stage tanks to make my orbit circular. Then i will have a little boost with 3 side Lv-45's for my escape, then after dumping side engines, i will have 1 middle Lv-45 with a full tank thanks to fuel pipes. 3. If i dont bother tilting it and let it accelerate, i will have an AP of 140-150km, but will have to spend all my second stage fuel to make it circular. So option 2 was the best choice for me. But it still doesn't feel so efficient. Because one single Lv-45 burns for atleast 3 minutes for a proper escape. Which is pretty much the capacity of the tank. I'm sorry if i wrote it complicated. Will make it much more clear when i upload pictures. I would appreciate any help i can get. I don't know how Scott Manley can manage things with such small rockets. Maybe it is a matter of practice. Time will show Good day.