aluc24

Probus, I'd like to ask, is there any way to hide "empty" parts of tech tree? I'm not playing with every mod possible, and these empty unlocks in tech tree are confusing.

Thank you very much, Ferram. I think a lot of us would appreciate this effort.

All right... I'm giving up. I'll just do Hohman. If anyone finds an accurate and user-friendly solution, let me know...

I tried it - measured my ascent time and distance again (14:45 (found a way to ascent quicker than before)), after creating maneuver right before apoapsis and orbiting to t- launch time, distance to KSC was 855. I then added 170.69km as you suggested, and the next time I launched when KSS was 1025.69km away. Even with perfect ascent, missed target by 600km... Something is not right, and I can't figure it out yet. That's very interesting solution. But does it account for Kerbin's rotation?

+/- 33.69km miss is only possible if RELATIVE velocity between plane and the target is 2246m/s, and that is only possible if the plane is stationary for these entire 15 seconds. But if they add up during ascent, the relative velocity is already smaller, and hence the miss is smaller. Even if I can't get it down to 5km, it is still worth time and dV to try to get as close as possible on the ascent. As for automated pilot, I'm using both Mechjeb and Pilot's Assistant (since I'm playing with FAR).

Well, 33.69km missed is only if I miss the launch window for these 15 seconds, e.g. the SSTO is stationary Usually, these extra plus or minus seconds happen somewhere in the middle or towards the end of ascent, so they won't contribute that much to missed distance. Well, maybe it will be hard to shave it down to 5km separation, but worth a try. Aser gave a very smart and valid method. If he can clarify what to do about rotation of Kerbin when measuring the KSS-KSC distance once the dummy maneuver node is made, then we have a working method.

The 3rd option sounds really good. But the Kerbin will rotate (and so will the KSC) when KSS makes one additional lap to record distance to the target as you described. That will throw off the calculations. Am I right, or am I missing something? I perform very strict ascent profiles using precision autopilots. Ground-to-apoapsis takes 16min +/- 15 seconds on each attempt. I'd say that's close enough for a precision interception (if I know when to launch).

Wow. Just... Wow. I just viewed that album. Most impressive. But I must ask: how did you plan these slingshots in the first place? I mean, how did you know that these planets will be in correct positions that many steps ahead, and that required slingshot altitudes won't be below surface/inside atmosphere?

That is very interesting solution! But could it be modified to use something else instead of landmarks? In my case, these landmarks happen to be in the middle of the ocean.

Actually, it holds pitch correct. It's the yaw that causes problems. I've tried increasing yaw Kd to 1.0, but it still cannot hold the attitude, it starts oscillating on yaw axis. What Kd value would you suggest? And... Sorry for bugging you with this but hopefully it will help improving your great mod.

Hi all, I'm sure this has been discussed before, but I really couldn't find any definitive answers to the issue except for "guess until it works". I have build my first SSTO (level 6, with no upgrades to hangar), that is capable to reach 100x100km orbit with around 120m/s dV to spare (not including deorbiting burn). That is pretty tight. I want to use it for transportation of crew and stuff to the KSS (Kerbin Space Station) I've built before. It orbits Kerbin at 100x100km altitude. My SSTO takes around 16min to reach apoapsis where it can perform circularization burn. The question now is - how do I correctly time the launch so that at the time of circularization burn, I'm as close to the target as possible (preferably under 5km). I'm using simple target distance between my SSTO and target. Once it goes down to a certain number, I launch. But it will take my ages to determine the correct separation by trial and error. How do I calculate how far away my target should be at the time I start up the engines on the runway so that I intercept it as close as possible? As I said, target orbit is 100x100km, and my SSTO reaches it's apoapsis in 16 minutes from the moment it starts rolling on the runway.

Yes, I have the 1028 version, and the latest FAR. Still, the water seems to have almost no resistance. Why does FAR influence water at all?

I see. Thank you for explaining it. But then, how do I set up Pilot's Assistant so that it would hold correct attitude when still in vacuum and in upper atmosphere when re-entering?

I'm not sure, but I think I've got a bug report. It appears that with FAR and KSP 1.0.5, water resistance became weird. I crashed my plane several times into the water, and as cockpit broke off, it started gliding at 50m/s in the water, barely slowing down (taking like 5 minutes to come to a full stop). Has anyone else noticed this?

I see... But why does it lose control even in vacuum? For example, preparing for reentry, I point my craft manually in desired attitude, stop all rotation with stock SAS (works fine), then input the exact numbers into Pilot Assistant, and engage it. And then it starts wobbling my plane around, moving further and further away from desired attitude with each oscillation. What am I doing wrong? At what altitude do you engage it? What settings do you use? Because I can't even make Pilot Assistant work in vacuum (preparing for reentry).

Crzyrndm, great mod. As I installed FAR, I find myself unable to fly without your great autopilot. Just a quick question, if I may. I'm now designing SSTO spaceplanes, and it appears that Pilot's Assistant has some trouble at keeping correct attitude at very high altitudes (50-70km). I'm not sure, but I think it doesn't use reaction wheels at all, just control surfaces. Correct me if I'm wrong. With that in mind, how do I set up Pilot's Assistant so that I can make a 40° AOA reentry? I can't find any "AOA hold" button, and as I said, at high altitudes, autopilot struggles to keep correct orientation.

Hey Slash, I have tried your spaceplane one more time, and I just can't get it work. You said your ascent profile is 10° pitch all the way, engaging afterburner at 290m/s? Well, with dry mode, that single Panther doesn't reach anywhere near that speed. The speed starts dropping at 190m/s. What's the secret? Are any of fuel tanks not full? Maybe you could upload your craft file, please?

I see, that must be it. It will probably show up soon enough.

Great stuff, Snark. Could you please make this mod CKAN available?

Hello, I'm playing 1.0.5 with these new Kerbin Space Station contracts. I've already launched a station, and now I got a new contract: send up 4 Kerbals. To complete it, there are two checks: "Crew: at least 4 Kerbals" and "Dock with Station Core". So, I sent a pod with 4 Kerbals, docked with one of several docking ports on the station, and transferred them inside. The "Crew: at least 4 Kerbals" is checked as complete, but "Dock with Station Core" is not. I've tried re-docking with different docking ports, but it makes no difference. The station is named "Station Core" and it's type is Station. So I'm not sure what is wrong here. Am I missing something, or is this a bug?

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned on this thread already, but the main problem with Moho transfer is that Kerbin and Moho has high relative inclination. You can make a fairly cheap transfer burn, but capture burns are usually insane. The solution: burn at Ascending Node until your Kerbol periapsis reaches Moho orbit, even if it doesn't intercept it. Then coast to periapsis, and adjust apoapsis so that you intercept Moho after a number of orbits around Kerbol. Capture burn will be quite cheap. Same goes for return to Kerbin. The downside is that this might take many years. The upside is that you can do it with around 4000m/s in total (one way).

Tried it with Panthers. At 5° attitude, plane levels out at 12000m and 600m/s with no overheats. Fuel consumption is lower, speed is higher, engine weight is actually less. Is it just me or are Panthers overpowered? Sure, they're next tier after Wheesleys, but usually new tier parts don't make older ones obsolete in KSP.

[quote name='BlueCanary']Maybe the engines being so close together is causing problems? If they were more seperated, maybe with some winglets added to the engine to radiate away heat, would that help?[/QUOTE] Well, it's internal heat, so I'm not sure if that could be it... [quote name='samstarman5']It sure does sound like the Wheesley is your culprit. If you are close to the next tier of aero-engines, then there is nothing wrong with taking your design over to sandbox and trying it with a higher-tier engine type, and see how it performs. Can just call it computer simulation. Don't give up on this design. That is a nice build, and having it at 30 parts is a boon in itself.[/QUOTE] Okay, I'll have to do that. Anyway, it somewhat beats the purpose of a low-tier plane. I really wanted to make a supersonic plane at as low tier as possible :D

[quote name='sal_vager']How hot do you get? I'm only checking with the Aeris 3A currently but the internal temperature seems to stabilize just above 900k and skin at 720k at 8km and 330m/s.[/QUOTE] I'm not sure how to view temperatures in numbers, but the bars fill up all the way, and parts explode, starting with engines.

[quote name='Rocket Farmer']I was just doing a wheesley test contract and noticed the same issue. Internal temperatures climbed whenever I pushed over about 330 m/s (about the speed of sound) the internals started hearing up faster than the external skin. This occurred at 3,000 m above sea level so being low isn't the answer. It probably is a hard cap allowing short term bursts of speed but not long-term cruising. Alternatively maybe try going higher. I was able to get wheesleys cruising over 12,000m with an optimal flight pattern. Going higher with significant deployed radiators might help while not running at 100% thrust.[/QUOTE] Thanks... Tried going higher, but it's impossible to sustain supersonic speed there. It appears my high-speed plane idea will have to wait...