Orc

Hi all and LordFerret in Particular. That is exactly the sort of helicopter I had imagined. It needs to be in the same colors as the vehicle and ground crew that move around the interior of the VAB, and needs to fly erratically with occasional puffs of ominous black smoke. Despite all this the Kerbal waiting to be recovered will STILL BE HAPPY to see it. What hidden dangers lurk beneath the otherwise tranquil terrain of Kerbin? Could these unseen terrors have something to do with the sudden urgency that Kerbals have about leaving their home world? Regards Orc

Hi all Since I first started playing KSP I always felt the game needed rickety looking 1950s style helicopters like the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky_H-34 flying in to recover the Mk1 Capsule from the sea, or grasslands. And I think Jeb should take out his fishing pole and get some quality fishing time done while he waits for the recovery team. Bob and Bill are just way too professional and will continue fretting about their precarious situation until they're back at the Astronaut Complex. I don't know what Val would do. Regards Orc

Hi to all and Sarbian in particular MechJeb is now working! Woohoo! Thank you Sarbian. Now I just need to learn to use the tools effectively. Thank you again. Regards Orc

Hi Sarbian Many thanks. I will give it a try as soon as the next launch window become available. Take care. Regards Orc

Hi all Please forgive me if my appeal for help is in the wrong place or otherwise inappropriate or impolite. I appealed for help in the following thread: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/162291-installed-mechjeb-but-cant-see-mechjeb-controls/#comment-3098143 Basically to summerize: I am running KSP version 1.0.5 on a Windows 7 Professional (64-bit) computer. I am using a Steam version of KSP but not the computer that KSP was originally downloaded onto. Steam is not installed on this computer either, if that makes a difference. I have tried using MechJeb2-2.5.6.0 and MechJeb2-2.5.6.1, which are (as far as I can tell) the appropriate versions for my version of KSP. I have attempted to install Mechjeb several times, starting with a clean copy of KSP on each occasion. After each installation the Mechjeb parts become available in the VAB as expected, but the 'tabs' or controls to adjust the Mechjeb don't appear. The error generated in KSP.log is always the same. I posted it in the above mentioned thread which is why I think people stopped replying to said thread. What am I doing wrong? Can anyone help? Alternatively is there an alternative Mod for me? I just want to be able to dock. That's all I need Mechjeb for. I can get two ships within 200 meters and 15m/s of each other fairly reliably. Getting rid on the remaining deltaV and distance has proven to be beyond me, which is why I need MechJeb's help. many thanks and regards Orc

Hi cliffdover I've been playing KSP for nearly 18 months now and still consider myself a noob but here is my advice: Go ahead and experiment. Either in Sandbox mode or in a Career game (remember that any flight with a unfavorable ending can be magically forgotten by 'Reverting' back to the VAB). Watching your rockets explode is almost as much fun as figuring out WHY they exploded. Start with the simple stuff first: one Mk1 Command Pod with one Mk16 parachute one TR-18A stack decoupler one RT-5 "Flea" Solid Fuel booster. Fit Mystery Goo Containment Pods to the Mk1 Command Pod for science. Use them on the launch pad, while in flight and once the Command Pod has landed. Send that to the launch pad and fly it. Learn how different piloting the craft is when you have SAS engaged as to not engaged. Try to land the capsule in different places around the KSC, so that your Kerbal pilot can hop out afterwards and collect a little Science from an EVA in a new biome. Then go back to the drawing board and replace the Flea with a Hammer and note the difference in acceleration and burn time, and how that affects your flight. Remember to spend your Science in the R&D to unlock more rocket parts and science gathering tools. Learn about staging by putting a stack coupler and a Hammer under your original Flea powered ship. This should get you enough altitude to get the Science points available in the 'Upper Atmosphere'. From this point you will start running into problems aerodynamics, heating and stability. For 'Stability' (i.e.: keeping the right end pointed toward space) there is a thread somewhere on the forums about 'why do my FLIPPING rockets keep flipping'. Aerodynamics and heating are part of the same problem. Your vehicle is going too fast through the atmosphere, which can't get out of the way fast enough. A rocket can tolerate a moderate amount of aerodynamic stress but excessive heat can lead to parts exploding (just as spectacularly as during re-entry). The only solution I can offer for this is to slow down a little or get out of the atmosphere sooner. Anyway, all of the above is the opinion of a noob. Take care, Regards Orc

Hi all I examined the KSP.log file and found the following: [ERR 07:54:55.236] AssemblyLoader: Exception loading 'MechJeb2': System.Reflection.ReflectionTypeLoadException: The classes in the module cannot be loaded. at (wrapper managed-to-native) System.Reflection.Assembly:GetTypes (bool) at System.Reflection.Assembly.GetTypes () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 at AssemblyLoader.LoadAssemblies () [0x00000] in <filename unknown>:0 Additional information about this exception: System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type 'MuMech.FuelNode' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type 'MuMech.MechJebModuleMenu' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type 'MuMech.ReentrySimulation' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type 'MuMech.SimulatedParachute' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type 'MuMech.SimulatedVessel' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type 'MuMech.FuelFlowSimulation+<>c' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type 'MuMech.ReentrySimulation+SimCurves' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type 'MuMech.ReentrySimulation+Result' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type 'MuMech.VesselExtensions+<>c' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type 'MuMech.VesselState+ResourceInfo' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type 'MuMech.SimulatedPart' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type '<>c' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type '<>c__DisplayClass40_0' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type 'DisplayOrder' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type '<>c' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type '<>c__DisplayClass29_0' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type 'Outcome' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type 'prediction' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type 'DragCubePool' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type '<>c' from assembly 'MechJeb2, Version=2.5.1.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null'. I can only assume that this is something bad that I've done wrong. Where do I go from here? Is there a specialist forum for this sort of thing? Thanks and regards to all, Orc

Hi all Thanks for all the advice and help. I am in fact stuck running 1.0.5. I had to use a laptop (notebook) computer in a unlimited public Wi-Fi space to do the original Steam and KSP download, and my home internet connection is simply too slow and too expensive to use for updates. And the laptop's networking has stopped working. The docking advice makes it clear to me that there are one or two more things I need to learn about Rendezvous before I can realistically expect to dock. To Ty Tan Tu: Thank you for your detailed explanations. I will be putting your words into action at the next available launch window. Kind regards to all, Orc

Hi all Installing a mod was not my first choice, especially seeing as my computer is a bit on the low-end in terms of specs. I don't think it has the horse power to accommodate too much extra. I don't have access to videos because I'm stuck on the ass-end of the Internet, and downloading them would be too prohibitive in (a) cost and (b) time. Yes there are still some places on the planet (Earth) that don't have access to affordable (or free) broadband-style Wi-Fi. But to answer Cpt Kerbalkrunch's question: I am capable of doing a pretty good rendezvous, enough to qualify to complete the 'Rendezvous two ships in orbit' contract. I can get a closest approach down to 200 meters and around a 15 m/s velocity difference and then I'm stuck. I accelerate (gently with a main engine using reduced thrust or with RCS) to kill off the remaining difference in velocity and suddenly the distance to target is growing or the velocity is growing. Do a quick flip around and reverse the changes and the same thing happens again. I can do this silly thruster dance until the ship runs out of fuel / mono-prop / electricity (or the crew mutinies) and not get any closer. If I look at how the other side of the ship's orbit is changing on the 'map' view I suspect the velocity changes are dragging the two ships' orbits out of alignment. What to do? Any advice will be appreciated. Regards Orc

Hi all After more than a year of playing KSP I am ashamed to admit that I still haven't managed to successfully dock two spacecraft. I finally downloaded and installed MechJeb, in the hopes that learning from the best would help me. However this has not been the case. I am running KSP version 1.0.5, downloaded from Steam some time (I think) in November 2015 to January 2016. I installed MechJeb from 'MechJeb2-2.6.1.0.zip' downloaded from the link provided by the KSP forums site. I have tried adding the MechJeb modules to existing and new ships in a Sandbox game, and to ships in a new and an existing Career mode Game. From what I read about MechJeb I was expecting tabs that would contain detailed controls to pop up, allowing me to tell the MechJeb how I wanted the rocket flown (in my case I want it flown until the docking port on the target ship makes contact with the docking port on the MechJeb piloted ship). The modules are clearly doing something because when I select 'Control from here' and leave the controls alone the ship in question does deviate from the course I was flying BUT doesn't get piloted into fatal accidents. This 'robo-controller' does not change throttle settings or executing staging, which suggests to me that those functions haven't been activated yet. If it makes any difference in the existing career game I was about halfway through buying all the 300 Science Points technologies, and had successfully landed a couple of missions on both the Mun and Minmus. Missions to Duna are on their way, and I have gotten the first Science Points from orbiting the Sun. What am I doing wrong? What have I (likely) screwed up? Any help would be welcome. Thanks. Regards Orc

Hi all Promise not to laugh at Orc but I have recently been playing: Sid Meier's Alien Crossfire (expansion pack of SMAC) Open Transport Tycoon Deluxe Less recently (but in 2017): Anno 2070 Neverwinter Nigths Startopia and wait for it: Wasteland (yes the original with 256colors 320x200 graphics). Take care, Regards, Orc

Hi all Excuse a foolish Ork if he has missed this elsewhere in the thread but has anyone mentioned Solar Thermal Tugs / Boosters? Almost all the benefits of Nuclear fission thermal with none of the problems, and if sensibly designed a reusable stage that can be refueled and used to send the next cargo trip to Duna ... sorry Mars. Basically big ass (big, like very big, but not solar sail big) parabolic solar condenser focuses lots of sunlight on a heat exchanger. Heat exchanger exchanges heat with cryogenic reaction mass that goes out of rocket nozzle very fast. Every action has equal and opposite reaction, STB and its cargo go in opposite direction. According to the smart people I first learned of the concept from the proposal is really only good for boosting cargoes out of LEO to the rest of the solar system. Their big plan was to design the system in such a way that the almost spent booster would do a hand-break turn on the Mun's (sorry Moon's) gravity well and come back to earth to be reused later. Over the course of a dozen missions or so it would pay for itself multiple times over. I can not remember numbers off the top of my head but the ISP was supposed to be very impressive and the over all performance about 50% of a nuclear fission thermal booster designed for the same application. With the bonus of running on Magic Sunlight and not Nasty Atoms ;-) Further off for more distance goals: Magnetic sails - huge (like multi-square-kilometer) arrays of super-conducting cables charged up with ridiculously high amounts of electricity. Interacts with the solar wind converting the momentum of the charged particles coming from the sun. Equal and Opposite Reaction results. Said to be of marginal use for a Mars delivery system if you discount the potential benefit that the sail offers any crew in the event of solar storm. Yep, the sail is a SHIELD against some of the badness that will kill your kerbals (sorry humans) in the event of a solar storm. When the numbers are run for use going out to the outer solar system the mag-sail looks much more attractive. More long term: the boosted Magnetic sail. When you absolutely have to get to Alpha Centauri in less than 999 life times. Get one big ass ship with an even much bigger big ass mag sail (or arrays of mag sails). Get several very big (and by big I mean very big) particle beam accelerators. These would probably be build on large asteroids, or even small moons. They would be supplied with power by stupendeously larger arrays of solar panels. These things are supposed to (in terms of charged particle release) OUTSHINE the Sun for suitable periods of time. Just on the tiny dot of space that is the target mag sail, but still.... Boost away. Thought to be able yield trip times to Alpha Centauri that are less than 6 decades. To slow down on the other end.... Well you might need to depend on the fact that the destination star is much bigger than Earth's. Or there are some complicated tricks you can do to 'tack' into AC's solar wind and whip your ship around for another decade or two of gravity-assisted slowing down. Another option is, if you can ignore silly things like test ban treaties is to use mini-nukes (0.1 kiloton wrapped up in lots of plasma producing material) to do an Orion-style engine with your Mag-sail. Might look pretty if observed from the other side of the solar system. Anyway, regards Ork

HI all I am a noob. I need to learn how to dock to go further in the game (i've landed on the Mun and Minimun and orbited the sun). I am playing the most recent version of KSP (1.1). I've followed the Docking Tutorial as taught by Gene Kerman. I use the maneuver nodes to get within 1 km of the target, and a velocity difference of 10 to 16 m/s. I am PRETTY SURE I've followed all of the instructions to the letter. So now I'm supposed to try get closer with the RCS, using H and N to speed up to slow down. Problem is the target gets closer and closer and then appears over shoot and I have to start adjusting my speed in the opposite direction. I can do this twisted little dance until the RCS propellant runs out and never get closer than 200 meters and 4 m/s. This is very frustrating. Is this just a symptom of a rookie pilot, or am I obviously doing something wrong? Or is Gene giving me bad (outdated advice)? Or do the Kerbals in the other spaceship NOT want to get rescued? Any help or advice welcome. Thanks, take care Orc

Hi all Recently started playing the full version of the game. In my search for more economical ways of reaching the Mun and beyond I took a ride on the Kerbal X (See: http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Kerbal_X ). The wiki page says it should be possible to get the Kerbal X to the Mun's surface and back home if you are careful with your fuel. I thought I was a reasonably decent pilot. Maybe I'm not. The best I can do is to get the Kerbal X lander stage back into Mun orbit before the fuel runs out. Even just orbiting the Mun can be challenging. I've modified the design to free up a little extra mass (swapped out the LV-T45s with LV-T3s saving 1.5 tons) and changing the Mk2 capsule for a Mk 1 (saving about 3 tons). The best I could do with that design was get the capsule back into Kerbin orbit (and not a stable one, the Mun would swing by and gravity whip the stranded capsule away after a couple of orbits). Am I a bad pilot or is this design no longer so good? It is a sweet ride to orbit. Thanks and regards, Orc

Hi all Thanks to all who helped me. I finally have KSP on my computer. I played for four hours last night. The different tech tree and (apparently) different aerodynamics and structural rigidity rules are going to be fun to master. Absolutely loving it. Much joy. Take care. Regards Orc

Hi all Forgive me if this is not the appropriate forum for this question. Has anyone else had trouble getting the STEAM version of KSP? I was able to register with STEAM, make the purchase and downloaded the STEAM app. And that is as far as I could go. I have a once-monthly two hour opportunity to download. I wasted more than half of that playing circular 'reset your password' with the STEAM app. Of cause the STEAM website doesn't have any real e-mail addresses to contact a real person. What should I be doing? Ask for a refund? Give up? Weep pitifully? I really, REALLY, REALLY want to play the full version of KSP. I WANT it more than any other Computer game I've ever wanted but I just can't seem to get it. Any help welcome. Orc

Hi all The objections to the space elevator mentioned above all apply to the 1980s concept of an elevator. The visions of death and destruction raining down are right out of Kim Stanley Robinson's Red Mars. Spectacular, awesome, fun but not up-to=date with modern thinking. Modern think calls for slight better carbon materials, nanotubes in the length of a couple of meters rather than the millimeters currently available. The 'cable' would in fact be a 'ribbon' composed of dozens of individual strands, held together by epoxies and by a series amount of criss-crossing reinforcement. The initial seed mass of the elevator was projected to be around 7 tons. The ribbon is slowly lowered (over the course of a couple of years) till it meets the ground station (an equatorial floating platform). In the meanwhile addition ribbon has been delivered to the satellite and crawlers start down the cable with the next ribbon, welding, gluing and spinning the reinforcements cross-overs as they go. Over a few of these mission cycles the cable is finally strengthened to the point were a single climber from the ground station can climb the elevator, deploying more cable as it goes. The entire construction period would take more than 10 years. Once it was done the cable would remain in a constant of maintainence and repair. This is not a product that is ever 'finished' - just like long steel suspension bridges are permanently being repainted with anti-rust paint. In the event of a cable failure the lower portion of the cable does fall to earth, but because it's mass is only kilograms for kilometres and not the tons described by KSR it falls to earth as so much black confetti, not a death dealing planet slicing blade of destruction. With the criss crossing reinforcement compromised and the tension gone the cable will quickly come apart. Obviously problems remain. The long term nature of the project is well beyond the scope of politicians and corporations who are worried about opinion polls and profits in the next quarter, let alone decades. The structure is also less capable than traditional elevator concepts, meaning lower tonnage, but then again it can also spawn addition elevators instead of relying on one vulnerable thraed. The materials don't yet exist. We are a lot closer to them than we were in the 90s, and a hell of a lot closer than we were in the 80s when the only material imaginable was a super double diamond helix thingie that was infinitely strong and infinitely expensive. The crawler tech would require some major work. Powering the damn things is still an issue. But mostly it needs people to stop laughing. The biggest thing elevator supporters and detractors don't get is that the materials that make the elevator possible automatically make OTHER launch concepts MUCH cheaper and safer. Why bother with an elevator when your regular space plane design is now 25% stronger and 50% lighter, or your standard disposable rocket stage is now light enough and strong enough (and empty enough) to fly itself back to the launch site? Building the elevator MIGHT JUST MAKE IT OBSOLETE. Anyways, YMMV, its all future tech, future fantasy right now, we can't even get reusuable rockets to land successful every time. Regards ORc

Hi all Besides for KSP (which has stolen all my game time since I downloaded it): Anno 2070 (can't play it because my desktop machine is broken) Anno 1404 (pale substitute for 2070) Startopia (which is fun and awesome in a cartoon type way). Past favorites - no longer playing or enjoying: Tropico 1 & 3 Neverwinter Nights (absolutely hate last chapter) Fallout2 Civ 3 &4 (5 sucked, especially on my limited hardware) Dark Void (awesome concept, very pretty, crippled by UI choices - can't play anyway because of broken desktop) I don't know if I'll ever go back to anything else KSP is perfect in everyway (and I'm only playing the DEMO!), Regards Orc

Hi all For early manned exploration, pre-colonization phase chemical propulsion is quite do-able. See Mars Direct as an example (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Direct). Admittedly Mars Direct DOES use a small-ish nuclear reactor at the Mars side of the journey to make sure the Earth Return Vehicle is fully fueled for the trip home. But many knowledgeable space technology specialists are certain that the same results could be achieved with large solar power arrays and/or just shipping more hydrogen fuel (12 tons instead of 6). And the nuclear reactor doesn't need to be a fission device. The plan as it was originally written could get away with using DIPS (Dynamic Isotopic Power System), which is basically a conventional heat engine generator running for the heat of RTG-like heat sources. Mars Direct is showing its age, as it is based on Shuttle-era technology and components. Someone could do an update assuming the availability of the heavy Falcon rocket from SpaceX. Another alternative is a solar thermal booster, which is like a NERVA, except that the nuclear reactor is 1 AU away and you needs a very big solar concentrater to focus its energy. The STB heats up liquid hydrogen to NERVA like temperatures using concentrated sunlight. It boost the cargo out the Earth-Moon system and then uses the last of its propellants to put itself in a free return orbit via a lunar gravity assist. It then spends nine months getting back to earth orbit after which it is docked with a fresh fuel tank and used again. The STB grants a significant boost in performance over conventional chemical boosters and doesn't have any of the problems assocciated with NERVA. Once serious colonization gets underway Aldrin cyclers boosted with STBs are likely to be the economical way to go, Regards Orc

Hi all Forgive for posting this question here but I couldn't really find anywhere else for it to go. I have scrapped together almost enough money to afford to buy KSP. There are two options available Steam or the KSP website. The KSP website appears to be more expensive (last time I checked) but Steam comes with its own baggage. Can the Steam version function without a persistent Internet connection? Which version will quicker/easier to download? I will have to do my download from an internet cafe or coffee shop where there is free, unlimited WI-FI access. My internet connection at home is hopeless too slow. I had to download the demo at a coffee shop. Can I backup my download and will it work when I restore it in the event of a harddrive failure? Any thing I've missed? thanks for any help and advice. BTW I am Orc and I'e been playing the Demo version (downloaded while at a coffee shop) since early December. KSP is the most awesome amount of fun I've ever had with a computer game. Kind regards, and keep safe, Orc

Hi all Before my desktop system broke I was playing: ANNO 2070, that was pretty much it. Now on my underpowered laptop I was playing ANNO 1404. And then I found KSP and I haven't touched anything else since. KSP is just way TOO MUCH FUN. And I'm only playing the demo (will get the real game when I can afford to). From what I can glean from other people's post the full game is going to be a ridiculous amount of FUN. Regards Orc

Hi Angorek All I can say is "FREAKING BEAUTIFUL". And "AWESOME". Some of those screen shots could easily be confused for the real thing.This page is going straight into my saved (and backup-ed) folder. Kind Regards, Orc

Hi all I've been playing the KSP demo for a couple of weeks now. I've gotten frustrated with the limited numbers of parts available, so I've been trying to change the .cfg files. I know I should I purchase the full game but i can't afford to for the foreseeable future. I've managed to change the crew capacity of the Mk1 Command Capsule, and managed to create a M2 Capsule that is identical to the Mk1, even though it should have had a different product write up adn supported a large crew. I managed to get the LT-1 landing Leg working fine, that was available in the Sandbox but not the Carear version of the game. (a) Can the demo be modded? (b) has anyone bothered? (c) am I being stupendously stupid in not being able to achieve more? Many thanks for your time and patience. Take care. REgards Orc

Hi all IF you want a reusable heat shield and you are doing a space plane or VTOL SSTO that brings most of its tankage back with it then your (Earth) design can get away with some semi-conventional alloys. ICONEL or some such was studied for earlier space planes, and for the space shuttle. The re-entry vehicle just has to be of a low-enough density that it can decelerate before the heat shield / skin starts to melt. On a aside I've been able to return craft from orbit and Mun flybys without a heat shield, some retro-rocket work and a lot of tanks. The important thing is to keep the engine and tank end pointing toward the direction of re-entry. If the vehicle slips around (capsule nose toward the ground) then your kerbals are about to get vaporized, or their parachute is which means they get to be vaporized when the capsule runs out of altitude. As always it worth noting that I am playing the demo version. Take care and have a good New Year. Regards from Orc

Hi all I'm playing the demo. Can't afford the full game for the forseeable future. Still having an absolutely silly amount of fun. Regards Orc