antipro
-
Posts
554 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Posts posted by antipro
-
-
42 minutes ago, Krafpy said:
So if I understand correctly, extending my MGA to have custom planetary sequences ?
correct, for example:
- the user chooses the planets included in his Grand Tour contract > MGA-Planner provides the best sequence and the trajectories.
- the user chooses a specific planetary sequence > MGA-Planner provides the best trajectories.
1 hour ago, Krafpy said:It was something I was already planning on.
good to know.
1 hour ago, Krafpy said:As for the altitude of the flybys, I'm currently limiting the maximum altitude to two times the radius of the body, so that may be enough ?
no, it wouldn't be enough but it doesn't matter, it's not that important in order to complete the Grand Tours contracts.
I said "low space" because of I was thinking about how to get as many scientific experiments as possible.1 hour ago, Krafpy said:But I'll try at least to get the sequence input done as soon as possible.
Thanks.
-
Hi @Krafpy, I understand that advanced math is familiar to you so,
just out of curiosity, could you write a software similar to MGA but which solves the problem of calculating the best route for a certain Grand Tour?
That is, given a series of celestial bodies, find the best low space flyby sequence, or given the exact sequence of celestial bodies, find the best route? -
hi, for a reason that need not be explained, I have to decrease the total dV of this spaceship by a certain amount.
I choose to believe in the KER's values rather than in those stock ones that I don't trust so much,
and for the sole purpose of testing I decide to set the total dV to 10254 m/s.
Anyway before to proceed I only would like to understand why in the main window of KER, where the various stages are listed,
the stage 8 disappears and reappears depending on how much fuel is loaded/unloaded from the stage 9.
Can someone kindly make me understand?
Here's a short video that shows what I mean:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/p7aa594kwrrqgkf/KER dV.mkv?dl=0
edit: nevermind, I forgot I have a couple of stage 8 tanks with the same fuel priority of stage 9.
setting them to their default priority, changes that behavior a bit, anyway the stage 8 continues to
appear/disappear when I remove a certain fuel quantity.
Setting these tanks to a lower priority should increase the total dV, like stock dV indicator shows but KER says which decreases,
so now I'm also not completely sure about KER values correctness too.
it will only be my impression, but as far as I can remember,
when assembling spaceships with radially attached tanks and engines with crossfeed enabled,
there have always been problems or discrepancies with both the KER and the stock dV indicator.
as always I will go on by trial and error, quite boring. -
2 hours ago, Krafpy said:
I guess that on MJ's trajectory, the first maneuver (on Kerbin's parking orbit) is not only prograde but also have a normal component.
yes, it has a normal component of -35, and also the parking orbit is inclined by 25°, that saves about 150 dV compared to if I launch into an Eq orbit.
This is why the navball maneuver indicator is so close to the prograde indicator.
2 hours ago, Krafpy said:Thanks for reporting this problem. I'll try to work on it as soon as I can.
Thx to you for this software.
-
hi, if possible I would kindly request a new feature.
Initial condition: equatorial 120km LKO, example target: Moho.
Now wanting to use an Eve swing-by, it would be useful to have a tool similar to the "Advanced Transfer" but
that allows me to choose a specific orbital point where to encounter Eve, for example the Eve-Moho's orbital planes's crossing point.
So that I can use Eve in order to match the two orbital planes as well as reduce the Pe.sorry if this has already been requested.
edit: I would also like to have in the "fine tune closest approach to target" feature,
an option that allows me to select the orbital inclination or at least to be able to choose to arrive in a polar orbit instead of an equatorial one. -
On 8/17/2021 at 12:27 PM, Krafpy said:
I updated the tool so now the ΔV for circularization around the destination body is counted in the total ΔV.
good, but I still can't calculate a better or at least similar dV result:
MJ adv transfer: 2198 + 1967 = 4165 m/s (at 100km)
MGA: Ke-Mo: 5301 m/s
MGA: Ke-Ev-Ev-Mo: 4470 m/s
-
it seems pretty cool and it would be nice to have a mod like this, anyway trying with a Ke-Ev-Ev-Mo and Ke-Mo sequences,
I can't get a result better than a direct Ke-Mo MJ adv transfer at year 168 day 96. -
Just now, Serenity said:
Well if you right click on windows on the career file and see the date when the folder/files were created, then you have that date...right?
I also thought it was that simple but apparently it isn't.
Because there is no "career file", there's only a "career folder" but it's always rewritten and its date it is not reliable.
What I see is in the "Kerbal Space Program" directory is that, there are many folders, included the "Ships" sub-folder in "Kerbal Space Program/saves/(career name)",
whose creation date is 28/11/2020 and there are no other older items.
So like swjr-swis said, it's reasonably safe to assume this was the date I've started this career.
-
52 minutes ago, Serenity said:
I think in Main menu options you can select ''human'' years, not sure.
Thanks but this is quite well known.
However this doesn't help at all: I was asking how to know the creation date of the "career data", in order to know how many days have passed since I started my career. -
8 hours ago, Reactordrone said:
Career games start at year 1, day 1
Thanks but this is quite well known.
Although it seemed pretty clear, I forgot to mention that I was referring to the actual date, that of the Gregorian calendar. Sorry. -
How do I check when did I start my career?
The oldest item in the saves directory is the folder "Ships" which is 255 days old.
Can I take this date as the one of my first vessel launch? -
12 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:
there is only two files for each vessel.
the first is created when I open the GT window: "gt_window_SOME_NUMBERS.cfg",
the second is created when I press "L": "gt_vessel_APHANUMERIC_STRING_Kerbin.cfg",
the third is created when the Destination Height is reached: "gt_launchdb_VESSEL_NAME_Kerbin.cfg",
when reaching atmosphere limit, the ascent graph is created: "gt_vessel_VESSEL_NAME_Kerbin.png".
Then I Revert to Launch and press "Clear Cache" which deletes all files except:
"gt_window_SOME_NUMBERS.cfg" and
"gt_launchdb_VESSEL_NAME_Kerbin.cfg"
so yes, there are just two files, thanks beforehand if you will delete these too.
I just would like to have a button that let GT "starts from scratch", like MJ has. -
46 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:
I'm adding a Reset Guess button to the Setup window for the next release
could you please add a "clear all files included those relative to the current vessel" button too?
or maybe just organize these files in separate sub-directory named as the vessel name?
-
hi, coming back to the game for the first time after the last ksp major release, I've updated almost all the mods and dependencies.
is all apparently ok but every time I save a game and I paste a text into the filename box,
an MJ message never seen before, appears for few seconds on the screen top right.
it says: "Pasted text wasn't a MechJeb custom window descriptor.".
I don't know what does it means, maybe I have accidentally touched something.
Can I do something to avoid that message every time I paste a text?
-
I was searching for this thread appeared yesterday, it seems it has been moved from "The Daily Kerbal" to "Announcements".
It seems also some messages have been shuffled and they no longer appear in the original time order.
I can't even find my message in "my activity" page, anyway it has not been deleted, like some other, it has only been marked as "hidden" and the background color is now pink.
From what I remember, this is the first time I see a pink message.
These "hidden/pink" messages are however still visible for everyone, even for unregistered users, so I was therefore just wondering why they were marked as "hidden". -
using this new mod version for the first time, I can immediately notice an annoying issue:
the x-science window has a filter box where you can write things.
i.e.: "pol landed lowl -inf -polar".
The issue in this new version compared with the old one is that I can no longer scroll to the right in order to see and edit what I'm writing. -
31 minutes ago, Dr. Kerbal said:4 hours ago, SQUAD said:
* Fix the MK 1-3 pod flag.
Yay! Im so happy!
yes, I'm happy too for the pod flag fix, but not so much.
4 hours ago, SQUAD said:Even though we still may release a minor patch here and there when needed, with this patch we are officially completing the 1.12 update, as well as the sustained development of the original KSP, as we are now shifting gears towards the development of KSP2.
Before you completely abandon ksp, I hope you find some time to release a minor patch in order to fix the RC-001S Command Pod diameter which is too large for the 1.25m heat shield.
The RC-001S Command Pod is only partially protected and you always need to do a "brake maneuver" before entering Kerbin atmosphere at high speed,
such as when coming back from Jool system.
There are some other parts which should be resized, i.e. the AE-FF2, but the RC-001S is the most important, obviously imho.On 2/15/2017 at 11:53 PM, KerikBalm said:There are a few parts that seem to be just a tad too big/small for what should be the "standard" diameter.
Making the heat shield bigger isn't the solution... making that probe core slightly smaller is.
-
2 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:
New release (out of beta)
6.0.0.7
thx, but I have 2 questions:
I install from ckan, it doesn't work.
So I check for needed dependencies and I don't know for "click through blocker" or "toolbarcontroller" which I had already installed,
but during x-science installation ckan does not recommend or warn you to install, "spacetux libraries" too, which I had to install separately.
Is this normal?
Secondarily the "Eva Experiment" still does not appear in the "here and now" window.
Is this normal? -
2 hours ago, Tivec said:
This is only an option if you don't need those for gimbal, so, not a lot to do there if you rely on gimbaling engines for pitchover.
you're right, that's true, it was implied it is a workaround for this rocket only, al least for now.
to perform the pitchover, at least one engine, usually the main one must have its gimbal enabled.
at least on those rockets whose mass and dimensions are too high for which the winglets alone are not enough.
anyway I'm still trying to figure out what the cause of the rotation and the "not-rotation" is, I won't succeed but I will try anyway, testing my other previous rockets as well.
some of which don't even have side-mounted engines, on which I can disable their gimbal, others have SRBs that don't have any gimbal.
and almost all of the rockets rotate at launch. -
10 hours ago, Curveball Anders said:
I used to have severe issue with rolling during launch until I disabled roll authority on my AV-8 (and other fins/winglets).
I have no doubts and thx but disabling roll auth on all my 6 winglets doesn't solve, with this rocket.
Anyway I've done several tests with all the parts that have effects on the rocket movements, such as reaction wheels, winglets and engines.
I practically have tested every combination, enabling/disabling all the possible switch and at the end I realized that the only way
to have a smooth as oil, very fluid launch with no rotation at all, is to set Vectors engines "Gimbal Locked".
No other settings like disabling Yaw, Pitch, Roll "Actuation Toggles" has the same effect.
So, apparently and according to the tests I've done till now with this rocket,
I can have a pretty nice take off, with no longer ACW roll at all by just locking vectors gimbal.
-
4 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:
it doesn't cause any problems
I'm not so agree on the word "any", better "much".
if a rocket starts taking off, rolling, it's bad to see and, even if it's rare to happens,
a fin or other parts can hit a TT18-A Launch Stability Enhancer.
anyway. ok I'll try to workaround this rocket into another way. -
24 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:
Happens with Mechjeb as well
I wouldn't want to contradict you but with MJ I've never had any problems with rolling rockets.
With MJ the launches are always very fluid, while with GT there is always a small initial ACW rotation,
bad but however irrelevant in most cases, so I continue to use it, because even if, it is more performing than MJ. -
I've recently built a simple rocket to land on pol:
but since I've substitute 2x Skipper Engines with the 2x Vector engines, the problem of rolling rocket at launch, a problem I previously mentioned, it is much more amplified.
the rocket swings so much that it is ugly to see. Reducing gimbal to 0 makes the rocket roll less at the beginning but it continue for so long.
setting gimbal to something like 40 or so is a good compromise but still the rocket oscillates so much.
So first I would like to ask if GT takes control of "control surfaces parts" too in order to compensate the apparently inexplicable and constant, initial anticlockwise turn.
Secondly I would like to ask if it is possible to add an option to regulate the impact/force GT has on control surfaces and engines gimbal. -
I use CKAN MJ 2 - DEV Release and I often update it.
But today wanting to update it from Build #1077 to Build #1080 and
reading the last change log: https://ksp.sarbian.com/jenkins/job/MechJeb2-Dev/1080/
I see a red dot instead of the blue one and hovering the mouse on it, a box appear reciting "Failed - Console Output",
instead of "Success - Console Output".
What does it means?
Online Calculator for Trajectories with Multiple Gravity Assists
in KSP1 Tools and Applications
Posted · Edited by antipro
Nice, I've just tried the Ke-Ev-Mo sequence for the whole year 168 and I got:
Departure date: Year 168 - Day 219 - 00:29:05 UT
Total ΔV: 2688.0 m/s
Pretty amazing, isn't it?
Then I tried a typical easy Grand Tour seq. such as "Ke-Ev-Mo-Du-Ke" for the first 100 years and I got:
Departure date: Year 53 - Day 240 - 05:11:55 UT
Total ΔV: 8218.7 m/s
Don't know about the dV, anyway the complete Tour lasted 57 years cause after the Eve swing-by something went bad:
the Apoapsids became very high, more than eeloo's SMA, and just before return home it decided I have to
literally pass through the sun...this will hurt.. eheh..
It takes some time of my slow cpu to calculate 5 or more planets, but I will do other tests. It's just funny.
One thing, if I can say: many Grand Tours contracts end with the "return to kerbin" condition,
therefore it would be useful to be able to choose whether or not to add the last circularization maneuver in the Total dV.
cause in these cases, the last maneuver coming from deep space, is aerobraking and not circularize.
Provided that it is mathematically simple enough, the next step would be to add bodies that do not orbit the same body, I mean Gilly, Ike and Jool's moons.
edit: with the "Ke-Ev-Du-Ke" seq. it seems all went good.
Departure date: Year 99 - Day 408 - 04:58:52 UT
Total ΔV: 3743.5 m/s (minus the circularization dV) 3743.5 - 904.1 = 2.839,4 m/s