RangerDanger75

Whoops! I was using my altitude for the calculation instead of my SMA. I hate making silly mistakes. Thanks for the extra set of eyes!

Ok I just read through the past 10 pages and didn't find any problems completely similar to mine. I'm using remote tech 2 (v1.4.0) with x64 KSP (v0.24) and I set up a quick 3 satellite network at an altitude of 1000km with the omnidirectional antenna that have a range of 2.5Mm. The satellites will connect with mission control, but not with each other. They are all within range of each other (~1.8Mm) and they can all see each other (I checked with the directional dishes).

I ended up hacking together some code to pull the data and create raw alarms in the alarm .txt All of that sounds very promising too, can't wait to see what comes out of this.

Is there anyway to import a large amount of UT dates? i.e. Launch dates for interplanetary transfers http://www.eiden.fi/ksp/phaseangle-Kerbin-Dres.txt

On the contrary, Oberth Effect states that rockets can do work more efficiently at higher velocities. This is why some satellites/rockets will do burns through gravity slingshots around planets/moons.

Damn I could teach someone all about the moon landings with these!

Something I learned the hard way was to keep adjusting your heading as you do your inclination change burn. Your orbital velocity should stay the same and your apoapsis and periapsis should as well.

I wouldn\'t really call it a failure, but it\'s always disappointing whenever my satellite constellations start to deteriorate. Especially since I put so much effort into them.

That\'s pretty interesting. I usually do the opposite, so my debris will just blow up. Not quite the same IRL =P

My two cents if you\'re still confused. A regular orbit looks just like a circle around the planet. Well you can also have elliptical orbits (which are just elongated circles). If you look at that curve, it\'s just a little less than half of an elliptical orbit. If Mars weren\'t there then the curve would keep going around until it reached it\'s starting point again.

Thanks to Maltesh, I just learned all about Kepler\'s third law! For those interested http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-major_axis#Orbital_period

3 Sustains: [list type=decimal] [li]I like the pictures to go with the instructions[/li] [li]I like the '10 Steps,' easy for the average Joe to follow[/li] [li]Good enthusiasm[/li] 3 Improves [list type=decimal] [li]Attention to detail, you 10 step plan is actually 9 steps[/li] [li]Your instructions were a little vague at points. For instance, it took me a few read-throughs and prior experience to understand steps 2-4[/li] [li]Don\'t be afraid to write more. The old adage, 'a picture is worth a thousand words,' is not necessarily true in this case. Explaining what you are doing and why you are doing it gives noobs more opportunites and a better chance to understand what is happening[/li] I would give it a low B (if you\'re familiar with the American school system).

How did you take into account the fact that the velocity wouldn\'t be constant in an elliptical orbit as opposed to the constant velocity of a circular orbit?

Pluto\'s way, although inefficient, is still perfectly valid. You do not need a 100x100km orbit to get to the Mun. In fact, if you really wanted to, you could have a 75 x 86 000km orbit and just wait around till your path intersects with the Mun. Again, not efficient, but it gets the job done. This is KSP though, efficiency is for chumps! ;P

My god, that is brilliant! I don\'t know why I\'ve never thought of that. The only problem I see is not being able to perform any corrections once the satellites have been deployed for a while.