AlpacaMall
-
Posts
73 -
Joined
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by AlpacaMall
-
-
I'm making a reusable mothership for those long, interplanetary trips. Playing with (among other mods) OPM and USI-LS.
For a NERV-powered mothership, how much dV can I expect to be able to pack in the mothership's single stage?
-
KSP does not have a built-in “map” of relay stations.
The closest thing the game offers is KerbNet. A feature of KerbNet is that some probe cores will offer “anomaly detection”; Kerbin’s relay stations will appear as some of the anomalies detected by KerbNet.
-
The easiest-to-learn way of getting to Minmus would be an inclination change while in Kerbin’s orbit.
Once you’ve launched your rocket into orbit of Kerbin, select Minmus as your target. This will create two new indicators on the map (“M”) view; the ascending node (“AN” on the map) and descending node (“DN”), both in green. These two nodes indicate the angle between your orbit’s inclination and the inclination of Minmus; mouse over the node to get the angle.
Now, you want to change this angle to zero. Make a maneuver mode at the nearest of the two nodes, and use a radial (or anti-radial) burn to drop the angle to zero.
From here, you should be able to get to Minmus in the same way as you got to the Mun.
-
14 minutes ago, reducing said:
I have part failure mods, life support, etc and my ships never get close to 1000 parts. You're complaining about taking hours to load a single ship and I'm telling you that 1000 parts is probably the reason. Even a 1000 part ship in stock would have difficulty loading on a good computer, add in multiple mods and you are asking for trouble. I'm not sure how Kerbalism part failure works but if you need more than 2 of anything then maybe you should adjust the settings so its easier on your system. In Baris you basically get to the point where stuff doesn't fail as often and you can repair it with the kits the mod comes with so you stop needing a ton of redundancy.
OP does grand tours. “Just make the game less hard” isn’t really a good guiding philosophy for that.
Regarding part welding, it should still help in some cases. On landers with multiple engines, wouldn’t the loss of an engine mean you have to shut down the opposite engine to prevent asymmetric thrust? That’s two parts which can be welded together, since the failure of one means that both become unusable.
-
Once you’ve done that, another easy way of getting science is launching a manned pod into a low polar orbit, and taking EVA reports above each biome. You’ll need to be able to get into orbit first, though.
-
On 5/18/2021 at 11:02 PM, AlpacaMall said:
Alright, here's my submission to the Jool 5 challenge. (3rd level, no ISRU)
Ship used: The KSS-J "Orca", with a mass of 198.951t and a cost of 320,294, assembled in 7 launches for a total cost of 664,705
Crew: Jeb, Val, Bill, and Bob, plus the new hire Lanuki, known for being the only kerbal to return from Eve. (don't tell him he was meant to be disposable)Part 0: ships used
https://imgur.com/a/MDsgwC1Part 1: assembly and departure
https://imgur.com/a/ifb8b4ZPart 2: Laythe and Tylo
https://imgur.com/a/1ivb7YXPart 3: Vall, Pol, and Bop
https://imgur.com/a/B3J2w4lPart 4: return
https://imgur.com/a/cKTdzLgMods:
Gameplay-altering mods:
Kopernicus + OPM; never visited the outer planets
Navball Docking Alignment Indicator
Trajectories
ReStock (changes some part sizes, most notably the Poodle)Gameplay-affecting mods:
BetterTimeWarpContinued
Easy Vessel Switch
Kerbal Alarm Clock
ScienceAlert
Tracking Station Evolved
plus visual mods(no DLCs)
This was my third time ever visiting Jool, and I'd never actually orbited or landed on any of the moons before, so I'm surprised and pretty happy that I managed to make everything work my first time designing the craft. Of course, it did take far too many quicksaves to land sometimes, especially at Laythe.
(note: After taking admin strategies into account (40% science), my mission would've netted a total of 23458 science. If only I hadn't clipped a few of my science parts...)
Any chance for an update on this?
-
At the scale you’re building at, the guidelines for space station design are probably the best things to search for. The two big rules I remember are:
1) Minimize the number of lights
2) Minimize the number of open docking ports
-
What mods do you have installed? Asking in the relevant mod's thread is probably more helpful than asking in the general questions forum.
-
If the other methods don't work, the worst case scenario is that you use engines to brake in the atmosphere once you're down at parachute altitude. At 1000m/s, that's about 250m/s you need to shave off for the drogue chutes to open.
-
11 hours ago, AHHans said:
Another solution is to launch the arms as they are in a way that you can decouple them in orbit - where they would just drift uncontrollably without any external help. And then have a small tug that can dock to the shielded docking port and maneuver each arm to their destination.
Dammit, I knew there was something simple I was forgetting... Thanks!
16 hours ago, jimmymcgoochie said:Do you need shielded docking ports? If not, just use the normal version and the arms will be symmetrical, making assembly easier
Open docking ports are supposed to be murder on the frame rate, so I use the shielded ones to prevent that.
12 hours ago, king of nowhere said:You will need 2 docking ports on your arms: one to dock the ships, and one to dock to the station, because now you will need to dock them to the station. So, you have the arms with clamp-o-trons on both sides. And sticking clamp-o-trons to each other is not difficult at all.
That would work if I didn't use the shielded docking ports, which don't have a node in the VAB. That's what I was originally considering with the engineer; send the arms up with two normal docking ports, easily attach them, then have the engineer swap out the docking ports.
-
9 minutes ago, Serenity said:
You can use Radial Decouplers on those structural parts, with the separation/explosive side connecting on them
and at the back side of the radial decoupler you can have whatever you want, a rcs robot a docking port, up to you.
Then you can move them and dock them and then you can decouple and deorbit the few debris or destroy them from the tracking station.,
Put separation power to zero to avoid explosions.
Its a bit tricky so test with something small first to see how it works.
That was my first thought, but the bug I linked prevents me from doing that; the decoupler always stays attached to the arms, not the ship carrying them, no matter which way the decoupler is rotated. And since the decoupler is technically the parent of the arm, I can't use an engineer to detach it.
-
I'm building a space station, which will have six arms that ships can dock to:
At first, I tried launching the middle section all as one piece, but it was too draggy and wouldn't fit in the 3.75m fairing. So I launched just the core and put the arms on docking ports, to be sent up later.
However, now that the core's in its proper orbit, I'm having trouble figuring out how to launch the arms. The regular docking port is the only node on the entire arm, and so I can't find a way to decouple the arms from whatever ship I send them up in, due to this bug. Decouplers stay attached to the arms, and docking ports can't release the arms when placed radially.
The only solutions I can think of is to send the arms up with unshielded docking ports, and bring an engineer along to swap them out with the shielded ones, but adding six extra docking ports and a crew reentry pod seems like a hassle. Are there easier ways to put the arms on the station?
-
50 minutes ago, Kinniken said:
"actually getting stuff done feels impractical", you mean doing actual missions in RSS? If that's indeed the case I'm not interested
Oops, I meant using non-tweaked stock parts in RSS. It's definitely not impractical with balanced parts.
-
If you're still interested in RSS, I've heard good things about the SMURFF mod, which tweaks the stats on the stock parts to make them fit for RSS.
(however, like everyone else here, I don't actually use it; I mess around in stock/RSS, but actually getting stuff done feels impractical.)
-
I'm trying to figure out how the small hardpoint works. I set up the following seven-part test:
(textures from Restock)
Both hardpoints are oriented in different directions. The left hardpoint was placed normally; I put it on the central fuselage, then placed the left fuselage on the other end. The right hardpoint was placed in the opposite orientation; I first placed the hardpoint on the right fuselage, then connected it to the central fuselage.
What I expected to happen was that the hardpoint on one side will decouple the side fuselage, and the hardpoint on the other side would decouple itself. Instead:
Its larger sibling, the Structural Pylon, also exhibits this behavior.
Can someone explain what's happening here? I'd like to keep the hardpoint attached to the central fuselage, but the game doesn't want to let me do so.
-
Another tip I've seen is that open docking ports will drop your frame rate significantly. Try only adding the docking ports you're sure you'll need, or using the shielded docking ports.
But then again, if that were the case then I'd have thought the first station would melt your computer...
-
4 hours ago, Geryz said:
Secondly (I will probably sound very dumb for asking this), are you supposed to post your submission as a reply to this topic or as your own thread?
It looks like people have done both in the past; I've posted mine as a reply, some have made threads, some linked imgur albums, and some created entire videos and put them here.
-
2 hours ago, Irihi said:
Good idea, but my mission is already gone bye-bye. The ship in question is now orbiting kerbol, and scheduled for a burn to a Jool transfer orbit in a few days. I'd have to rendezvous in deep space...
In the future, don't forget that you can quicksave and revert to an earlier save! (In this case, it would let you start over and use the Oberth effect too
)
-
Alright, here's my submission to the Jool 5 challenge. (3rd level, no ISRU)
Ship used: The KSS-J "Orca", with a mass of 198.951t and a cost of 320,294, assembled in 7 launches for a total cost of 664,705
Crew: Jeb, Val, Bill, and Bob, plus the new hire Lanuki, known for being the only kerbal to return from Eve. (don't tell him he was meant to be disposable)
Part 0: ships used
https://imgur.com/a/MDsgwC1Part 1: assembly and departure
https://imgur.com/a/ifb8b4ZPart 2: Laythe and Tylo
https://imgur.com/a/1ivb7YXPart 3: Vall, Pol, and Bop
https://imgur.com/a/B3J2w4lPart 4: return
https://imgur.com/a/cKTdzLgMods:
SpoilerGameplay-altering mods:
Kopernicus + OPM; never visited the outer planets
Navball Docking Alignment Indicator
Trajectories
ReStock (changes some part sizes, most notably the Poodle)Gameplay-affecting mods:
BetterTimeWarpContinued
Easy Vessel Switch
Kerbal Alarm Clock
ScienceAlert
Tracking Station Evolved
plus visual mods(no DLCs)
This was my third time ever visiting Jool, and I'd never actually orbited or landed on any of the moons before, so I'm surprised and pretty happy that I managed to make everything work my first time designing the craft. Of course, it did take far too many quicksaves to land sometimes, especially at Laythe.
(note: After taking admin strategies into account (40% science), my mission would've netted a total of 23458 science. If only I hadn't clipped a few of my science parts...)
-
10 hours ago, Irihi said:
Otherwise I can try gravity braking or powered gravity braking around Jool, Tylo, or Laythe. I think 500m/s should be plenty, considering some people on this forum seem to be able to ping-pong around the entire kerbolar system with a kitten fart worth of propellant.
Gravity braking around Tylo/Laythe is probably your best bet; it's a lot less trial and error than aerobraking, and costs about the same amount. If done correctly, you can get a free Laythe intercept right after the gravity capture too.
10 hours ago, Irihi said:Here's another question that could save me several hours; If I wanted to put more big stuff on a ship (like more NERV's or something) that won't fit in cargo containers, can I just blast a big ball of tanks and engines into orbit, rendezvous, and then have an engineer assemble the whole thing? I did this with MechJebs after I got that mod, but those are small. What's the biggest thing an engineer can move around/attach/detach in free-fall?
Since they're too large for engineers to build, you can try assembling it space-station style; put your NERV cluster on a docking port (or multiple ports, if the angle's important) and dock the whole assembly at once.
-
4 hours ago, Hotel26 said:
prefer "form factor", which is much more important than mere appearance. It's much easier to fit a cylindrical 2.5m part into a space vehicle (not just space stations). You can see the seating is oriented this way, too.
Can you explain "form factor" a bit more? If I'm interpreting it correctly, then it means that the part isn't bulky and doesn't make placing other parts around it hard, which clearly isn't the case with the equally sized crew cabin:
Spoiler
a perfect fit!
Seating makes sense, but that's another preference thing; my kerbals don't seem to suffer from any negative effects even from sitting upside down, if my outposts ever came to that.
4 hours ago, Hotel26 said:I'd assume heavier due to "longer trip duration (space for supplies, storage) plus radiation/micro-meteorite shielding".
Again, makes sense logically, but these don't exist and protecting against them is down to preference.
-
On 5/8/2021 at 8:08 PM, rudemario said:
Does anyone know why when I plan an Aerocapture maneuver on Laythe with my SSTO and I get the X to be directly on a spot I want on my manuever, it moves later? While set to Prograde in the descent profile at 0 Degrees it changes to be completely off mark when I'm just about to enter the atmosphere. I'm still facing prograde; I don't know what's going on.
Something I've done to fix that is go through all the zeroes in the descent profile and just click each one and hit enter. Maybe it's showing zero when it's not actually set to zero?
-
Is there any advantage to using the 4-kerbal Hitchhiker cabin over the crew cabins?
I'd always assumed that it's designed as a space station module, and would be lighter than the airplane cabins. However, this doesn't appear to be the case:
- The Hitchhiker has a mass of 2.07t, or 0.518t per seat
- The Mk1, Mk2, and Mk3 crew cabins have masses of 0.91, 1.85, and 7.18 tons, or 0.455, 0.463, and 0.449 tons, respectively
The only use I see for the Hitchhiker is the 2.5m shape; however, given that the airplane cabins have higher heat tolerances and impact resistances, it doesn't seem like the Hitchhiker is meant for atmospheric flight, where shape and aerodynamics actually matters. That leaves appearance as the only possible use I can see for this part.
Is there something I'm missing? It doesn't seem right that the part is unbalanced in this way.
-
13 minutes ago, Rylant said:
Let me ask. I see it has built in transfer windows. I am not sure what I am doing wrong, but the windows seem off a bit. I used the alarm clock for a Dres encounter from Kerbin, but found that when alarm clock told me to go, the suggested time was off by like 35 days. I am sure I am just missing something here.
I recall reading that the KAC transfer window formulas don't take some factors like inclination into account, leading to them being slightly off. If you're playing in the stock system, you can switch to the "By model" setting, which uses actual in-game data instead of calculated windows.
)
"Deploy" elevons on planes
in KSP1 Gameplay Questions and Tutorials
Posted
What is deploying the elevons used for?