hubbazoot

In your persistent.sfs file in \KSP\Saves\default\ There should be a bit that\'ll look something like this: name = LM1 Debris sit = ORBITING landed = False landedAt = splashed = False met = 25.5199994295835 lct = 747.657894978483 root = 0 lat = 0 lon = 0 alt = 0 hgt = -1 nrm = 0.2346817,-0.8339807,-0.4994005 rot = -0.4874776,-0.2444381,0.5007009,0.6722457 CoM = -0.0004030367,-2.702126,-0.001496201 stg = 0 prst = False ORBIT { SMA = 686522.644843065 ECC = 0.056790084827483 INC = 0.62585617064119 LPE = 136.294885195864 LAN = 231.440224230999 MNA = 1.99312675605197 EPH = 773.097894409855 REF = 1 OBJ = 1 } PART { name = stackDecoupler uid = 4294864034 parent = 0 position = 0,0,0 rotation = 0,0,0,1 istg = 2 dstg = 3 sqor = 2 sidx = 3 attm = 0 srfN = None, -1 attN = bottom, 1 attN = None, -1 mass = 0.8 temp = 161.3903 expt = 0.5 state = 2 connected = False attached = False } PART { name = fuelTank uid = 4294863960 parent = 0 position = 3.56165764969774E-05,-1.06625986099243,-0.000182117641088553 rotation = 0.0001399906,-8.734037E-05,-5.284387E-06,1 istg = 2 dstg = 4 sqor = 2 sidx = 7 attm = 0 srfN = None, -1 attN = top, 0 attN = bottom, 2 mass = 0.3 temp = 160.8601 expt = 0.1 state = 2 connected = False attached = True fuel = -0.1683977, FLOAT } PART { name = fuelTank uid = 4294863936 parent = 1 position = -0.000303431006614119,-2.5819890499115,-0.0010031407000497 rotation = 0.0003026263,-0.0001738835,-0.0001152071,1 istg = 2 dstg = 4 sqor = 2 sidx = 8 attm = 0 srfN = None, -1 attN = top, 1 attN = bottom, 3 mass = 0.3 temp = 160.3447 expt = 0.1 state = 2 connected = False attached = True fuel = -0.2991953, FLOAT } PART { name = liquidEngine uid = 4294863912 parent = 2 position = -0.000705582671798766,-4.04639148712158,-0.00243949703872204 rotation = 0.00044756,-0.0001764518,-0.0001538282,1 istg = 2 dstg = 4 sqor = 2 sidx = 9 attm = 0 srfN = None, -1 attN = top, 2 attN = None, -1 mass = 2 temp = 159.703 expt = 0.5 state = 2 connected = False attached = True } }VESSEL { Remove the vessel you are interested in removing, and you\'re good to go. Make sure you\'re not ingame when you do this. Note: If the name is not '____ debris', it\'s an active ship. Also, keep a lookout for the 'name = mk1pod' bit. That\'ll clue you in that it\'s an active ship.

I have enough background knowledge to be conceptually comfortable with doing it. I was really wondering what your 'ascension curve' looked like as you climbed through different altitudes. (I.E. what you\'re looking for at each altitude.)

Kosmo-not, I mean this in the best way possible... you\'re disgustingly good at this. What sort of background has given you this 'knack?' I\'m going to an engineering school, but there\'s no aerospace study here, so I don\'t have much of a background in that. I\'m mostly curious about your orbital burns. I find that when I turn sideways as quick as you did, it doesn\'t work for me. My general approach is 90deg (straight up) until end of lower atmosphere, then 70deg through the next layer, then 45 deg until I reach my target Ap, I do my acceleration burn at my Ap to 'round it out.'

Kosmo, that\'s my general algorithm for ANY orbit.

Oh, I\'m not saying those altitudes I recommended are safe. I tend to hang out at about 8k for a munar orbit, unless I\'m landing and then I drop down to 4k for a brief stint. For kerbin orbits, I tend to hang around 73k for my low points. Allegedly, the highest point on the mun is 3285, and so the lowest I\'d recommend for a 'low-as-you-can-go' orbit would be 3300m. I did an orbital survey of the mun (lots of screenshots that I still don\'t know what to do with) at 8km, and even that high I felt like stuff was reaching up more than halfway to me.

What\'s your Ap and Pe? round orbits are very difficult to actually rendezvous with, due to the gratuitous rounding error at 2x and 1x time acceleration. What I\'d recommend doing if you\'re trying to match up with a round orbit is to make one that\'s just eccentric enough to be stable but has a matching Ap and a lower Pe. As soon as you either 'switch away' from the craft with the round orbit or accelerate up to 5x, it\'ll run on the rails. Here\'s the short version of how I do an orbital rendezvous: 1. Get into orbit, ~70km range (for me) 2. Match planes with the target orbit. Looking at your target orbit edge-on can make this much easier to find. 3. Match up Ap points, within about a km or two. 4. When you AND target craft are near Ap at the same time, accelerate to match up Pe\'s. 5. When target craft is within about 4km of you, you can start 'shooting from the hip' and accelerate straight in. Depending on how far away you are, this can take quite a bit of fuel. Don\'t worry about your map at this point in time, just keep trying to match position and velocity.

Atmospheric edge is at about 69100m, I\'ve been down to 60k before it started getting really notable, it depends on how much you wanna babysit it. Highest peak is 3285M on Mun, so as long as you\'re above that, you\'re good. You can 'Get away' with lower. The highest peak is at about the 45 deg north, so if you stay less than 45 deg away from the equator, you could squeal it down lower. I\'d recommend 69200 for Kerbin and 3300 for Mun. Kerbosynchronous orbit is at 2868.4km, 1008.9m/s. http://184.154.141.114/~kerbalsp/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page Oh, and remember, anything you put up into orbit before docking clamps you won\'t technically be able to attach to.

Inspired by, yes. I made this system myself, but I used the same concept.

^ That. When I was doing stage testing, some of the later empty fuel cans even got to an escape velocity from the sun...

Mun survey finished. After I pruned out all the guaranteed dark side shots (It was cool, they were all less than 900k, which I found interesting. Easy sorting though.) I\'m now left with 1722 pictures of the Mun. Each of these shots is 1600x900, and is ~1mb. I have about 2gb of data at the moment I\'m figuring out what to do with, and it\'s a little overwhelming. I\'m thinking I\'ll put them in a per-sweep folder format, as this will make matching up common sets much easier. If anyone has a suggestion of what to do with such gratuitous amounts of data, I\'d like to hear it. Here\'s a sample of one of the polar shots I took. These are about the darkest of the batch. The first spoiler is my thoughts on the first shot, the second two are pictures. I think that\'s the pit where the Munolith is, in the top right corner of the shot.

I wanna see how you did it.

These are moreso isometric shots, and I lack the technological knowhow to do anything much fancier than put them in folders by latitude

I just finished the survey, and my estimate was pretty close. It looks like the final image set size will be 1.5~1.7gb. Unfortunately, I already have a dropbox and that dropbox has tons of goodies in it. I\'m gonna start sorting by latitudes and get rid of the ones on the dark side here tonight.

Thanks for the plugin info, some of those are certainly interesting, but I\'ve been trying to do all this vanilla as some of the plugins feel too much like 'cheating.' The coordinates would be handy, though. Just an update on how it\'s going: I set up the polar orbit and have been going around for about two hours. I just watched as I passed by one of my past missions to the Mun, and I\'m getting a LOVELY band spread, just enough that every bit of terrain ends up going underneath the rover. I\'m not so sure about the max mountain height, though. There\'s something at ~50th south parallel that looks awfully ominous. The mountain in question is directly south of the leading edge of the Mun, if anyone wants to go do an in depth survey. From what little I\'ve been watching, I haven\'t seen anything too alarming. There\'s some very flat terrain for a lander followed by another rather large shield-hill at about the 20th south parallel. I\'m planning on doing a survey of Kerbin after this and seeing what info I can gather from a survey of that. We\'ll have to see how long this data takes to review, though. If I find anything remarkable, I\'ll note the latittude it\'s at and post a picture. So far, the most rugged terrain appears to be at the north pole, which is the most rugged terrain I\'ve seen anywhere. Right as I finished this, I passed my marker again. My spacing is PERFECT. If anyone wants photos of an area, let me know.

To those who are interested... I\'m scouring the Mun for Easter Eggs, good places to land, topo, etc. More info on project here: http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/index.php?topic=10493.msg158622#msg158622

Tweaked my orbit a bit so I could get all daytime shots.

So I\'ve decided to take on a rather ambitious project... I\'m going to screenshot every square meter of the Mun. I just got the orbiter set up at 8km altitude (highest terrain I\'ve seen so far has been 6km, so I figure that this is 'safe.' I aligned the pod to always be oriented 'north,' so there\'s some hinting as to what latitude the object of interest is at. I\'m running completely stock, so longitude will be a little more tricky to figure out. I flew right along the edge of the sunlight, so some of the shots will be a little dark, but I\'ll try to make sure they\'re good. Edit: I just changed the orbit so now I\'m flying in good daylight. I\'ll be able to get sunlit shots of every bit of Kerbin. I\'ll be skimming through the collection Friday night and posting the ones that are interesting. I\'d like to hear from you guys what sort of things would interest you (Peaks, Valleys, Poles, and 'Easter Eggs' will be posted, of course.) I\'ll be taking the shots at once every 10 seconds, or once every 5.6km along my orbital route. I\'ll be skimming through them tomorrow night and posting them as I see interesting ones.

I\'m curious as to what you did, really curious.

This is, by far, the QUICKEST trip to the mun I have ever made. Depending on how you manage the fuel in this craft, you can get to the Mun with 12 fuel tanks in ~8hrs, or get there in as little as 42 minutes MET. General instructions: Start sequence at full throttle, go to next stage every time you hear a set run out of fuel (every 6 tanks) For the quick landing time, make sure the Mun is almost directly overhead.

I got to Mun in 42:01, and that was cutting it really close. With a little bit better fuel management, I think I could cut it down further, but this is pushing the limits of what\'s possible so far. This is the fastest among me or my friends, and I\'d be happy to share my design with anyone who asks.

Ah, I totally forgot about one 'plane' of motion. If you were inside the SOI of Kerbin and accelerated time, this would only speed up rotational, but not translational, motion.

You launched west, you\'re bound to get some insaneo speeds doing that, seeing as you get an 8000 m/s boost. I, too, am curious as to what your full stage looks like getting off the bad. I\'ve gotten it down to 3:58:54 to touchdown.

Re-optimized my launch angle, managed to shave about an hour off my launch time. 4:40:05

Landed in 5:33:07, could cut an hour off of that with a little bit better aim, I spent quite a bit of time shaving off altitude over the mun.

Piecewise response! Here we go. Like I said in my orig. post, I assumed there was some form of spirit of cooperation between the players. I like that idea. It\'s kinda cheat-ish, but it would probably be the simplest approach. The 'true time' suggestion was kinda bubbled into my 'voting conditions,' i.e. the voting condition could be a 100% consensus. 20KM is miniscule. The only time I ever really get within 20km of another ship is an orbital rendezvous. It\'s 11,400km to the Mun. The picture I posted really is actually the best explanation of this. What happens in that episode of Star Trek is the crew comes across a planet that is in a time well. The planet itself is moving in an INCREDIBLY fast orbit, or appears to be, but the crew is unaffected outside of this region. They end up sending their resident AI down to the planet, and beam him back in about 10 seconds, but two weeks have elapsed on the planet already. So, if you\'re not technically 'in space,' yet, what\'s it to you if the planet is rotating fast? You and the planet are in your own 'inertial frame,' so it really doesn\'t 'matter' what the exact position/orientation of the planet is. Yes, it would turn the gravity wells also into time wells, but that seems the easiest way to allow multiple players to time warp and keep the 'system time' relatively intact. See above. Like I said, spheres of influence having their own time warps. I usually don\'t aim for a specific spot on the Mun to land until I\'m actually in its gravity well. When coming back, I don\'t aim for a specific spot on Kerbin to land until I\'m back in a low orbit around Kerbin, so I really don\'t care if the planet is spinning at 5000RPM while I\'m putzing to/from the Mun. The idea is, I don\'t think people are *too* concerned with the exact orientation of other astral bodies, so long as the position is right, which this time/gravity well system would allow for. That could make waiting for your 'special' friend who can\'t get out of low orbit very difficult to play with if you\'re trying to go to the Mun, and are really multiplayer-ing for sake of having someone to talk to.