Midnight Star

*jumps into the middle of the thread while only reading the first 10 or so posts* I\'ve gotten a rocket up without a decoupler up and it works fine. As soon as I strap on that decoupler, when the inner tanks are almost empty, the decoupler fails and everything blows up into smitherings. The tanks themselves don\'t blow up, it says that the decoupler fails.

Does anyone else have trouble controlling their ship now? I use to be able to control the ships even without rcs units and it worked fine, albeit it was a little slow. Now, let\'s say I try to turn by pressing the D key. The ship starts turning but it also starts rotating and soon enough, I lose control of the ship and the only way to fix it is by using the engine. Another thing I\'ve noticed is how much all the ships I\'ve had enjoy breaking the connections between itself and other pieces, in particular the decouplers. I\'ve noticed with plenty of weight, the engines are fine. But as those tanks empty, the ship starts wanting to buckle under the added stress. And so far, all my ships enjoy rotating even with ASAS on. It\'s a nice little challenge having to completely change your rocket design though, since the added power of the new engines is too much for most of the parts to handle at full power. Lots of struts spam.

In the real world, both tanks would fall at the same rate until they reached terminal velocity :3 in which case, the full tank would have a higher terminal velocity and would fall faster.

Which is why I made this thread, I\'m wondering about what the math is involved unless someone has already done it. Moreover, I would like an educated guess rather than doing it 'the kerbal way' aka before I spent the next 5 hours launching ships up to orbit, getting it to 11kkm and seeing if an intersect vector appears. I figured that if you launched x minutes earlier than when the mun would appear over the horizon, where x minutes is the amount of time it takes to an altitude of 80km or a velocity of ~2100 m/s, it would work but it\'s a bit hard to get it to work, especially since it\'s difficult to determine the correct angle the mun needs to be at.

I think you\'re missing the point.... I know how to get to the Mun and Minmus. I\'ve done plenty of times. The point of this thread is that I\'m asking if anyone knows at what angle would it take so that I wouldn\'t have to make a circular orbit and just keep burning once I\'m burning at a pitch of 0 degrees or how I could find out using physics/math/etc.

Well yeah, that\'s kind of the point though. It takes fuel to make a circular orbit, wait and then burn towards the mun right? I\'m trying to figure out at which orientation of the mun will it take to lift off as if going into orbit (doing a gravity turn starting at about 15km and flattening it out at about 35km+) but instead of making a circular orbit, just keep burning until you hit 11kkm require to reach the mun. I mean, in theory, you COULD burn directly up to 11kkm and hit the mun if you waited for the mun to be the right angle, but you would be fighting gravity the entire time and would be less efficient The pic was a rough example that I did in 2 seconds >.> it isn\'t what I believe would be the actual method.

It largely depends on how big the orbit is. I can get it down to less than 25 meters difference without using RCS for a 6km x 6km orbit. For an orbit that is 2000km, I can get it within 100 meters or so using RCS. It seems to me that the higher you go, the less accurate you can get.

Well yeah, what I meant is something like what I attached.

I was wondering if anyone could give me some information on how to do a launch which would require no transfer orbit. While I\'m at it, any links to how to do this the hard way (actually doing math) would also be appreciated.

Holy f... Ok, how do I change it so that it always Stores raw data? I just realized after I left my laptop on for 8 hours that it wasn\'t on >.> I do hate how none of the options are saved when you close the program.

A black alpha channel would mean that it is transparent I believe. At least that\'s how the other channels work. And yeah, I\'m currently doing a full Min map at 10km and then I\'ll find the highest altitude on that rock and adjust the orbit accordingly. And then wait the 299 hours it takes for it to do a full orbit. Also, another question. If I cover the same area twice, is the data rewritten or is there multiple copies of the same data? I want to do several passes but if the data is just written down in the csv file as it arrives, I\'m not sure I would want to take the extra effort to do so.

Here\'s a fun glitch that happens sometimes in windows systems with transparency. It usually doesn\'t work and there are times where the system will show black and sometimes it will show true transparency. I opened up the files in PS and they are all transparent, that\'s where the problem is probably. I edited the image by putting a black background on it and it works fine now. So the original png\'s are transparent and should be black. That\'s why the bug is there. Also question, I\'m assuming that the best way to get the highest resolution image would be to have the lowest orbit possible and not warping correct?