RoboRay

I did some experimenting with PEG last night and learned some things... My manual ascents have not been as efficient as they could have been. PEG is getting me to the same orbits with extra fuel left over. For anyone wondering what we're talking about, there is an implementation of NASA's Powered Explicit Guidance algorithms that ran on the space shuttle flight computers for MechJeb's Ascent Guidance module. The details of it are found here: ttps://github.com/lamont-granquist/MechJeb2/wiki PEG is a little tricky to configure, because you have to tune the parameters to your vehicle characteristics and desired orbit. Solutions for some vehicle/situation combinations are simply impossible, so you may have to launch into a parking orbit then maneuver into your desired orbit. It's a really neat tool to play around with in RSS or 10x rescale games if you're interested in how ascents are done in the real world. It's probably not going to work well at stock KSP scale, though...

I haven't even played around with PEG yet... I'm still driving with pitch/yaw inputs into SmartASS SFC+. I should try it out.

Oh, they absolutely were. I had been thinking about cutting the S2 and S3 RCS propellant by 80%, which should have still left a little extra in the tanks, but figured that I would wait for heavier payloads to force me to do it rather than screwing with a rocket design that worked. The payload module is still mostly empty space at this point.

I'm launching early weather satellites for cash to upgrade the Tracking Station and Mission Control so I can try for a lunar flyby in my restarted RP1 campaign (now that I've figured out RP1, mostly...) My second-generation satellite launch vehicle uses a single LR-79 booster engine on a 2 meter wide tank for the first stage. Second stage is 1 meter diameter, powered by an AJ10-42. Third stage is an Aerobee in the AJ10-27 configuration. The launcher isn't much, but it's enough to put dinky 100 kg satellites into the 600'ish km, 45 degree orbit needed, and it's fairly cheap as well as quick to build. Well, it can usually reach the right orbit, if nothing goes wrong. And occasionally even if something does. On my latest mission, the LR-79 broke about halfway into the ascent, resulting in a major performance loss. It left me low and slow with the second stage ignition. The AJ10 ran like a champ, though, lofting my apogee nearly to the planned perigee. I ran the second stage RCS tank dry of peroxide to eek out every meter per second I could get. I knew I was going to need it. Approaching apogee, I fired the Aerobee and it also performed flawlessly. It got me a positive perigee, but not quite enough for a stable orbit. I still had 25 liters of peroxide in the upper stage, which had turned out to be excessive on previous missions, but I hadn't removed it because it provided a nice maneuvering reserve. Now, it just might save the mission. 600 km circular obit achieved, with 2 liters of propellant to spare! I jettisoned the third stage and deployed the omni antennas I slipped into the satellite design to turn all the contracted weather sats into a low-LEO communications cloud. Don't laugh! It's 1958 and nobody has invented the dish antenna yet.

The nice thing about SXT is that reuses stock textures rather than including its own. So, at least your RAM doesn't hate you.

Not much. I just started putting together a GSO comsat constellation... ...in 1960. The launch vehicle is basically a Titan, but using a pair of H-1 engines instead of the LR87. The LR91 second stage is topped by a restartable AJ10-104 inside the fairing to handle the transfer injection, plane change (I launched from KSC) and circularization at GSO. I was a little tight on Δv and with an abysmal surface-level TWR, so I added four Castors.

Having all these improvements in a new KER release for KSP 1.3.1 would be fantastic. It's probably going to be a while before RSS/RO/RP0 users reach KSP 1.4.x. I generally prefer KER HUDs to MechJeb HUDs because they are easier to read, but the KER in-flight Δv readouts being broken with RealFuels has forced me back to MechJeb. Would this just be a recompile, or would it require actual code changes? I won't beg if it requires code changes.

The LR-89s have about 10% more thrust than the LR-79s and the Isp is about the same (the 79 is just a second or two higher). My understanding from reading various RO/RP0 posts was that the LR-79 got better over the time and the LR-89 didn't as much. I haven't quite gotten to point of buying one and starting to R&D it, but if I can get by with investing in just one of two such similar motors, my preference is for the one with more to offer in the long-term. We'll see how it goes.

Absolutely. Fewer engines is definitely safer when probability comes knocking. I just lost thrust on an another RD-103M going for polar orbit. The bad engine held together, though, and I was still able to hold it on course and crawl into low orbit (two contracts for the price of one... first polar orbit and first solar powered satellite! Also brought along a lot more science gear to gather as much LEO data as I can transmit back.) I'm also planning to go for the LR-79 and LR-105 for my next rocket, for lunar probes and manned orbitals.

After dabbling in the Real Solar System using SMURFF for a while, I finally went all-in with Realism Overhaul and am running my first RP0 campaign. And, after almost a decade of sounding rockets, manned suborbitals in rocket planes, and much R&D... it's time to put up my first satellite! The two first stage boosters are powered by single RD-103Ms and the first stage core sustainers are two more RD-103Ms. Second stage is equipped with a pair of AJ-10-37s. Third stage has a single AJ-10-37. Fourth stage uses a pair of XASR-1s. Fifth stage is a single XASR-1. Sixth stage is a solid-fuel Aerojet X103C10. Man, things get complicated when engines tend to fail or blow up if you exceed their maximum rated burn-time! This wasn't designed to be an orbital launch vehicle... it grew into it. The little Aerobee upper stages began life as sounding rockets. Then I put them atop a single RD-100 for more altitude. The lower stage grew into the twin RD-103, and the AJ-10s were inserted in the middle. Then I realized how close I was to being able orbit a tiny probe with what I had, and added the pair of RD-103 boosters. 1205x5715 km orbit! Not bad for a first attempt.* I didn't even need the SRB kicker on the probe... I was in about a 160x1175 km orbit after the final liquid stage was done. *Or, the first attempt without any engine failures. I lost an RD-103 on my first attempt, an AJ-10 on my next two attempts, and an XASR-1 on my last failed attempt... Damn you, TestFlight! All stages had sufficient avionics for positive control throughout the flight, except for the kicker. I had to make sure to save enough peroxide for the final liquid stage to orient itself on prograde via RCS after coasting to apogee, before spinning it up to spin-stabilize the kicker.

ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS EXCEPT EUROPA ATTEMPT NO LANDING THERE You had one job!

I kind of wish that, maybe once a year, the forum admin would run a script that automatically locked all threads that hadn't received a new post in over a year.

No deliberate space junk. I drop all spent stages on impact trajectories, or give them the means to set themselves onto an impact trajectory if it's not feasible to just drop them on one. No suicide missions. Every crew-member has a way to come home. No reloading to avert a disaster or screw-up. Problems happen and I deal with them. Every manned launch needs an in-flight abort capability to save the crew. See #2 and #3. New launchers get unmanned test flights before carrying crew and new manned spacecraft get low-orbit tests of all features before leaving the SOI. See #2 and #3. Probes go everywhere before people do. See #2 and #3.

I went to the moon, but I have yet to do the other things...

The launch vehicle's wings have to be larger than the ones on the spaceplane atop the stack, yes. That would have been the case for Dyna-Soar as well.

* Updated map nodes to be visually different when behind a celestial body. Can we get a setting to turn this off? Dimming out the parameters text to make it hard to read is not a desirable feature to me.

Never say "never"... [Mission Album]

Oh, now how did I miss this? Looks very handy!

Perfect example! That attitude is exactly what I'm talking about. I'm not complaining. Yet, if you ask any question about future availability or (in my case) point out a flawed reason someone gives for why it's not yet available, you get accused of complaining. It's kind of ridiculous.

And there are people who use SMURFF for a stockish experience in the real solar system. Since RSS has no dependencies on RO, I always raise an eyebrow when someone says the next RSS release is waiting on a RO update. But it's not my mod, and I don't want to sound like I'm complaining.

Usually, yes. Gemini MOL was an exception, though that was an off-center hatch that would be closed for reentry.

I've been finding the hole in the center of the Dragon fuel tank really useful for tucking an LV-909 engine into on kicker stages... Have you considered including a variant of the Dragon heat shield with a matching hole in the center? It could be really useful for some lander designs.

Oh, and I didn't get any pictures of the launches, but here's the taxi taking the crew home... Unfortunately, because I was landing on munar farside in daylight, I'm landing on Kerbin at night. At least KSC has runway lights.

I came up with a new concept for a Mun-lander design, so I built it and took it to the Mun. Hey, that's Farside Basin down there! Can you believe that after playing KSP for five years, I've never landed in Farside Basin? Turn around! We're going to Farside Basin! Humph... It looks like pretty much everywhere else. Oh, well. I almost forgot the flag! Ok, let's get out of here. The Grasshopper lander stays docked in munar orbit for reuse by the next crew.

I'm doing a "no capsule landings" game, using only runway landings for crews, and sent my second manned craft design up to do some orbital surveillance... for, uhm, science. I'm going for a 50 degree inclined orbit to get some spy pictures of the Badlands. Just cleaning the lens. I've photographed my target zone, but have to spend the rest of a day in orbit to bring KSC back under my groundtrack for a daytime landing. Reentry checklist complete... all equipment is stowed. Tail surfaces deployed for high-AoA attitude. Cross-range maneuvering... my trajectory is bringing me down a little east of KSC, so I'm banking right to shift my track to the west. Still going Mach 2, will continue descending on this heading to get lined up with the runway. Three down and locked. Going a little fast, so I'll open the split-rudder brake. Let's get this film to the lab!