Specialist290

This is the first I've heard of it. Then again, I haven't really been following any discussions on resources lately.

So a while back, I was trying to figure out the math behind aerobraking, and failing at that horribly. I ended up doing the next best thing and made a large handwritten table comparing the altitudes of various levels of atmospheric pressure across different planets. Because it was handwritten, this took several hours. Today I finally figured out how to set up a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet that could do all of the number-crunching in about fifteen minutes. Here are the fruits of my labor: This table shows the altitude for a given atmospheric pressure on each planet of the Kerbol system that has an atmosphere, with various points of interest highlighted in different colors. The index altitudes are marked by having their cells filled, as are those that are either in vacuum or "lithobraking" range. Someone with better skills than mine could probably have taken this and turned it into a nice, eye-pleasing graph, but I figured I'd put the info out there in case someone finds it useful.

Unless you've built your probes such that you have a margin of error thinner than a knife's edge, you should be able to get away with setting up your orbits so that they bracket the ideal launch time by a few days at most on either side, giving yourself a few hours between each craft's burns. (In other words, if you have for instance five probes, set them up so that one puts you at periapsis on the ideal orbit right on the tick, then one each something like three and six hours before and after that point.) It's likely that you'd have to perform some midcourse corrections anyway, so it shouldn't be too much trouble to correct for if you get your final escape burn in the neighborhood of your destination. Unless you're a math wizard, though, I'd advise trying to set up the first "kicks" as close to the launch window as you can. If you don't have it already, Kerbal Alarm Clock has a number of nifty features that can help with this. I'm not experienced enough with Protractor myself to really answer that last question, unfortunately.

Or just put the colony underground, or underwater.

I think the Surface tab of Kerbal Engineer Redux (includes much of the same info as MechJeb, without the autopilot) also shows you the surface coordinates of your craft in flight. I don't have that option set on my copy if it does exist, since I don't really use it, but I think it's there.

I can already hear my laptop's CPU sobbing at the thought. Speaking of water, though, it's really good at blocking radiation. Depending on the state of Laythe's plate tectonics, (i.e. if there are any "hotspots" near the surface of the crust like the ones Yellowstone and Iceland sit on top of) perhaps you could build an underwater base next to a geothermal vent and actually have a really cozy setup.

Eve and Duna are probably the two easiest planets to get to, but getting to another planet at all is something to be proud of. Good job! That said, if you're willing to do some experimenting (and maybe a little digging on the forums), you'll discover some tricks that might make your next mission a little easier. If you're interested, there's a thread in my signature that's got all manner of useful information.

Alternately, you could try turning your graphics settings down in the Preferences menu. Pointing your camera away from the planet helps, too, if that's an option. If you've got any other programs aside from KSP running in the background (like Steam, uTorrent, or things like that), turning them off will also help free up processing cycles for the game. I'm on a laptop, so I've pretty much gotten used to expecting lag, then taking countermeasures to reduce it where I can.

I'm on a laptop. Lag is noticeable, but only a problem when launching my larger vehicles, and I'm generally a patient guy.

True enough, but in an emergency, never forget the Kzinti Lesson. EDIT: Crossposted. Indeed, the only real difference between a bomb and a rocket is that the rocket has a hole for the explosion to escape out of before the whole thing breaks apart.

Very nice stuff. Looks quite impressionistic, which is a personal favorite style of mine.

One thing I've found that helps with placing panels edge-on is to turn off the angle snap. Otherwise, the game tries to do silly things with them. Another thing that helps is experimenting with the QWEASD rotational controls in the VAB, if you don't know about them already (and holding down "Shift" for fine-tuning). My own designs tend to be a bit minimalist: (Had a small accident while landing the "box" rover. It's a long story.)

The "skipping back into space" concern exists in real life because most capsules only have a limited amount of time that their life support systems will keep the crew alive. The capsule itself would eventually return to Earth; it's just that, by the time it did, the crew would likely have been smothered by its own carbon dioxide (or starved, or dehydrated, or... well, let's just say it's not a pretty picture). In KSP that's not as much of a concern, unless you're playing with other mods like Ioncross Crew Support.

If you're only trying to get that last bit into orbit (the capsule with the LV-N), you've got way more rocket than you really need. If you're trying to get something much larger into orbit, I'd advise launching each part separately with a smaller rocket, then assembling them in orbit. For that matter, your payload itself might be much larger and more inefficient than you really need to complete the mission. Once you're above the atmosphere and in a stable orbit, your engine's fuel efficiency (ISP) matters much more than its raw thrust, and the exact amount of fuel is less important than the mass ratio (i.e. the number you get when you divide the mass of the whole thing with full fuel tanks by its mass when empty). Both of those work together to determine your craft's "delta-v potential." There's an awesome website that explains exactly how that works in layman's terms. tl;dr: Your problem might be that you just have Too Much Rocket.

Thanks for the link! I'll take a better look at it later tonight, when my unlimited bandwidth kicks in, but it looks like it might be quite useful.

Nicely done, and congratulations! Docking really is one of the harder skills the game throws at you. Glad you stuck with it.

Nicely done! It's always fun to read mission reports like these. Some day I should go through that backlog of screenshots I've got and write up one myself.

Nicely done! From what reading I've done on the subject, there's usually a series of tracking stations on the ground that monitor the craft's trajectory and take readings relayed by the craft's instruments. They also typically cross-check their data by asking the astronauts to give the readings on the cockpit instruments as well if it's a manned mission.

Indeed. There's that whole "Public discussion of moderator actions" thing. Which is why this thread is now about this man's music (and his afro):

I think what Nova's trying to say is that: Yes, it's a technical problem, but it's one that's more trouble to solve than would really merit the effort. EDIT: Crossposted with the man himself.

I have to agree with Tristavius there. The problem isn't so much one of the information not being available, it's more a high "signal-to-noise" ratio, especially from people who take other's knowledge of technical jargon for granted. EDIT: And Eric S. makes a good point as well, which I think ties in with mine. Those who grasp these things intuitively are less likely to catch the bits that other people's brains get snagged on and try to smooth them out.

On a related note: What happens when you have something landed on the surface of one planet, then another body clips through it coming from "under" the lander? Has anyone investigated that?

Nice! Added to the list. Glad to hear it! I'll keep an eye out for other quality tutorials I can scrounge up. Maybe this thread will even spur some of the more knowledgeable users who hang out around here to write a few.

One frame a second? All the way to orbit? That is dedication, right there. I'd say this calls for nothing less than a full-on party.

No problem It's good to a series that specializes in one area, especially for teaching more advanced concepts and tricks to players who already know what they're doing generally but are looking for new ways to get even better.