Joe_Bender

Just to flesh out my previous comment. I would consider that a day be used as a unit of time measurement for time warping. This would allow the devs to come up with a solution of calculating everything in game and its new position. Now how does one set this up? Easy. Hitting the ESC button, gets you the Game Paused dialog box with: Resume Flight Space Center Revert Flight Settings Now we just put another push button called 'Time Warp'. Clicking on this button, brings up another dialog box with a input section. The button would say something to the effect, 'Days for Time Warp'. You type in how many days you want to jump to the future and then you will see the 'loading screen' as the program does the math and when its done, you come back to the game and see the ESC dialog button which you would hit ESC to get out of and you are now closer to your maneuver node. Of course, the new button would have the old 'OK' and 'Cancel' button for obvious reasons. So for example, I have a spacecraft that is going to Eve but the launch window is for another 30 days, seventeen hours, twenty-four minutes, I would input the 30 days and come out of time warp with just seventeen hours and some change left till my node. That should give me time to back check my maneuver and then just ingame time warp. Why only 'days' for time warping? Cuz it makes it easier to calculate if you have a set value to put against all the other numbers the game has to crunch to make our internetspaceships fly.

Or 'time jump X days'? I think it would be better if the feature was in the ESC dialog box where you can end the flight or jump to the space center. The reason for this is because the game is paused at the moment and any time jump would only be a number crunch for the CPU with no graphics involved. And you wont have to leave the ship you want to time warp.

“First, I believe that this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal, before this week is out, of landing a kerbal on the mun and returning him safely to Kerbin. There is no strife, no prejudice, and no national conflict in outer space as yet. Its hazards are hostile to us all. Its conquest deserves the best of all kerbal-kind, and its opportunity for peaceful cooperation many never come again. But why, some say, the Mun? Why choose this as our goal? And they may well ask why climb the highest mountains? We choose to go to the Mun. We choose to go to the Mun this week and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too. Also mistakes will be made, others will be blamed.†~ John F. Kerbin ----------------------------------------------------------------------- I recall hearing this speech right after I became Director of KASA (Kerbal Aeronautical and Space Administration) and believed what our late president, John F. Kerbin said was true and possible. However, we have come upon a setback which may hinder our plans to expand further into outer space. MOHO 1 mission report: Objective: Place an unmanned probe onto the surface of Moho, investigate and photograph the Moho environment, return the data by telecommunications link in preparation for landing an excursion module with at least two Kerbals in the near future. Prelaunch: Per mathematical calculations and use of a ‘cheat sheet’ found in a drawer, Delta V data was computed to put a probe into LKO (low Kerbal orbit), eject from the planet, transfer to Moho, obtain a low Moho orbit, and land a probe upon the surface. As such, exact amounts of fuel were loaded upon the spacecraft with little overrun for any type of contingency. Spacecraft design: The probe would be using the Rockomax 48-7S motor with a FL-T200 fuel tank for deorbiting and landing only. The transfer vehicle will be built with one LV-N atomic rocket motor and one Rockomax X200-8 fuel tank. Launch vehicle will be the standard build of four liquid fuel boosters and tri-motor with Rockomax Jumbo-64/X200-8 fuel tanks. Mission: Vehicle launch was nominal with no errors indicated. Ejection burn from Kerbal was completed on time and no errors indicated. However, an error was found at median point of transfer flight. The orbits between the spacecraft and Moho were not coplanar. Investigations into the orbit path did show that the spacecraft would encounter the planet but not on an elliptical orbit. A decision was done to try to correct this issue with a midpoint burn of around twenty seconds. Planet encounter was achieved but the angle of attack was not in the Moho equilateral plane. A burn was planned at the PE to circlize the orbit of the spacecraft and place it within an acceptable altitude for probe landing. It was at this point that the amount of fuel in the transfer vehicle would not be enough to perform this maneuver. As the unit burned the remaining fuel, it was jettisoned and the probe motor was used. The probe began its descent with no issues. At the altitude of 2500m, it became apparent that there was not enough fuel left in the probe to achieve a safe and successful landing. The probe ran out of fuel fifty meters above Moho grade elevation. There was a major development that led to the mission failure. Diagnoses of mission: Errors – failure to fully design the flight path which lead to a fuel inefficiency and mission demise. Recommendations: Check and back check all calculations for flight plan and fuel usage. This will become more mission critical once we get ready to activate the next program. Thank you, Joe Bender Director Kerbal Aeronautics and Space Administration

Thanks!!! That helps me alot in planning on my ship builds

http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Cheat_Sheet Tell me if I am reading this map correctly. If I want to go from Kerbin to Jool and obtain a orbit, I have to have the following DV. 4550 m/s to launch and obtain Kerbin orbit 950 m/s + 965 m/s (1915 m/s total) to get to Jool 2630 m/s to slow down and get into Jool orbit I am not sure about the DV needed to fly from Kerbin to Jool. Would it just be the 965 m/s from Kerbin intercept to Jool section only? And what numbers do I use to get back? The same numbers, only in reverse? 965 m/s from Jool to Kerbin and another 950 m/s to slow down enough to enter atmosphere? Or just the 965 m/s?

lets see.......what does the RL ISS do? Science on earth atmosphere, solar system investigation, and of course, what do worms do when they are in zero g. Maybe something along those lines. Give the station a long term reason to be orbiting a planet. Other things that may be interesting. A station where you can build large ships in space. Except that you must haul the raw materials up from Kerbin to build whatever module you need. Each module would require certain items.....computers, shielding, wiring, and such. Then you have to supply the station with this material and then set up the build which takes x amount of time. When the part is finished, you just attach it to the project ship like you would in VAB. A station that looks out past the Kerbin solar system and discovers new suns and planets that would be reachable in further builds of the game. A station built in a planets orbit as a precursor to a base on the planets surface. A midway point between Kerbin and the base. If anyone has seen the movie 'Moon', we would have a surface mining program. But instead of shooting pods straight back to Kerbin, we must take them up to the station where freighters would return them to Kerbin. Besides, I would like to see more stock parts to build even fancier spacecraft. different shape fuel tanks, a round shape rod instead of the I beams which have their place but dont really work for antenna extenders. Or better yet, a extendable truss so we can extend antennas like in the Voyager probes. How about re-skinning the stock parts especially the ones that look like they were built in the 1800s. K, Im through.....time for more coffee.

So I got bored yesterday and came up with a stupid idea of using jet engines to launch a rocket. I built a two stage rocket with LV-T45 motors and then attached three jet engines radially around the bottom. I used structural pylons so I can dump the engines when they became useless. I also had to run a fuel line FROM the fuel tank TO the engines. As far as staging goes, I had the jet engines do the lifting with the T45 not firing at lift off. So when I reached around 20k in elevation, I drop the jets and ignite the rocket motor. benefits? I only used half the fuel if I went all rocket engines. Worth it? Probably not, but just for giggles, it was something different.

Its interesting......kinda like figuring out what my GF spent the twenty dollars on which I left on the table.

May I suggest you look up 'asparagus' staging? It would be more effective if you put boosters on the main tank that you jettison as they empty instead of trying to duel-prop your second stage. To do a tri-tank, just use the tricoupler and strut the heck of the tanks down at the bottom......unless you are launching a really heavy payload, three large orange tanks is just a little bit of overkill and youre just launching fuel.

If you end up in LKO (80km or less) and you still have the last lifting stage with you, using four sepatrons pointing backwards will be enough to deorbit that stage when you separate it from your space vehicle. 1. when you build your rocket, place four sepatrons on the final stage of your rocket, down on the lower end next to your motor and face the nozzles upwards. place them in the same staging as the decoupler for that unit. 2. launch into orbit, finalize orbit, and then rotate craft to prograde. 3. stage the tank/motor/sepatrons. they will fire and decrease the speed enough so that the last lifting stage deorbits. I havent tried this with higher orbits but it may require more sepatrons to get enough of a speed decrease.

I typically put four to six OX-STAT panels around my tugs or kicker units just for the simple fact that they need some power and I dont want to mess with deploying panels. I also use them on my landers.

When I started playing, I had to hit F5 (quick save) each time before I changed from VAB to launch platform or to space center. Now I can change screens with no issues. Wait.......that was for 0.19...............nvm (/me looks at the plastic bag full of brand new F5 buttons he ordered from Microsoft and wonders what to do with them)

This will be dealt with!

I use a cat food can fuel tank between the orange tank and my main motor. I also use struts to secure the two tanks together. I place four struts from the cat food tank top to the orange tank bottom because you will get part wobble when you launch.

Well, all I can say is that I have launched several vehicles with the Copula as the main and I did not have any issues with flipping. I take it that you are just swapping the dummy with the copula on a built rocket. Have you tried building a brand new rocket with the copula using the same parts and see if you still have this issue? When I experience flipping, it is typically because my rockets are flying faster than what they should be. The point of thrust is not inline with the rockets retrograde point and the rocket has >3.0TWR and the motor just pushes the rocket over......aka oversteer.

Well, I count six boosters with motors and possible one main engine but in the staging, it shows nine motors in the first stage. Do you have a tri motor setup on the main tank? If so, why? Also, you can combine stage five and stage six because you want the clamps to fire off when you crank the motors on. Besides, you dont need that many clamps, try three or two instead. Is the final objective just to attach the copula only to the station? If so, I would flip the copula upside down so that when you dock it to the station, it faces up from the center of your base. This is just some of my comments.

Wait.....what?

I would really like it if the skins on the stock parts were updated. Some of these things looks like they were stolen from the shops building the SS Titanic.

Yea, I cant wait to get a full set of 'bobs' on one of my ships. 'This is my brother Bob and my other brother Bob.' I have one right now called 'Orely Kerman'..........must be an Irish Kerbal....always happy just like Jeb......I bet he drinks alot.

Since I updated to 0.2, I dont get to see Jeb, Bob, or Bill anymore. Did they retire? (is the kerbonaut rotation on the fritz?) )

Was the bottom attachment node location fixed in the LV NB motor? It seems that when I try to decouple, the motor plodes cuz the node is too far up into the nozzle. I put a bug report on it but it turns out that the part isnt stock but part of this mod.

I just updated MJ to 2.08.........looooooove it! One question though, is there a manual or URL on the 'advance settings' on the RCS balancer? I set the 'overdrive' to 0% because it seems to me that causes the RCS to become Turbocharged.....not wanted.

I never strut my engines. I do strut the tuna can fuel tank to the orange tank to keep it from moving around though....four straps works for me.

or add a tiny motor/tank on the bottom just to help in slowing down the descent if it gets too fast with chutes alone....just crank it up before you land, no sense in wasting fuel when you still have ten thousand feet before landing.

And probably add a OX-STAT panel on the rover so it doesnt go dead on you. You never know when you might want to move it around.