Stazi
-
Posts
29 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Stazi
-
-
http://i.imgur.com/kkYTOOH.png
Pulling is definitely optimal, to turn the thing just have lots of SAS/RCS and time, make sure to lock the pivot while turning and unlock while pulling.
I've not actually pulled this one but I have a 1500t E class I pulled into a 500km orbit by just sending 3-4 of these ships in succession when they ran out of fuel, it would be fairly easy to make a larger version with the bigger tanks and more engines though.
Is pulling it easier with the pivot unlocked then? I've kept it locked when I tried a tug for pulling, but I didn't think about trying it unlocked.
-
Easiest is pulling, you don't need too much clearance between the engine and the asteroid for it to still work. I set up 8 modules with rcs and 5 large ASAS each around it and then pulled. I could max throttle if I had RCS on but not without (and that's with 0.04 TWR). The least time consuming (but painstaking) way I found was when I was pushing it: I freed the pivot, went into IVA, zoomed in on the navball, and manually herded the center of mass marker around (aiming just to the left of it makes it move right, etc...).
Got any screenshots of what you used to move the Class E? I've got a 3,000+ ton rock that I managed to nudge into orbit using a nuclear tug, but it just doesn't have the d/v or thrust to handle anything more with it. I was planning on pushing it to LKO to use as the base for a station, but at the rate it's going I might be better off switching to a D or C.
-
This one had a bit of an inclination above Mun's orbit...
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y4/PokerTrann/KSP/polar-asteroid_zps22cc2636.png
I can't imagine an intercept that'll ever work for this one. Goodbye, ice caps and coasts...
So far 2/3 of my .23.5 saves have had a Class A get spawned in like that in an extreme polar orbit. The orbit is well inside the orbit of Mun so there wasn't any SoI changes from it to cause the orbit. I guess sometimes they just spawn in at that one spot to get thrown into orbit without any outside help.
-
I finally had a Kraken attack on one of my probes. Odd part was I wasn't controlling it at the time or anywhere close enough to have physics active on it. I just looked in the tracking station and saw it had split apart. Below was the result...
At the time of the screenshot, it was traveling at 41,521.75 times the speed of light.
-
Steam never needs to do a full reinstall just to update a game. It just replaces the files as needed based on what the developers give them.
-
I already addressed that that in the earlier post. Basically, right now it's not worthwhile to transmit anything other than crew reports; everything else you should bring back with you. And if you're bringing it back, you're not using energy.
The problem is the way the diminishing returns work for data. A certain research item might give 20 SP the first time, 7.2 the second, 2.5 the third, and so on for a total of ~30 science points if you just park the craft in one biome and take the same data point over and over again. If the sensor in question only has a 40% transmission efficiency, you'll get ~12 points out of that series of transmissions, which is clearly less than you'd get for just bringing back the 20-point initial data and never transmitting. Even the 60% efficiency sensors would result in less science if you spend energy to transmit them. So for a returning vessel it's only worthwhile to transmit data types that have 80 or 100% efficiency, like crew reports, but these also provide far less science than the various sensors you'll get later on. (Also, the last five sensor types all have such low weights that there's little downside to stacking many of them on each vessel. Goo is heavy, and the science bay is bulky, but the thermometer and such are practically weightless and take up almost no room.)
Therefore, the only times transmitting those other science types would be worthwhile would be:
1> if you're sending a vessel not designed to return AND you have no intention to send a manned mission to that body at some later date. (For instance, the probe I dropped into Jool's atmosphere, or the one I crashed into the Sun.)
or
2> A rover on a multiple-biome planet/moon other than Kerbin (at present, that's only Mun), where you might not want to go to the effort of sending multiple trips.
Otherwise, you're better off going manned and returning with the data intact; not only do you get more science from the single trip, but you also leave the door open to collect the full smaller amount for a second or third trip to the same location.
Actually, repeated transmissions will yield almost the exact same amount of science as returns. The difference ends up being in the decimals, so if you have the means to do it there's no reason to not transmit data at this time. Can't find the topic on it but someone already debunked the "returns > transmissions" thing.
-
My next objective is landing somewhere other than Kerbin or the Mun.
Despite having played the game for over a month now, I've still never visited any other planet or moon. I have put a probe into an orbit that could possibly intersect three different planets though, but that was back on my 0.19 save.
-
Since 0.20 I've been trying to keep space clean and not needlessly risk any Kerbals, this includes cleaning up debris when able. All my designs include a probe core in the final stage before the payload, simply to de-orbit things if I end up not needing the payload engines to reach orbit. Back in 0.19 I had a piece of debris actually come quite close to a station at a significantly higher velocity, so I'm trying to avoid having things like that happen again.
If I'm feeling extra super lazy though, I might just 'end flight' the debris from the tracking station to save time.
-
This thread gave me the gift of inspiration!
I present the Avalanche rover, with the capacity to carry two Kerbals, ample RTGs and solar panels to power it forever, a wide, low body to prevent it from flipping, and four landing legs only there to "make it look cooler".
You just gave me an idea... I'll post it later if I can manage to get it to work.
EDIT: So much for that idea. Was going to make a rover that could drive even if it flipped upside down, but it seems as though wheels in KSP only function if the 'bottom' of the wheel is in contact with the ground.
-
Does the satellite have MechJeb on it or any form of ASAS? I've noticed lately that MechJeb/ASAS can cause the AP/PE to fluctuate slightly due to the ship rotating around while trying to maintain a specific heading.
-
I'm... not sure what this is supposed to be...?
-
I don't have access to the wiki right now. Can someone check the atmosphere height of Jool? That number seems way off to me.
KSP Wiki lists the Jool atmosphere as "138 155.11 m" so 138.155km. Aeshi's numbers aren't off enough to really worry about.
EDIT: Ninja'd;.;
-
The ant. If it was radial maybe I would use it, but as it is right now I don´t.
Once I started to build huge lifters I quite like the 55. I had to use it once my twr dropped below 0.5 for my last stage, so I slapped 18 of them onto my last stage and volia, i had 0.9 twr. Sadly my lifter is unusable, unless you can bear with an 30 min ascend due to lagg.
The KSPX part pack adds a radial version of the LV-1 Ant, among other very useful parts.
-
Another way to do this, assuming your lifter has some fuel left, is to put a probe core on your lifter stage. After decoupling payload, shut the engine down, point retrograde, put throttle to max, reactivate engine then switch back to your payload.
Make sure you're not pointing prograde when you decouple or you'll torch your payload with engine exhaust!
I successfully use this technique from orbits as high as 200km- with a strong engine and fairly empty tanks it's amazing how much dV you can shed while still within physics range
Since 0.20 I've been playing with debris enabled, and I've been placing a probe core in all my orbiter stages to help reduce clutter by burning them retrograde once I release the payload.
You can even use the payload engines to give a small push to the orbiter stage to help shed some of its velocity before attempting to de-orbit it.
-
That's precisely what happened with the single player campaigns of the early Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon games of the early 2000's--people downloaded new weapon mods that had better accuracy, better penetrating power and lots of ammo...thus, they went through campaign in a breeze...but yeah, whole thing becomes pointless.
Yeah that's pretty much how most games become if they get over-modded. I lost interest in New Vegas and Skyrim because I spent more time testing and creating mods for them than I did actually playing the game.
Since 0.20 was released for KSP I started over fresh and have been avoiding any mods that would make things feel like cheating, like ridiculously efficient engines or parts. I've been sticking with KSPX, KWRocketry, KOSMOS, and MechJeb for 'repeat' tasks like launches of the same module or to test things.
-
For me it would have to be the white radials. My old tug was designed using them, and it was so inefficient that I scrapped the entire ship and rebuilt it from the ground up. I use the 24-77 engines for all my landers because they have a small profile and don't get in the way of other parts very often. The ION engine is standard on all of my satellites and deep space probes, even if the burn time for maneuvers with it can get quite long.
The rest of the engines I haven't really used much so I can't really comment on them yet, but I suppose I haven't used them since other engines seem to outperform most of them as it is.
-
I can't really see KSP getting "farmers" who sell persistence files. All it would take is one person to upload the file for free and everyone could get it without needing to pay someone else to farm for them. That and it's fairly simple to just edit a file or two and 'cheat' your way through things.
This actually makes me wonder how career mode is going to work with mods, since right now it would be extremely simple to just use mod parts to bypass any research or cost for parts.
-
After 0.20 was released I started over with a fresh save, and have adopted the "leave no Kerbal behind" policy. Just last night I went through a few different designs of a rescue ship built to operate within Kerbins SoI. It's still not working as well as I would like, since the dV on it is barely high enough to land on the Mun and return. I've also started playing with debris enabled again(yay for 0.20 memory optimization!) so I've been working on variations of the rescue ship designed to dock with and de-orbit spent stages and debris.
-
De-orbiting a tug that had a couple design flaws. I didn't think to attach a decoupler between the main tank and the capsule in case of an emergency, so I recovered the crew with another ship and landed them. The thing docked to the nose of the capsule is a small de-orbiter probe that has around 1800-2000m/sec of dV on its own, which gives it enough to reach most things in the Kerbin SoI once placed in orbit.
-
I can get all the tanks set up and the staging, but as soon as I try to add my fuel lines, they automatically go to 6 x symmetry. As soon as I move the cursor over my tanks, it automatically changes. I have tried to hot key X to change the symmetry, but it doesn't do anything. What am I doing wrong?
An easy way to set it up for six-way symmetry asparagus staging is setting the symmetry to two and creating a full stage with it. Then just Alt+left click the decoupler and place the rest of the stages using two-fold symmetry, setting up fuel lines and struts afterward. This has the added benefit of keeping the decouplers in groups of two for simpler staging, since you'll likely be dropping two tanks at a time.
-
Did anyone else notice the frowny faces on the strut bases?
-
Once you dock the two ships together, right-click on the two tanks you want to move fuel between while holding Alt. Then click on the [in] button on the tank you want the fuel to move to.
-
I could hardly sleep last night because I was up until about 7-8am using RCS thrusters to bring a tug back from the Mun. When it was over and I went to try and get some sleep, all I could think about was how to redesign the ship to have better dV so it doesn't get stranded again.
So no, you're not a bad person for having KSP on the brain. I'm sure a lot of the dedicated players think about it throughout the day.
-
After towing a lander to the Mun, I decided to return the tug back to Kerbin instead of just leaving it drifting in orbit. Took one look at the fuel and figured I had maybe 220-230m/sec of dV left in the main engines. Not wanting to strand the crew in space, and because I was feeling too tired to send a rescue, I set up a node to return to a Kerbin orbit and began burning through my RCS with small bursts from the main engines. Eventually they broke free from Munar orbit and were on their way back to Kerbin, where I had to repeat the same process to deorbit. The fuel barely lasted long enough to get the PE into the lower atmosphere, but once in atmo the drag was enough to bring them back to the surface with parachutes deployed.
Then I realized I had a Kerbal still on the Mun in the lander.
Asteroid spawning should be reduced...
in KSP1 Suggestions & Development Discussion
Posted
Stop tracking every asteroid that shows up. If you don't track them, there's a limit of about 10-15 "Unknowns" that can be spawned at one time. They'll eventually go away after some time has passed, and a new one will spawn elsewhere to replace it.