nadreck

I want Joolian trojans (particularly icy ones)

Not rocket scientists, engineers! In my experience scientists can and do read(talk to any about peer review work), on the other hand an attitude I found common among engineers was that manuals got thrown out with the packaging and wrapping - and anything that they couldn't figure out how to work, coax or kick into working was either "designed wrong" or "came broken".

If we see ice asteroids in the Trojan's of the Jool Orbit in .23 then I want to be able to extract hydrogen and oxygen from them in .24. We should also have the option to fuel LV-N's with straight H2 with an appropriate increase in ISP to 1100 and an appropriate decrease in thrust - also the option to fuel the LV-N with water at an ISP of 600 but higher thrust. Oh and fix the LV-N's to run on just oxidizer or fuel, and jet fuel

Ok, as a step towards resources how about ice asteroids at the Joolian trojan points?

Wow, that would be neat! That one is a frustration and now I have a work around. BTW OP (that bit of vernacular makes me think of Ron Howard in Andy Griffith) thanks for starting this thread it has been a gold mine! Here are my contributions: 1-) Use 4 radially spaced high power lights as landing lights on vertically landing craft, use them in the day time, and use get a tool that can help you align your craft on landing, determine (with a little practice) AGL altitude accurately, works day and night, and can help protect against "terrain" risk. 2-) RTGs make very solid attachment spokes for wheels on rovers (I have a rover/lander that uses them) 3-) an inline docking port (aligned to point up) is a perfect "control from here point" for VTOL craft using the 24-77 thrusters mounted perpendicular on a fuselage

Quick Progress Report: @ ~ 14h Total science to date: 660 Flights in progress: Manned: 4; Jeb' on his way to Minmus in a minimal lander, almost 3 days away, he may be overtaken by a far more modern craft on a hyperbolic course after the initial Munar science results are tabulated; Bill on a more extensive lander orbiting Mun batteries down to about 15% after doing and transmitting as much orbital science as possible given his fuel and power situation, Bill has decided to wait for an automated craft with more power and more fuel that is about 4 hours away to transfer to that for landing then hopefully rendezvous back with his original non automated craft to return to Kerbin with it's science while the automated one brings its samples back; Bob' on a slightly better equiped (solar power) and better fuelled lander heading for Mun Lodzer on an identical lander to Bob' to do science at a different surface site Probes: 1 - a Kerbal Capable automated Munar lander on its way to rendezvous with Bill who will transfer to this vehicle for landing and take off and send his more primitive vehicle with it's science data and experience back to Kerbin Fatalities to date: 4 Jeb - on an initial test flight with a badly attached chute - to date the only engineering fatality Bob - his capsule and science equipment under parachute but with no manoeuvering capability scraped the side of the north polar mountains on a descent the chutes were dislodged and the capsule tumbled and exploded Gillas - anomalously 'poofed' to dust on the tundra after falling a mere 1.25 meters Gillas' - scraped the side of what seems to be an impact crater beside a lake in the badlands. He had erroneously deployed his chutes before being sure he was past the hazard. He did not have enough fuel when he cut the chutes to manoeuver away and land safely Two more scientific instruments are in development and hopefully once the current wave of Munar exploration, observation, and experimentation are complete they, and a not insignificant amount of other technology can enable a 2nd wave of Kerbin centric experimentation, a 2nd Munar wave and an automated hyperbolic catch up launch to Jeb' on his Minmus mission before the first true interplanetary flights kick off with a flight to Moho in 4 or 5 days.

Oh and somewhere around 5h 30m Gillas 'poofed' to dust on Tundra for no reason. He went on EVA, fell off the side of the craft no more than 1.25 meters and just went 'poof'.

Ok, I started career mode a 2nd time on Monday and I am challenging myself to a space race against the KST (Kerbin Standard Time) clock and calendar. The challenges (all in a new game created in career mode): LAP 1 - Climb the tech tree fastest Objective to max the tech tree - 10738 science points in the shortest elapsed Kerbal time Scoring: 1 pt per minute that it takes Resolving ties: Count fatalities - lowest count wins LAP 2 - Flag the planets and moons - probe Jool and Kerbol Objective to visit and flag all astronomical bodies except Jool and Kerbal from the same game used for Lap 1 in the shortest elapsed time (my plan is to take some hyperbolic Kerbol escape trajectories to get to Jool and Eeloo much quicker than Hohman transfer orbits would) (LV-N's required). Also to complete this lap probes must have penetrated Jool and as close as possible to Kerbol. Scoring: 1 pt per hour to the last probe or flag Resolving ties: Count flights in progress - lowest count wins - if that is tied count fatalities and lowest count wins LAP 3 - Return at least one Kerbal from the surface of each body where a flag was planted Objective to bring a Kerbal back from each to the accolades of the Kerman clan Scoring: 1 pt per hour until the last Kerbal returns Resolving ties: the lowest number of Kerbals still in space (if that is tied of course the lowest fatality count) Lowest score in each lap wins I am tracking my progress in a thread in the mission reports section of the forum: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/59003-Kerbal-Space-Race

I am submitting what I just started as a challenge on the challenges thread, but I will track my progress towards my 3 goals in my second career session on a thread here. So see: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/59004-The-Kerbal-race-to-space-Lap-1-science-Lap-2-bodies-Lap-3-ticker-tape-parades for more details on the specifics of the challenge The Kerman clan's chief scientist has calculated the probability of an Extinction Level asteroid impact on Kerbin to be thousands of times higher than previously theorized and has convinced the government to back an accelerated space program with the triple goal of fully exploring the Kerbol system, colonizing the most appropriate bodies, and developing and refining the science and engineering needed to do that. In a speech that moistened the eyes of the aspiring rocket scientists and pilots, Werner von Kerman himself instigated the Kerbal Space Race. at 42m into the challenge I broke the 100 pt mark with my 5th sub orbital RIP Jeb, jumping on an untested rocket with poor stability and a badly attached parachute by 1h 20m the first trans munar class vehicle is launched with Jeb' hoping to pilot it efficiently enough to have enough fuel to land on and return from minmus by 2h in Jeb' is on an intercept trajectory with Minmus in a rudimentary craft with approximately 1000m/s delta-v remaining. He will be given a go/no go to land as soon as he reaches the Minmus sphere of influence. at about 3h Bill Kerman is launched in an upgraded trans-munar/minmus craft in theory this craft is expected to have enough delta-v to land, though not necessarily take off from Mun - though the hope is that exceptional operational efficiency might at about 3h 30m Bob Kerman bravely flew the mark 4 suborbital, actually it could orbit, but landing modes in difficult terrain were being experimented with as well as trying to access remote and hard to study areas of Kerbin geography/geology. This craft was equipped with the new materials bay and as it was parachuting into the north polar mountains, it scraped the side of a mountain and set off the parachute release mechanism then fell down to the next ledge exploding and killing Gillas. by 3h 52m a total of 288 science points had been earned and Bill Kerman is on an intercept trajectory with Mun at about 5h enough science had been earned to unlock the Stayputnik, the thermometer and the 48-7s engine a new orbital and an all over Kerbin parachute/gear/rocket landing craft is rolled out to continue testing and calibrating science equipment and flight/landing techniques while accessing some of the most remote Kerbin geography. at 5h 15m a remotely guided vehicle with an empty Mk 1 command pod and much superior delta-v and science devices are headed for Mun, potentially to rendezvous with Bill and provide a return craft for him.

I had success with it in 0.21.1 and managed to launch 4 landers with that sort of arrangement - haven't tried it in .22 as I now sling my Nerva's out on all four sides of my landers. I may be trying it again at some point again to send a fuel depot to Joolian space.

You need the smaller decoupler under each engine then the lower upside down quadcoupler

UH60guy, I didn't need my Kerbal to get to the parachute to re pack it, he just had to be in eva. Do your parachutes even go back up with the return craft?

I just did an amphibious landing/takeoff off from Laythe and did not have that problem. I did repack my chutes when I did my EVA to get a water sample and EVA report. Is it possible that repacking the chutes would help?

Got a nice shot of Jool coming out from behind Pol just before Jeb took "A cupola good ideas in a lander" down to get a surface sample.

So with their trusty landers, and atmosphere probes, Bill, Bob and Jeb arrive at Laythe in the good vessel DS - Groupo Niche: In orbit around Laythe (keeping it quite elliptical to save delta-V) you can see the Laythe Lander on the left end of the ship, and what I call "A cupola good ideas in a lander" on the right, that also is the heart of the interplanetary reach using 4 LV-Ns. 3 pods will return to Kerbin with the science (though that is a formality for style, since just with the Jool atmosphere probe, the landings on Laythe and Pol so far, the tech tree is maxed). Now Bill didn't quite get where he wanted to go on Laythe in his lander, but it turns out that it was amphibious even in launch mode. Note that to save weight (the parachutes that were used to reduce the landing thrust requirement to minimal were blown away before launch with radial decouplers) only the parachutes on the lander can remain. Hopefully there is sufficient fuel to soften the landing back on Kerbin. So, the sample from Laythe was some of that funky ocean. Bill complained bitterly of the smell in the lander can after he reboarded: Here the remains after the side tanks were jettisoned comes back to dock with the reduced ship (note that the big orange tank has now been discarded a it was empty by the time the final orbit around Laythe was established. Here the happy gang is at Pol: The support modules and Bill and Bob stayed in orbit while Jeb went down. Now they are back in orbit with Jeb sneezing all over the place after exposing himself to the dust from Pol. They are also having a bit of a discussion about what to do next. Jeb is positive they can manage manoeuvre to Val, land and take off and make it back to Kerbin intact, Bill thinks they should go for Bop and return to Kerbin, while Bob says go back to Kerbin now 'cause he just wants to have plenty of margin in case anything goes wrong.

Just finished tech tree for the first time but it took me more than a decade of Kerbal time and I haven't even got Bill, Bob, and Jeb home from Jool, they are orbiting Pol right now. When my new computer gets here next week I intend to challenge myself to starting a new career mode, and trying to max the tree in the shortest possible elapsed Kerbal time and to visit every body in the system (probes only for the Kerbol and Jool) in the minimum possible Kerbal time. Thinking of seeing if I can push it for Jool and Eloo with hyperbolic trajectories. I need to return a Kerbal from each mission to Kerbin though.

They are all clones

My first successful rescue mission. I find the 'culture', at least of the players who post here on the forum, all take a lot of care to rescue Kerbs who get stranded. Has anyone looked at the wording on ending a flight in Space Centre and the dialogue box and decided then to rescue their Kerb(s)?

Actually a very valid reason to have engines above the CG running is to have base engines supplemented by engines you are not throwing away with the base. You get a better overall delta-V if (with no extra weight penalty) you can use all the crafts engines at launch (like an asparagus design). My NERVA landers have their engines available during ascent phase, though I don't see a point in turning them on below 30,000M on Kerbin as their 240Kn really only contributes significantly when the last boost stage is running.

My first aerobraking without an intend to de-orbit and land would have been returning a two part lander from Mün.

Actually it is partly about the consumables, but not because the cycler is magically stocked by the space ice-cream faeries and tang sprites, but because the infrastructure to recycle consumables (hydroponic gardens etc.) would not need to be accelerated each trip. The same is true for the large extra mass required to make an effective centripetal habitation unit. Oh and active course management would be needed, in the Solarian and Kerbol systems. In KSP one option for dealing with a cycler, and one needed to plan two or more simultaneous interplanetary expeditions (or even simultaneous flights to Mun and orbital launches), is keeping a future manoeuvre timeline on paper or spread sheet and note each time you are considering a physics warp as to whether it would cross one of those points. If it does, then that is the time to go out to the Space Centre, switch to the cycler (or other vehicle) and do the manoeuvre. As a general rule you might want to avoid having certain types of manoevres overlap (landing, aerobraking, rendezvous/docking, etc)

I like the difficulty level of this first iteration of career mode, but yes I am a space nerd and have been all my life. I only started playing this in 0.21.1 and career mode made perfect sense to me, I chose to try it stock and give up mechJeb because I wanted to prove something to myself. However enough about me, I just want to posit about what sort of people find career mode, or even KSP in general fun, or not fun. How one deals with frustration and failure and how one responds to learning are somehow at the crux of this. There are people who get their enjoyment in KSP in the time they spend planning and thinking then having that borne out proving their ability to understand. Others are the shoot from the hip, charge down the corridor at the stormtroopers type who accept failure as a matter of course and who simply try again after blow ups, they get their fun not because they visualized an outcome and went through an iterative process to get there. It is possible that some people who might enjoy one of those two styles tries the other first. As for the charge that there is not enough documentation or enough learning structure built into the game, it seems to me that comes from a level of frustration, not so much correlated to the nerdiness of the player. Sure someone who can Google up an answer to their immediate question (which in general I have been able to when I couldn't figure something out) has more fun and being able to to navigate searching as research tool is a little nerdy I guess, but the fact is I have a lot of space knowledge and needed to do the googling, I still haven't mastered landing winged craft in KSP and I have my pilot's license. Others are stymied by the concepts of orbital mechanics, some with the requirement to think symetrically in designing boosters. However, the common threads I see for (and in) complaints are about: 1) getting a leg up in terms of learning how KSP and it's underlying physics work in a way that doesn't conflict with the users learning style and doesn't mess with their frustration tolerance levels 2) being oriented towards a specific goal (SSTO, orbital space plane, docking, landing, etc) and becoming increasingly frustrated by failure 3) seeing a lack of specific reward (particularly pre 0.22) beyond self actualization for in game accomplishements 4) a lack of gamelike rules and constraints, while some of us simply add our own (I have read people who have added rules for the use of Nerva engines or RTG, many of us try like hell never to "terminate" debris or missions, some expend inordinate efforts down to restarting from scratch if we kill a Kerbal) the point though is that many complain that the rules aren't there. and just since 0.22 came out: 5) feeling constrained by career mode. Why there is a feeling of constraint has to do I think with people comparing themselves with the most vocal, nerdy and successful of us, who, when we found we were given a set of rules under which there was a clear goal but constraints on achieving the goal we embraced and then started making it even tougher on ourselves. Those of us who already had some added rules (like point 4 above) tried to apply those rules, beyond that many of us dreamed up new ones. Then we were vocal about it, talked about our success and I feel that may have left many feeling like their enjoyment of the game was tied to following the same path or having the same enthusiasms.

Oops, just realized I didn't address the urgency of getting to it and rescuing despite the fact that it was bound for a Mun encounter that will send it out of the Kerbin SOI. There are two possibilities: 1) wait for it to go, then treat it like a rendezvous with another planet or if you are bold and have significant delta-V do what I suggested above, but once on a course that is closely matching the target vehicles add a manneuver right in front of your craft and adjust the lateral and prograde velocities of that manneuver to be on a hyperbolic orbit with a rendezvous point before the Munar SOI, depending how far out the target vehicle is when you start you could do this with as little extra delta-V to kill as 500m/s at rendezvous.

Been there with unmanned craft and manned ones (no fuel either once). Rendezvous between LKO and an eccentric orbit is quite easy, between two different eccentric orbits is possible but trickier, I find the best bet is to adjust the orbits so that the inclination is the same first, then to perform a manneuver to adjust get a closest approach when the rescue craft is at a point in its orbit closest to the PE of the target craft. Go for the closest approach when the orbits almost match, not the first closest approach that comes up as you add prograde vector in the "add manneuver mode".

I want Joolian Trojans!! Give me a 1km diameter ice trojan that makes for 16megatons of Lox and H2! A great basis for a space economy and with an ISP of 450 in vacuum it beats existing chemical fuels all hollow!