Do you use the LES?

[Harry Rhodan]

I couldn't care LES.

[SnakyLeVrai]

I use them yes, I also make bigger ones, like this LES for a 90 tons spaceship:

 

And I've also made a bottom-approach, putting the LES below the payload, I think it looks better. More streamlined, no need to separate it when reaching orbit...

 

[Thomassino]

Absolutely. I like realism, thus every manned mission MUST have some kind of abort mechanism... heck, I even put sepratrons on my shuttle to pull it away from stack if something happened.

[Superfluous J]

I've played with it (as I have every part in the game) but never used it seriously, after the first few launches when it was new.

It's a bit of "realism" I am happy to do without.

[StrandedonEarth]

If I put the LES on my rocket, then nothing ever goes wrong. If something goes wrong with my rocket, there's never an LES on it.

So maybe I should just slap an LES on everything, and nothing will ever go wrong! (with the boost phase, anyways)

[Godot]

When I have uncovered the techs to build Sepratrons (almost) all of my manned rockets get a form of LES ...

I also often use the stock LES, in connection with commando capsules that are covered in fairings during ascent (just like the original Apollo rocket)

[Geschosskopf]

23 hours ago, guitarxe said:

I find it a very neat idea and even put it on as many flights as I can, but I've never actually had the need to use. Did anyone ever get into a situation where they had to make use of it in the game?

I figure that because there's no 1.25m LES, the Kerbals got in the habit of not using them as they worked their way up the tech tree, so saw no need to use the 2.5m version when they unlocked it   From a practical POV, however, the stock 2.5m LES is unnecessary if you're any good at building rockets.  And even if you're not, the LES adds no functionality because simply spamming SPACE works fine.  The only reason to use it is for aesthetics.  And if you're going to do that, get a better one from a mod that has a built-in decoupler.

Philosophically, however, I figure if the WW1 pilots could fly combat missions without parachutes, my Kerbals can fly without an LES

 

[Kosmognome]

11 hours ago, Brofessional said:

The LES is never necessary because there are no random part failures or chain-reaction explosions in KSP.  Even in worst case scenarios like your boosters slamming into your core stage, the capsule remains unharmed 99.9% of the time.

If you are playing completely stock and have big rockets, wobble can be a problem. If you accidentally turn too hard, the rocket can start wobbling and break apart. If you play without reverts, the LES come in quite handy.

 

But in general, I use it more for RP purposes. If I have a manned craft, I have to have some abort mechanism.

[KerbonautInTraining]

14 hours ago, MaxxQ said:

Actually, the LES used for Apollo DOES lift the capsule up and to the side. 

I know, but it spends a vast majority of its energy pulling the capsule up unlike the stock one.

[Randox]

Sadly, no. I've yet to come across a situation where both the command pod needed to immediately separate, and I could react fast enough to issue that command. The parts we have to work with aren't ideal either, as they spend too much dV on a sustained burn, instead of the high thrust required to separate the command pod (quickly) from a powered vehicle that could potentially have a very high TWR. I'd rather have an ejection system that can accelerate the command pod at 10g for 2 seconds than one that can only accelerate me at 2g for 10 seconds, because the kinds of failures that can kill my crew usually happen at the end of the launch stage, when TWR is at it's highest.

I would also be a lot more willing to use something like that if there was an automated launch system that could detect things like exploding engines and fuel tanks, decoupler structural failure, and initiate the ejection sequence immediately. An option for the ejection thrust to be slightly offset would also be nice, so that the command pod gets out of the rockets way automatically, very important with a short burn duration where the user may not react fast enough to steer manually.

[Mitrae]

I used it once... Just for the look of a Saturn V replica

Edited April 17, 2016 by Mitrae

[AlamoVampire]

Stock LES? No. Novapunchs LES? Yes. Far more powerful and better size choices

[Guest]

 I use it on all my crewed missions. I really don't like killing my kerbs.

[DonaldPK51]

I use it to jettison the expendable descent module on my basic Mun/Minmus base design. On Minmus especially, it hurls it so far away there's no worry about debris to deal with.

[DunaRocketeer]

I have a launch failure mod installed - 1 in 50 launches will go kaboom, so I need some way of protecting my kerbals, but the stock LES doesn't cut it. I either use the upper stage rockets tied into my abort button, or else sepatron clusters.

[sumghai]

I always have some sort of LES on all my manned vessels, and in fact, every time I design a new craft or modify an existing one, I always conduct unmanned pad and first stage abort flight tests to verify that my LES setup is working properly. Partial flight automation by MechJeb helps ensure repeatable and reliable results.

My early Kerbal One through to Seven one-man vessels based on the Mk1 Pod used a set of Sepratrons as a pusher-style LES. An additional bonus was that these doubled as backup deorbit engines, after Jeb in Kerbal One accidentally mistimed a circularisation burn and ran out of fuel.

My current workhorse spacecraft is the three-man Kerbal Exploration System Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (KES-MPCV), which is based on my SDHI SMS mod. I experimented with the stock LES briefly, but found that its burn time was too short and the constantly-running pitch control motor meant that safe pad aborts were not possible. So instead, I used the longer-burning escape tower from Claria Lyrae / @stupid_chris's KSPX pack.

The latest version of my SDHI SMS mod includes its own LES, designed to allow safe pad aborts. It also has a steerable solid fuel-powered pitch control motor, allowing players to steer the jettisoned pod as desired.

 

[Daelkyr]

I love LES posts on my kerbbed rockets. I use HGR 1.25 m LES as quickly as it's unlocked in career and then use SDHI or the stock 2.5 m LES for my larger craft. I can't stand the idea of having a kerbal die if I can prevent it.

I like to play with DangIt! and a strong desire to avoid reverts. Once I even got the LES and parachutes mixed up in the 1st stage engines group with led to a hilariously frightening accident. 

[Draco T stand-up guy]

22 hours ago, ag3nt108 said:

Never used it or even considered using it.  Reverting a launch is too convenient

But difficult when you've turned reverts off

5 hours ago, DunaRocketeer said:

I have a launch failure mod installed - 1 in 50 launches will go kaboom, so I need some way of protecting my kerbals, but the stock LES doesn't cut it. I either use the upper stage rockets tied into my abort button, or else sepatron clusters.

Which mod would that be?

[DunaRocketeer]

It's called Kerbal Launch Failure, I'm not sure whether it's up to date, but there are other mods, Dangit springs to mind.

KLF will make one of your engines pitch over and overheat until exploding, causing varying degrees of damage to your booster.

[Orangepeel]

On 4/16/2016 at 3:04 PM, KerbonautInTraining said:

The stock one should take inspiration from the real thing and pull the capsule up instead of throwing it to the side imho. 

Well, It's actually safer that way. Imagine this: You're flying in your ship, but something goes wrong, and you need to use the LES. The ship's thrusters are still going, and your ship is going straight up. If the LES is propelling you straight up, you'd be stuck on top of the rest of the ship, and you'd probably get caught in the explosion. But, if it goes at a sideways angle, you go to side, away from the rest of the ship, and your kerbals survive. Get what I'm saying?

[Starman4308]

39 minutes ago, Orangepeel said:

Well, It's actually safer that way. Imagine this: You're flying in your ship, but something goes wrong, and you need to use the LES. The ship's thrusters are still going, and your ship is going straight up. If the LES is propelling you straight up, you'd be stuck on top of the rest of the ship, and you'd probably get caught in the explosion. But, if it goes at a sideways angle, you go to side, away from the rest of the ship, and your kerbals survive. Get what I'm saying?

Please note the time of the last post before posting. The post before yours was almost two years ago.

It was topical and relevant at least, but it's generally frowned upon to post in really old threads.

On my end: LES, all the time, tested on the pad and in flight before I ever put a Kerbal onboard. I take crew safety seriously.

[SiriusRocketry]

LES towers take up valuable space, which I need to place a docking port or parachute on. So no, I don't use the LES.

[razark]

Use the LES?  Once or twice.

I usually jettison it without using it, however.

[Geonovast]

14 minutes ago, SiriusRocketry said:

LES towers take up valuable space, which I need to place a docking port or parachute on. So no, I don't use the LES.

Attach the LES to the docking port in the VAB.

Set up action group that decouples docking port and activates LES.

[ZooNamedGames]

Just now, Geonovast said:

Attach the LES to the docking port in the VAB.

Set up action group that decouples docking port and activates LES.

I've used flipped decouplers to have the same effect and it can save an AG slot in the process as well as make it possible to stage off.