How often do you use Mechjeb?

[RoboRay]

I use it most of the time. Do you think Neil Armstrong was steering the Saturn V during launch? It was under fully automatic control until it was in orbit. Similarly, they didn't just eyeball the moon and take their best guess as to when to boost for TLI, they had computers in Houston figuring out exactly when and how long to burn, and the PNGS controlled the engines. About the only time an Apollo 11 astronaut was actually manually controlling their vessels was during transposition and docking maneuvers, nulling a few residuals, and for the last 2.5 minutes of the landing.

I figure if they had similar systems for Apollo, why shouldn't I use it?

Of course, the astronauts also learned how to do those things manually, practiced it regularly, and actually performed some of those supposedly automated tasks by hand a few times.

Which saved Neil Armstrong and Dave Scott on Gemini 8 when the spacecraft decided to start an uncommanded roll leading to a 60 RPM tumble that forced them to shut off the orbital control systems and manually get the spacecraft back under control using the Reentry RCS.

It's one thing to use automation to lessen your workload by taking care of things you do know how to do. It's something else to use automation as a crutch for things you can't do.

Except maybe as a learning-aid.

Edited September 18, 2012 by RoboRay

[PakledHostage]

It's one thing to use automation to lessen your workload by taking care of things you do know how to do. It's something else to use automation as a crutch for things you can't do.

Spoken like a true professional.

[khearn]

Of course, the astronauts also learned how to do those things manually, practiced it regularly, and actually performed some of those supposedly automated tasks by hand a few times.

Which saved Neil Armstrong and Dave Scott on Gemini 8 when the spacecraft decided to start an uncommanded roll leading to a 60 RPM tumble that forced them to shut off the orbital control systems and manually get the spacecraft back under control using the Reentry RCS.

It's one thing to use automation to lessen your workload by taking care of things you do know how to do. It's something else to use automation as a crutch for things you can't do.

Except maybe as a learning-aid.

They learned to do some of those things manually. But they didn't learn how to launch manually, they had no option to take control until after MECO. Up until then they were "spam in a can" and the only thing they could do was twist the abort handle and hang on. Well, above a certain altitude they would have also needed to manually use the RCS to get the capsule oriented blunt-end forward after the launch escape tower had fired.

But you're right about the astronauts being able to do much of the other tasks that the computers normally did. Attitude control, such as the Gemini 8 example was definitely one. They also backed up the computer on any course change burns like the TLI, hitting the manual start and stop buttons at the same time as the computer issued the commands, just in case. They could certainly have done those burns manually, given the correct data.

And the computer was certainly no substitute for Neil in the last few minutes coming down on the Moon. The computer could have made a soft landing, the Surveyor probes made "soft" landings under computer control (sometimes they bounced a few times, but Jeb would have enjoyed the ride). But in Apollo 11, the computer would have set them down in the boulder field around West Crater, which could well have been a disaster. The Surveyors also had an annoying tendency to land in craters with fairly disappointing views. Having a man at the stick for the final stage of the Apollo landings was vital.

But I don't think the astronauts ever had the ability to calculate when or in what direction to burn for course changes. For that data they relied on computers 100%. There's no way they would have manually taken a sighting on the moon and said "Yeah, I think now's about the right time to fire for TLI. Hang on!" like we have to do without MechJeb.

What would be nice is to have a MechJeb-- that does the calculations for you and tells you what heading you need to point and how long to burn, and let you to the piloting manually. Maybe in future versions, when we have Gene Kerbin in Mission Control, they can provide that kind of support.

[PakledHostage]

But I don't think the astronauts ever had the ability to calculate when or in what direction to burn for course changes. For that data they relied on computers 100%. There's no way they would have manually taken a sighting on the moon and said "Yeah, I think now's about the right time to fire for TLI. Hang on!" like we have to do without MechJeb.

Sighting off the Mun is a rudimentary form of celestial navigation, and they did make extensive use of celestial navigation.

You can adjust the angular displacement between the start of your TMI burn and the Mun very accurately by adjusting the altitude of your parking orbit. You can develop your own program to calculate the length the TMI burn required to efficiently rendezvous with the Mun. I wrote my own, but there are others out there.

And I know I've over used this example but it continues to be relevant to these discussions. Here's a free-return trajectory that I flew around the Mun back in January, long before MechJeb or the Patched Conics trajectory projection system even existed. Per the challenge, I jettisoned everything but the pod and parachute immediately after completing my TMI burn. I had no way to adjust my trajectory after that but the boys still made it home on the first try. That was only possible because sighting off the Mun is an accurate method of navigation.

Edited September 18, 2012 by PakledHostage

[RoboRay]

What would be nice is to have a MechJeb-- that does the calculations for you and tells you what heading you need to point and how long to burn, and let you to the piloting manually. Maybe in future versions, when we have Gene Kerbin in Mission Control, they can provide that kind of support.

That is exactly what I want... a Flight Computer, preferably with it's own trajectory-prediction map screen, so you can plan your burns and transfer orbits, then have it put a flight-director marker on your attitude indicator, along with start/stop timers for your burns.

Of course, that function can be more or less accomplished through trial-and-error in conjunction with the Quicksave feature.

Edited September 18, 2012 by RoboRay

[CobraA1]

Well, I started the game not using it, and got to the Mun and Minimus without it. So I know how to handle the craft manually if needed. And I'll likely do stuff manually every once in a while.

But I do use it. Especially now that I'm using the Kethane mod and need to land at a precise location.

And actually, MechJeb has taught me some things I didn't really know much about before. Gravity turns, docking, etc.

Why? Because MechJeb gives a lot of feedback on how well you're doing. I have numbers that give me important info. And I really didn't know how to do a lot of stuff when I began playing the game.

MechJeb also helps with the tedious parts. Do I really need to manually perform all of my piloting? Not really. I'd rather focus on the mission.

[TinfoilChef]

That is exactly what I want... a Flight Computer, preferably with it's own trajectory-prediction map screen, so you can plan your burns and transfer orbits, then have it put a flight-director marker on your attitude indicator, along with start/stop timers for your burns.

Of course, that function can be more or less accomplished through trial-and-error in conjunction with the Quicksave feature.

I have to agree with this.. an onboard flight computer to help plan orbits, transfers, rendezvous, burn times & such. Something like the Transx MFD in Orbiter 2010. It helps plan the flight and show's you what direction to burn but you determine the goal of the maneuver in question and handle the actual flying yourself.

[Vocosol]

I used to use it, but decided that half the fun in KSP is trying to learn how to not blow up your pilots. Now I just try and do everything manually- usually with disastrous results.

[Tim_Barrett]

I don't like depending on it, and it doesn't work for planes anyway.

[Nibb31]

I use it pretty much all the time. I learnt how to do all the manoeuvers manually, but now, I pretty much concentrate on the mission, building a craft that for that mission, and getting where I want to get. Many missions involve multiple launches (like having fun with the docking mods, refueling, Mun base delivery, crew transfers, or building a comsat network). Flying the same rocket manually 5 times in a row can get boring, especially when you have a robust design that works well and there are no surprises. So it's nice to just lean back and let the computer handle the boring part so that you can concentrate on the mission.

[Will_hynes]

Never used it, and landed on the Mun 7+ times and Minmus 3 times.

[ScramUK]

I've played KSP stock.

I feel that having the autopilot performing all of the maneuvers would take away some of pleasure (and hilarity) I find in KSP. And that's 50% of the game play / enjoyment right there. I do like the information feed you would get from mech-jeb however.

I guess I simply prefer my trial-and-error approach. It's a far more gratifying experience in my opinion. Personally, I've always enjoyed the challenge of a mission far faaar more than its eventual success. I almost feel sad when i click that 'End Flight' button, because the fun has come to its end.

Edited September 19, 2012 by ScramUK

[Bioman222]

I only a few times used it, when I was attempting to make a fleet of attack starships to blow the **** out of Evotians a fleet of peaceful interplanetary space ships. Even then, I used it as my slave to keep my ship stable and help me get to orbit! I don't like being replaced by machines

[TheDarkStar]

MechJeb is only necessary for things like current mass of your ship or TWR. Without MechJeb, yoiu can still easily do things like precision landings. Even though it uses less fuel, you should have some extra.

[Chev]

I've almost exclusively used Mechjeb-less ships (though not vanilla, I do use things like muon detectors, bigtrak floodlights and the fuel fix) until recently and been able to do precision landings on Mün and Minmus, though not Kerbin (what with the drag). However combined with the engineer redux chip I've found it to be a huge help for quickly testing experimental ship layouts, especially heavy lifters. It's pretty handy to just tell it to fly around and watch instead of having to wonder if the latest explosion was a flaw in your piloting or in the design itself. It does seem to have a few problems with daisy chain/asparagus-type staging though, and will happily collide right into the side tanks while they're dropping.

[PigletPG]

I pretty much compute everything in my head on the fly. I have no need for Mechjeb. If it fails on launch I just need to make something more stable.

Besides, why use autopilot when you can fly yourself?!

[Beowolf]

First I learned to do everything flying by-hand, with loads of help from this forum. Then I installed MechJeb and for a while used it as much as possible to learn its limitations and quirks. Now I understand it and use it whenever it feels good. I find I tend to use combinations of the simpler functions (MechJeb warp to apo/peri, then SmartA.S.S. to orient) and burn manually for orbital maneuvers. For ascents, I fly major changes by-hand, but when debugging or tuning a design, I love the consistency of MechJeb.

In other words, I use MechJeb exactly like I'd use a real autopilot in a real airplane.

[phoenix_ca]

I've almost exclusively used Mechjeb-less ships (though not vanilla, I do use things like muon detectors, bigtrak floodlights and the fuel fix) until recently and been able to do precision landings on Mün and Minmus, though not Kerbin (what with the drag). However combined with the engineer redux chip I've found it to be a huge help for quickly testing experimental ship layouts, especially heavy lifters. It's pretty handy to just tell it to fly around and watch instead of having to wonder if the latest explosion was a flaw in your piloting or in the design itself. It does seem to have a few problems with daisy chain/asparagus-type staging though, and will happily collide right into the side tanks while they're dropping.

Indeed. Great for testing, it is. As for your issue though, depending on what your doing, you might be able to mitigate that by changing the ascent profile. I try to adjust MechJeb so that it only starts a gravity turn after the boosters have been released and sent crashing on some poor Kerbals' heads (I'm fairly certain the reason parachutes can be triggered after the stage is separated is foresight on Squad's part; I bet recovering boosters later will save money in career mode). You can also help mitigate the issue by taking manual control. Radially-mounted boom-sticks can usually separate just fine if the rocket is traveling at an angle; the issue comes from MechJeb continuing the turn. Disengaging, then re-engaging the ascent autopilot at these stage separations can save your rocket from scraping metal. (Come to think of it, it'd be really handy if MechJeb stopped a gravity turn for a second, maybe two, at each stage separation.)

In other words, I use MechJeb exactly like I'd use a real autopilot in a real airplane.

Pretty much how I use it too. Though I prefer to let it perform burns for me for fine-tuning. I can't circularize an orbit nearly as well as it can. That and I don't see why I shouldn't avail myself of so much lovely data. I love math; that doesn't mean I want to play a game that requires me to have a spreadsheet next to me to calculate what to do next.