NovaSilisko Posted November 1, 2011 Author Share Posted November 1, 2011 This is my current mainstay exploration vehicle:It launches on this rocket:It\'s fully capable of being a lander, it just doesn\'t have any legs that fit in the fairing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberion Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 Thats not really that different from my launcher - half a tank more on the 1st stage, and I use 1 big tank instead of 2 little ones for the middle one. I mostly did it so it would be 2m all the way up.Not sure if I am gonna try to land the big part of the 1m ship or not, gonna do some testing once we have a Mun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted November 1, 2011 Author Share Posted November 1, 2011 We must be doing some things very differently then, since I never have issues with RCS fuel. I\'m avoiding using normal SAS (infact, I might remove it soon) for anything now.I try to design the rocket so the first stage burns out just before winglets become useless, then I have a much smaller ship to move with RCS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberion Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 I\'ve been playing around some more once I finalized the build.The third tank expires about 34k with the boosters, which usually puts Apoapsis at 90 to 100k. I use that 2nd stage to circularize, and it usually has 30% left for Munar burn. I pretty much only use RCS on the 1st stage to rotate to 45deg. at 11k and then on level when 1st stage goes out.Its afterward that RCS gets used up, since pretty much everything you do in space needs it, and once I jettison the 2nd stage, the part that was inside the shroud loves to tumble around - I\'m sure thats a bug since I shouldn\'t need that much babysitting - nonetheless it chews through fuel.Still, gonna need tons for munar landing. Currently, I\'d say 200-300 units for the whole trip.Edit: Got a perfect launch this time, this screenshot taken directly after jettisoning the 2nd stage and the shroud. I had only used 1 of the 2 Service Module tanks on the lower stages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeroignite Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 I smell a Mun trip with no RCS challenge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted November 1, 2011 Author Share Posted November 1, 2011 I\'ll continue to insist you\'re doing it wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
comradephil Posted November 1, 2011 Share Posted November 1, 2011 Yeah, although I\'d love more RCS in my tanks, I generally just use RCS because I\'m too lazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted November 2, 2011 Author Share Posted November 2, 2011 I reduced the consumption of both RCS units anyway, and slightly decreased the thrust of the big one. In the future, a service module isn\'t going to be 100% RCS fuel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberion Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 Should be fine, the big ones are pretty stout, they moved that big rocket with ease. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted November 2, 2011 Author Share Posted November 2, 2011 Here, have some 0.5 http://dl.dropbox.com/u/575558/Kerbal%20Space%20Program%20-%20Silisko%20Edition%200.5.zipAdded experiment racksAdded micro RCS tanksAdded second, completely unfinished service moduleAdded a 2m to 1m payload connectorTweaked RCS unit and fuel weightReduced all decoupler weightsShortened the existing stack decoupler.Pressurised fuel tank now holds 100 units of fuel, and weighs 1.05 units.SRBs now more capable of overheatingASAS made usefulBig 2m engine now overheats more easilymk3 pod has proper node placement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberion Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 So, it looks good - the new 2->1m part needs a new name and description, it matched the fairing bulkhead.I also encountered the issue Harv was describing Here; When I came out of a 50x warp the rocker was suddenly wobbling with no input, ASAS off.I couldn\'t stop it, and when I started the engine again, the screenshot occurred. Super-bendy!It was the connection between the engine and decoupler.I think maybe its because of the size change on the decoupler - I didn\'t attach-reattach from my saved ship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeroignite Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 I dig the new radial RCS tanks. What\'s especially nice is the scalabiliy; I don\'t need to pack any more than I think I\'ll need. They\'re especially great for lander stages. Consumption rates on the Golgathrust RCS blocks is reasonable, though the standard RCS seems on the low end IMO. Super-light decouplers were unexpected-- they weigh almost as little as struts! Not really sure how that affect gameplay other than possibly encouraging aggressive staging. It also means I\'ll have to rebalance the weights of my mod decouplers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derhp Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 Loving the new decouplers. Pod - > Decoupler -> command module looks like a proper space vehicle, yet still very kerbal. I\'m pretty much only using this pack these days, making a mun candidate as we speak. Only thing is, I can get the payload fairings to work for me. Someone explain like im five. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archer Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 Loving the new decouplers. Pod - > Decoupler -> command module looks like a proper space vehicle, yet still very kerbal. I\'m pretty much only using this pack these days, making a mun candidate as we speak. Only thing is, I can get the payload fairings to work for me. Someone explain like im five.You take the thingy you want in the fairings (lander?), plop on the base plate, attach the fairings to the base plate. Launch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberion Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 You take the thingy you want in the fairings (lander?), plop on the base plate, attach the fairings to the base plate. Launch.The fairings require 4x symmetry, too. No explosive bolt pieces.And its tricky to get the base plate on sometimes, make sure the 2 green nodes are closest, dont let a pink some snap on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zuff Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 Sorry if this has been mentioned already, but a 2m decoupler (same height as your new regular decoupler) would be great.Still loving this pack! It\'s been my favorite by far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derhp Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 I should have said, I can get it to work for payloads of 1m or less. However If I use it to hide 2m engine, it just won\'t let me apply the fairing to the base plate. The only time I was successful was using various spacers, I think it was 3x RCS blocks before the decoupler that worked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryten Posted November 2, 2011 Share Posted November 2, 2011 The pronlem is that the decouplers have been shortened, but the fairings haven\'t shortened to adjust for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted November 3, 2011 Author Share Posted November 3, 2011 The pronlem is that the decouplers have been shortened, but the fairings haven\'t shortened to adjust for this.Sweet zombie jesus I\'m an idiot.You can fix this temporarily by stacking two decouplers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aiyel Posted November 3, 2011 Share Posted November 3, 2011 For the record, I just pulled a picture-perfect munar landing and return with my posted rocket design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aiyel Posted November 4, 2011 Share Posted November 4, 2011 Here\'s photo evidence from my second run. Botched the return landing, cushioned too much which caused the chute to disengage. COuldn\'t recover in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NovaSilisko Posted November 4, 2011 Author Share Posted November 4, 2011 From all the trouble I had, I felt like I hadn\'t balanced the parts for a lunar landing very well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchie16 Posted November 4, 2011 Share Posted November 4, 2011 I uncommented the lines about gimbaling in the cfg files; will that be enough to enable it? I didn\'t notice the nozzles actually appearing to move, though I did seem to have some control while the engines were on even without RCS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killerhurtz Posted November 4, 2011 Share Posted November 4, 2011 Quick detail: there\'s a little inconsistency with the LV-T300. The title mentions T300, but the description says T150, and the payload fairing\'s ring node size differs from the size on the actual fairing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeroignite Posted November 4, 2011 Share Posted November 4, 2011 From all the trouble I had, I felt like I hadn\'t balanced the parts for a lunar landing very well...They seem wonderfully balanced for it to me.EDIT: the rocket I used to get there (and presumably back, KSP crashed on me) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts