What did you do in KSP1 today?

[cantab]

https://imgur.com/9wFwkhG

https://imgur.com/QJXbThw

Flies surprisingly well, for a giant multirotor with a rocket hanging under it. The nightmare has been getting it in the water WITHOUT it blowing up. Even though it was descending at about 1 m/s when the main body hits the water that's still enough for a spectacular RUD. I had to use the rotors to very gently and carefully lower it in.

[purpleivan]

More precious funds in my no contract career game, courtesy of Tylo and Bop.

Return vehicle was the first to arrive.

 

Tylo lander arrived a bit later, then headed to the surface.

Jeb suffered a "moment" when leaving the command seat in the lander, that sent him spinning.

But no fear, Captain F9 is here.

After this little incident he made it safely on on to Bop.

The mission added around 1 million funds, as well as a chunk of science (the tech tree is now fully researched). It's not going to be enough to fund the upgrade of all the remaining facilities to level 3, but it's a very large chunk of what's needed.

Next step, a trip for a couple of cheap vehicles to Minmus to pick up the rendezvous, docking and "space station" rewards.

[Lisias]

So, I did another run on KSP 1.9.1, but this time using KAX and Open Cockpits - yeah, I'm wetting my feet slowly, Add'On by Add'On.

However, this time the glitches are starting to get on my nerves. Problems on Symmetry on editing parts on VAB/SPH are annoying, but survivable (you just set things twice). Glitches on the Map where you need to select a Node in order to KSP "remember" to load all the Manoeuvring Nodes (instead of remembering them as you load the Map Scene) are annoying, but finding and clicking on a Node on entering the Map is not the worst thing that happened to me on this game.

But Symmetry glitches on the Control Surfaces on craft spawn are near unbearable - every time I spawn a craft, need to revise all the controls to make sure nothing got the deployment inverted (pretty nasty on flaps).

There's also a new glitch (at least for me): something is forcing the "Control from Here" to be set to the wrong part! I had to force the "Control from Here" on the Stage action, otherwise I would had to fix it manually every time too.

On the other hand, once these bugs are manually fixed (or "gambiarrados"), the thing is working fine, I had some fun on it:

On a nice touch, the gunners can be set to automatically "search for targets", a pretty guns animation!

Craft on Kerbal-X.

[Chequers]

I know it's elementary for most of you guys, but today, I finally managed a manned Mun landing and return, without quicksaves or reverts (I'm playing with those options switched off).

In the end, I did the mission in two parts, the first to send a science probe to establish an ideal landing site, and get the scientific equipment on the surface. Then a second manned mission successfully saw Jebediah land on the surface, collect the science data from the probe, and launch.

It really helped not having to lug the science equipment on the manned lander. It's made me realise that even slightly increasing the weight of a craft can add up to pretty major impact on delta-v. By focusing on creating a lander that just needed to carry Jeb, I could maximise efficiency. 

[papuchalk]

3 hours ago, Chequers said:

I know it's elementary for most of you guys, but today, I finally managed a manned Mun landing and return, without quicksaves or reverts (I'm playing with those options switched off).

In the end, I did the mission in two parts, the first to send a science probe to establish an ideal landing site, and get the scientific equipment on the surface. Then a second manned mission successfully saw Jebediah land on the surface, collect the science data from the probe, and launch.

It really helped not having to lug the science equipment on the manned lander. It's made me realise that even slightly increasing the weight of a craft can add up to pretty major impact on delta-v. By focusing on creating a lander that just needed to carry Jeb, I could maximise efficiency. 

sounds logical, but you might spend extra fuel to land exactly at previously landed probe with science. based on you skill, the fuel consumption for exact landing site could be enormous. then, it does not matter if you spend delta v because your ship is heavier due to taking lots of science devices , or because you do lot of correction burns. But i agree that especially Materials bay is enormously large, and it usually does not fit to any of my manned landers... 

 

btw where the fun begins is with life support mods. I personaly pla ywith Kerbalism last weeks. All life support devices add another enormous weight to crafts, besides food and water, also the presurized tanks with o2, hydrogen, nitrogen, chemical process devices (mainly water and o2 recycling), more electricity capacity and generators -- more living space for longer missions - and most of all the shielding against radiation. all add weight and need for more delta v

Edited March 16, 2020 by papuchalk

[Hotel26]

48 minutes ago, papuchalk said:

to land exactly at previously landed probe

@Chequers

Great job on that landing!!  (I'm sure it was a thrill.)

Edited March 16, 2020 by Hotel26

[aagun123]

[cantab]

4 hours ago, Chequers said:

I know it's elementary for most of you guys, but today, I finally managed a manned Mun landing and return, without quicksaves or reverts (I'm playing with those options switched off).

No reverts ramps up the tension a hundred-fold. And it's such a good feeling when you nail the landing.

[RedWolfKerbal]

Managed to get a lot of missions completed.

Managed to finally have an airplane design that works.
Did spend 2+ hours trying to land planes so that i don't waste money, lol. Gotta love career mode. After having successfully landed once, the next missions that took me up with the plane I spent another hour trying to land the craft in cockpit view.

Been enjoying everything about this game. Lots of explosions for my Twitch Stream lol

3 hours ago, cantab said:

No reverts ramps up the tension a hundred-fold. And it's such a good feeling when you nail the landing.

Oh my goodness, I could never do that in career mode. I wanted to so bad. But i would be starting a new career mode every single day because of the lost money. I have settled for career mode being its own all encompassing challenge. 

Maybe after a lot more practice I can decide to go no reverts or quicksaves. However for Twitch streams, a good quicksaves gets everyone a lot of explosions to watch lol. Like when I was trying to land my planes, took me about 30 attempts over 40 minutes. And OH MAN, when i landed that thing I felt amazing lol.

[Mars-Bound Hokie]

 

I unleashed several Obliterator prototypes on the KSC and started destroying all I could see. Some BDArmory users may criticize me for a lack of armor, but I make up for that with its wide array of weaponry. Besides that, its primary probe core and power source (an RTG) are protected in a box of armor. 

 

Here are some pictures from the tests:

Spoiler

Test 1:

Spoiler

• Using the front machine guns to destroy an armed plane.
• I couldn't figure out how to set two craft with AI modules against each other (the game won't let me switch).

 

• All guns.

 

• I was foolish enough to launch too many missiles at once, causing the turrets to get blown off.
  • At least I can use the tank turret.
• Bye bye, Neptune IV.

 

Test 2:

Spoiler

• Hitting the water tower at the SPH with one shot (no locks or targeting cameras used)

 

• I was foolish enough to point my missiles at my own tank turret, but at least the Obliterator is still functional.
• Even better, despite the missiles' abysmal inaccuracy, I managed to destroy the SPH.

 

Test 3:

Spoiler

• It took three hits, but I destroyed the VAB with just the tank turret.
  • The two missiles were launched by mistake.

 

• Pretty neat targeting camera, huh.
• I had my turrets locked on to the top of the control tower and shoot it twice with the tank turret.
  • The missiles STINK. I have to shoot way above a large target in order to hit something.

 

• Caused a lot of destruction from that one spot.

 

 

I plan to modify my craft so that it won't sink as much in the middle - or even get better missiles - and then present in on KerbalX.

[Chequers]

11 hours ago, papuchalk said:

sounds logical, but you might spend extra fuel to land exactly at previously landed probe with science. based on you skill, the fuel consumption for exact landing site could be enormous.

It was more the size of the materials bay, rather than just the weight, that meant I was having to build a more complicated lander to make sure it was stable. A more complicated lander meant a more complicated lifting stage. My breakthrough was simplifying the lander to simply having to get a Kerbal down safely and back again. I didn't have to do too many correction burns — the landing site was pretty equitorial.

Thanks for the tip on the life support mod - I'm playing completely stock vanilla for now, but I'll keep it in mind once I've finished this playthrough!

 

10 hours ago, Hotel26 said:

@Chequers

Great job on that landing!!  (I'm sure it was a thrill.)

Thanks! It sure was — sweaty palms for sure. Huge relief after re-entry on Kerbin!

10 hours ago, cantab said:

No reverts ramps up the tension a hundred-fold. And it's such a good feeling when you nail the landing.

So true! There's so many things that can go wrong. So many steps from launch to landing and back again. Some can be corrected, but more often than that, timings and calculations are so meticulous that one wrong move ends the mission in disaster. It's a great feeling when it all comes together.

[Klapaucius]

I had a personal success. I've been trying to get better at rocket design and flight, so I figured the best way to learn is to start with the hard problem.  Using Mission Builder, I put a launch pad at sea level on Eve.

 

I'm stoked I got three Kerbals in a Mk1-3 command pod into a safe orbit.  I'm sure it could be made way more efficient, but for the moment, I am pretty happy.

 

Now that I have a functional sea-level rocket, the challenge will be to figure out how to get it from Kerbin to the surface of Eve without destroying it.

 

 

 

 

 

[NHunter]

Today my Gateway mission finally began arriving:

[Guest]

Now I have gone mad

Crew needs to come soon

17 hours ago, Chequers said:

I know it's elementary for most of you guys, but today, I finally managed a manned Mun landing and return

I feel so proud for u! I can't wait to see what you do next

[Chequers]

54 minutes ago, The Doodling Astronaut said:

I feel so proud for u! I can't wait to see what you do next

Thanks! Next will be trying to get the whole Science and Kerbal package onto the Mun in a single launch, rather than splitting it. The brass don't like double launches - they're expensive. I'm developing an Apollo style setup as a solution.

Love your base! One day I'm sure I'll get to interplanetary missions - very inspiring.

10 hours ago, RedWolfKerbal said:

Oh my goodness, I could never do that in career mode. I wanted to so bad. But i would be starting a new career mode every single day because of the lost money. I have settled for career mode being its own all encompassing challenge.

It's not too bad. The main cost is testing craft - the lifting stage, the orbiter, the lander; each component has to be tested before bringing it all together to make sure that it works. Then there's finding a good landing site with probes: You can't just 'give it a go' and revert to a quicksave if its not a good location. And every single test carries its cost, so each flight has to be weighed up.

What I do like though, is that it extends missions into entire programs. Contracts to do temperature readings and surveys aren't just ad-hoc for a bit of cash, they're vital to support the main program that you've got going on. The entire payment from a contract can be blown on a single test flight of a rocket that serves no purpose — except to show you that it didn't work.

But that makes the final result really satisfying - and the final vehicle a really carefully honed piece of kit, that you're immensely proud of. I don't think I could play KSP any other way now. That buzz from a succesful mission - and everything that went into it - is so intoxicating.

Edited March 17, 2020 by Chequers

[Maverick_aus]

3 hours ago, The Doodling Astronaut said:

Now I have gone mad

 

That's an interesting base design you've come up with there.

[Elro2k]

Had a routine trip to Minmus by way of an SSTO, but along the way I noticed a Solar Eclipse!

 

 

[RoninFrog]

4 minutes ago, Elro2k said:

Had a routine trip to Minmus by way of an SSTO, but along the way I noticed a Solar Eclipse!

Those solar panels don't look very efficient at the moment.

[Lisias]

Tonight I decided to put KSP 1.9.1 on test on something I value very much : water ships.

Spoiler

TL;DR : it fails miserabily

I'm toying with hydrofoils since KSP 1.4, maritime crafts are my second most favorite type of crafts - hydroplanes? Just love them.

So I made this ship, a hydrofoiled MK3 fuselage. 64 PAX and 2 pilots being pushed over the waves by 4 Wheesleys.

It worked perfectly on KSP 1.7.3, beautifully surfed the Kerbin seas at > 70 m/s. Not bad for a 53 tons fatty lady.

But... Why in KSP 1.7.3? I wasn't going to probe 1.9.1? Well, I did. And got his:

The freaking thing just took off and reached 5K high at Mach ~1.   

I don't know exactly what's happening, but apparently wet fuselages and wet lifting surfaces lose drag. And perhaps weight?

So I made this stunt to check the facts:

And yes, this time I got drag, the thing didn't got beyond 200m/s - but it took off the same.  

The (almost) very same craft behaved absurdly differently on KSP 1.9.1, what again confirms my original thesis that it's plain impossible to import a reasonable complex KSP < 1.8 game into current KSP.  it just doesn't worth the trouble, things changed too much on essential, primordial behaviours on the game to the point I consider migrating savegames from KSP < 1.8 a liability. So I will just won't..

I'm currently reevaluating my options. There are real value on KSP >= 1.8, better graphics and faster physics. And some new cute and usefull parts. But none of it worths my savegames, I'm playing them for 2 years for a reason.

My verdict is that KSP 1.9.1 is almost good enough for newcomers (the glitches are annoying!), as long they stay away from the water and don't mind (too much) airplanes. Anything that splashes down will behave in an absurd way, harming the game if you enjoy KSP by what it is (was?) - a physic simulation with some resemblance with real physics.

On the bottom line? I'll handle KSP >= 1.8 to keep my Add'On working and supporting them, but my gaming will remain on 1.7.3 . 

Crafts on my site, one of them on Kerbal-X.

Edited March 17, 2020 by Lisias
missing phrase

[cantab]

15 hours ago, Klapaucius said:

Using Mission Builder, I put a launch pad at sea level on Eve.

Today I Learned the Mission Builder can do that.

[Retro Starship]

Just now, Lisias said:

The (almost) very same craft behaved absurdly differently on KSP 1.9.1, what again confirms my original thesis that it's plain impossible to import a reasonable complex KSP < 1.8 game into current KSP.

This really bothers me. It seems someone changed simple aerodynamic parameters to make something else easier or what they thought would be better. This may affect a lot more, especially when your depending on ships that took  a long time to develop. 

 

[Guest]

18 hours ago, Chequers said:

The brass don't like double launches - they're expensive

Launch two of 5!:

Brought the main transport into orbit today! Now all we need to do is send the landers to Duna! The Crew will be supplied to the transport system by the already proven Orbital Crew System that is also being used for the asteroid space station:

[papuchalk]

ksp 1.9.1

which planet i landed a rover on today ?

[Curveball Anders]

Previously I managed to get a ship, with a lab and crew into orbit  around Eve.

Able to dip down into "low in space" and grab science until I get bored.

The expedition also had a lander, aimed for Gilly.

It "landed" (or barely connected) on Gilly and I even managed an Eva on the "ground", using up serious amount of Eve fuel to stay down...

Now that lander, and it's crew, is re-united with Eve-One in orbit, but with an issue, they don't have fuel to get back to Kerbin.

So, I designed a return craft, with just space to get my people (and their science) home, and sent it off.

And despite doing deep research and many  calculations, I took the same design but replaced all crew and science with spare fuel and send it the same way.

It never hurts to have a jerry can...

[Dan Kerman]

Learned F4 toggles target/distance indicator..  docking now may commence!