Is it possible to keep relative distance between two objects in the same orbit?

[AceMgy]

Why don't you use Zenith Rockets Family? They are stock and have plenty of dV.

You mean the LV-N's? I'm okay with using those, although now that I think about it they're pretty advanced being rocket engines with 800 isp. I don't think there's any rocket currently that could match that efficiency but it's at least feasible in the near future. Even with those you can burn a lot of fuel with heavy loads. Perhaps I am being a tad bit too efficiency-minded, but I had to split my station design in two due to lag and that's introduced another drain on my precious fuel (which is shipped clear from Minmus, mind you).

[Wjolcz]

I meant this: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/showthread.php/33381-0-20-2-Zenith-rocket-family-%28modernised-for-0-20-x-with-perfect-subassembly%29?highlight=zenith+rocket

But now I see how you're doing it and in my opinion you sir deserve a medal. Recreating the whole history of rocket engineering is really time consuming and challenging. Even more than goals I set for myself.

[AceMgy]

Those are some neat rocket designs. Had no idea you could fit that many LVs on the back of an orange.

Yeah, and my insistence on playing this as a pseudo-campaign mode does take time. Really annoying when an update comes out and you have to do everything over again (I can get to the Gemini program pretty quick now). I've actually done a lot more than my medals in my sig show, I've just decided that they should only apply to my current save to help me keep track of things. I just had a save delete itself on me, but I'm almost to the point where I can start mining Kethane again.

I can't wait for the real campaign mode comes out, but then I'd have to deal with money. So far I've been assuming a space program where the public is as eager about space as I am and are liberal with funding. I've been fuel-efficient, but I'm not sure if that translates to money efficiency considering the amount of infrastructure I build to do one mission...

[entaran]

Hyperedit can put them on EXACTLY matched orbits and you can even distance them apart to the millimeter.

However, (and i just tested this) they will still drift whilst timewarping regardless. There is some degree of error in the basic physics engine/floating point issues/etc.

Short version: Impossible.

Long version: Put one in a higher orbit (20 or so km higher) and you'll get a transfer window about every 8th orbit... which equates to 3 or so a day. (assuming 120-140km orbits or so)

Good luck mate.

[Yourself]

Also keep in mind that if you got two objects in matching orbits, the relative velocity between them would not be 0 unless they were right on top of each other. For example if your satellites were in the same orbit but directly opposite one another, the relative velocity between them would be twice orbital velocity. For example, if you and your target are in perfectly circular orbits at an altitude of 100 km above Kerbin and your target is 10 km away, the relative velocity between you will be about 32 m/s.

[Rickenbacker]

Things in space will always drift apart, or closer. Especially in KSP, where the rounding errors on timewarp add up and change your orbits a little bit each time you timewarp. So no, it's not possible, but you can probably get pretty close...

[AceMgy]

So, I've found a solution / workaround that works pretty well. I've put KSS at an 85 km orbit so it'll always be at least 5 km away from DVS which orbits at 80 km (the rendering distance is 2.5 km, so a spacecraft can never render both at once and lag horribly). This means there is a transfer window every 48 hours between them. That normally would be horribly annoying, since you can't timewarp that fast in LKO, but I remembered that I had downloaded a mod and never used it. So I extracted Kerbal Alarm Clock into my KSP folder and tried it. After working with it today, I've found that I can just use mechjeb to calculate when the next window will be, then set an alarm 20 mins before it happens, then do other stuff! Or I could just follow one of my high-orbit satellites until it's time. It works extremely well, plus I'm now managing several probe missions at once now, this should definitely be in the stock game when campaign mode comes out.

They're not in the same orbit, so I don't have the aesthetically pleasing situation of two stations hovering right next to each other. However, this is almost preferable: if you actually had two stations that needed transportation between them with minimal delta-v, and one was an explosion hazard, you'd arrange them just like this. They're only close once every 2 days, and the rest of the time progressively far away, so the chance of an explosion wiping out both stations is essentially nill (not considering the debris an explosion would produce, but it would be relatively low velocity), you just have to plan ahead to transfer at the right windows.

So I'm in the process of building KSS among other things. It's coming along nicely. Wish I had the ability to create an SSTO to build it with like the shuttle did with the ISS but oh well...

I'll consider this thread answered, even though I technically didn't achieve what I wanted. I had a question for the modders who may be lurking: would it be possible to create an active orbital correction module. The way I would do it would be to have an orbit monitoring module, which would open up a menu where you could enter the desired orbital parameters. Then at a cost of propellant and electricity it would keep it there. Obviously it'd be tricky to implement with KSP's on-rails physics, but the way I would do it would be to have it actively push the station around when out of timewarp, then if you timewarp or select something else it'd teleport it to the target orbit, calculate the theoretical amount of propellant required to do that, subtract that propellant from the reserves, then put it on rails... I don't know if you can modify the game that deeply and I'm barely competent at programming...

[CluelessModeler]

As it pertains to an inclination change... If you align your docking target to face exactly retrograde, and dock straight on, will that still mess with your inclination?