Are escape towers needed?

[jpkerman]

Several mods have escape towers (L.E.S.) included but as much as i feel they are needed in a loosely believable way, are they actually needed? With the function to revert and return to a launch or VAB/SPH save, I do not need them but I think it was not envisioned that way. Squad's description of the revert function made it sound as if it was to test your designs before making a true launch. But as long as you stop the mission before smashing into something, you seem to be able to revert. I feel that in career mode there should be two 'go to launch' buttons. One is 'simulated test launch' and you end at 70 KM and the other is the 'Go to launch' and no reverting is allowed after that ignition.

[Galileo Kerbonaut]

Nope, they're not needed at all. The reason I use them is because I like to build in a fail-safe system for my Kerbals and I never revert a flight; but it's only for role playing yet. I try not to kill too many of those little green guys; escape towers are helping me to accomplish that.

[TimMartland]

If your playing hardcore, then escape towers are invaluable! If you use F5 and reload as a crutch however there pretty pointless. But they look cool!

[kiwi1960]

No, why go to the cost of an escape method when Kerbals are cheap enough...

Besides.... give the cowards a way out and they will take it... just like the Generals didn't allow RAC pilots to wear parachutes in WW1 .... they, like a captain of a ship, was expected to go down with their plane...

Funnily enough, Pentagon thinking since WW2 is better... they said it takes no time at all to build a plane... but at least 20 years to grow a pilot...

But that is Earth.... logic here doesn't apply to Kerbals....

[Krosulhah]

I use these as i frequently forget to stage my rockets properly, ending up in very dangerous escape, requiring an escape system, such as a tower and parachute system.

[Vlk]

In a sandbox game, game mechanics will not necessarily force you to do fun things. (But escape towers are fun to make, even if you reload after a fail)

[WafflesToo]

Never needed one actually. My usual plan is to cut the throttle, coast up to apoapsis, eject the capsule and deploy chutes.

In a run-away rocket scenario, deploying the chutes asymmetrically is enough to get the capsule away from the stricken vessel.

[MGCJerry]

I havent managed to need to use escape towers yet. I have gotten pretty good at aborting failed launches by ditching the rocket and saving my little guys. I've power landed more landers on Kerbin than anywhere else so far. Even after all that, I still typically revert to VAB.

[little square dot]

escape towers (L.E.S.), are they actually needed?

They aren't needed any more than sabre engines, 2.5m battery banks, nose cones, and other such parts that make spacecraft-building and flying more interesting and convenient, but don't necessarily add functionality.

That said, there are a huge number of people playing KSP that make crew safety a point of pride, and of those people a significant portion go quite heavy on the role-playing side of things, absolutely refusing to revert, quicksave/load etc.

Even still, a pre-packaged L.E.S. isn't needed, as the subassembly system makes it easy enough for folks to build and use their own designs, however there's something about a good and balanced, single-unit L.E.S. that seems to cause a stirring in the loins of a lot of players.

Personally, given the number of catastrophic launchpad or low-altitude failures that I've subjected my poor kerbonauts too, I like the peace of mind a trusty L.E.S. can provide. (and they're loads of fun!)

[shamelessplug]The new DoPToOT Advanced Stock Rocketry weld pack, due out the day after the launch of .23, has L.E.S.'s available in a number of sizes.

(...not to mention a stock payload fairing system, NON-OP 5m and 3.75m sets of parts[including new engines], 0.625m probey parts, and balanced rescales up the wazzoo)[/shamelessplug]

Edited December 16, 2013 by little square dot

[stringyquark]

Like bow ties, not needed but way cool!

[I_Killed_Jeb]

I havent managed to need to use escape towers yet. I have gotten pretty good at aborting failed launches by ditching the rocket and saving my little guys. I've power landed more landers on Kerbin than anywhere else so far. Even after all that, I still typically revert to VAB.

Same here. I'll always play out the scenario to safe recovery and then revert. Who wants to clean up all that mess?

[little square dot]

Like bow ties, not needed but way cool!

...unless you're that Tucker guy.

[lucusloc]

Several mods have escape towers (L.E.S.) included but as much as i feel they are needed in a loosely believable way, are they actually needed? With the function to revert and return to a launch or VAB/SPH save, I do not need them but I think it was not envisioned that way. Squad's description of the revert function made it sound as if it was to test your designs before making a true launch. But as long as you stop the mission before smashing into something, you seem to be able to revert. I feel that in career mode there should be two 'go to launch' buttons. One is 'simulated test launch' and you end at 70 KM and the other is the 'Go to launch' and no reverting is allowed after that ignition.

I'm not trying to come off as harsh, but why should squad go through the effort? If you want to play hardcore do so, if not then don't. It is up to you to decide what is a simulated test launch and what is real. If you think that you do not have enough self control to stick with a decision and not change you mind mid flight about what is "simulated" and what is "real" that is not squads problem, that is yours.

Now what is really needed is a way to test builds without having to go through all the trouble of a launch, like testing the RCS on my satellites, but that is less about keeping myself honest with myself and more about saving myself a 2 minute launch only to find that the RCS placement is off balance. I can test a launch system by hitting "launch" but I cannot test 0g without going through a launch. We need a "test in 0g" button.

[stringyquark]

Now what is really needed is a way to test builds without having to go through all the trouble of a launch, like testing the RCS on my satellites, but that is less about keeping myself honest with myself and more about saving myself a 2 minute launch only to find that the RCS placement is off balance. I can test a launch system by hitting "launch" but I cannot test 0g without going through a launch. We need a "test in 0g" button.

You can always put it on the launch pad then hack gravity. That is how I test RCS balance without launching all the way to space first.

[Skyrunner27]

I did have a escape tower on my Minmus missions, and I even used them once to abort a mission with a stage failure. As an added plus the retro rockets I put on the main stage also provided a method to deorbit my debris.

[little square dot]

You can always put it on the launch pad then hack gravity. That is how I test RCS balance without launching all the way to space first.

I use HyperEdit. Two clicks and you're in space, a few more and you can be in space orbiting whatever body you like. It's excellent for testing vehicles in the various atmospheres too.

[softweir]

I'm another of the role-playing guys who uses LES systems in case of emergencies. It somehow makes a mission feel more "real", and the extra challenge of designing a vehicle to use them well makes a successful outcome all the more gratifying. ("Successful" can mean "a successful abort" just as much as "a successful mission"!)

[metl]

I'm afraid I don't know a whole hell of a lot when it comes to rocket design and spacecraft. From the discussion, I can gather that an escape tower or an L.E.S.. is some sort of system that allows the pilots to survive a catastrophe, but could someone give me an example of how to do it in-game? I guess I'm not quite grasping the idea when capsules are usually outfitted with chutes to return as it is.

[Roxette]

... hack gravity. That is how I test RCS balance without launching all the way to space first.

PSA : http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/rcs-build-aid-v0-2/

[little square dot]

could someone give me an example of how to do it in-game?

an example:

TOP (sky)

cluster of sepMotors----->assign "activate engine" to action group "abort"

truss

decoupler----->assign to action group 1

chute----->assign to action group 1

capsule

decoupler----->assign "decouple" to action group "abort"

BOTTOM (rocket)

Using the example above, if you were to suffer a catastrophic failure shortly after launch you would hit your "abort" key (backspace by default) which would decouple the capsule and activate the escape tower engines, then when sufficiently clear from the chaos you would hit "1" to decouple the tower and deploy your chute.

[makinyashikino]

Never used one, never will. The Kerbals are the one who built it out of duct-tape and Papier-mâché, they knew what they were signed up for!

[Paul Kingtiger]

In future career mode kerbal deaths may damage your score. Escape towers will be more useful then.

[SkyRender]

If you're the sort who never reverts a flight from launch no matter how bad it goes, an escape tower abort system can be kind of essential. But if you revert the moment a launch goes bad, no, they're not going to serve much of a purpose at all.

[metl]

Using the example above, if you were to suffer a catastrophic failure shortly after launch you would hit your "abort" key (backspace by default) which would decouple the capsule and activate the escape tower engines, then when sufficiently clear from the chaos you would hit "1" to decouple the tower and deploy your chute.

Holy wow! i never even knew there was an "abort" action group let alone a hotkey for it! I just assumed the "Abort" button on the altimeter was something not actually implemented yet! I am so playing around with this! While possibly pointless (atm), it does sound like fun!

[magnemoe]

Never needed one actually. My usual plan is to cut the throttle, coast up to apoapsis, eject the capsule and deploy chutes.

In a run-away rocket scenario, deploying the chutes asymmetrically is enough to get the capsule away from the stricken vessel.

Yes you can also set up an abort sequence who cut all engines and decouple pod from ship.

Unlike real world KSP rockets don't blow up like bombs, yes you have the danger of telescoping where something breaks and the upper stage passes through the pod, but this happens so fast and at so high speed an escape tower would not help you.