What are the most important things you've learned about playing KSP to pass on?

[Blaarkies]

9 hours ago, kermand said:

Thanks for making my point. 3 terrier gives you the thrust you need and weight less than a poodle. In certain cases, the lack of isp is made up with the reduction of your engine mass. In certain case, not so. Hence the importance of doing the math or checking with KER.

I might be mistaken, but i consider the net TWR of engines to be not very useful information, especialy in the case of first stages, where the mass of engines is usually negligible compared to the mass of fuel+payload. What counts if the total TWR of your ship.

"net TWR of engines" is a direct measurement of how much extra dry mass the ship carries to achieve a certain TWR. So yes, Maths/KER is your friend here. 

On a 36t stage with 22.4t of fuel :
- 3 Terriers achieve a  TWR of 0.48 and a total DV of 3772.79m/s
- 1 Poodle achieves a TWR of 0.66 and a total DV of 3781.19m/s
For a craft comprised of a wet/dry mass ratio of 2/3 and a TWR of 0.5, then using 3 Terriers is the tipping point for switching from clusters to single bigger engines.
* it would be cool to also compare cost, but i didn't even add the cluster structures' mass (which should be negligible considering the Octo-strut)

In olden KSP, the "spark" engine had an insane TWR so much that it out-competes some of the bigger engines just by mass reduction for the same amount of thrust. That and other balance issues were fixed though, and now as long as the total mass of the cluster does not exceed the mass of a single one-bigger engine, then you are probably gaining dv from the mass reduction.

Edited April 11, 2017 by Blaarkies

[kerbinorbiter]

The thing I've learnt is that when a community wants to do something they will do it and I learned the ins and outs of the soyuz, the most valuable thing for me is learning:  MOAR BOOSTERS and how to rondavous (the hardest thing I've ever done)

[Donkey32]

I do love Stage Recovery. The heavier, more expensive stuff tends to fall closer to KSC, just naturally.. And even if you only return half of the value of your craft, you're WAY better off than not.

Something I learned from flight sims as a kid and am re-learning here, a tip for understanding the Navball:
Imagine that the ball is a mirror, reflecting the world around you and each marker is a reflection of something in the mirror..  Also, Because it's reflecting the surrounding world,  if you put yourself in the ball looking out, it's easier to imagine how the "reflected" markers relate to you.

[jackstech]

put the center of mass in front a little bit higher from the aerodinamic overley  to make it a jet / ssto fly better

[ARS]

If it woobles: struts

If it slow: boosters

If about to crash: EVA your kerbal

If fallen from great height: kerbal helmets makes a good impactor

[Noud]

Don't drink and fly

I repeat Don't drink and fly!!!!

*this will often result in doing the same easy mission over and over until you fall into a limbo

[A_beholder]

Using MJ to land at the KSC is the best way to land on the italy-shaped peninsula ~200 km from the KSC.

[steuben]

negative values for  propellant ratios will allow me to generate fuel but not generate thrust... even if thrust is negative.

[NordicToast]

Don't try to rendezvous in interplanetary space. Just don't.

[kermand]

On 6/7/2017 at 3:25 AM, NordicToast said:

Don't try to rendezvous in interplanetary space. Just don't.

But some people say they rdv with asteroids in interplanetary space. So it must be possible (not that i ever tried it myself)

[Tyko]

On 6/12/2017 at 5:09 PM, kermand said:

But some people say they rdv with asteroids in interplanetary space. So it must be possible (not that i ever tried it myself)

It's totally doable, I've captured a dozen or so large rocks from interplanetary space. 

[memes in space]

On 1/27/2014 at 5:44 AM, ShadowDragon8685 said:

KSP is a great, fun game, but it has a difficulty curve like, well, a rocket. I figure there's some critical "lessons" to get yourself over to achieve competence. Here are the ones I've learned, so far.

1: MechJeb. I find KSP to be just about unplayable without it. I know that there are surely some purists who will disagree, but without an autopilot and MechJeb's VAB calculations, I'd likely still be considering myself lucky to so much as make Kerbin orbit, let alone be gearing up for my second shot at a Munar landing. I'd also likely have no idea of what to do without having seen MechJeb do things, but I've watched MechJeb in action enough to have an idea what on Kerbin it's doing and how to do it myself. Mechjeb is cheating. But whatever

2: When in doubt, radialize! I've experienced nothing but bitter, hilarious disaster trying to build vertically, barely able to get ridiculous expanding stacks into Kerbin orbit. Instead, I figured out that I have to build outward; the same fuel tank+engine design, in a serial decoupler arrangement, is vastly less useful and powerful than two/three/four/six of the same fuel tank + engine design arranged radially around another of that same engine design. Also use asparagus staging

3: SRBs, and how to use them. Specifically, SRBs are good for an initial bump to get your rocket engines up to speed and to let them carry some or all of the lowest-altitude work alone, with MechJeb on the limit to terminal velocity setting to save fuel, but it's not really worth it to use them for more than that. Radial liquid fuel engines are so much more useful, I'm pretty sure I could get a radial SSTO going. Liquid fuel is always better

4: The KW RockoMaverick engine, for when you don't yet have the Mainsail. This could work with the LV-T30 stock engine and I think it would still be superior, but KW Rocketry is what really sells it. Get a big old 2.5m Rockomax fuel tank stage going, however much is appropriate to the payload you intend to use, and stick one of those KW LFTA 2-1 conical 1.25-2.5 adapter-fuel tanks on the bottom, inverted. Stick on a tricoupler (or a quadcoupler, if you have it - those will definitely make it better,) and attach three KW Maverick D-1 engines. Gives you massively more thrust than the Rockomax Skipper (350*3 = 1050 thrust > 600 Thrust,) with better ISP at sea level and no worse ISP in vacuum and far more alternator output, not that that will matter on your ascent stage. It is heavier by 2 tons, true, but the far greater TWR means you'll ultimately save a lot in getting into orbit, and the RockoMaverick has been consistently lifting payloads into orbit for me that the Skipper can't. Not to mention it looks boss as heck, especially if you have six or twelve of them radially arranged around a central..  Haven't used KW in forever, might add it

5: Less is more when it comes to payload, more is more when it comes to engines. If engines are your payload, you're going to have some tricky balancing work to do, and your ascent stage will probably wind up being approximately the radius of the Death Star. No, not really. My Duna flyby vehicle's ascent stage was a 3.75m 1-layer asparagus. Learn asparagus.

6: Navigation lights. I'm pretty sure they came from B9 Aerospace since they were manufactured by "Tetragon Projects." Use the red lights on the left side of the craft and the green on the right, and I like to put the white lights strictly down the "top" - that is, with the craft as a whole (that is, the first command part) not rotated, the white lights go straight down the middle when facing out of the VAB. This helps so much when you're in space and looking at your ship trying to work out which side is which. (Not to mention it makes your ship look boss as heck. ) Great.

7: Don't forget batteries and power generation! You don't want to SSTO a 45-ton payload and be about ready to embark on a Mun shot only to realize that your entire power supply is the tiny supply in the lander strapped to the top of your transfer stage! This is true too.

That's what I've figured out, anyway. Some of it may be wrong, but it's what I've got and it's what's worked for me. If it's stupid, but it works consistantly, was it really stupid?

There is one thing I want to know, though...

Is there any practical point to installing fairings without FAR? I haven't got it installed and don't intend to. Fairings look boss as all heck and watching them pop in orbit is great, but without FAR, are they just adding mass and (paradoxically,) drag? Or do they actually shield the drag of their payload and replace it all with their own drag in stock, because that would probably justify the weight several times over on the ascent stage. Aerodynamics still apply. It makes your ship more streamlined, it helps. Also, it's like one ton for a huuuuge fairing.

EDIT: Rip, didn't realize this thread was super old

Edited June 19, 2017 by memes in space

[SinisterSonar]

If your gunna use physical time warp when your engines are on, just don't. And of course because I said this everybody is going to go and try it.

Edited June 27, 2017 by SinisterSonar

[Virdin]

I have tons of things to pass on. For one...

1. Never control a rocket from an external seat (just not enough torque).

2. Accomplish something trivial before going ambitious.

3. You will fail in your mission at some point, if not, good job.

4. Don't forget F5 exists.

5. [x] Science is the best mod for science.

6. Try sandbox before heading over to something like career or science mode. 

7. Don't forget F9 exists.

8. If you're going to challenge yourself, you need to tweak your rocket to near perfection.

9. Understand what delta-v is, (Acceleration. :0).

10. (The final one.), Don't quit on the game if you fail. I've done it before, and I regretted it a lot.

 

Have fun with KSP. Don't let the moholes suck you in at night!

 

[Spricigo]

11 hours ago, BogusDionysus48 said:

If your gunna use physical time warp when you engines are on, just don't. And of course because I said this everybody is going to go and try it.

Well.. Doing it often without problems. Wheels  pogo sticks with physical warp is a bit worse. 

[SinisterSonar]

1 hour ago, Spricigo said:

Well.. Doing it often without problems. Wheels  pogo sticks with physical warp is a bit worse. 

Um... Pogo sticks?

[felcas]

It is all about speed man! All about speed!

 

[Spricigo]

3 hours ago, BogusDionysus48 said:

Um... Pogo sticks?

 

Phusical warp x4 at least feels like someone switched the whells for those:

 

21 minutes ago, felcas said:

It is all about speed man! All about speed!

 

I beg pardon, is rather about Momentum.   (granted, maybe what exact physical variable is still up to debate)

[llanthas]

10 hours ago, Virdin said:

I have tons of things to pass on. For one...

 

5. [x] Science is the best mod for science.

 

 

Check out ScienceNow.  

 

[felcas]

45 minutes ago, Spricigo said:

I beg pardon, is rather about Momentum.   (granted, maybe what exact physical variable is still up to debate)

It is a phrase of effect for laymen people, not for kerbomongers like us  

[Spricigo]

3 hours ago, felcas said:

It is a phrase of effect for laymen people, not for kerbomongers like us  

Just got a new lesson:

Say something with enough conviction and the right amount of jargon and people will think you are specialist.

 

Serriously, there is lot and lots of phase of effect, while in close view are vague and shallow the significance they carry is very strong. For sure many were already mentioned in this very thread.

4 hours ago, llanthas said:

Check out ScienceNow.  

I tried and found no such mod. May you provide a link?

[felcas]

13 minutes ago, Spricigo said:

Just got a new lesson:

Say something with enough conviction and the right amount of jargon and people will think you are specialist.

 

Serriously, there is lot and lots of phase of effect, while in close view are vague and shallow the significance they carry is very strong. For sure many were already mentioned in this very thread.

I tried and found no such mod. May you provide a link?

LOL I agree in both statements. And thing is one need to simplify a lot something that is true to pass over to laymen, even if it is not really true, but the important thing is to catch people curiosity and make them question about, soo you come in and explain it better.

 

[llanthas]

On 6/27/2017 at 4:35 PM, Spricigo said:

I tried and found no such mod. May you provide a link?

 

You're right, I'm a b00b. 

It's Science [x] that I've been using - for some reason, I thought it was called ScienceNow...   It's incorporated the old push-button features from ScienceAlert (which should be part of stock KSP arrrgh!)

 

[Serenity]

Bigger doesn't always mean better.I spent many many hours trying to overpower with brute force the space enemies(gravity,aero drag etc)

and even more hours fighting my desire to sent huge spaceships to do things that half a size vessel could have easily done.

 

[Curveball Anders]

On 2017-06-27 at 8:06 AM, Virdin said:

6. Try sandbox before heading over to something like career or science mode.

I do it the other way around.

I mainly use career, but uses a sandbox for experiments and 'tests' when I run into trouble.

Edited July 13, 2017 by Curveball Anders