Which one?

[Kasuha]

Some parts are IMO bound to be removed before the final release so the question is when rather than if. And of course it would probably hurt less if it happened just once.

Personally I have no problem with it, I'm starting a new save with each release anyway. By the time new release is upcoming I am always long time out of bodies to fly to.

[cantab]

SP+ has been getting all the press and is actually where the mod and modder are involved, but note that we're also getting the functionality of Enhanced Navball and some of Crew Manifest/Kerbal Crew Transfer in stock.

[Alshain]

Some parts are IMO bound to be removed before the final release so the question is when rather than if. And of course it would probably hurt less if it happened just once.

Personally I have no problem with it, I'm starting a new save with each release anyway. By the time new release is upcoming I am always long time out of bodies to fly to.

That is true, but it would be even less painful if we had a release with both sets of parts for at least 1 version and we were warned in advance they were going away so we could start removing old parts and adding the new ones in one game version. The alternative is recreating using alt-tab and an old version of the game. I too start new saves but often bring my planes over to the new save. My rockets I could care less about, I can rebuild them in a heartbeat.

[rkman]

It goes back and forth, it's hard to say if they should outright replace them or not.

It's hard to argue that (some aspect of) the game should not be improved just to appease people who don't realize the consequences of playing a game that is not yet finished.

[Pecan]

How comes no-one's commented on the functionality of other mods that are being incorporated?

Enhanced Navball, Crew Transfer/Crew Manifest/ShipManifest and, possibly (?), Connected Living Spaces :-)

[Red Iron Crown]

How comes no-one's commented on the functionality of other mods that are being incorporated?

Enhanced Navball, Crew Transfer/Crew Manifest/ShipManifest and, possibly (?), Connected Living Spaces :-)

That's a good question. Crew transfer has been a long time coming, it'll be great for docking ports to finally function the way we thought they would before being added. Navball enhancements are also welcome (hopefully docking alignment too, please!), though I suspect Enhanced Navball's resize/reposition features won't make the cut.

[r4pt0r]

That's a good question. Crew transfer has been a long time coming, it'll be great for docking ports to finally function the way we thought they would before being added. Navball enhancements are also welcome (hopefully docking alignment too, please!), though I suspect Enhanced Navball's resize/reposition features won't make the cut.

With the addition of crew transfer, do you think we will be able to transfer science from one command pod to another without eva?

[Red Iron Crown]

With the addition of crew transfer, do you think we will be able to transfer science from one command pod to another without eva?

Squad only knows. It's a common scenario that I hope the devs consider during implementation.

[Superfluous J]

Just a lil warning - As you skip ahead in orbits, it's becoming less and less relevant for any complex interception with each and every orbit, as it doesn't seem to compensate for the motion of the starting planet, only the destination. :/

For Duna that doesn't matter so much, but for Moho..

With my method I rarely need to skip ahead or back more than an orbit or two, and that's almost always just to avoid a pesky Mun encounter going out or Ike/Joolian Moon encounter coming back. I should really make a video where I detail it but I did keep a text file of the process somewhere...

I used to use the various transfer window helpers out there but these days I do this (Note I'm saying "Kerbin" and "Duna" but this literally works for any Hohmann Transfer):

1. Plan a node to JUST escape Kerbin, preferably in front of or behind depending on where you're going. For Duna, you should escape just in front. I use PreciseNode and leave Kerbin usually with about 900-950 m/s. If I went 1 m/s less I'd stay captured in Kerbin's SOI.
   
2. Plan a second node on your ship's orbit around Sun. Give it enough prograde thrust to reach Duna's orbit, and set Duna as a target. You should get connection markers and unless you're very lucky they won't be near each other.
   
3. Drag that 2nd node around (you'll have to also modify its prograde amount due to the two orbits not being perfect circles) until you actually have an encounter. Hopefully it'll be a real SOI change encounter but if you just get the markers really close that's enough.
   
4. Delete the first node. KSP will remember the 2nd node's location but its directon and amount will be totally wrong. If you have PreciseNode, see below instead of performing the next steps.
   
5. Warp to that Maneuver node (Kerbal Alarm Clock is very nice here) and when you get there, delete it and create a NEW maneuver node about where you'd have to burn. To get to Duna, this is a little after your ship will go into Kerbin's shadow.
   
6. This node should easily get you a Duna encounter. You may need to burn normal on ejection. Do it. Drag the node around to get it as good as possible. So long as you connect with Duna, you're fine. Correction burns once you have an SOI encounter are miniscule.
   
7. Do the burn, and follow the maneuver node as precisely as you can.
   
8. Feel like a baws
   

If you use PreciseNode, you can do one better:

1. Instead of leaving that maneuver node that's at the right time but the wrong place as a simple marker, let's make it an actual correct node!
   
2. Using PreciseNode (never EVER touch the maneuver node itself. It'll snap back to the current orbit and you'll have to start over), move your burn forward and back in time until it's at the correct place in orbit around Kerbin to burn out to Reach Duna.
   
3. Also modify the dV needed, and note that it's less. There's Hohmann at work. Actually, it may be a LITTLE more but it'll assuredly be less than this plus the 900-950dV you had on the first maneuver node at the beginning.
   
4. Keep adjusting this node until you have a maneuver to Duna planned, possibly hundreds of days in the future.
   
5. Warp to and execute that node. Like above, follow the node as closely as you can. You're throwing a dart across the Solar System and trying for a bullseye.
   
6. Lean back and bask in the awesomeness that is you.
   

I gather that you still use KER to know available delta-v.

Imo KAC is a matter of convenience for IP, but KER or similar is essential unless one does not mind spending a lot of time on trial and error, or calculate.

Yes. I consider dV to be critical informtion that I don't want to play the game without. Frankly I'd rather the location of Kerbin be hidden from me than my ship's dV.

Edited August 20, 2014 by 5thHorseman

[Wanderfound]

That's a good question. Crew transfer has been a long time coming, it'll be great for docking ports to finally function the way we thought they would before being added. Navball enhancements are also welcome (hopefully docking alignment too, please!), though I suspect Enhanced Navball's resize/reposition features won't make the cut.

Resize/reposition is the only reason I have Advanced Navball installed.

[LABHOUSE]

I hope BN and KW but I think another will be chosen.

Dying to have a stock bay that looks right.

[Pecan]

I hope BN and KW but I think another will be chosen.

Dying to have a stock bay that looks right.

Ermmm, have you read anything in the last day or so?

The answer is no longer out there, it's in here.

[Renegrade]

With my method I rarely need to skip ahead or back more than an orbit or two, and that's almost always just to avoid a pesky Mun encounter going out or Ike/Joolian Moon encounter coming back. I should really make a video where I detail it but I did keep a text file of the process somewhere...

<snip>

Yes. I consider dV to be critical informtion that I don't want to play the game without. Frankly I'd rather the location of Kerbin be hidden from me than my ship's dV.

Oh, I see, it's outside of Kerbin's SOI, and I think using a multi-orbit technique. I'm often playing against life support (usually BTSM (43kg/day minimum) or TAC_LS (1kg/week?), or Snacks! (uhh not even sure how big a snack is)), so I have to cross the distance in a half-orbit, using absolutely the lowest possible dv, so I have to make it in that first half-orbit or Kerbals are likely to die before the mission is complete.

Also I usually burn from LKO to leverage Mr. Oberth~. Normally to Duna it would be like .. 950dv to Kerbol orbit, and another 920-ish to Duna.. but if you burn just a bit faster at LKI, it's like 1055-ish total instead of 1870, a 43.5% savings (critical when your ship is mostly LS instead of LF/O :/ ). YOu don't actually need fancy tools to figure out what the correct ejection angle is either, just dial up 1055-ish dv on a maneuver node and drag it back and forth using either it's center handle or PreciseNode's +/- UT controls.

If I'm playing pure-ish stock (ie w/o life support, or on any probe), though, I think my technique is not all that different from yours, if I'm understanding it properly, although I always try to get the initial burn from LKO to put me at the target planet's altitude before making any adjustments in interplanetary space..

BTW, I have found it odd that KSP gives you maneuver nodes in DV and seconds, and yet this information isn't available directly anywhere in stock. Initially I used to use the formula that 90 units of fuel (including the correct amount of oxidizer, 110 per 90) is one ton and worked out the dv by hand (current wet mass is available in the 'info' tab of the map) prior to using KER and VOID...

[Superfluous J]

Oh, I see, it's outside of Kerbin's SOI, and I think using a multi-orbit technique.

Not quite. You really have to see it in action. I've made a video but won't be uploading it to YouTube for a couple days. Those first 3 steps you're not doing those burns, just using the maneuver nodes as a high-tech scratch pad to figure out when to actually do the real burn. That real burn is a single burn in LKO to take full advantage of Oberth and his effects.

I'm often playing against life support (usually BTSM (43kg/day minimum) or TAC_LS (1kg/week?), or Snacks! (uhh not even sure how big a snack is)), so I have to cross the distance in a half-orbit, using absolutely the lowest possible dv, so I have to make it in that first half-orbit or Kerbals are likely to die before the mission is complete.

My plan could take that into account, but you'd have to modify it a little bit so you didn't launch your ship hundreds of days before the window. You can do essentially the first part of that with a probe in LKO that is there specifically for the purpose of planning these windows, and then launch your ship when the time comes. I'll have to do this in my upcoming series where I will be actually using the Snacks mod to simulate life support.

Also I usually burn from LKO to leverage Mr. Oberth~. Normally to Duna it would be like .. 950dv to Kerbol orbit, and another 920-ish to Duna.. but if you burn just a bit faster at LKI, it's like 1055-ish total instead of 1870, a 43.5% savings

Yup. In the video I just edited together but won't be uploading for a couple days, I even detailed that I guessed it was about 1/3 savings but my numbers were roughly the same. I think I had 1700ish for the two planning nodes and 1100ish for the actual final node.

BTW, I have found it odd that KSP gives you maneuver nodes in DV and seconds, and yet this information isn't available directly anywhere in stock.

I don't find it odd. I find it infuriating.

Edited August 21, 2014 by 5thHorseman

[Kasuha]

BTW, I have found it odd that KSP gives you maneuver nodes in DV and seconds, and yet this information isn't available directly anywhere in stock.

I don't find it odd. KSP shows you your current speed and the maneuver tells you how much you need to change it. That does not have anything to do with thrust or fuel consumption. The seconds value has something to do with thrust, but it's about thrust only - it does not take fuel consumption (and acceleration increase) during burn into account.

By the way, both are inaccurate. Especially on long burns you're going to spend different (higher) amount of m/s of dv to make the orbit change. And thanks to your ship becoming lighter during the burn it does not take that long.

[Renegrade]

Yup. In the video I just edited together but won't be uploading for a couple days, I even detailed that I guessed it was about 1/3 savings but my numbers were roughly the same. I think I had 1700ish for the two planning nodes and 1100ish for the actual final node.

I'll have to check that out, not quite getting it from the description

I don't find it odd. KSP shows you your current speed and the maneuver tells you how much you need to change it. That does not have anything to do with thrust or fuel consumption.

Sure it does - how do you know if you are able to change your speed (y'know, a delta in velocity) by that much?

To make the maneuver planner line up with the rest of the UI's level of information, it should really only have the progress bar portion, or the rest of the UI should have dv or at least 'seconds of fuel at full power' indicators.

I can run up the figures by hand (although there's no way of finding out an engine's full thrust in space without running it up to a known thrust level), or use a mod, but that's kinda beside the point.

By the way, both are inaccurate. Especially on long burns you're going to spend different (higher) amount of m/s of dv to make the orbit change. And thanks to your ship becoming lighter during the burn it does not take that long.

I'm aware of that. It makes a number of um, let's say overly optimistic, contradictory assumptions. Like how it's assuming an instantaneous change in speed, and yet there IS a time indicator.. etcetc

[cantab]

The delta-V for a manoeuvre, combined with its direction, defines the manoeuvre. It can't not be in the game without ditching the manoeuvre planner outright. The delta-V of a rocket, on the other hand, is a derived property - important, yes, but a consequence of the rockets engines, mass, and amount of fuel. While it would be nice to have, it's not required for the game to work - as proven by the game working fine without it in stock.

[Kasuha]

Sure it does - how do you know if you are able to change your speed (y'know, a delta in velocity) by that much?

You don't. The maneuver doesn't as well. You can plan maneuver for any change in velocity, even those far exceeding capabilities of your ship. It only shows you what will happen if you change your velocity by that much.

Just note that I am not opposing your idea that rocket's dv capability information should be available in game. I'd definitely enjoy it and so would many other players. I'm just opposing the idea that presence of maneuver dv information is somehow invalid, incomplete or useless due to lack of rocket's dv capability information. In my opinion, it is not. It makes sense and is useful on its own.

[Red Iron Crown]

Delta-V is the currency of spaceflight (that's a great turn of phrase, Kasuha). The game not calculating it is baffling to me. Any halfways serious player is going to want that information, and making them resort to mods, external tools, or manual calculation for it is an indication of incompleteness to me. I understand that Squad doesn't want to overwhelm the player with numbers, but delta-V and TWR are the fundamental essentials of spacecraft design; these are some of the few numbers that absolutely should be included.

[NecroBones]

Delta-V is the currency of spaceflight (that's a great turn of phrase, Kasuha). The game not calculating it is baffling to me. Any halfways serious player is going to want that information, and making them resort to mods, external tools, or manual calculation for it is an indication of incompleteness to me. I understand that Squad doesn't want to overwhelm the player with numbers, but delta-V and TWR are the fundamental essentials of spacecraft design; these are some of the few numbers that absolutely should be included.

I couldn't agree more. I'm amazed that it doesn't at least give you a Current Thrust-to-Mass display (IMHO more important than TWR which is variable based on which body you're orbiting, and distance from that object). The closest thing we have is the G-load meter (which requires running the engines of course).

I do understand that calculating dV is a bit complicated since you can do a wide range of ridiculous staging and fuel-routing, not to mention treating docking sections as separate stages or not. Frequently KER and MJ disagree slightly on the results, and they can both royally screw up with more complex staging and docked parts.

But mass, total thrust, and TWR/TMR should be easily available stats for those who want them. And if they can do it reliably, dV would be the most useful.

[Renegrade]

Just note that I am not opposing your idea that rocket's dv capability information should be available in game. I'd definitely enjoy it and so would many other players. I'm just opposing the idea that presence of maneuver dv information is somehow invalid, incomplete or useless due to lack of rocket's dv capability information. In my opinion, it is not. It makes sense and is useful on its own.

Well, we'll have to agree to semi-disagree then. While I agree that it's not invalid or useless on it's own (afterall, the missing bits can be done by hand, which is what I did for the longest time heh), it DOES feel incomplete to me.

One thing I want to put out there is that the VAB(and SPH) could really use a 'current mass' indicator. The only way right now to manually calculate dv for a craft being built is to either manually sum up all the masses of the parts (especially fun since it doesn't tell you which ones are massless), or to launch to launchpad, go to the map, and click the 'info' screen, stage by stage..

Not really a disaster in either case ('specially since I have KER and VOID nowadays heh) but it just feels.. off to me.

[Kasuha]

One thing I want to put out there is that the VAB(and SPH) could really use a 'current mass' indicator. The only way right now to manually calculate dv for a craft being built is to either manually sum up all the masses of the parts (especially fun since it doesn't tell you which ones are massless), or to launch to launchpad, go to the map, and click the 'info' screen, stage by stage..

Actually I am missing this more than a dv indicator.

I'm playing KSP for a bit over a year now, and I calculated dv of my ship maybe three times total over that time. My ships may not be as effective as those from people using KER or MJ but I find them effective enough and it fills me with pride that I am now able to slap a few tanks to an engine and say okay, this seems to be good for the task - and it is, most of the time. I have not run a refueling mission for ages. And in case I am really unsure, I just "run a simulation" which is IMO better experience than checking a table of numbers. Better support to running such experiments is what IMO the game needs more, too.

On one hand, I am walking proof that the game can be played the way HarvesteR intends it to be played (to my knowledge).

On the other hand, I'm not one of many. I believe majority of serious players do use KER or MJ. Playing by numbers is easier than leveling your guesstimating skill.

[Corw]

Actually I am missing this more than a dv indicator.

I'm playing KSP for a bit over a year now, and I calculated dv of my ship maybe three times total over that time. My ships may not be as effective as those from people using KER or MJ but I find them effective enough and it fills me with pride that I am now able to slap a few tanks to an engine and say okay, this seems to be good for the task - and it is, most of the time. I have not run a refueling mission for ages. And in case I am really unsure, I just "run a simulation" which is IMO better experience than checking a table of numbers. Better support to running such experiments is what IMO the game needs more, too.

On one hand, I am walking proof that the game can be played the way HarvesteR intends it to be played (to my knowledge).

On the other hand, I'm not one of many. I believe majority of serious players do use KER or MJ. Playing by numbers is easier than leveling your guesstimating skill.

Wow, you are so awesome and cool, I want to have you babies. Actually, no.

So you claim you can make an interplanetary single launch mission from the first try?

[KerbMav]

Wow, you are so awesome and cool, I want to have you babies. Actually, no.

So you claim you can make an interplanetary single launch mission from the first try?

No, he did not, he described his approach to the game.

Edited August 22, 2014 by KerbMav

[Corw]

No, he did not, he described his approach to the game.

He said and I quote "I have not run a refueling mission for ages". That would mean that after reaching LKO he can reach his destination without a problem. If he is restricted to Kerbin and its moons, yeah, that is reasonable. But if that claim stands for interplanetary missions of any complexity, I would like to see screnshots and possible craft files. It wasn't before I went interplanetary that I actually had the need for hard delta v numbers, so based on my personal experience, he is rather good and I want to see that or full of ...., which again from my personal experience with people is more likely.