Presentation with KSP

[Crutchlow13]

Hii!

I'm currently working on a research paper of artificial sattelites. Doing the written part was not that bad because I just needed to search for information and copy it, but I have to do a presentation which needs to include a "practical" part.

I was thinking to use KSP to demonstrate how a satellite is set in orbit, but I've never played it before and I don't know exactly what I should do. Could you help me please?

Thanks!

[technicalfool]

Getting hold of the demo would be a good first step, assuming you haven't bought the full game yet. That should have enough parts for you to fling something into orbit.

The other trick of course being that you don't just go up, you go sideways, and incredibly quickly at that. Planets on KSP are about 10x smaller than they should be, but that still means more or less 2km/sec (or around 4,500MPH) velocity required to remain in a stable low Kerbin orbit. You might want to mention some of those differences in your demonstration, since actual satellites such as the ISS are travelling at around 17,000MPH.

I'm sure other people here will chime in with more useful tips, so I'll leave the rest to the crowd!

[Javster]

Indeed: the way I first made orbit was going straight up and firing sideways at my peak. You might want to try Near/Far for an accurate gravity turn

[NathanKell]

It depends on whether you have the demo or the game. If you have only the demo, yeah.

[Thomas988]

If you have the full version, why not use RealSolarSystem and Hyperedit?

[Epthelyn]

What exactly do you mean by "set in orbit"?

If you want to demonstrate the relatively simple orbital mechanics behind a satellite launch into an orbit at a particular altitude then that should be fairly easy and KSP is perfect for that.

If you want to realistically demonstrate a satellite launch and all the potentially complicated stuff involved then KSP can still do that, but that may be difficult if you've never actually played the game before.

[NathanKell]

The issue is that without FAR, your ascent will look very, very little like a real ascent. With FAR, KSP can server as a suitable analog for a real ascent; without it, it's going to be somewhat odd.

[Crown]

[...]I have to do a presentation which needs to include a "practical" part.

[...]to demonstrate how a satellite is set in orbit, but I've never played it before and I don't know exactly what I should do. [...]

The differences between KSP and the real world have to be explained, as technicalfool mentionend, in case you use KSP for your demonstration. If you use the demo, your comrades can try the same scenario too. And you all don't have to buy the game.

The Kerbal 5, which is included in the Demo is able to reach orbit and get even higher. Sadly the demo has a very limited number of parts and does not represent the beauty of quality of the game nowadays (it might be time for a new Demo). Since you already know the basic scheme of setting a satellite into orbit I will just explain how to get the Kerbal 5 into an stable orbit. There's surely a lot of tutorials out there but I am going to explain it here again because I don't know how much time you have to figure search for those. The numbers are not precise and don't have to be, so don't worry if your numbers don't match mine.

How to get the Kerbal 5 from the Demo into orbit:

Requirements:

- KSP Demo

- Knowing the controls for the rocket

1. Start a new savegame, with a name of your choice.
   
2. Click on the launch pad and choose the Kerbal 5, click "Load".
   
3. After the rocket is loaded (the camera moves down a bit), press T to activate SAS.
   
4. Swap Stage5 and Stage6 by click&drag Stage5 over Stage7.
   
5. Hit "Space" twice to (A) activate the Boosters (also called SRB) and ( releasing the launch clamps
   
6. Shortly after launch tilt the rocket to the right using "D" to about 85° (ignore the HDG marked number). Hold "F" to switch off SAS of the correction. Let "F" go if the orange marker crosses the desired angle.
   
7. While the rocket ascents go to full throttle. Nothing happens yet. Meanwhile the rocket wobbles, that's normal.
   
8. Swap Stage4 and Stage5.
   
9. (T+00:28) When the SRBs burn out hit space twice to ditch them and activate the liquid engines.
   
10. Keep the needle in the right gauge (that's the acceleration) in the upper green section by throttling down from time to time.
    
11. (T+00:58) At 6'300m (middle of light blue) tilt to 70° (again, ignore the as HDG marked number. You might want to keep that around 90°, but not thaaat important).
    
12. (T+01:23) At 12'700m (end of light blue) tilt to 60°.
    
13. Go to map view and zoom in to the arch. Mouse over the AP and watch the number rise.
    
14. (T+01:48) At 22'500m (middle of darker blue) tilt to 45°.
    
15. (T+02:07) At 32'300m (end of darker blue) tilt to 30°.
    
16. (T+02:15) At 39'000m tilt to 20°.
    
17. Go to map view and watch the AP rise to about 72'000m. Press "X" when it's there.
    
18. Tilt rocket to -10° (marker now in the brown stuff, ignore the HDG number).
    
19. When you hear music (or over 70'000m), throttle fully up.
    
20. Keep and eye on the rocket. When the engines burn out, stage twice to ditch the spend stage and activate the new one.
    
21. Watch the AP rise until "Pe" appears and rises above 40'000m. Then you have a quite misshaped orbit, but hey, you are in orbit now. Oh, cut engine with "X".
    

-To make the orbit it a bit better shaped, you can try to fiddle with the throttle and the pitch a little bit during the orbit insertion.

-At AP you can make the orbit circular if you want.

In case you want to show a real rocket launch, there are a lot of videos of launches on http://www.youtube.com/user/SpaceVidsNet/videos but some of them aren't from launch to payload deployment.

Arianespace with it's launch vehicles Ariane 5, Soyuz and Vega is a good choice since they only transport satellites. On the 16th October there's another Arianespace launch with an Ariane 5 which carries two satellites. On their stream they explain it quite well and you are given a graph which shows the rocket's ascent path. In case you prefer another launch, Spaceflight Now has a big list and (almost) anything from American and French companies will be streamed.

List of streaming sites (I feel they have the better quality than SpaceFlightNow):

http://www.ulalaunch.com/webcast.aspx - ULA, United Launch Alliance

http://www.arianespace.tv/ - Ariancespace

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html - NASA (for anything that goes to the ISS)

http://www.spacex.com/webcast/ - SpaceX

It might be useful to record the stream to cut uninteresting things out.

In my opinion, the differences between a KSP launch and a real launch are too little when it's about a presentation on the basic principles. All the law apply to both a real rockets and KSP (with other drag model and scales but that's pretty much it).

[cantab]

The issue is that without FAR, your ascent will look very, very little like a real ascent. With FAR, KSP can server as a suitable analog for a real ascent; without it, it's going to be somewhat odd.

Even in the stock game you can fly a much more realistic ascent profile than players usually do, it's just actually less efficient, but that won't matter for the presentation. If you like, mention in passing that the simulation's aerodynamics aren't very accurate so a real rocket's ascent might be slightly different.

[Kerbart]

It might be good to know what the audience is. "Research paper" can mean many things. Is it PHD level? College grads? Freshmen? High schoolers? A demo for "back to school" night? The science fair? Boyscouts? A Toastmasters speech? Without knowing who the audience is we can speculate a lot about what the OP should tell his audience and what we need to tell him, but without knowing it's hard to give a correct response.

[Crutchlow13]

Hi there! Sorry for replying so late but I've had lots of exams and little time;.;

Getting hold of the demo would be a good first step, assuming you haven't bought the full game yet.

Well I bought the game a few days ago because it's the least thing I can do to thank the developers for making this game and giving me this tool to do my presentation:)

If you have the full version, why not use RealSolarSystem and Hyperedit?

I'm pretty new to the game so I don't know what they are about

What exactly do you mean by "set in orbit"?

If you want to demonstrate the relatively simple orbital mechanics behind a satellite launch into an orbit at a particular altitude then that should be fairly easy and KSP is perfect for that.

If you want to realistically demonstrate a satellite launch and all the potentially complicated stuff involved then KSP can still do that, but that may be difficult if you've never actually played the game before.

Well,basically what you said first, to demonstrate in an easy way the orbital mechanics behind a satellite launch into a geostationary orbit (as I'm planning to focus on communication satellites). I'd like to film a video (or do it live, i'm not sure about that) and play it while I'm explaining what I'm doing. the thing is that I don't want it to be like a gameplay, but a background to explain the "physics". Ii'm not sure what to say though, so If someone could help me with that I would be very thankful :3

The issue is that without FAR, your ascent will look very, very little like a real ascent. With FAR, KSP can server as a suitable analog for a real ascent; without it, it's going to be somewhat odd.

Yeah I've been playing the game for a while now and I've realised that it's maybe it's weakest point, but I might play a video of a real launch as well from the links that Crown provided.

It might be good to know what the audience is. "Research paper" can mean many things. Is it PHD level? College grads? Freshmen? High schoolers? A demo for "back to school" night? The science fair? Boyscouts? A Toastmasters speech? Without knowing who the audience is we can speculate a lot about what the OP should tell his audience and what we need to tell him, but without knowing it's hard to give a correct response.

The audience will be two teachers who will know little to know about this topic and maybe some highscoolers, so it's expected to be fairly easy (i'm a college grad myself so I can't go very deep neither )

Thank you all so much and sorry for my english:blush:

[Pecan]

Kerbin-stationary is a high orbit to launch into. It is normal to launch into a low orbit and then boost to the higher one, either still using the last launch-vehicle stage or the satellite itself (which might make a better presentation). I'd recommend that you 'script' exactly what your mission will be (here, if you want us to critique it). Might I also suggest that you look at Chapter 3 of the tutorial in my signature, which deals with Kerbin orbital satellites (albeit they are polar-orbit mapping satellites instead of synchronous CommSats). It might give you some ideas anyway.

As you say you want it to be a background rather than a gameplay consider install MechJeb (MJ), which has autopilot capabilities. Presentation outline might then go as:

1. Introduction/objectives
   
2. Launch with MJ. Takes about 5 minutes to Low Kerbin Orbit (LKO), during which explain the launch vehicle (staging or whatever you are interested in), ascent burn, gravity turn - orbit is more about going sideways fast, not going up - and circularisation (orbit injection) burn.
   
3. Jettison launch-vehicle.
   
4. Set MJ to increase satellite apoapsis (Ap) at next periapsis (Pe), then circularise at new apoapsis. Time this first but it'll take a few minutes, even with auto-warp. Use the time for an explanation of Ap, Pe, prograde, retrograde, etc.
   
5. Similarly bring inclination to zero-degrees. While MJ finishes that off explain normal/anti-normal burns.
   
6. Whatever you like ... questions ...
   

[DrD]

Well what fascinated me when I first got into KSP was orbital mechanics in general, such as periapsis / apoapsis, transfer orbits, etc. Especially how thrusting prograde (forward) puts you into a higher orbit that overall is slower than a lower orbit such that to catch up to an object you need to burn retrograde (slow down.) Inclination changes are also interesting especially when you understand how making the change at apoapsis is more efficient.

All these concepts can be demonstrated very nicely in map mode. Map mode is ideal for seeing how orbits change when you burn different ways.

So if I was doing this paper, here's what I'd do:

1. learn about the concepts above. there are several good guides to basic orbital mechanics on this site and many here can answer the specific questions you'll probably have after reading the basics.

2. Use KSP in map mode to demonstrate basic orbital mechanics, including:

a. circular orbits vs elliptical

b. effect of burning prograde, retrograde, normal/antinormal, radial in/out

c. Hohman transfer orbits

d. circularization burns

e. inclination change especially as it relates to current velocity. A good spot to discuss vectors and difference between speed (scalar) and velocity (vector.)

f. You could also throw in surface speed vs. orbital speed and why rockets take off to the east. This can then lead to a discussion on relative motion in general and the whole theory of special relativity. You could use map mode to show how for example an orbit when viewed from the perspective of say the Mun is very different from the same orbit from the perspective of Kerbin. Map mode shows this very nicely. Hint: if you focus on Mun map mode will draw your orbit relative to the Mun, return focus to your ship and you'll see the orbit relative to Kerbin (if you're still in Kerbin's SOI.)

I think all this would work best if you do a lot of video editing so you can just show the parts you want and perhaps cut back and forth to some diagrams on orbital mechanics. The specific sequence for a satellite launch would be:

launch to the east

establish circular orbit

burn prograde to increase apoapsis (Hohman transfer orbit)

inclination change at apoapsis (geosynch satellites need an inclination change I think)

circ burn at apoapsis to change to a circular, geosynchronous orbit

Anyway that's what I'd do.

[Crutchlow13]

Kerbin-stationary is a high orbit to launch into. It is normal to launch into a low orbit and then boost to the higher one, either still using the last launch-vehicle stage or the satellite itself (which might make a better presentation). I'd recommend that you 'script' exactly what your mission will be (here, if you want us to critique it). Might I also suggest that you look at Chapter 3 of the tutorial in my signature, which deals with Kerbin orbital satellites (albeit they are polar-orbit mapping satellites instead of synchronous CommSats). It might give you some ideas anyway.

As you say you want it to be a background rather than a gameplay consider install MechJeb (MJ), which has autopilot capabilities. Presentation outline might then go as:

1. Introduction/objectives
   
2. Launch with MJ. Takes about 5 minutes to Low Kerbin Orbit (LKO), during which explain the launch vehicle (staging or whatever you are interested in), ascent burn, gravity turn - orbit is more about going sideways fast, not going up - and circularisation (orbit injection) burn.
   
3. Jettison launch-vehicle.
   
4. Set MJ to increase satellite apoapsis (Ap) at next periapsis (Pe), then circularise at new apoapsis. Time this first but it'll take a few minutes, even with auto-warp. Use the time for an explanation of Ap, Pe, prograde, retrograde, etc.
   
5. Similarly bring inclination to zero-degrees. While MJ finishes that off explain normal/anti-normal burns.
   
6. Whatever you like ... questions ...
   

Since I've done a written part, I will first explain basic concepts(e.g kepler laws, orbital speed,period...), different types of orbits and different types of satellites and what they are used for. And here's when it comes the KSP part, where I'll exemplify what I had said before. The mission could be a communication satellite launch and to get it into orbit, but I then thought that I could do something bigger but I'm not exactly sure what to do. Maybe a communication satellite network? What do you think?

Will MechJeb make it look more like a real launch? Because I don't want that they think that it's an easy game with no physics behind, do you know what I mean?

[plaerzen]

record your tests flights, show a bloopers reel at the end to demonstrate things ain't easy.

[Jr6150x]

Pretty cool mate! This is a great idea. Last year for school I used KSP to simulate the LADEE launch for a presentation. Hope yours works out to!

[LordFerret]

My cousin's son used KSP for a project at school, similar. He made a video and stood there in class while it played, narrating it. Got him a good grade! I agree with plaerzen above, also maybe show the construction phase of the vehicle too.

[Pecan]

...I then thought that I could do something bigger but I'm not exactly sure what to do. Maybe a communication satellite network? What do you think?

Will MechJeb make it look more like a real launch? Because I don't want that they think that it's an easy game with no physics behind, do you know what I mean?

There are several questions behind what you're asking. I am lucky enough to have been taught how to make presentations, lectures, professionally; something most people are just dumped into. Walter Cronkite is a fairly famous presenter and (I can't find any references so it may be apocryphal) was said to have been interviewed himself, to wit:

Q: If you have to give a 5-minute presentation how long does it take you to prepare?

A: For a 5-minute presentation I'd probably take two or three weeks.

Q: Two or three weeks, that seems like a very long time! What if it was for 10 minutes?

A: A 10-minute presentation would take around four or five hours.

Q: Less time for a longer presentation? What if it was an hour?

A: I'm ready.

The point being that the shorter your presentation the more sure you must be of exactly what point(s) you want to make and how you will make them, everything else must be cut. If you have a long time - waffle!

As a very loose rule-of-thumb expect to only make one point per 5 minutes. So what is your most important point?

?? A communications-satellite is usually placed in a planet-stationary orbit so that it can always send and receive signals with the same patch of ground ??

- sub-point: A 'stationary' orbit means it orbits (orbital period) in the same period as the planet turns.

- sub-point: 'orbit' means going sideways so fast you keep missing the ground as you 'free fall' towards it.

- sub-point: The lower you are the less time you have before you hit the ground - so the faster sideways (around) you have to go.

- sub-point: Which means the higher you are the slower you go (orbital velocity)

- sub-point: So there is an 'ideal' altitude where the orbital velocity => orbital period = planetary rotation

The LAST thing I'd recommend is that you go bigger, unless you have a lot of time. To be honest I don't know what "look more like a real launch" would mean - but then neither does your audience so don't worry about it (/handwavium <-ignore this if you don't already know it). What a 'real' launch looks like (from Kerbin? Earth gravity but much smaller? Have they seen (not just watched on TV) a 'real' launch?) isn't your point - the maths and physics of it is.

Just because Kerbin isn't Earth doesn't change the problem - find an orbital altitude where the orbital period matches the planetary rotation. Focus on that and only that.

(Unless you have a lot of time - in which case I might start charging ^^).

Edit: Oh - the MJ recommendation is because getting an autopilot to do it is more 'real' AND it means the thing is live, but you are free to talk while it happens. This isn't just a case of "watch this recording ..." (yawn), it's "here is this thing launching ..." (now). You won't be able to predict just how circular the final orbit will be, how flat the inclination, etc. YOU will have to set-up the necessary corrections in steps 4/5 of my original outline.

{ETA Again: The ideal presentation is 10 minutes, following the "I tell 'em what I'm going to tell 'em, I tell 'em, then I tell 'em what I told 'em" structure:

3 minutes: why the point is important to them

3 minutes: the point

3 minutes: how much better things are if they get the point

1 minute: questions, thank you ... oops (leave them wanting more)}

In brief: Introduction, subject, summary.

Edited November 20, 2014 by Pecan

[metl]

If you've done the proper research for a paper with proper citations and not just copy and pasting, you should have enough knowledge of the physics to be able to explain it as it goes through the process. If you are trying to use KSP as an out for a quick and easy grade (and your in college) based on what a bunch of random people in a forum tell you, your professor is going to rip it apart. But hey, it's your grade. If you were one of my students, I wouldn't just accept a video presentation of a video game as hard research.

[Crutchlow13]

Thank you very much! That was surely helpful.

[...]To be honest I don't know what "look more like a real launch" would mean [...]

[...]Unless you have a lot of time -[...]

Well I think I've just succed in making it as a "real launch" as I wanted with the mod RemoteTech, because you are not able to control the vessel unless it's in range. But this won't allow me to do it live with MechJeb's autopilot because it goes crazy when the satellite doesn't reach the mission control.

And for the time, I have 20-25 minutes, so I will have plenty of to time to finish

If you've done the proper research for a paper with proper citations and not just copy and pasting, you should have enough knowledge of the physics to be able to explain it as it goes through the process. If you are trying to use KSP as an out for a quick and easy grade (and your in college) based on what a bunch of random people in a forum tell you, your professor is going to rip it apart. But hey, it's your grade. If you were one of my students, I wouldn't just accept a video presentation of a video game as hard research.

You got me wrong. I will use KSP as a background to exemplify the orbital mechanics that should covered. Of course I have done a research, and that I think I will be able to explain it (what do you refer by "physics?).

[Pecan]

Well I think I've just succed in making it as a "real launch" as I wanted with the mod RemoteTech, because you are not able to control the vessel unless it's in range. But this won't allow me to do it live with MechJeb's autopilot because it goes crazy when the satellite doesn't reach the mission control.

KOS (scriptable autopilot) is the usual way to control things when you're using RT. I have to say though I think you're making the 'background' KSP much more difficult than it has to be. Good luck, in any case.

[Dispatcher]

I recommend that you involve your audience. During construction and flight, ask for opinions about the kinds of decisions that the participants think would result in a successful mission.