As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
We're funding a new Acquisitions Incorporated series on Kickstarter right now! Check it out at https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/pennyarcade/acquisitions-incorporated-the-series-2

[Kerbal Space Program] Shiny new thread! Desperately seeking pictures of rockets

1141517192099

Posts

  • Nova_CNova_C I have the need The need for speedRegistered User regular
    I haven't noticed any changes to the controls.

    However, I've noticed that lateral separators no longer apply any force, so I've been using the Sepatron boosters a lot more.

  • VeeveeVeevee WisconsinRegistered User regular
    Ianator wrote: »
    [Tycho?]: I think the Autosaves are just directly to your profile save so if the game crashes you can load again at that point.

    Yeah, auto save is like a single save that is constantly overridden every time you do pretty much anything. It doesn't care if it's an older or newer save, it will be overridden. The quick save is a separate save that is never overridden until you do another quick save, so loading that save can, as Tycho found out, very easily set you back an ungodly amount of time which is then saved through the auto save immediately. Because of this, I try to do a quick save as soon as I load my game so that if I, or my damn cat or something, accidentally loaded the save I'd only lose that days progress instead of finding myself back at the start of the tech tree losing all that hard work.

    IanatorcrimsoncoyoteZilla360Elvenshae
  • lowlylowlycooklowlylowlycook Registered User regular
    edited July 2014
    After yet another landing that lacked even a smidge of excitement, I'm thinking that the difference is that my lander is a bit underpowered compared to what I used to use which makes managing my velocity easier and thus allows me to concentrate more on keeping the decent vertical.

    Basically it comes down to the existence of LV-1Rs.

    lowlylowlycook on
    steam_sig.png
    (Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
  • [Tycho?][Tycho?] As elusive as doubt Registered User regular
    Nova_C wrote: »
    I haven't noticed any changes to the controls.

    However, I've noticed that lateral separators no longer apply any force, so I've been using the Sepatron boosters a lot more.

    Is this a bug or something? I noticed as well, when my big hydraulic manifolds didn't stop the liquid boosters taking out the main stage. I kinda like that I have to use sepatron, but I don't see the purpose of the bigger separators.
    After yet another landing that lacked even a smidge of excitement, I'm thinking that the difference is that my lander is a bit underpowered compared to what I used to use which makes managing my velocity easier and thus allows me to concentrate more on keeping the decent vertical.

    Basically it comes down to the existence of LV-1Rs.

    Less thrust helped me as well, makes the whole thing a lot less nail-biting.

    mvaYcgc.jpg
  • Zilla360Zilla360 21st Century. |She/Her| Trans* Woman In Aviators Firing A Bazooka. ⚛️Registered User regular
  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    I haven't noticed any changes to the controls.

    However, I've noticed that lateral separators no longer apply any force, so I've been using the Sepatron boosters a lot more.

    Is this a bug or something? I noticed as well, when my big hydraulic manifolds didn't stop the liquid boosters taking out the main stage. I kinda like that I have to use sepatron, but I don't see the purpose of the bigger separators.

    It's a bug specifically with the 64-bit version, relating to Unity's physics engine.

  • VeeveeVeevee WisconsinRegistered User regular
    Anyone else get a contract to test the mainsail on Minmus? I can tell you that, while it does work, it is not an ideal engine for that little ball of rock.

    Jeb had other things to say, mainly that it still didn't have enough power after landing a craft on Minmus with 5 of them, but he's a special kind of crazy bastard

  • Nova_CNova_C I have the need The need for speedRegistered User regular
    Daedalus wrote: »
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    Nova_C wrote: »
    I haven't noticed any changes to the controls.

    However, I've noticed that lateral separators no longer apply any force, so I've been using the Sepatron boosters a lot more.

    Is this a bug or something? I noticed as well, when my big hydraulic manifolds didn't stop the liquid boosters taking out the main stage. I kinda like that I have to use sepatron, but I don't see the purpose of the bigger separators.

    It's a bug specifically with the 64-bit version, relating to Unity's physics engine.

    I'm not running the 64 bit version. I know this because just yesterday I exceeded the 3 GB memory limit for the first time.

  • DhalphirDhalphir don't you open that trapdoor you're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
    Are there any decent part packs for rover-related parts?

  • ShogunShogun Hair long; money long; me and broke wizards we don't get along Registered User regular
    Dhalphir wrote: »
    Are there any decent part packs for rover-related parts?

    what exactly are you after? I wish we had a lot bigger selection of wheels and bodies

  • DhalphirDhalphir don't you open that trapdoor you're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
    Wheels and bodies mainly, yeah.

  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    Wow, this SSTO came together nicely. Now to try for using it to complete the aerospike engine around Minmus contract.

    ElvenshaeZilla360
  • lowlylowlycooklowlylowlycook Registered User regular
    So how do people arrange fuel supplies to these RAPIER engines?

    steam_sig.png
    (Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
  • DhalphirDhalphir don't you open that trapdoor you're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
    What do you mean? If you're going to spend any significant amount of time in the atmosphere besides a normal takeoff, include a liquid-fuel-only fuel canister, but otherwise just plug them into a normal LFO tank. You'll have a bit of oxidiser left over and no fuel to burn with it, but that's not a big deal.

  • lowlylowlycooklowlylowlycook Registered User regular
    I guess I haven't researched oxygen tanks. Is that what LFO stands for?

    steam_sig.png
    (Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
  • crimsoncoyotecrimsoncoyote Registered User regular
    LFO is liquid fuel+oxygen. LFO is the default tank, so you likely have a few different LFO tanks to choose from.
    There's no tank that only holds oxidizer. There are some tanks that have fuel and no oxidizer (may be listed as "structural fuselage" I think), so in order to run a jet engine on it, you need air intakes as well. This also goes for RAPIER engines in air-breathing mode.

    ElvenshaeZilla360
  • IanatorIanator Gaze upon my works, ye mighty and facepalm.Registered User regular
    LFO is liquid fuel+oxygen. LFO is the default tank, so you likely have a few different LFO tanks to choose from.
    There's no tank that only holds oxidizer. There are some tanks that have fuel and no oxidizer (may be listed as "structural fuselage" I think), so in order to run a jet engine on it, you need air intakes as well. This also goes for RAPIER engines in air-breathing mode.

    Structural Fuselage is just that, structure. You're thinking of the "jet fuel" tanks - there's one that fits in with 1.25m rocket part and one or two of those will fill all your air-breathing needs.

    steam_sig.png
    Twitch | Blizzard: Ianator#1479 | 3DS: Ianator - 1779 2336 5317 | FFXIV: Iana Ateliere (NA Sarg)
    Backlog Challenge List
    crimsoncoyoteZilla360
  • VeeveeVeevee WisconsinRegistered User regular
    Ianator wrote: »
    LFO is liquid fuel+oxygen. LFO is the default tank, so you likely have a few different LFO tanks to choose from.
    There's no tank that only holds oxidizer. There are some tanks that have fuel and no oxidizer (may be listed as "structural fuselage" I think), so in order to run a jet engine on it, you need air intakes as well. This also goes for RAPIER engines in air-breathing mode.

    Structural Fuselage is just that, structure. You're thinking of the "jet fuel" tanks - there's one that fits in with 1.25m rocket part and one or two of those will fill all your air-breathing needs.

    You can also take any LFO tank and remove the oxidizer turning it into the "jet fuel" tank.

    ElvenshaecrimsoncoyoteZilla360
  • [Tycho?][Tycho?] As elusive as doubt Registered User regular
    So this is interesting. Bob has been exploring Mun a bit (his little jet pack is so fun and dangerous, at one point he tumbled at least a km down a crater side before finally going splat), and I've been using this map of Mun's biomes.
    MunBiomeMap.png

    I'm at the north side of East Crater, and while flying up the side to get to the highlands, I passed over Polar Lowlands, which is really the side of a smaller crater. Which is cool, more biomes = more science, but it sure doesn't feel very polar to ol Bob here. Any thoughts?

    mvaYcgc.jpg
  • VeeveeVeevee WisconsinRegistered User regular
    Sounds like you may have found a bug in the Mun's biome map. Send squad an email with the exact coordinates of where you found the probably errant Polar Lowlands and they'll fix it in a future patch, assuming it is indeed a bug.

  • DhalphirDhalphir don't you open that trapdoor you're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    So this is interesting. Bob has been exploring Mun a bit (his little jet pack is so fun and dangerous, at one point he tumbled at least a km down a crater side before finally going splat), and I've been using this map of Mun's biomes.
    MunBiomeMap.png

    I'm at the north side of East Crater, and while flying up the side to get to the highlands, I passed over Polar Lowlands, which is really the side of a smaller crater. Which is cool, more biomes = more science, but it sure doesn't feel very polar to ol Bob here. Any thoughts?

    More accurate map of the Mun biomes
    i0xdh2P.jpg

    Commander ZoomZilla360
  • DhalphirDhalphir don't you open that trapdoor you're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
    watching Cosmos while playing KSP

    best things

    Zilla360ElvenshaeIanator
  • DhalphirDhalphir don't you open that trapdoor you're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
    This is one of my favourite lander designs for the Mun and Minmus. Four radial fuel tanks surrounding a central science jr, fed by fuel lines. Then a separate tiny fuel tank with a small engine atop a decoupler on top of the central core. This example pictured has safely landed on the Mun with over 3000m/s of delta v in the four radial tanks, and a further 1.3k delta v in the ascent/return stage. Ideal for biome hopping.

    8FHuGFP.png

    Zilla360ElvenshaeAl_watSceptrecrimsoncoyote
  • [Tycho?][Tycho?] As elusive as doubt Registered User regular
    Veevee wrote: »
    Sounds like you may have found a bug in the Mun's biome map. Send squad an email with the exact coordinates of where you found the probably errant Polar Lowlands and they'll fix it in a future patch, assuming it is indeed a bug.

    I also found Polar right next to it, and got surface samples from both biomes. It is right on the border between the crater and the highlands, so maybe that is the cause of the bug. However, this would be an interesting place in real life as well; crater rims have interesting geology that isn't found at the bottom or on the surface.

    mvaYcgc.jpg
  • DixonDixon Screwed...possibly doomed CanadaRegistered User regular
    edited August 2014
    Is it possible to have a manned lander that runs just on those small stock ion engines?

    EDIT: I did not realize there are that many biomes on the moon, fuck those midlands though. Felt like no matter where I went that's what I got

    Dixon on
  • InfamyDeferredInfamyDeferred Registered User regular
    edited August 2014
    Dhalphir wrote: »
    This is one of my favourite lander designs for the Mun and Minmus. Four radial fuel tanks surrounding a central science jr, fed by fuel lines. Then a separate tiny fuel tank with a small engine atop a decoupler on top of the central core. This example pictured has safely landed on the Mun with over 3000m/s of delta v in the four radial tanks, and a further 1.3k delta v in the ascent/return stage. Ideal for biome hopping.

    8FHuGFP.png
    The design I use is similar, but with a 400 fuel tank in the center, 200's attached radially, a materials lab on top of each of the 200s and a goo pod under each. Less overall delta-v, but more materials labs because they yield pretty decent science return.

    InfamyDeferred on
  • DhalphirDhalphir don't you open that trapdoor you're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
    Oh, I should probably explain that I modified my goo canisters and materials bays to be reusable.

    the main reason for materials bays/goo canisters to be one-use-only is to avoid transmission spam. That was why they made the initial change. With the additional advent of transmission caps anyway, I don't see why they shouldn't be reusable again, especially with funds now an issue.

  • DhalphirDhalphir don't you open that trapdoor you're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
    Dixon wrote: »
    Is it possible to have a manned lander that runs just on those small stock ion engines?

    EDIT: I did not realize there are that many biomes on the moon, fuck those midlands though. Felt like no matter where I went that's what I got

    Not if you want to carry all the requisite science equipment. If it was just a pod ion engines could do it, I think.

  • DixonDixon Screwed...possibly doomed CanadaRegistered User regular
    aw that is no good, even if you were able to set it up in a manner that had like 6 engines? or how much thrust would you need?

  • DhalphirDhalphir don't you open that trapdoor you're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
    Its not about pure thrust. It's about thrust to mass ratio of the engines, fuel, and power generation. Ion engines barely have the thrust to push that weight around, let alone the weight of payloads. In deep space, thrust to weight ratios don't matter much - low thrust just means a long burn time for manoeuvres. But when you're trying to land on a planet, you need lots of thrust to counteract the stronger gravity nearer the surface, and you don't have the luxury of feeding out thrust over a long time period.

    Zilla360Elvenshae
  • InfamyDeferredInfamyDeferred Registered User regular
    edited August 2014
    Dixon wrote: »
    aw that is no good, even if you were able to set it up in a manner that had like 6 engines? or how much thrust would you need?

    The best way to find out would be to install Kerbal Engineer; it shows the lander's Thrust to Weight Ratio and you can cycle through the moons and planets. Anything TWR under 1 would be impossible to take off with. It would vary an incredible amount depending on what you're landing on, Minmus probably one ion engine would work, the Mun probably two or three. Tylo you probably couldn't take off no matter how many you had.

    InfamyDeferred on
  • [Tycho?][Tycho?] As elusive as doubt Registered User regular
    Dhalphir wrote: »
    Oh, I should probably explain that I modified my goo canisters and materials bays to be reusable.

    the main reason for materials bays/goo canisters to be one-use-only is to avoid transmission spam. That was why they made the initial change. With the additional advent of transmission caps anyway, I don't see why they shouldn't be reusable again, especially with funds now an issue.

    You make a good point. From a realist stance, I find science a bit too tough to come by- I'm also impatient to unlock more of the tech tree to get my interplanetary missions going. How did you modify these things?

    mvaYcgc.jpg
  • DhalphirDhalphir don't you open that trapdoor you're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
  • [Tycho?][Tycho?] As elusive as doubt Registered User regular
    Thanks.

    for anyone else interested:
    You could also change the part.cfg In GameData/Squad/Parts/Science go to GooExperiment/MaterialBay and open the part.cfg there you add the line "rerunnable = True" in the brackets of MODULE after interactionRange

    mvaYcgc.jpg
    Gnome-Interruptus
  • wonderpugwonderpug Registered User regular
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    Dhalphir wrote: »
    Oh, I should probably explain that I modified my goo canisters and materials bays to be reusable.

    the main reason for materials bays/goo canisters to be one-use-only is to avoid transmission spam. That was why they made the initial change. With the additional advent of transmission caps anyway, I don't see why they shouldn't be reusable again, especially with funds now an issue.

    You make a good point. From a realist stance, I find science a bit too tough to come by- I'm also impatient to unlock more of the tech tree to get my interplanetary missions going. How did you modify these things?

    I'm not a big fan of how you collect science with the science equipment, but there's tons of science to be had just through the new missions. Scan through the rewards for your available missions and you'll likely find some with big science payouts. I've got the majority of the tech tree unlocked on my current save and almost all of the science has come from missions.

  • [Tycho?][Tycho?] As elusive as doubt Registered User regular
    wonderpug wrote: »
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    Dhalphir wrote: »
    Oh, I should probably explain that I modified my goo canisters and materials bays to be reusable.

    the main reason for materials bays/goo canisters to be one-use-only is to avoid transmission spam. That was why they made the initial change. With the additional advent of transmission caps anyway, I don't see why they shouldn't be reusable again, especially with funds now an issue.

    You make a good point. From a realist stance, I find science a bit too tough to come by- I'm also impatient to unlock more of the tech tree to get my interplanetary missions going. How did you modify these things?

    I'm not a big fan of how you collect science with the science equipment, but there's tons of science to be had just through the new missions. Scan through the rewards for your available missions and you'll likely find some with big science payouts. I've got the majority of the tech tree unlocked on my current save and almost all of the science has come from missions.

    Yeah I've seen that too. I've also seen some big science pay-outs not happen because of a bug. And I got like 250 science for an easy mission, only to have it replaced when I neglected to quick save. Sigh.

    mvaYcgc.jpg
  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    I'm having a problem with TacLifeSupport where mid-way through a flight the containers just disappear and my planes then lose all control and go weird. Can't figure out what's happening - the part just straight up vanishes.

    Zilla360
  • DhalphirDhalphir don't you open that trapdoor you're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
    [Tycho?] wrote: »
    Thanks.

    for anyone else interested:
    You could also change the part.cfg In GameData/Squad/Parts/Science go to GooExperiment/MaterialBay and open the part.cfg there you add the line "rerunnable = True" in the brackets of MODULE after interactionRange

    Thanks for quoting that, I was copying the link from my tablet right before bed and didn't want to delve into the link and post the text.

  • DhalphirDhalphir don't you open that trapdoor you're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
    @Arsonide‌
    I love your Fine Print mod. I really do. But do the aerial survey locations have to reward so little science for how much time they take? I think it would be more enjoyable if the survey locations were closer or more valuable.

Sign In or Register to comment.