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

Dhalphir

They're intersecting for a very brief time because they're moving at different speeds. You want to zero out relative speed once you are within a few kms. The better your thrust to weight ratio is the longer you can wait before starting th burn to match velocities.

Prime

Right so the problem is most likely in my matching speed. Will take another look tonight and practice.

I've kinda ignored this game for so long, but man its fun. Glad I picked it up. Playing on the science only career mode to gradually get used to all the bits. Such good fun. Is it possible to research yourself into a dead end btw. Most unlocks have helped me do more things to earn more but i'm slightly cautious about picking a "useless" node.

crimsoncoyote

There are some that are more valuable than others, for sure. But I don't think you'll actually be able to research your place into a hole.
I think it's generally recommended you head down the bottom branch of the tree, since that's where all the SCIENCE! bits tend to be, but not to the exclusion of all else.

Dhalphir

There's enough science on the Mun and Minmus alone to get 80% of the tech tree or more. You'll be fine.

Elbasunu

ANyone have any experience with the multi-player mod? My online friends are getting into this again, and I think it'd be fun to be able to play "together" at least while everyone is online.

lowlylowlycook

My first attempt at a Minumus hopper was a bit of a bust because

1) forgot to supply electricity to SAS module. DOH!

2 didn't put RCS thrusters in the same plane as the center of mass. DOH!

3) putting a chair on top of the hopper makes the controls less than intuitive since it seems to think that forward is up. DOH!


I think number 3 might be near fatal. My experiments seemed to point to needing both to be in staging and docking mode for all the different possible maneuvers. Even if, with an SAS to take care of stability, it was possible to fly this thing, I'm not sure that it would be worth the time to learn how.

Metzger Meister

I'm awesome at building rockets and launching rockets. Orbiting and doing space stuff, NOT SO MUCH. I can't even imagine trying to get to the danged ol' mun and landing some danged ol' kerbals on it, much less an umanned probe.

InfamyDeferred

You've at least done a flyby of the mun, right?

Metzger Meister

No. I AM SO TERRIBLE AT THIS. EVEN WITH MECHJEB! Maybe I just haven't played with stuff enough yet.

Edit: Also, all of my manned (kerbed?) missions are named Dawntreader (Dawntreader Mk 1, for example, being my first sub-orbital launch) and all my unmanned craft are named ZSD in honor of Mr. Bowie (Ziggy Stardust of course.)

InfamyDeferred

Have you used the Maneuver node tool to plan a maneuver yet?

InfamyDeferred

(You'll need a level 2 tracking center and mission control in career mode; science and sandbox have it unlocked always)

Metzger Meister

InfamyDeferred wrote: »

Have you used the Maneuver node tool to plan a maneuver yet?

i... have not. actually. i'm not really sure how it works. i was trying to watch some youtube tutorials but did not find them altogether enlightening.

InfamyDeferred

If you're playing career mode, buy the level 2 mission control and tracking center.
Point your cursor on your blue orbit line, and click. A ring will appear with 6 icons. Dragging the icons in and out will show (via dotted line) what the result of burning up/down/north/south/forward/back will be. You can also drag the center around your orbit to change the time. The green circle represents forward (prograde); this is what you need to do to get to the mun.

Right click on the mun and set as target. The orbit will turn green. Then when you use the tool to create an orbit that intersects the mun's, it'll put two white tick marks on the mun'so orbit that represents where you and the mun will be at your closest. Get the ticks together and you should see your orbit change color and probably change direction; that's the mun giving you a gravity assist.

To execute the maneuver, point at the dark blue icon on the navball, observe how long it says you need to burn, then time warp until half that amount and go full throttle (so that equal parts of your burn are before and after the selected time).

Note you will need to be in a nice equatorial orbit; if your orbit is tilted you will have to untilt it at the points where your orbital plane intersects with your target's (marked AN and DN)

Nova_C

Commander Zoom wrote: »

My "rover" on Minmus, last game, was actually an RCS sled.

This is a few versions ago, but I built this base on Minmus (You can see it had a small Kethane refinery):

And this is the rover that detached and could get to any biome and return with science:

Veevee

InfamyDeferred wrote: »

burning up/down/north/south/forward/back will be.

These are also called Radial/Anti-Radial/Normal/Anti-Normal/Prograde/Retrograde, whose definitions are, in part, defined by the orbit itself and not the planetary body you're currently orbiting in. These are defined as, essentially, Away from center of orbit/Towards center of orbit, Above orbital plane/Below orbital plane, More velocity/Less velocity.

More maneuver node info can be found here http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Maneuver_node

Really, the whole KSP wiki is fantastic.

lowlylowlycook

OK with working SAS this thing is flyable and switching between staging to orient the hopper and docking to move isn't too bad. But man, the navball is almost useless. I'm not sure if it's worth it.

lowlylowlycook

"Mission control to Jeb. We are detecting anomalies. We have watched Star Trek so we need you to tell us if the Energy Being is evil or just misunderstood. Over."

"Jeb to mission control. Honestly I was just trying to climb back on our lander then this happened. Over"




"Mission control to Jeb. We need you to verify that literally has fallen apart. Over."

"Jeb to mission control. Affirmative. Over"

Mission control to Jeb. Do not wear a red shirt. Repeat. Do not wear a red shirt. Over"

"Jeb to mission control. Roger."

[edit] Lighting is better in this shot.

lowlylowlycook

My young nephew just called up to announce that he was starting the campaign. Also wanted advice on how to not crash.

Previously he has been most interested in airplanes and cars with rocket engines.

Metallikat

Anyone else experience issues with planets that have been scanned not showing minerals in the tracking station? I did a polar orbital scan of the Mun and sent the data. When controlling the satellite that has the scanner, I can see the overlay that shows where the ore is located. However, from the tracking station it tells me that I have not yet scanned the Mun and doesn't show me anything at all.

Synthesis

1.1 can't come soon enough. I tried to deploy my terrestrial hibernation testing chamber (a big hibernation pod attached to a fission reactor...on wheels...outside the airfield...) only to get that annoying empty parts inventory glitch again.

Jasconius

1.1 sounds a bare minimum of 1 more month away

perhaps even 2 or 3 months

Veevee

While that absolutely blows I have no problem waiting as long as I need to before I start playing this again. At last count, my required mod list is about 30 items long and I have at least another 15 or so I want to throw in as well. Just my "required" list puts me over the memory limit no matter what I do.

I mean, I'm 15 minutes away from 666 hours recorded on steam and that doesn't count the 1000 or so hours I put into this before that. I think I can play something else in the mean time.

Void Slayer

Metallikat wrote: »

Anyone else experience issues with planets that have been scanned not showing minerals in the tracking station? I did a polar orbital scan of the Mun and sent the data. When controlling the satellite that has the scanner, I can see the overlay that shows where the ore is located. However, from the tracking station it tells me that I have not yet scanned the Mun and doesn't show me anything at all.

Are you keeping the satellite in orbit and on scanning mode? If you turn it off it removes the scan data information.

Satsumomo

If you can't wait for 1.1 for 64 bit mode so you can use more mods, I definitely recommend doing the 64 bit "hack", because so far I haven't had a single big problem, the only that happens is not being able to upgrade your buildings (But going into one, and then exiting usually fixes it) and that sometimes, your right/left click buttons get swapped.

Other than that, the game loads faster, runs a bit smoother and absolutely no crashes.

Synthesis

Satsumomo wrote: »

If you can't wait for 1.1 for 64 bit mode so you can use more mods, I definitely recommend doing the 64 bit "hack", because so far I haven't had a single big problem, the only that happens is not being able to upgrade your buildings (But going into one, and then exiting usually fixes it) and that sometimes, your right/left click buttons get swapped.

Other than that, the game loads faster, runs a bit smoother and absolutely no crashes.

I need to try this again--last time I did it was around 0.90, and I got constant, constant crashing. The solution was "Run Linux." :P

Has it gotten more stable than that?

On the other hand, my big complaint is that vehicle design is glitchy for some inexplicable reason. I don't have memory crashes right now because of the new active texture management mod.

lowlylowlycook

This is what Kerbal pilots do when they want to feel alive.



I'm actually kind of amazed at how this handles given that I couldn't line up the center of mass and center of lift due to needing a lander pod to provide the Kerbal. Or maybe the flight model has changed so that it isn't quite so easy to get into spins.

Synthesis

I take it a MiG-15 was considered too luxurious and decadent to the Kerbals?

lowlylowlycook

You aren't really living if you have SAS. Or landing gear.

Elvenshae

lowlylowlycook wrote: »

You aren't really living if you have SAS. Or landing gear.

... seatbelts.

Hevach

I conisder EVA parachutes a must have mod, so that plane is not nearly as scary to me as it probably should be. My mind just assumes I can bail out when it starts losing altitude.

lowlylowlycook

Current version has a parachute on the nose. That's so I can run the engines to slow down enough to land, a fatal flaw with the rear mounted parachute. That's what I like to call engineering.

Drove around with the launch undercarriage a bit. Turns out that not only is the raised walkway large enough to fly under, so is the garage in one of the buildings. So far I'm not pilot enough to do either. Not a chance I'd manage to hit the screenshot button at the right time.

Synthesis

Yeah, as long as you're not concerned about the rest of the aircraft, practically any aircraft can be give a parachute recovery system for the pilot's compartment if you botch a landing or something explodes (short of the cockpit itself).

crimsoncoyote

so... I'm trying to come up with a SPACE RACE challenge set of rules among my friends. The idea is to make it fun, but also challenging.
That said, the rules probably need some tweaking.

Would someone mind taking a look and offering some thoughts or suggestions on what I have?

Here they are (spoiled for long):

NTH ANNUAL KERBAL SPACE PROGRAM SPACE RACE

Rules:

1. Choose a faction. At least one player must be the Soviet Kerbals; at least one other player must be the USK (United States of Kerbin). This is VERY important (well, ok, not really)
2. Challenge must be done in Career mode. With a custom difficulty (a save file will be provided)
   • Reverts will be disabled
   • Starting science will be X
   • Starting money will be X
   • Buildings will be partially/fully upgraded(?)
3. You have X minutes to complete the MISSION.
4. Jeb, Bill, Bob, and Valentina cannot take part in any mission.
5. No cheats/debug menu
6. MISSION: Bringing a kerbal to the Mun and returning (alive) is worth 100 points. This is the base score; points are added/subtracted based on the below criteria.
7. The Player with the most "points" at the end of the challenge wins.

Scoring:

1. +10 points for being the first (in real-time) to accomplish a mission to and from the Mun (must plant a flag on the surface)
2. +2 points for any on-mission kerbal beyond the first.
3. +20 points for visiting Minmus (must plant a flag on the surface) in the same trip as the Mun mission
4. -3 points for every lost kerbal (stranded or dead); not exclusive to the final Mun mission (i.e. no reverting)
5. -5 points for every unlocked science node beyond the first X [note: I am considering pre-unlocking some of the nodes and reducing the amount of free starting science]
6. -50 points for not planting a flag on the Mun
7. -20 points for an unmanned Mun mission
8. -10 points for landing on the Mun, but not returning

BONUS POINTS:

1. +20 points for performing the mission in a SSTO (single stage to orbit) vehicle
2. +5 points for having the fastest mission time
3. +5 points for having the most g-forces
4. +5 points for having the highest max velocity
5. +10 points for landing at the space center. +20 points for landing on the launch pad.

General idea is that I want them to compete to get there and back fastest (in real time), but it's not the end of the world if they aren't the first player to do so, since they can win bonus points by doing some extra work. Another idea I've considered to go along with that is a sliding point value based on the time to complete the mission (100 for first X minutes, 90 for X+Y minutes, etc).

lowlylowlycook

crimsoncoyote wrote: »

so... I'm trying to come up with a SPACE RACE challenge set of rules among my friends. The idea is to make it fun, but also challenging.
That said, the rules probably need some tweaking.

Would someone mind taking a look and offering some thoughts or suggestions on what I have?

Here they are (spoiled for long):

NTH ANNUAL KERBAL SPACE PROGRAM SPACE RACE

Rules:

1. Choose a faction. At least one player must be the Soviet Kerbals; at least one other player must be the USK (United States of Kerbin). This is VERY important (well, ok, not really)
2. Challenge must be done in Career mode. With a custom difficulty (a save file will be provided)
   • Reverts will be disabled
   • Starting science will be X
   • Starting money will be X
   • Buildings will be partially/fully upgraded(?)
3. You have X minutes to complete the MISSION.
4. Jeb, Bill, Bob, and Valentina cannot take part in any mission.
5. No cheats/debug menu
6. MISSION: Bringing a kerbal to the Mun and returning (alive) is worth 100 points. This is the base score; points are added/subtracted based on the below criteria.
7. The Player with the most "points" at the end of the challenge wins.

Scoring:

1. +10 points for being the first (in real-time) to accomplish a mission to and from the Mun (must plant a flag on the surface)
2. +2 points for any on-mission kerbal beyond the first.
3. +20 points for visiting Minmus (must plant a flag on the surface) in the same trip as the Mun mission
4. -3 points for every lost kerbal (stranded or dead); not exclusive to the final Mun mission (i.e. no reverting)
5. -5 points for every unlocked science node beyond the first X [note: I am considering pre-unlocking some of the nodes and reducing the amount of free starting science]
6. -50 points for not planting a flag on the Mun
7. -20 points for an unmanned Mun mission
8. -10 points for landing on the Mun, but not returning

BONUS POINTS:

1. +20 points for performing the mission in a SSTO (single stage to orbit) vehicle
2. +5 points for having the fastest mission time
3. +5 points for having the most g-forces
4. +5 points for having the highest max velocity
5. +10 points for landing at the space center. +20 points for landing on the launch pad.

General idea is that I want them to compete to get there and back fastest (in real time), but it's not the end of the world if they aren't the first player to do so, since they can win bonus points by doing some extra work. Another idea I've considered to go along with that is a sliding point value based on the time to complete the mission (100 for first X minutes, 90 for X+Y minutes, etc).

Maybe 3 "speed" bonuses: Fastest real time, fastest game time, fewest launches.

Satsumomo

Synthesis wrote: »

Satsumomo wrote: »

If you can't wait for 1.1 for 64 bit mode so you can use more mods, I definitely recommend doing the 64 bit "hack", because so far I haven't had a single big problem, the only that happens is not being able to upgrade your buildings (But going into one, and then exiting usually fixes it) and that sometimes, your right/left click buttons get swapped.

Other than that, the game loads faster, runs a bit smoother and absolutely no crashes.

I need to try this again--last time I did it was around 0.90, and I got constant, constant crashing. The solution was "Run Linux." :P

Has it gotten more stable than that?

On the other hand, my big complaint is that vehicle design is glitchy for some inexplicable reason. I don't have memory crashes right now because of the new active texture management mod.

Yup, the general consensus is that 1.0.5 works great in 64 bit mode. You will probably get some nag-screens from mods saying that they are not supported under 64 bit, but so far all of my mods are working correctly, and no crashes. Before, I was getting a crash every 30 minutes or so.

Synthesis

Satsumomo wrote: »

Synthesis wrote: »

Satsumomo wrote: »

If you can't wait for 1.1 for 64 bit mode so you can use more mods, I definitely recommend doing the 64 bit "hack", because so far I haven't had a single big problem, the only that happens is not being able to upgrade your buildings (But going into one, and then exiting usually fixes it) and that sometimes, your right/left click buttons get swapped.

Other than that, the game loads faster, runs a bit smoother and absolutely no crashes.

I need to try this again--last time I did it was around 0.90, and I got constant, constant crashing. The solution was "Run Linux." :P

Has it gotten more stable than that?

On the other hand, my big complaint is that vehicle design is glitchy for some inexplicable reason. I don't have memory crashes right now because of the new active texture management mod.

Yup, the general consensus is that 1.0.5 works great in 64 bit mode. You will probably get some nag-screens from mods saying that they are not supported under 64 bit, but so far all of my mods are working correctly, and no crashes. Before, I was getting a crash every 30 minutes or so.

In retrospect, I could've sworn I tried 1.0.5 in 64-bit before, but I know what I'm doing home when I'm home next.

Then I'll try and diagnose that goddamn parts bin bug.

Synthesis

So, for those of you braving the 64-bit version...

The framerate improvement (over OpenGL anyway) is awesome--but how do you get around a few mods deliberately not working in KSP? In my case, the most obvious one is Realchute--I'm aware there are 64-bit bugs, but it seems like people force their way through anyway.

EDIT: Ah, the 64-bit unfixer. Fair enough. Lot of hard crashes, but still, great performance.

Veevee

Oh. My. God.

Just did the 64-bit install, then went and added my mods. All 80 or so of them. 4767 ModuleManager patches later and, well, look at it



I... I don't know what to do here, guys. This is all- it's just so sudden.

Spoiler'd for huge

Synthesis

Veevee wrote: »

Oh. My. God.

Just did the 64-bit install, then went and added my mods. All 80 or so of them. 4767 ModuleManager patches later and, well, look at it



I... I don't know what to do here, guys. This is all- it's just so sudden.

Spoiler'd for huge

Haha, same for here--though I've only used the basic cloud mod, I really ought to get a new ground texture mod. What're you using?

Also, what version of Unity are people using for 64-bit? I'm using 4.6.4--it does the job, but I do get a hard freeze every ~20 minutes of so of gameplay.

Satsumomo

So strange, I'm using 4.6.4 and I'm not getting any crashes, I've also used the unfixer. I think one of your mods must be causing this.

Realchutes says it isn't compatible, but people on reddit have told me it works just fine, but I haven't tried it myself.