Kerbal Space Program v9 - "Escape Rocket" Hat DLC, only £0.99! - Games

[img]http://i.imgur.com/LsK3ZiM.jpg[/img] I made a thing. (I underestimated the amount of power the electromagnet needed, so 10 seconds after I took that screen it lost power and dropped the plane) Also it's impossible to fly without mechjeb, many times so with that kind of weight attatched to the winch. [editline]15th April 2013[/editline] Also, you guys know of that proposed propulsion tech for satellites that involved stringing it to another one, and having that one spin the main vehicle around until centrifugal force tightens the teather, and then when it spins fast enough the main vehicle detaches itself and gets flung into a new orbit? I remember something like that but the name escapes me.

I'm trying to get a fairly heavy lander (the 3-man pod that was in the earliest versions of the game, the shortest full-width fuel tank, a pair of FLT-200s and the atomic rockets that go with them, plus miscellanea like landing gear, ladders, etc) to the Mun, but getting to Kerbin orbit is a nightmare; I seem to keep falling into the trap of "heavy so need more rockets, which makes you need more fuel which makes you need more rockets" ad infinitum. Should I just make the lander lighter, or am I missing a trick as regards getting heavy loads into orbit?

asparagus staging, gravity turn as you go up, don't make the lifter too big and heavy

awsome article aboot nasa's next gen bigass engine [url]http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/04/new-f-1b-rocket-engine-upgrades-apollo-era-deisgn-with-1-8m-lbs-of-thrust/[/url] ITS GOT SO MUCH THRUST!!!!

[QUOTE=Greenandred;40292647]I'm trying to get a fairly heavy lander (the 3-man pod that was in the earliest versions of the game, the shortest full-width fuel tank, a pair of FLT-200s and the atomic rockets that go with them, plus miscellanea like landing gear, ladders, etc) to the Mun, but getting to Kerbin orbit is a nightmare; I seem to keep falling into the trap of "heavy so need more rockets, which makes you need more fuel which makes you need more rockets" ad infinitum. Should I just make the lander lighter, or am I missing a trick as regards getting heavy loads into orbit?[/QUOTE] Asparagus.

anyone know how the HOME admin module works? It has a converter which drains energy but doesn't actually produce anything [editline]15th April 2013[/editline] ah it needs air intake [editline]15th April 2013[/editline] maybe a dumb question but would it work on duna? [editline]15th April 2013[/editline] guess it does [editline]15th April 2013[/editline] messing around moveable state [t]http://i.imgur.com/netMrhi.png[/t] deployed state [t]http://i.imgur.com/AMInwH6.png[/t] lol

Spaceport is working but no forums :(

[QUOTE=skeligandrew;40294190]Spaceport is working but no forums :([/QUOTE] Yeah, I need the forums up again so I can look at the orbital resonance charts for ISA MapSat.

[QUOTE=GoldenDargon;40294237]Yeah, I need the forums up again so I can look at the orbital resonance charts for ISA MapSat.[/QUOTE] You mean this? [url]http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:StdKQWquPMYJ:forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/entry.php/501-ISA-Mapsat-Ideal-and-Non-Ideal-Altitudes+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk[/url] <3 you google cache

[QUOTE=Eltro102;40292937]asparagus staging, gravity turn as you go up, don't make the lifter too big and heavy[/QUOTE] I looked up asparagus staging and it was amazing how much it helped; thanks! What it [i]didn't[/i] help was me forgetting how little thrust atomic engines give out and hurtling into the Munar surface at 100ms^-1. Now I know to begin my deceleration burn eaaarly tomorrow (or swap the atomic ones for regular liquid fuel).

[QUOTE=Greenandred;40294862]I looked up asparagus staging and it was amazing how much it helped; thanks! What it [i]didn't[/i] help was me forgetting how little thrust atomic engines give out and hurtling into the Munar surface at 100ms^-1. Now I know to begin my deceleration burn eaaarly tomorrow (or swap the atomic ones for regular liquid fuel).[/QUOTE] nukes are basically only good for interplanetary manuevers/high orbit stuff

[QUOTE=LordCrypto;40294933]nukes are basically only good for interplanetary manuevers/high orbit stuff[/QUOTE] Yeah, I'm starting to realise. I really like them for adjusting my orbit and moving between planets, but I think the Mun landing was a good sign to try something else to decelerate. (Until now, I've only launched satellites around Kerbin and the Mun, so I've not needed to experiment with slowing back down to land.)

I modded my nukes to produce 100 less heat and kicked their total thrust up to 190. Undoubtedly the best rocket engine now. Dumbs from the bitches who ain't shit

[QUOTE=Oicani Gonzales;40295610]op hacker sinner etc[/QUOTE] says the guy who hyperedited his transfer ring into orbit

[QUOTE=BandClassHAH;40295520]I modded my nukes to produce 100 less heat and kicked their total thrust up to 190. Undoubtedly the best rocket engine now.[/QUOTE] You should use mainsail with infinite fuel instead

[t]http://cloud-2.steampowered.com/ugc/595874391790357698/44233120CD7C4841D1ACB11B336875A2411248AF/[/t] This little beauty got me all the way to the Mun (First time ever!) only to have me not know how to slow down on approach and it smashing on the surface :v:

Good news and bad news over here. I got a job, so I don't get much time to plan and fly as much these days. I am trying to improve mining operations and I have a question. How much does kethane weigh per liter? is it the same as fuel? And while I'm asking, is Mono propellant the same density? Surely its more efficient to convert on the surface and carry it up, right?

well it's alot lighter than fuel but people seem to generally agree that bringing up the fuel is more efficient don't know about mono

If you think about it, if you bring up Kethane, you're lifting both the weight of the kethane, and the weight of the fuel/ox needed to bring yourself up and back. With just fuel/ox, it's just that. And you have reserve tanks in that case, instead of Kethane, which would suck to be stuck with if you failed to orbit or rendevous again.

"craft To Anywhere was not loaded because it had the following parts missing: protractor.plain" I don't know what that means

[QUOTE=Blazyd;40296827]"craft To Anywhere was not loaded because it had the following parts missing: protractor.plain" I don't know what that means[/QUOTE] That you don't have the protractor mod installed?

Think tomorrow i'm gonna try and build an interplanetary spaceplane.

[QUOTE=LordCrypto;40294933]nukes are basically only good for interplanetary manuevers/high orbit stuff[/QUOTE] nukes are excellent for landers as long as you don't use them alone. make a square with an engine on each "leg" with landing struts. 4 of those engines are able to land medium payloads down iirc and it gets great isp. not to mention your lander looks pretty cool which is always a plus.

[QUOTE=RayvenQ;40296899]That you don't have the protractor mod installed?[/QUOTE] Oh right, that craft had a protractor on it and I don't have the mod anymore. Guess I'll re-install it.

Can you dock with dead craft? i.e. You've pressed "end flight", or it's technically debris.

[QUOTE=Blazyd;40297391]Oh right, that craft had a protractor on it and I don't have the mod anymore. Guess I'll re-install it.[/QUOTE] you can also open the .craft in notepad and remove protractor easy enough, since you dont really attach anything to it

[QUOTE=ryandaniels;40297564]Can you dock with dead craft? i.e. You've pressed "end flight", or it's technically debris.[/QUOTE] ended flights do not stay in the universe

[QUOTE=ryandaniels;40297564]Can you dock with dead craft? i.e. You've pressed "end flight", or it's technically debris.[/QUOTE] Think so, as long as it's still in the map.

[QUOTE=LordCrypto;40297604]ended flights do not stay in the universe[/QUOTE] What about debris?

shazam. Facebook favors me for KSPSP photo [img]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1417259/kerbal/screen%20shots/kosmosfb.png[/img]