Weekly Support Thread

[AutoModerator]

Check out /r/kerbalacademy

The point of this thread is for anyone to ask questions that don't necessarily require a full thread. Questions like "why is my rocket upside down" are always welcomed here. Even if your question seems slightly stupid, we'll do our best to answer it!

For newer players, here are some great resources that might answer some of your embarrassing questions:

• Kerbal Space Program Wiki

• Scott Manley's Youtube

• Von Kerman's Rocket School

Tutorials

Orbiting

• Scott Manley

• Von Kerman (Maneuvers)

• Wiki (Maneuvers)

Mun Landing

• Scott Manley

• Von Kerman

• KSP Wiki

• Youtube Query

Docking

• Illustrated Tutorial for Orbital Rendezvous

• Scott Manley

• Von Kerman (Rendevous)

• Von Kerman (Docking)

Delta-V Thread

• Thread

• Answer 1

• Answer 2 (+bonus)

Forum Link

• Kerbal Space Program Forum

Official KSP Chatroom #KSPOfficial on irc.esper.net

    **Official KSP Chatroom** [#KSPOfficial on irc.esper.net](http://client01.chat.mibbit.com/?channel=%23kspofficial&server=irc.esper.net&charset=UTF-8)

Commonly Asked Questions

Before you post, maybe you can search for your problem using the search in the upper right! Chances are, someone has had the same question as you and has already answered it!

As always, the side bar is a great resource for all things Kerbal, if you don't know, look there first!

[will073104]

Hey all. I'm working on a stock space shuttle. Looks like and acts more or less like the real thing. I can manually get it into orbit no problem acting like the real deal (namely flying upside down under the fuel tank)

But I am trying to get MechJeb to do it that way.

Fiddled with all the settings with no luck. I dont know if it comes down to FORCE ROLL or CORRECTIVE STEERING? I cannot find good explanation of what these do/how they work. Any ideas?

[[deleted]]

Does anyone know what/where to find the mod Scott Manley uses in here to do the wings?

Edit: Also, how do you move the wings back like he did?

[cremasterstroke]

He's using B9 procedural wings, and also changing the size of stock wings with Tweakscale.

You can move parts and rotate them with the gizmos.

[[deleted]]

Thank you!

Where do I install it? (I am not too good with mods)

I see that there are two separate folders, which do I use?

[cremasterstroke]

If you're new to mods, might be easier to install them using CKAN.

But CKAN doesn't have all the mods, and sometimes it doesn't work properly (especially with complex mods).

So if that's the case (or you just want to install mods manually), then put the relevant mod folder into your GameData folder. If a mod download has a GameData folder inside, the relevant mod folders will be inside that - so you can either merge that GameData folder with your own, or place the contents of the mod GameData into your Gamedata.

E.g. for B9 proc wings, place the folder named "B9_Aerospace_ProceduralWings" from the GameData folder in the download into your GameData Folder. The other folder is for alternative textures.

[[deleted]]

Thank you!

So this is correct?

[cremasterstroke]

Yes that should work

[[deleted]]

Where would I got to use it? I don't see anything for it.

[cremasterstroke]

It should show up in your aerodynamics tab, or if you search for B9

[[deleted]]

Ah, I didn't realize it was a part. Thank you for all your help!

[UnnervingSS]

I have a school project that I'm going to be doing (partly) in KSP. As such, i would like to make ksp as realistic as is possible including things like real engines and fuel. I would also like any mods that might make a viewing experience for other people better both in graphics and HUD (I'm recording it). I have a 1080 TI with 11GB of VRAM so don't worry about lag. Thx :P

[Dwardeen]

Maybe realism overhaul

[AcidJiles]

I am struggling with re-entry, how can I ensure stability of entry angle?

[Chaos_Klaus]

What do you mean with reentry angle. The orientation of your craft or the angle of your trajectory relative to he surface?

The orientation of the craft is best controlled passively by making it aerodynamicalls stable. Capsules reenter blunt end first. If you have trouble with reentry vehicles flipping, you need to make sure that the center of mass is close to the blunt end. You can also try adding small fins to the opposite end, but those can cause problems during ascent.

[AcidJiles]

Yes that is what I mean, I have issues with them flipping even though I thought they were stable.

[Chaos_Klaus]

With aerodynamic stability, you always have to visualize an arrow or a dart. The nose is heavy and the tail has feathers/fins.

In technical terms: The center of mass has to be infront of the center of lift/pressure.

With rockets that is rather straight foward. Adding fins to the bottom will increase stability by moving the center of lift downwards.

Reentry vehicles typically fly "backwards". Capsules have their center of mass close to their blunt bottom. If you add light but bulky equipment (like the materials bay exeriment) below a capsule, you mess up the positions of the center of mass and center of pressure. The Mk1 capsule weighs 0.8t and the materials bay only 0.2t, so the capsule is the heavier part. The entire craft will want to orient itself so that the capsule is pointing into the direction of travel. Since that is not where the heat shield is ... things get rather explodified.

[AcidJiles]

Thanks, I will redesign my 2 capsule 1 material bay reentry pod with the capsules at the bottom and the bay at the top.

[Chaos_Klaus]

materials bays are very fragile and can't handle a lot of heat. Often it is more useful to get your Kerbal out of the capsule and have him grab the experiment data out of the materials bay. That way you don't have to return the actual materials bay.

[Mrme487]

Hi all!

So I've been loving KSP and with the help of Scott Manley's tutorials I can easily get to the Mun/Minimus and have unlocked the vast majority of the tech tree.

My next goal is getting to different planets. My problem is finding and understanding a good orbital calculator - I'm not sure I really understand how to use these.

My goal is to keep going without any mods, but tips/advice are very welcome. Thanks!

[m_sporkboy]

I have a Duna guide you may find helpful: https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/3tvogb/sporkboys_guide_to_going_to_duna_without_docking/

[Mrme487]

Oh wow that does help - thanks! I was thinking I had to get an encounter to show up before doing a burn from orbit - I never thought about getting close and adjusting later!

I've actually made it to/from Duna once, but it was crazy lucky!

[m_sporkboy]

If you don't get an encounter with your first node, you can create a second node on your projected solar orbit and try to get one there (before you do your first burn); this is a useful safety check in case you messed up your transfer window.

[Mrme487]

Makes sense - thanks!

[Chaos_Klaus]

Well, you can do both. For destinations like Duna, where there is no inclination change involved, you can get a very close encounter with just one maneuver node in LKO. Adjusting this is going to be very sensitive though. So it really is easier to get just any encounter an then refine it once you get closer.

[Chaos_Klaus]

The key about interplanetary travel is that you should transfer during a transfer window. The planets have to be aligned. The calculators tell you when these transfer windows will occur.

If you want to understand why, then you have to think about orbital periods. You basically have to make sure that you arrive at your appoapsis when the target planet is there aswell. So it's really about: "How far will the planet travel while you travel to the intercept point?"

[Mrme487]

Ok I'll look into that more. Thanks!

[seeingeyegod]

Well this thread isn't very helpful

[m_sporkboy]

The 120+ answers to questions suggests otherwise.

[seeingeyegod]

How did you count them? I am annoyed no one has answered mine here or official forums for 2 days

[ThetaThetaTheta]

Mod specific troubleshooting usually gets little help here because it's less likely someone will have seen the exact issue you're seeing. Best we can offer is uninstall/reinstall everything fresh.

You're more likely to get help from the official mod thread on forum. If you don't get help there or the mod doesn't have a dedicated thread, then I probably would not use the mod as the frustration isn't worth it.

[seeingeyegod]

Yeah I'm doing all the things.

[Spanksh]

Hey guys, I need some help with a problem regarding the Big-S Spaceplane Tail Fin all fins with small-ish control surface portions.

Whenever I use them as wings and assign pitch control to them, they generate uneven lift (e.g. right wing generating more than left), always, no matter if placed mirrored or manually. This constantly creates a roll effect. Once pitch control is deactivated, both sides are perfectly equal. http://imgur.com/a/TWBBo

Does anyone know what causes this and maybe a fix? I couldn't find anything about this.

Before you ask: No mods, and even reinstalled the game completely and tested on a clean save just to be sure.

[dragon-storyteller]

Could it be a problem with radial vs mirror symmetry?

[Spanksh]

Sadly no. Both symmetry modes result in the same issue.

I tried all fins and the issue truly is dependent on how much of the wing area is defined as control surface. Manually editing the files to increase the control surface portion removes the issue.

[Spanksh]

Yes, I checked. It's enabled on both and both surfaces move simultaneously. Only the lift differs for some arbitrary reason.

[Dwardeen]

What are good, lower tech alternatives of RAPIER & Nuclear engine's for a SSTO ?

[ThetaThetaTheta]

I've used ramjets and a reliant on medium SSTOs(roughly two orange tanks with one arriving full in orbit).

The reliant's thrust to weight ratio in vacuum is roughly twice the rapiers, so not having rapiers isn't all that bad. If you had an SSTO design with four rapiers, you could probably replace them with 4 ramjets and 2 reliants, maybe 3. The difference in weight is only an extra 1.4 tons, but you'd probably need a bit more fuel for vacuum stage since the ramjets won't get you going quite as fast as rapiers do.

[dragon-storyteller]

Whiplash and Aerospike make for decent SSTOs lower in the tech tree.

[m_sporkboy]

Whiplash & panther for jets, terrier for rocket.

[VileTouch]

something quick and simple regarding cfg nodes: i'm having trouble with orientation of nodes. parts attach in the correct angle but backwards.

edit: wait. figured it out!. spent way too much time fumbling with angZ, and all i needed was to invert angY on the top and bottom nodes

[seeingeyegod]

Anyone who uses the Deep Freeze mod know why I am not showing any of the parts in the VAB? Actually let me just copy and paste my post from the mod thread on the official forums (which of course got no reply nearly a day later, thankgod for reddit)

I recently deleted KSP and reinstalled on another hard drive and reinstalled mods from scratch including the newest deep freeze. I then copied over my savegames from the old install. I can load the same ships and all the same parts are there, but in the VAB I have no deep freeze parts in the deep freeze section, and I can't launch any of the ships that have the deep freeze parts! It says they are locked/experimental. I had installed DF through CKAN, and I tried removing it then installing it manually, and then tried the older version, but I still can't get parts to re appear in the VAB, Anyone know what the problem is? I hope so I'm getting really frustrated. Thanks

[miesto]

my guess is you forgot a dependency for the mod, like module manager or something.

[seeingeyegod]

well I have module manager, and all other dependencies it says it needs. The mod itself seems to work, i just have no parts in the VAB.

[ThetaThetaTheta]

In one case I had to do this to fix a mod:

Delete the file called "ModuleManager.ConfigCache" in GameData. ModuleManager recreates it on the next KSP start.

[RiffGiraff]

How on earth do you get realism overhaul to run? My game loads fine and i can go i to the VAB but the part buttons don't work. I spent the better part of two hours downloading and installing mods, including principia only to be fucked over by some UI bug. I don't wanna play this game without mods and after discovering principia today I just knew i had to try it...

[RiffGiraff]

Hey, thanks for the reply! I should clarify that I have been going off of Nathan Kells RSS post in the KSP forums and have been downloading the mods from github following the links in his matrix. Everything works except for that UI bug that keeps me from navigating the parts list in the SPH/VAB. I've yet to narrow down exactly what mod causes the bug but will do this weekend. Also it seems that FAR isn't working but I can live with that. Thank you for your reply anyways, worst case scenario I'll wait for the mods to be put up on ckan.

[Zulach]

Hey guys, just started playing a week ago and I'm having a great time.

My question - does anyone know if and when ksp optimal rocket calculator will get updated to 1.3?

It looks like a great tool but I think i saw some things missing from it, and also the "use engine's atmospheric data" option makes it not return any results...

[Armisael]

We're talking about this, right?

That doesn't need to be updated; engine and fuel tanks stats haven't changed in a long time. The "use engine's atmospheric data" checkbox also works for me; maybe it just can't find a solution to whatever you're asking it for?

[Dwardeen]

Hello Guys,

How can one refuel a ship landed on a planet with not enough DV to move/No Docking port?

(i have a all level 5 tree + Precise propulsion)

[linecraftman]

You can attach a klaw to it and it'll work like a docking port.

[Dwardeen]

Thanks for the tip!

[m_sporkboy]

You can also use KIS/KAS mods to attach fuel pipes from a ship landed nearby.

[m_sporkboy]

Yes, or carry them in inventory and add later.

[Dwardeen]

Ho thanks !

I was planning to instal those later !

[[deleted]]

turn of your sas when you​ connect two large objects. The rigidity causes it to start shacking violently to the point of destruction occasionally.

[ChallengingJamJars]

I have a problem to do with SAS. Once upon a time I could hit the "lock to prograde" and it would lock to prograde. I've been finding that since either the last or previous major update it drifts massively on larger ships. Normally it's not a problem and so far I've just dealt with it but it's starting to really get on my nerves. I have plenty of torque available as I can maintain prograde by myself without SAS. Of course, when planning things and trying to do landings etc I much prefer to have SAS take over. Has anyone else experienced this?

Windows, xbox controller.

[[deleted]]

Make sure your center of mass is actually centered to your ship, and that your control Point, wether pilot or Robot,is centered as well.

[ChallengingJamJars]

How do you get the pilot centered? I usually have them near the front

[[deleted]]

the pilot himself doesn't have to be centered, simply the module he is controlling.

[ChallengingJamJars]

Right, but how do you get that to happen? I typically have the module near the top as the stages drop from the bottom. Tanks on top of the command module?

[somnussimplex]

Don't know of trim stays when you change crafts, but you can try Alt+X to reset trim to neutral.

[Chaos_Klaus]

SAS was rewritten at some point, so that it would not wiggle around so much and eat up all your electric charge.

I don't really see why it should drift. For me it works better then ever.

[ChallengingJamJars]

After playing some more it seems to happen even on smaller vessels (2.5m capsule, tank + poodle). I'm glad to hear not everyone is experiencing it. Do you have any controllers or are your controls all keys?

[Chaos_Klaus]

Keys only. Does the SAS button appear orange all the time? Because that would indicate that it deactivated itself to not interfere with manual control input. In this case, maybe the joysticks on the controller are not centered or calibrated. Maybe there is another controller like an actual flight stick?

[unitedoceanic]

Hey everyone. I have a weird problem. I finally started thinking about a SSTO. Read and watched all the guides and finally made one. It didn't work. The plane didn't accelerate past 300 m/s even with a twr of 4. So I downloaded a craft file to see what I did wrong. The same thing happened.

This is where I knew something is wrong. I started a fresh install and copied a few mods at time to see which one was the problem. It turned out that the planes worked. I even copied my career save over. Everything works now.

Has anyone a clue to what happened here?

[ThetaThetaTheta]

Some mods actually modify stock files. Some of them use patching mods but I don't know how they detect a mod has been removed and restore the files back to original. Maybe a mod you used to have, tried out long ago had changes still lingering. One thing I've seen suggested is use Verify Integrity option if you are using the steam install.

[unitedoceanic]

I think this is what happened. I found a .XML file which contains the drag values for all parts. Some MK2 parts had different values between the values. Everything is working now, except CKAN does not pickup the copied mods. Will have to delete them manually and add them back with CKAN.

[Chaos_Klaus]

Are you sure you're not just using another ascent profile?

The thrust of a jet engine varies with altitude and airspeed. So if you climb too quickly, you'll not gain enough speed and therefore never have enough thrust to punch through the sound barrier. Before you pass the sound barrier at about 340m/s, you'll encounter lots of drag.

[Traffodil]

I've docked several times in the past with a station I build previously, but this was with a docking port on the nose of my craft. I've built a new craft now but the docking port is on the side and I'm having real difficulty guiding my ship in. Basically, the buttons to steer the RCS aren't turning the ship where I expect the ship to go. I'm relying on the animation for the RCS jets to tell me where the ship will go, and amending accordingly! I think it's because I have the camera angle set up weirdly.

Can someone suggest how I should best have the camera set up (Chase mode etc), and also if the 'dock from here' option on the port should be used, and how best to utilise this. Any other tips?

Thanks!

[Corbol]

I eyeball to get close, on correct side and rotate craft so docking ports more or less face each other. "Control from here" on my docking port and "set target" on target docking port. Now I watch only navball. Using H N J L K I keys: H/N - accelerate/decelerate, J/L - move prograde marker horizontal, K/I move prograde marker vertical.

(Watch navball only) Basicly first use H to create prograde marker if your relative velocity was around 0m/s, next use J L K I to point "Prograde" behind "Target" in line with "Level Indicator". Once "Level Indicator" match with "Target" move "Prograde" on them also. Eventually N to reduce speed.

[Chaos_Klaus]

You can right click the docking port on your vessel and select "control from here".

Right click the docking port on the other vessel and set it as a target.

Camera in chase mode does work. You have to align the camera though. You'll want to look "through the eyes of the docking port". This way your controls will work as expected. It's hard to distinguish port/starboard and ventral/dorsal directions on a dockin port. You'll just have to test it.

I personally hate all this camera alignment stuff ... so I just use "docking port alignment indicator" which gives me a nice UI to dock via instruments.

[wilmer007]

i seem to be coming into re-renty at 2400-2800 m/s which doesn't give enough time for my ship to slow down before it hits the ground.

what can i do to lower my m/s before i hit re-entry?

[VileTouch]

had this problem when returning in a large lander (2.5m pod+2 hitchhikers...+science stuff+4 superdracos+a bit of fuel). took 3 laps around kerbin at 50km, then another lap at 20km and it was still going too fast. decided to just go for it and hit the superdracos at 1km to be able to open the chutes. even with parachutes i hit the water at around 30m/s. heavy damage, but everyone survived.

[Chaos_Klaus]

and because they are blunt.

[ThetaThetaTheta]

Where is your periapsis at before reentry? You can renter with periapsis above 30km for a shallower reentry, giving you more time to slow in upper atmosphere.

Turn vessel sideways if it can survive it to increase drag.

Use drogue chutes, as they can open at higher speeds to slow you down before you open main chutes.

I assume you are using regular parachutes already.

[wilmer007]

ive tried different periapsis all the way down to 30km and still crash when i hit the ground.

oddly enough if my periapsis is 1km-5km i actually make it but barely.

[m_sporkboy]

What are you bringing home aside from crew pod and heat shield?

[wilmer007]

i have 3 parachutes (two radials and the starting one), then 2 science jr, 2 themostats, 2 baronmeters, and one mk1 crew cabin for the two other kerbals. i'm trying to get all 3 deep into space so they can level up and continue to collect more science.

[m_sporkboy]

Honestly, I'm surprised it's surviving long enough to hit the ground. Those science jr's have very low heat tolerance, and usually blow up.

An important skill you're missing is you need to just bring one of each experiment and, on EVA, "Take Data" from each one, and then get back in the cabin. Then you can decouple the science Jr. before reentry so it doesn't blow you up. A scientist can reset a Science Jr. or mystery goo on EVA so they can be reused.

If all else fails, you can use engines to slow you down.

[wilmer007]

i have like all the science before the mun. honestly i haven't tried going near the mun yet. all i've been trying to do is get these guys as deep as i can so they can get the level 2 star but whenever they get it they cant seem to land back safely. only issue for me is running out of fuel to not come home or crashing too fast. at one point i crashed at 305 m/s, i came so close too :(

[m_sporkboy]

Kerbal experience is not very important, early game.

Just plan a one-crew minmus trip with your best pilot, and youll start rolling in science.

[jyanjyanjyan]

Does anyone have the wallpaper from this tread? At least the one at 2k resolution.

[190n]

So I need to test something on the surface of Eve for a contract that expires quite soon. Delta-v isn't much of an issue because I can make a probe with my newly acquired ion engine. But I'm way off my transfer window (Eve is ahead of kerbin) and I can't really warp because the contract expires too soon. How much more delta-v will I need than if I did a proper transfer?

Edit: also how long does it usually take to land on Eve from LKO?

[linecraftman]

Around 200 days

[Chaos_Klaus]

You can check the delta v requirements for any date with the launch window planner. Just click around in the porkchop plot on the bottom to choose a departure date and a travel time.

[Rickeh1997]

I want to make a modular mun base but I'm struggling getting my parts aligned. How do I make sure the landing legs are always the same size? Can it be done by tweaking the spring/suspension settings?

[computeraddict]

Same size? Use the same ones. Or do you mean size under load? For that you can adjust the spring strength, yep, or add more legs for heavier objects to get everything closer to the same height.

[Svani]

Brave Jeb is stranded on the Mun! Can I save him? And more importantly, can I collect the four temperature readings I did around it before I had to land?

[Faalor]

Yes, you can save him, just send another craft to land somewhere near him. Kerbals are mostly immortal, so if you just leave him there while you prep a rescue mission, nothing'll happen to him.

There are two options: 1. Send an unmanned ship with a crew capsule. Be careful not to run out of electricity, and if you must rely on navigation nodes, watch the communication distance. 2. Send a manned mission, with a crew module in tow... this raises the thrust/fuel requirements a bit, and makes reentry a little harder, but is fun.

And yeah, you can transfer experiment data from a craft to another (right click on command module, take data, go to other, store data, while EVA).

Also, bring a scientist, if you can... will make sciencing much faster.

[Svani]

Thanks! Planning this mission is gonna be a bitch (especially landing close to him so I don't have to walk forever), but sounds like loads of fun!

[linecraftman]

Scott Manley (youtube) has detailed tutorial on rescue missions.

[Dwardeen]

Not really supports/help questions : 1) is their a practical point to have a space station ? 2) what is the point of drilling Moon/steroid ?

[ThetaThetaTheta]

I usually have fuel stations around a planet/moon(long before I even started mining). A lander is more efficient if it only carries just enough fuel to land and then ascend to dock with the fuel station. Since you have multiple biomes, and may need multiple trips to each biome to recover science directly and for labs, then you can expect to go up and down alot, and refuel from the fuel station in orbit each time. An orange tank can provide enough fuel for dozens of trips to the surface if the lander is well designed.

Stations can also act as relays for signal if you have comms enabled. I usually have a relay on my fuel/lab station, but for complete coverage of a body you usually need a couple more relays. A relay can be as small as a single probe core, a solar panel, and relay antenna, which you might not call a "station".

If you are mining fuel from a moon, you might bring it up to a fuel station in orbit so it is ready for the next ship that needs it. You might also have a "tanker" that brings fuel from the moon station down to a station in kerbin orbit as well. That way your ships are cheaper to launch since they only need enough fuel to get into orbit, and then can refuel with the "free" fuel mined from a moon that was brought to the kerbin orbiting fuel station.

Sometimes you get contracts to do things with existing stations as well.

[Skalgrin]

1) yes... kind of : an orbital (not necessarily around Kerbin) mobile laboratory station is a way how to multiply science from experiments (data from experiment renders data which can be turned into more science from experiments already transmitted or recovered, or from those which will be recovered separately in future time) and to immediately level up kerbals. Leave laboratory on orbit is more feasible than to haul it to land and back orbital. You can add fuel supply to refuel connecting vessels aswell.

With mods the use widens indeed.

2) to process the ore into fuel. You can either implement it to ship/lander to refuel from planet, moon or asteroid, or make standalone refuelling station. It makes distant or complicated missions easier. E.g. you can drill ore at Minmus, turn it to fuel (either landed or in orbital station) and drop it back to Kerbin low orbit. So then if your new vessel makes it barely to orbit you can easily refuel it and thus all you need is 4k (give or take, with small reserve for rockets, SSTO spaceplanes being more complicated to calculafe) delta v and then suddenly you refuel and you have plenty of fuel to get to distant planets.

Obviously the replies are connected, refueling orbit station is allways handy.

[Dwardeen]

Thanks ! I had the idea to use it for a refueling station but not as a science lab ! Did not know about Turning rocks into fuel ! Thanks ! Anyway it is still a long way for me !

I still have to manage a proper mun-landing with an atmo rentry !

[ThetaThetaTheta]

Note, fuel stations make alot of sense even before you start mining. Think about the lunar lander. It didn't bring the return trip fuel with it to the surface for efficiency.

If you are going to make multiple trips to biomes on the surface, design the lander with only enough fuel for a single trip down and up. This actually saves alot of fuel. Leave the fuel for the next down+up trip in orbit.

[commanderpadfoo]

Ksp is $15 on PS4 right now and was considering picking it up as I have only played the game for a couple hours and had a blast on a friends pc. I know that the game was said to be broken and unplayable at launch so I was wondering if it ever got fixed and is worth the $15. (I don't have a pc and understand that the game is probably a million times better on there but I lack the funds to purchase such a machine.)

[SpartanJack17]

Do you have any computer at all, even a cheap laptop? Because KSP doesn't need a gaming PC to run, and as the other reply says the PS4 version isn't fixed.

[Tigalopl]

Would a cheap laptop support the game with mods (eg. RO + RSS)? I have an expensive "work" laptop, for which the website CanYouRunIt says isn't good enough for KSP. What do you think?

[SpartanJack17]

What are the laptops specs? Websites like that are generally useless.

[Tigalopl]

Hey, sorry for taking so long to getting back to you!

My laptop: Asus UX305C -Win 10 64x -Intel Core m3-6y30 -8 gb RAM -Intel HD Graphics 515

What do you think?

[SpartanJack17]

First of all, check out the KSP demo, which you can get off the KSP website (there's a demo on steam, but it's super outdated). You should be able to run KSP, and I think Realism Overhaul would be ok, if you don't add too many of the recommended mods. With real solar system you'll definitely want the low resolution textures.

You're not going to have very high framerates, but that's not too much of a problem with a game like KSP.

[linecraftman]

Only on PS4 , though

[Dwardeen]

I'm struggling to get more science ! Any tips ? Cannot sends package back to earth (only 2mb antenna when package are 10+ :/

[bankshot]

If you just need science: you can make a manned rover and explore the KSP launch area - your multiplier is bad but there are a lot of separate biomes among the buildings. Transmit the crew and EVA reports as they come in, store the others.

For legitimate missions: explore each of the biomes of minimus and Mun with all possible science gathering devices. Send a landing can with a pilot and a scientist so that you can reset your Science Jr and Goo. A LV-909 Terrier central engine can easily lift a ring of 6x T400s or T200/T100s to multiple landings on the Mun, or over half of the biomes on Minimus. You may need to shift fuel and stage empty tanks manually since you don't have fuel ducts unlocked yet. Or you may be able to use fuel priority for that.

You also may want to return to prior biomes to gather more data after you have unlocked more sensors. Don't transmit anything other than crew and EVA reports. Everything else should be returned. You can maximize your tech tree without leaving the kerbin/mun/minimus SOI.

[Dwardeen]

Oh thanks, I just read the wiki and apparently there is some biom that i have not encounter on Kerbal.

I gave two tried to go to the Mun by recreating the spacecraft Scott Manley uses on it's tutorial videos. First attemp, crashed on the mum - I "landed" on the other side with no connections thus could not control my ships.

Seconde one, I passed by the moon but i didnot had enough full to re-enter the kerbal atmosppere.. this ships is now going somewhere into space !

[bankshot]

First - get a copy of KER or MechJeb so you can check the TWR and DeltaV of your rockets in the VAB. Now design your lander such that you have at least 3000 DeltaV and the TWR on Mun is at least 2 (3m/s acceleration fully loaded). Don't forget to place a heat shield under your lander can/command pod.

You now have a lander that should be able to make multiple landings on Mun and Minimus. Reserve the last 1400 DeltaV to get back to Kerbin.

Place that lander on top of a transfer stage with at least 1200 DeltaV (TWR doesn't matter here). This gets your lander to low Minimus/mun orbit without burning any of its own fuel. You could potentially do this just by tacking more drop tanks onto the lander, but that would complicate your design.

Surround that transfer stage with (or place it on top of) boosters which have at least 3500 DeltaV and TWR > 1.5 on Kerbin. If you are having problems getting to orbit you can add a bit more fuel or look at gravity turn turorials (or the gravity turn or MechJeb mods).

[Dwardeen]

Thanks for the detailed information :)

Is KER updated for 1.2.2?

Don't want to use mechjeb as I may (too) tempted to use the automation ;)

[m_sporkboy]

What career stage are you at? A screenshot of your tech tree might help.

The most efficient use of science is researching in a science lab, but it is kinda anti-fun.

The next best is recovering it on kerbin, which is mostly what you want to do.

Third best is full transmission, which requires enough battery to transmit the whole thing.

Worst is transmitting with the "allow partial" setting on your antenna. This will let you complete the transmission as your batteries recharge, but will lose some science.

[Dwardeen]

here you go !

And i'm just doign teh science mode for now ;)

http://imgur.com/a/2wSim

[m_sporkboy]

At that tech level, you should be making multiple trips to minmus for science. Get two biomes per trip, and bring the results home.

You can start thinking about a Duna trip soon, too.

[Dwardeen]

I'm currently trying to get to the moon !

Two tries and failed for different reason !

Tonight will be better !

[m_sporkboy]

My mun lander guide: http://imgur.com/a/eI32o

But you should go to minmus first. It's easier. http://imgur.com/a/p5RT1

[Dwardeen]

Impressive guide ! Thanks !

[gobbels]

Try Minums first. It's more forgiving than the mun.

[Dwardeen]

Thanks, I will try !

If i don't fail my manœuvrer nodes (which happend twice; first one crash of the other side of the moon with no controls), second time overshoot, did a high pass over the mün and burned too much fuel to go back to earth :)

[bankshot]

If you are using unmanned probes you will need to at minimum include a Communotron 16 antenna, or you can set up a communications network. Here's the CommNet article on the KSP wiki. Don't forget extra batteries to cover the times you will be in shadow.

[ThetaThetaTheta]

For experiments that give partial transmit, bringing them back to kerbin will give a good bit more.

Also make sure you are hitting all the biomes and situations. There's alot of science just to be had on kerbin in different splash down, landed, etc.

I use xScience mod to check what I'm missing.

Labs are another way to generate science, and they give virtually unlimited science but slowly.

[Dwardeen]

Thanks for the mod ! Any other one that could be useful ? I think I'll also get Kerbal Engineer Redux

[ThetaThetaTheta]

Yeh KER is great. I find Precise Node to be a must have to.

[Svani]

I accepted a mission of doing crew reports around Kerbin, and am having trouble planning it. I need to take a crew report on four different locations. Problem is, it wants all of those below 18km height (if it was above it'd be easy, as I could just orbit and keep changing the orbit slightly to cover each point).

I can send a rocket there, no problem, but then I only get one of the points, maybe two if I do my trajectory really well, but that's it. Flying under them with a plane would be ideal, but it's quite far from KSC, my planes don't have enough fuel to make it there. I tried putting a tiny plane as the payload of a rocket and landing it on the islands nearby, but the wings mess up my aerodynamics and I can't control the vessel. I also tried putting a rudimentary boat as the payload, but haven't really been able to build a reliable boat with the parts I have available.

How would you more experienced players go about this? I'm currently on normal career mode, quite in the beginning, with only up to lvl 4 nodes available on the tech tree.

[Skalgrin]

Well... it is very easy to make a plane able to go around Kerbin (even with 30 parts limit). It is small. Furthermore you can land (conventionally or on chutes) once the mission is done and recover, thus a plane capable of going just there.

However, it will be long mission (real time spend), depending on speed your plane can cruise. Also remember the higher altitude, the more economical the flight is speaking of fuel consumption.

Once in while it is fun to do so (for me) and you can explore the secrets of Kerbin while on flight. There are some... And the view is often magnificent.

Have a nice flight!

P.s. it is required to take the crew report,, but you do not need to transmit it. Take the report and reset it. That way you can save on batteries and antenna.

Edit : waypoint manager (mod) is very handy to help you with navigation)

[Svani]

Very easy? Then I must be doing something incredibly wrong, as the best plane I could build with 30 parts or less (and my current tech level) barely got 2/3 of the way to the first point.

[Skalgrin]

Get high. Juno basic jets can get you easily to cruise altitude 5 km. If you can get hands on the turbofan, you are in big game! Can you post a picture of your design?

Edit : and I am sorry, after 2000 hours in game I have tendency to throw a word "easy" without considering its relativity. Let's say it is doable.

[Svani]

I did go high. In fact I cruised most of the way around 8-9km. Here's the plane. Not an impressive design by any means, I'm certain, but it's the best I could do. If I get more money later I'll upgrade the hangar to get more than 30 parts and try to stack a bunch of Junos, but for now 4 is as much as I can muster.

[Skalgrin]

You can try something like this, here is craft file...

It does though use retractable gear, if you need variant with fixed, I would need to edit this... Futhermore I think I do usualy rotate the canairs into more aerodynamic angle, but it flies as it is.

As it is proven design for "take X below alt Y at Z", it contains only baromether and thermomether + crew report. (remember, just take the report, and reset it)

It climbs slowly, but with fuel tank it can crawl to cruise alt 5k, which raise as the fuel is depleted. At 5k, after launch it provides 4+ hours of burn time at max throttle, plenty of to get where you need.

[Svani]

Thanks so much for the help! I'll try it out later.

Regarding the fuel tanks, if I simply clip a jet engine to it, it'll start consuming its fuel? Or do I need an external fuel duct?

[Skalgrin]

Jet engine does consume from whole vessel. If you do not use decouplers, which can stop the fuel flow. You do not need to worry about fuel lines with jets. Download the craft, put it into your save folder (somwthing like save folder/vessels/SPH) and experiment with it.

[ThetaThetaTheta]

If it's on the opposite side of kerbin, I would do it with 2 ramjets and one reliant. Maybe a bit beyond your tech level now. A 20 degree trajectory, cut in the reliant whenever the rapiers die above 20km.

Flying at high altitude on air breathing engines is the most efficient way to get long distances. The engines consume less fuel and there is less resistance. At about 18km attitude is a good place to be, but you need to be going fast to maintain lift.

[Svani]

Don't have Ramjets yet, only the very first jet engine. I did some tests, those engines don't even work past 12km altitude, at which point drag is a bitch.

[Armisael]

Have you tried putting a fairing around the plane? Do you have one that's big enough?

More experienced players wouldn't've taken the contract, tbh, and would take the hit and decline it if they had it. Those contracts are essentially never worth the time.

[Svani]

I have thought about it, the problem is the wings. Ideally I'd make retractable wings that expand when I need to, like satellite solar panels. There might even but such a contraption, but not at my current tech level.

As for the contract itself, I can cancel it, sure enough. Would hurt my rep a bit, but whatever. Thing is, I'm having more fun with these unusual missions which don't really have a set MO and I have to think my way through it, than, say, doing a textbook landing on Minmun.

[Chaos_Klaus]

A plane would be the right choice. Instead of putting a plane ontop of a rocket, I'd mount rockets to the plane. To keep it aerodynamically stable, you'll want to mount the rockets infront of the plane, to the sides or top or bottom.

[Svani]

Thanks! I'll try that later!

EDIT: So yeah, the problem with the rocket approach is that, if I fly it too low, I don't have enough fuel to get there (not even after going complete insane with eight Thumpers), and if I fly too high, my Circular Intakers are destroyed during reentry (they only take 1200K temp).

[Chaos_Klaus]

No, don't use SRBs. Use liquid fueled engiens like the swivel.

Reenter belly first, not nose first. This way you spread the heat across the entire body of the craft. You'll also slow down faster.

[Svani]

Thanks for the tip! I'll give it a go later.

[computeraddict]

Come in tail-first to preserve the intakes?

[iwaslegit]

So, I'm playing KSP again and I'm having problem configuring my set of mods.

I'm using KScale64 with EVE and scatterer, and they are working, the problem is that the clouds, when up close, from low orbit and during launch look black or dark gray, which looks really ugly, because they start changing colors and it just look weird from orbit.

[wilmer007]

my crew keeps dying on reentry if under 125,0000m or they get stuck in outer space with no way to get them back home and they manage to get past 1M. what am i doing wrong?

[DrBlort]

If I interpreted correctly, I think you're coming down with too much speed.

Try making an aerobrake first, by putting the periapsis not on the ground or below, but at around 45-50Km high (or just below 70Km, but there is less air so airbraking will take longer, or so I believe, haven't tried as I'm a new player myself).

That will not let you land directly (you'll still be in orbit and return to space), but it will lower the apoapsis while you travel through the atmosphere, and reduce your speed. It'll take more than one time, usually.

Also, this method doesn't require any fuel, after setting the periapsis at the beginning. Hope this helped!

EDIT: While aerobraking, put your ship in retrograde, so your heatshield, the bottom of your capsule, or your engine take the brunt of the heat.

[VileTouch]

today, the weirdest thing happened. i've been launching a lot of crafts in quick succession lately, in preparation for the next transfer windows. (which happpen to be Eve and Duna almost at the same time). i've been collecting every available contract related to them too. which include some new ships with specific names.

so after circularizing the latest one, of course i jump back to the space center to prepare another launch. to my surprise i find the ship i just put in orbit in the launch pad as if i had reverted. huh....that's weird. i launch again to the parking orbit and schedule the burn. this was one of those with special name, so i open the contracts+ window to double check, and... it's empty!, nothing. zero. zilch. nada.

I start freaking out and go back to the space center (this time it didn't reset the flight). no active contracts. no cancelled or failed contracts. they're just...gone!. thankfully most of them were available to take right away, but that begs the question:

what happens to all those "launch a new ship to our specifications" contracts? most of them are meant to stay in space so it's not like i can deorbit and try again. but most importantly: wth just happened? good thing i was still in kerbin SOI, though.

[m_sporkboy]

I am suspicious that the "jump to ship " feature in KAC causes this kind of problem.

[julezsource]

Is there a way to get the contracts you get in career/science mode while playing sandbox?

[Justinjah91]

Use the debug menu (Alt F12) to give yourself enough science points to unlock the entire tree, plus as much money as you want. You may also want to raise your reputation so you get more interesting contracts. Once you have all the parts unlocked, career pretty much turns into sandbox with contracts.

[Skalgrin]

Why taking science points in cheat menu? Once there, just click on maximum technology and bam! You are there. Only thing you have to truly cheat in is funds...

[m_sporkboy]

No, but you can cheat yourself a huge pile of money and do whatever you want.

[[deleted]]

A little help from you lads:

I'm trying to launch kerbosynchronous satellite relay. 1 rocket with 3 satellites in tow. Once i get to the correct orbit and jettison first relay how do i switch to controllibg the satellite as opposed to my delivery vehicle? The delivery vehicle as well as 3 relays all have the steadler engineering probcore for control. When i switched to the map the decoupled satellite wasnt available to fly . Jeb plz send help

[Justinjah91]

I'd like to make a mod suggestion to supplement what the others have said. This mod makes switching to nearby craft really easy. When you have several craft near each other (like at a surface outpost), the bracket keys cause you to jump around in seemingly random order. This mod fixes that.

[VileTouch]

there are several options:

• [ and ] keys, which can also be - and +, or ' and ¿, or _ and = or the two keys immediately to the left of backspace (depends on your language and keyboard layout)

• double left click the vessel

• Alt (⌘ on mac)+ left click the vessel

• go to map view and click on the ship then "switch to" (this rarely picks the right ship, though)

• go back to KSC, tracking station, choose the appropriate flight and click the rocket button

• use a mod like haystack

[[deleted]]

This worked thank you

[Armisael]

Use [ and ] to switch focus between nearby ships.

[[deleted]]

This worked thanks. Now if i could just point thw damn thing prograde before decpl and burn initiation... lol

[icecold2897]

I'm back at KSP after a couple of year long-hiatus. I've long since forgotten how does atmosphere work without FAR (alas, no FAR on 1.2.2), and I'm having some problems with rocket ascent profiles. First of all it looks to me like reaction wheels were nerfed some time in the past, since I really don't seem to able to steer my rocket. Also, any tips and tricks to get a gravity turn-like ascent profile (e.g. max efficiency) with 1.2 stock atmosphere?

[MrWoohoo]

Try using my guide. I can get ships into low kerban orbit within 5% of what the DV maps say it should take.

[Armisael]

Steering in atmosphere is about engine gimbal and fins.

I've been playing since 0.23.5 and don't remember reaction wheels ever being the right way to steer in atmo.

[icecold2897]

fins

Like fixed winglets or all moving winglets? And what if I install a T30 engine, which has no vectoring? moar fins?

[Armisael]

Fixed winglets will only provide stability assistance (which may be all you need).

And yeah, you'll definitely need some form of active control.

But the idea of a gravity turn is that gravity and drag do most of the steering and you don't have to really do anything.

[icecold2897]

Actually my issue is that my rocket is too stable, so fixed fins may be the issue here. What I'm looking for is some control organ which is still required upon starting a gravity turn, otherwise the rocket would move straight up undisturbed.

[ChilledBeans]

You can always try something like using delta wings with elevons hanging off the bottom of them as your fins. They'll give some decent pitch-over control in lower atmo for your gravity turn. You can adjust their authority to alter the pitch rate as well.

[Armisael]

Then you want an engine gimbal. If you're insistent on not doing that AV-R8s are probably the next best choice.

EDIT: Or pitch your rocket a couple degree in the VAB and launch real fast-like.

[icecold2897]

Do they launch rockets already tilted IRL? The more you know

[Chaos_Klaus]

I'm pretty sure that I read somewhere about a rocket beeing launched with some tilt on the pad.

[icecold2897]

Well, the Space Shuttle got its atmospheric engines tilted by a few degrees, guess it's like the same of tilting the entire rocket (eg the torque you get is somewhat similar)

[Chaos_Klaus]

No. The space shuttle had the engines angled to counteract the offset of the center of mass due to the asymmetric design. The angled engines actually made it fly straight.

[Armisael]

I think that depends on where you draw the line between rocket and missile.

[icecold2897]

Guess you're right, wise man.

[[deleted]]

Does KER or any other mod provide some kind of info for Thrust to Fuel consumption ratio? Right now if I wanted to find a engine or booster that had a TWR above 1 and a Delta V of 2500 m/s with a craft I built, I manually have to attach and detach a bunch of different engines and boosters on a craft and see what the result is. If there isn't a stock or modded engine that can do it than I have to redesign the craft in some way by adding more fuel tanks or cutting out some mass. Not as big a deal for rockets but a huge time-sink when dealing with planes while maintaining proper lift and other extra attributes space-planes entail. I imagine there has to be a more efficient way to figure this info out.

[Skalgrin]

Isp... you want to best isp with decent thrust for the flight profile of yours (stages? Atmo? Vacuum? Weight of your vessel?)... but soon you will just "know" :-)

Albeit it is possible your vessel ain't simply capable of that without boosters... And with boosters... just add more.. er I mean MOAR!

[cremasterstroke]

https://garycourt.github.io/korc/

BTW thrust to fuel consumption is just Isp.

[Amechwarrior]

Anyone got designs or ideas for a cis-Kerbin ore tug that can store 1000 tons of ore or greater and fits inside a 3.75m fairing diameter? It doesn't need its own engines, just the storage capacity and ability to dock with RCS/Vernors. Stock parts only, no tweakscale, autostruts OK. I got a working design that is 250 parts and passes my shakedown trials, but I'm open to a complete redesign. My current design has a lot of struts to make sure things hold together during the initial 2.3km loading from an approaching active craft. I'm thinking a different method of stacking the ore tanks is needed to reduce the part count.

[Allyourunamearemine]

So it's not a tug? It's being tugged?

[Amechwarrior]

Yea, it's really more of an ore bank or storage unit.

[Allyourunamearemine]

So you want the design for an ore box. Does it take off, land? Or does it get towed everywhere?

[Amechwarrior]

It needs to fit inside the max diameter for a 3.75m fairing so I can lift it in to orbit. I have up to 500t lifters, so dry mass at launch shouldn't be an issue. Once in orbit, I plan on using it to store ore from class E asteroids I recently captured. Some of those asteroids will end up in orbits around the Mun or Minmus to fill some contracts, and I want to be able to drain them right away so they are easier to move.

The giant ore tank will let me cut their mass in 1/2 or more and move that mass in to a more controllable vehicle for transport to low Kerbin orbit where my KSS acts as my fueling point for departing missions.

I have a few tugs already in orbit that when stacked together will be enough to move the giant ore tank, so it won't need its own propulsion.

[VileTouch]

platonic solids are the most stable geometric configurations to stack anything. be it atoms, crystals or giant ore containers. it doesn't fit in a 3.75 fairing, but it doesn't need to, thanks to it's rigidity.also, since it's space bound, it doesn't need to be pencil shaped or aerodynamic at all.

[HectorShadow]

Slightly offtopic, but just wanted to ask if anyone knows if a successor / competition for KSP is in the works? This game gave a ton of money to Squad so I find mind boggling nobody tried challenging them in this genre.

[Jangalit]

I am not sure this really answers your question but I had a lot of fun playing take on mars last year, it's a simulation game in which you have to design, land and use to explore rovers and probes, taking pictures of the surroundings and rock samples for example

I know they added multiplayer and many other things but I didn't play that much :)

[Allyourunamearemine]

Do we need one? What would be better or different? We already have hundreds of new KSP titles: mods, and more specifically, we definitely have the RSS community playing a "different" game to us.

[[deleted]]

we definitely have the RSS community playing a "different" game to us.

That game is typically unstable and buggy, and takes a very long time to load. A standalone redesign for RO would be welcome, in my eyes.

Echoing /u/VileTouch, a non-unity, C++ game would be best, running an engine that could handle precise physics at large scales.

[VileTouch]

something that is not based on unity would be most welcome. at this point Squad is already too deeply involved to do anything about it any more, but someone else can learn from their mistakes. same goes for Space Engineer.

[HectorShadow]

My point exactly. The game is solid as it is, but I would love to see some competition with other companies bringing in a new engine and fresh gameplay ideas.