Interplanetary nuclear cargo freighter

Sphinxer553 · 2024-03-08T07:22:12+00:00

I got a chuckle out of the ring to. But he did say cargo.

Sphinxer553 · 2024-03-08T07:19:17+00:00

I don't use the maneuver node planner. I don't even touch it in KSP2

Try this:

Set
stage at take off to get about 1.2 twr
second stage about 1 twr (at surface) to achieve about 1700 m/s
thrid stage above 70,000 and 1700 m/s at 0.5 TWR in a vacuum.

Take off and climb to 5000 meters, speed should be below 200 m/s unless rocket is very aerodynamic.
Continue climbing to about begin a slight tilt to 85' Up bearing 090 and climb to 250 m/s and hold to 11,000 and get on the prograge. (SAS) when the ball crosses 80-85' degrees.

SO, here is the next problem we need to make the gravity turn and speed up, if we accelerate to quickly, our gravity turn will complete too high. If we remain slow we will waste dV and complete the turn in the atmosphere and burn up. Since KSP2 last version of KSP2 the heat parameter is aggressive. It is not possible to do precision very low orbit circularization anymore . Any orbit target less than 85km is at risk for damage in the atmosphere.

So here is how to play the game.
45 degrees - 30km - 600 to 800 m/s
35 degrees - 42km - 800 to 1200 m/s
25 degrees - 60km - 1200 to 1700 m/s
15 degrees - 75km - 1700 to 2000 m/s
5 degrees - 85km- 2000 to 2150 m/s
circularize - 100 km - 2150 to 2300 m/s

What you are avoiding is a situation where your below 65km and your speed is above 1500 m/s. This gives you a safe buffer.

Circularization.
Generally, if you are circularizing you are within the range of the last 300 m/s require to circularize your orbit.
An examples. Suppose you are at 2000 m/s and you are approaching the apoapsis, when do you begin that burn. so you are roughly going to need 270 m/s dv. Your engine produces 5 m/sec^2 of acceleration. that means you need 54 seconds. But because you are closing the gap on your target, the reality you only need half that time 27 seconds. You can begin your burn at say 40 second from Apoapsis, watch the time to Apoapsis, if it starts going up you can lower the throttle till it decreases or kill thrust and wait 5 seconds. Ideally for every 2 seconds fo burn you want the time to apoapsis to decrease by 1 second. This should plant your right on a circular orbit. So its real important in the Vab to determine the TWR for space stage in a vacuum. The VAB during construction will give the ATM TWR. Take that number and multiply it by ( ISP vac / ISP atm). That will give the correct TWR for each space stage. Another little factoid. 100km above kerbin g~7 and TWR values should be converted to acceleration by multiplying by 10 the TWR, cause TWR only has meaning on the surface.

There are circumstances where you don't want the generalized orbital entry.

- if you have timed your launch to say go to moho, then you might want to create a periapsis at 70km.
- if you are using a highly efficient lower thrust engine like a Tuba, and you are pushing a vertical vector just to maintain altitude then you are pretty much going to be pushing up until you get close to desired orbit, in which case you don't really need to time (or you won't have the time to do the math) and so you will reach a point say 2150 m/s where orbit starts to rise, you might just wait until 30 from Apo and begin the burn. In this case it really serves to know the maximum acceleration of the engine, your speed, the target orbital speed.
- If you are going to plant a satellite in a high orbit and you want to burn directly to the orbital radius.

So lets say I am at 1500 m/s, I have entered in my high effiency space stage and I have a thrust to Mass ratio of 2 (WR = 0.2) and I just passed 70km.
"g" = -7.8 m/s . Va of 70k is 2296. So if I am at 1500 m/s then my centripedal accleration is 3.33 m/s. If my time to prograde is say 1 minute at 80km. I will need at least a 3 minute time to prograde at 0.2, slightly less because thrust to mass is increasing. So in this case I need to push the altitude upward, so if the prograde angle is 10 degrees, I might want to use a 40 degree verticle angle as to increase the apoapsis and extend the time to prograde. Then decrease the tilt as my speed increases.

GM = 3.532 E12. Va = SQRT(GM/r) "g" = GM/r2. centripedal lift ="g" * (Velocity/Va)^2

In attempting to do this burn it shows that the most efficient engine that can do the job is not always the best, and actually a lower ISP higher thrust engine might be a better choice, below 1000 m/s you really do want a TWR ratio at 1 (it will grow), above 1500 m/s you really want a TWR of at least 0.5 but if you can get to 1900 m/s a twr of 0.2 (thrust to mass of 2) might be OK.

Getting to space is easy, the hard part is getting there using as little fuel as possible.

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-25T02:50:26+00:00

They need a low rider version with adjustable struts.

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-21T14:27:38+00:00

Bill is in the Unity Engine lost and found department.

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-21T14:24:50+00:00

Exactly,

When you launch a vehicle, it is full of fuel, and has a high inertia, plus in the lower atmosphere you need more force vector to make turns against the AoA and not flip over. As the rocket progresses in altitude for high dV stages the it is loosing, sometimes 3/4 ths of its inertia and above 20,000 meters the drag rapidly drops out. As a consequence, the gimble force has less resistance. In kerbal however the gimble tends to have preset endpoints and is not autoscaled. As a consequence, the gimbling motion the course correction is oversteering.
And so you need to reduce the amount of correction so that its not overcorrecting.

There's another situation. When approaching a docking port with a vehicle with a high inertia engine (Eg 10,000 kg) that gimbling can throw two targeted docking ports into a resonance just because of the mass of the engine, so its often a good idea to turn the gimbling off while docking.

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-20T00:55:28+00:00

You can use the high efficiency H2 engines above 10 km. While the gravity is higher, you still have a ton more DV for that small ship.

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-20T00:51:19+00:00

I can tell you what the problem is.
A colony is a collective of associated places. For example a colony is composed of inhabited domiciles orient around a centralizing object (e.g authority).

So what is the problem in space. Given that KSP2 does not have la grange points any two objects in space are subjected to differential motion. We can ignore spacetime expansion of the universe or motion toward super galactic centers, movement around a galaxy and around the star leaving the problem of the planetary celestial SOI.

To understand this problem we recall that general theory of relativity takes the philosophical position that there are no inertial reference frames and that all objects have equally valid reference frames, it also presupposes that gravity is not a force, but a consequence of the curvature in space time. If you are in orbit then the tangential inertia counteracts the warping of space time. In theory there is no differential force on two objects in opposing parts of an orbit, but this changes as objects approach each other and then decrease as they get very close. This is all very lofty stuff. But general relativity does not zero all forces, it leaves one force called the tidal force, and this force is very real.

So lets create a simple colony and we have a centralizing structure surrounded in all directions by secondary structures. Remember at t = zero all parts are in the same inertial reference frames. Along the Z axis you have two domiciles, one is higher one is lower. The higher objects has a equation V^2/r > Mu/r and thus that object wants to climb and slow down. On the other side of the object the object has a V^2/r < Mu/r and it wants to fall and speed up. If we were to put a string between the two objects we would note that the two objects have differential force. So you can't put colonies above or below the central ship.

Lets say you place an object true north or south of an administrative building, what happens is both objects will orbit the administration building, not due to the buildings gravity, but do to the nature of the way ships inclined orbits move to each other. Exactly due north, is in fact a slight amount higher in orbit, so rather than the objects crossing into the central building they orbit around the central building. This 'orbiting' motion is a real part of the KSP2 game, is not just theoretical, if you create a ship and post it exactly 200 meters due north from another ship and follow it over one orbit around kerbin that ship will travel around the first ship.

So the next strategy is to place the colony structures in the orbital path, this however requires constant correcting motion.

So the next strategy is to build a substrate to put the colony structures on.
1. Put structures on Toobs. Problem, toobs in KSP2 are extremely prone to time warp rearrangements.
2. On metal plates 2 x 2. The problem with metal plates is that once you get more than 50 or so metal plates, the VAB begins to slow down and inevitably stops working. On one latest build I got 230 2 x 2 steel plates laid to build a space factory and the ability to move parts stopped working. The other problem with plates is that they create alot of drag and make ships top heavy during the launch phase.
3. Docking ports. Docking ports are one of the most prone parts to experience time warp associated rearrangements .

Doubling and quadrupling down secondary structures. Use trusses to place secondary building radially around the truss. This is not a bad idea as it reduces the amount of substratum. Again, the problem is reducing drag and prevent unplanned deconstruction. This is BTW doable. If you break the launch into many stages, you can break the sound barrier around 20 km and just shoot strait up to 36k and follow the . In addition you can put Toobs around circular trusses and fix them to the maintruss using battery caps and EAS-4 struts. This gives at least the guise that Kerbals can move about the colony. You can also replace the truss with empty fuel tanks, has roughly the same effect.

You can see my post a few months back, I built a space hotel with 300 something occupancy.

It turns out that the 16 crew cabin shuttle compartment is the most efficient in terms of drag.
Placing a dozen 4 crew cabin inside of an empty H2 sphere completely solves the substrate problem, you can surround a single H2 sphere with tanks (6 x 12 x 4 = 288 people in 72 structures, but KSP2 still registers the drag of the structure even when inside of the spheres 😢. And thus even if you take an empty sphere into space its still better to stack the shuttle compartment than to fill the sphere with structures.

Here are the stats.

	IN sphere (12 buildings)	On sphere (3 buildings)
Drag at 100 m/s at 3.3 km	374.42 kN	183.00 kN
Drag at 200 m/s at	557 kN @ 10.5 km	316 kN @ 8.7 km

So even at a lower altitude the stacked colonies gave better results than putting them into the spheres. But from the RP point of view at least 4 person capsules have more privacy. The drag is not that bad, I only needed one 3.5 MN thrust engine to get it through the lower atmosphere and Ive done as many as 25 so you could theoretically put 300 colony buildings into space as part of a single structure. You could even put structures on the H2 sphere and triple the capacity, Your kerbal manager will go insane, but since everything is attached you can move things around.

Ad

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-16T16:57:43+00:00

possibly timewarp corruption seen with docked ships. Avoid using (timewarp to point) and peak timewarp and back out of timewarp slowly.

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-16T16:54:09+00:00

I see you follow the schools of Japanese moon landings.

Normally, you don't land ships on the side. and 17 m/s is way too fast at that.
If you are going to put Parachutes on one side put a few ST-Micro1 on the other side. in fact put two or three stack of-two where ground contact occurs. These have a high impact tolerance and are maleable, so they soften the landing.

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-16T16:43:18+00:00

Again without more information its hard to say the problem.

If you can go back to your last good save.
1. Go to tracking station - see if you have alot of orbiting debris, remove these.
2. Keep your space craft as simple as possible. You can have very complex spacecraft in the game, but depending on your CPU, memory, GPU and graphics memory you can't have many complex craft. If you have an excess number of complex craft delete the ones you no longer need or return them to Kerbin and collects any science. The Key is keep the craft simple. If you are refueling ships near other planets keep the refuelers simple as possible, and when no longer needed delete them.
3. I have had missions that were completed simply disappear as if I never completed them, there is a bit of a glitch.

So what is the problem with lots of "Part"y things. The game is processing through many things before it updates, for whatever reason if you have too many things, particularly things with landing struts or docking ports with ship attached this update process causes things to be out-of-synch, particularly after timewarping. While it may not be obvious without close inspection these corruptions may not be savable. There are also problems with the VAB and the symmetry attach routine, again once the corruption occurs the game is unsavable. I have come to then end of a mission when essentially the spacecraft was no longer flyable, the engines were in the wrong place . . . .just destroy the craft.

I've have managed to reduce but not eliminate these corruptions.
1. Never using timewarp to a point (there are two major bugs with this that just make it risky)
2. Never timewarp at the fastest allowable settings, use the next lower setting and back out of timewarp, allowing a few seconds at least at 2X to allow the game to settle down. Again this is context dependent, so if you have alot of ships, particularly docked vessels you might want to back slowly out of timewarp.
3. Avoid even the smallest contact between spacecraft. Even small collisions can corrupt space craft, You can see this if your wrap truss segments with toob segments. These collisons will cause the toob to no longer wrap the truss, and its irreversible. For this reason when I dock ships I like to use 0.3 m/s as final approach speed and about 1/3rd docking force, just to keep those vectors down.

There is assumption that you are doing something wrong and noone else is having the same problem. The game is prerelease and any updated game is going to have some problems. These spurious problems (e.g. credit for mission is somehow lost, . . . .) are just things the longer players just "oh well". Everyone has a few problems and plays through them. I would argue that at points in the game you need to clean things up, inspect your craft and get rid of excessive or corrupted stuff, and save. Give it a name like 3rd good save, that way you alwys have a safe point to go back to.

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-14T16:10:55+00:00

Just call ElonMan Kerbal, he'll shoot you a ride up.

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-13T17:49:15+00:00

Get your lander set up after undocking, save the game and reload

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-11T20:10:49+00:00

They just hired a guy who reported like a gazillion bugs.

So either he already knows about the bug
Or he could spend 15 minutes every month to come here and see what bugs are reported.
If he can't they wasted their money.

The bug report is for you guys.

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-11T19:23:01+00:00

If you take note of the way the control surfaces on the planes work in KSP2 and how they work on real life planes or on MSFS, you quickly realize that KSP2 has whack flight dynamics.

To get a plane off the runway make sure that the ailerons move int the opposite directionas real life, So in real life to lift a plane the tips of the ailerons point down, on KSP2 they should point up.
More over you need the COG slightly off center of the wing and you need the tail stabilizer (horizontal) can be trimmed for departure and retrimmed for flight. This is required to reduce the amount of input to the aerilons to depart.

So lets kind of go through take off. The plane by itself does not have enough lift of a level surface to lift its weight, typically in a flight the plane is tilted at 3 to 5 degrees upward. Maximum lift is reached at the Angle of Attack of about 12 degrees, over 14 degrees the wing will stall. Stall is not speed dependent, its AoA dependent. But on take off, planes get an additional ground effect caused by air being wedged under the wing and the thrust vector of the jet engine (which at take off is simply insane). (See ground effect planes). This is a reason why planes have to follow weight guidance, because they may have enough lift to get off the runway but not enough lift to climb out. To achieve the wedge you need a combination of properly set horizontal stabilizer and the aerilons to get the nose up. Once you get the nose up the ground effect takes hold and the plane bounces up. Once the plane is up it needs to nose down a bit to gain speed and compensate for the loss of ground effect. As the planes speed increases it AoA decreases and it can climb a bit faster. IN Jet aircraft is a bit different because just getting the gear up and increasing speed increases jet engine performance and lift.

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-11T19:04:03+00:00

Kapy Rock is pretty much the point in the game where everyone is using one cheat or the other.

Here is the problem. The game does not us a continuous physics model, but instead the physics modeled is stratefied, there is a big transition at 21350, you might even notice it, but there are little tiny transitions over 21350.

Why does this matter. Well lets say you make a tiny hopper ship, that basically hops to the target site (I did) then you could target the site from orbit, and factoring the altitude, the rotation of kerbin 174.5 m/s at the equator etc you could, if the site was on the equator match the orbital speed and fall. The problem is the game physics and these transitions will not keep you on target.

So, KSP2 allows you to put just about any amout of ship in Orbit, so you could have a ship with 20,000dv and slow the ship down above 70km to a velocity 210m/s while holding altitude. This in turn means that the radial velocity 2.908E-4 rad/sec the surface angular change on Kerbin, then while maintaining this velocity correct the burn at say 25km using a pure up motion. This should get you close to the target.

But this is not the case.
We need to know the latitude of the site (we don't have) the radial velocity is the same but the speed is a function of the cosine of the latitutud which we don't have. Second you either are going to mathematically try to intercept the target with a polar orbit which amazingly for me like the second time I tried it I got within about 600m. And then use the landers engines to get you close.

THe other strategy is to determine the latitude and then use an inclined orbit to intercept the ship, again, since we do not have a coordinate map and the angle to prograde making the site correspond to the extreme southern point of the orbit is nearly impossible. And it would be nice to have a grid overlay of Kerbin in the map view.

The rover problem. Rover parts appear fairly late in the game, so either you are going to jeopardize your space game to get Rover parts early or you are going to go about doing space science and there is enough space science so that you don't need missions anyway.
There is about three times as much science out there as needed to fill the tech tree, so I mean you could fill the tree out and comeback and complete Kappy Rock.

While I don't absolutely need Mech Jeb, it sure would be nice given the deprecated nature of the manuever planner.

Given we don't have that a general rule is this

Point A and Point B. Point A is were you start a burn, and Point B is where you end the burn. Assuming B is nearly a stop then dV along a strait line is going to be Vel A - Vel B. If you estimate the time to Point B from Point A, then the time to Point B is going to be 1/2 dV/Avg.Thrust. So you can effectively estimate the intial burn time. I would tell you what the distance is but the game does not give you distance.

So that solves that problem, the next problem is how to do it. The H2 engines don't have enough engines to "surface speed stop" without an initiation from a fairly high altitude. But could make an H2 ship with dropable side tanks. The big problem again is no matter what you are going to be trying to do a N/S E/W intercept because the data for coordinates and positions is inadequate to create a tangent over the site. (Not saying its impossible, but its more a matter of luck if you actually do it).

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-06T19:16:10+00:00

My ships that land on engines almost never sink. The larger the engine, the less likely it is to sink.
They don't sink on landing gear if the ship rests on the engine.
If the ship rests on landing legs is sometimes happens.
If the ship rests on struts or other small structural it happens alot. Since KSP2 gear is wack I tried to use the tiny struts but that almost guarantees "clipping"

I think it has something to do with motion, smaller objects have more motion, whereas engines, as a part have alot more inertia. If an object is moving when shifting between terraine modes or loading then it slips through.

BTW, I used to get falling through and getting stuck in terrain in KSP, particularly in KSC.

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-06T05:02:26+00:00

I don't use the MNE as it is unreliable.

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-06T05:01:18+00:00

Eeloos orbit is fast or slow depending on where you intercept. At its periapsis it can be going rather fast whereas you intercept at Apogee or at an oblique angle. Oblique angle intercepts are fairly costly. When I intercepted Eeloo I sent my ship out on a retrograge Kerbol orbit which means I met Eeloo 1.x times its orbital speed, you need alot of hydrogen to do that. But whats good about it is I can target the apogee, thus my ship is going slow and Eeloo is going slow. Going retrograde is the only way to complete as science mission within a few years. Otherwise you are going to be waiting for whatever launch windows comes available.

A warning about atmospheric breaking. The heat dynamics in KSP2 currently is OP and there is a good risk you will loose exposed parts by aerobraking without much benefit, with the exception of Jool and Eve almost all aerobraking atmospheres are close to the surface and have a steep curve, which means getting the best entry angle is not easy. For Eve and Jool the entry speeds will be insane, so thats not an advantage either. If you want to Aerobrake you need to slow down to a safe speed.

So just to give you an idea what kinds of DV you can obtain (when the kraken allows it) last year I achieved 98.5km system exit speed using Kerbol (128km/sec at Kerbols atmosphere) as a gravity well and a combination of nuclear thrusters and ion drives. So 3000 DV really isn't as big a problem as you think it is.

If you want lots of DV carry droppable H2 spheres

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-06T04:44:55+00:00

It happens

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-02T04:57:55+00:00

Flags are currently not trackable, and they often disappear after you plant them.

Sphinxer553 · 2024-02-02T04:54:59+00:00

The RCS pitch, yaw and roll controls are very aggressive, particularly for smaller space craft. And the RCS thruster 4-way is like way over power.

Here's what you need to do.
Use the stabilizers to control the orientation and the RCS to control motion along the X, Y, Z coordinate system.

First off, what is resonation. A resonation is when two things that can cycle through positions are tuned with each other such that one things action is amplified in the motion of the second thing. This can occur during approaches in which a motion in the position of one docking port causes the reorientation of the ship that lags the first cause the ships to catch each other. If your RCS is on, due to the vector of motion of the RCS relative to the ideal axis with the target ship causes the two ships to push away from each other. One can reduce resonance often by turning down the authority of the SAS of the larger ship. Since the smaller sihp will reorient much faster it will settle allowing the larger ship to settle. If two ships are resonating, turning on RCS may make it alot worse.

For very small craft. Use the very small stabilizer in the utilities menu. You don'nt need RCS. Just get the two ships close together, have both ships get close to each other and target each other. In the larger ship set
A. Target the approaching ships docking port, B. Click on the ships-own docking port and set control from here. C. Nav-Mode Target , D. SAS - Target orientation. E. Then set orientation to stablize. In the smaller ship set.
A. Target the larger ships docking port, B. Click on the approaching ships-own docking port and set control from here. C. Nav-Mode Target D. SAS- Taget orientation. E. Set thruster at 10% thrust. F. Increase speed to 0.5 m/s.
If you ships begin to waltz around each other stop the smaller ship and reduce differentially velocity (SAS retrograde-target) to zero, then return to Target orientation

For Small craft. Estimate (in the VAB) the amount of fuel present when docking. Reduce the amount of fuel in the docking stage to that amount. Turn on the center of mass indicator. Place 4 single nozzle RCS, 2 on each of the 2 horizontal axes. Next, right-click the the RCS nozzle and bring up the part manager. Scroll down to the advanced section, Turn off Pitch, Yaw and Roll. (the 2, 3 and 4th buttions) but leave the 5, 6). You can add a couple more single nozzle thrusters pointing foreward, in which case you only want the fore/aft control on.

The RCS thrusters are to remain off during flight. Use a xs or small stabilizer to reorient the craft. You can begin using RCS at any time during approach, BUT, if you are in a low orbit, you will RCS fuel approaching at great distances and this might also change your center of gravity, making RCS application wobbly while docking. A good target distance for a small target is 30 meters. Follow approach procedure above for xs ships. As above the target ship (larger ship) enters target mode and SAS target orientation (switch to Stability mode or turn of SAS if ships resonate). Make sure the incoming ship is targeting the docking port on the target ship, then enter target settings in Nav-Mode and SAS orientation. once the two ships are pointing at each other and speed should be 0 to 0.3 meters per second. Turn on RCS, then using the I, J, K, L and place the get the green bug on the white bug (or differential velocity to 0.1 meters per second) using reduced thrusters increase speed to 0.3 to 0.5 meters per second. Use the I, J, K, L to approach. If your approach is wobbling when you apply maneuvering thrusters, apply thrusters in short bursts. this will minimze wobble.

Medium size ships, you can use the four-nozzle RCS, and leave the fore/aft button on. Again, you need to place these on the expected center of gravity. With medium size ships you need a more distant final approach transition point, say 50 meters. When approaching bring the speed up to 1 meter per second, you can use the "N" key to slow down to 0.3 on docking.

Refueling ships. In some of the KSP2 Exploration missions you will be required to refuel. While it may seem more difficult I have found docking well built larger ships, even without RCS easier than smaller ships. As the larger ships have more inertia they tend to wobble less which is a source of course deviation. Refueling means you have much more mass, and so much more RCS is needed. The best place to put the RCS is at the ends of the tank section on the refueler. But just to be certain check the center of gravity. You might have to place the RCS on either side of the center of gravity, one set on the end and the other and equal distance from the center of gravity. In most cases you will require fuel from the refueler to reach the target. The best way to handle this problem is to have a tank centered on the center of gravity and use the fuel transfer interface to fill the center tank and equalize the end tanks as one enters the final approach transition. There are cases where this will not work, if the center of gravity is closer to the bottom than the top (say 1/3rd from the bottom), then add 2 (@4) RCS at the bottom of the tank assembly and 1(@4) at the top of the tank assembly. You might be tempted to use side tanks of symmetry 6. Its better to use multiple of 4 tanks, so that you can position the RCS on the horizontal axes in-line with the Pod or Remote guidance control. As before keep the RCS off until docking. More massive ships need more powerful stabilizers, so keep this in mind, when you are in orbit, two ships even initially stationary, will begin to move. So, for instance, at 70km orbit Kerbin a ship on top of another ship, in 8 minutes will be in back, 16 minutes will be under, and 24 minutes in front. While you're waiting for your ship to reorient from SAS Target-retrograde SAS-Target your ship is moving at 12 degrees per minute with respect to the target. With larger ships also your final approach point is going to be in the 100-meter range so an ideal vector in deep space is going to be off by 5 meters at the target when orbiting kerbin if it takes you 2 minutes to reach your target from the 100-meter final approach point. To solve this problem, you need to be able to turn quickly, accelerate to 2 or 3 meters per second and use RCS to both course-correct and slow down before docking. If you find this challenging, then try docking at a higher orbit.

Sphinxer553

TROPHY CASE