Kerbal Space Program

[kylector]

I had heard of this game before but Mortus' videos put me over the edge to buy (thanks, Mortus!). I bought yesterday and am getting pretty into it. I'm beginning to understand orbits (I did the tutorials) but am not doing so great learning how to read the ball. Matching another object's orbit is still out of the question for me.

Where would be a good place to learn? I see there are tons of YouTube vids but am looking for good ones that are hopefully up-to-date.

Also, how should I get started with mods?

Thanks!

 

[Magus`]

Scott Manley on youtube has some of the best videos for KSP, IMO.

 

[grendelmk1]

kylector[/url]"9lgznsl]I had heard of this game before but Mortus' videos put me over the edge to buy (thanks, Mortus!). I bought yesterday and am getting pretty into it. I'm beginning to understand orbits (I did the tutorials) but am not doing so great learning how to read the ball. Matching another object's orbit is still out of the question for me.

Where would be a good place to learn? I see there are tons of YouTube vids but am looking for good ones that are hopefully up-to-date.

Also, how should I get started with mods?

Thanks!

Oddly enough, I still remember learning the basics from reading "The Smoke Ring" way back when.

Forward takes you out, out takes you back, back takes you in, in takes you forward.

So if you're behind something and need to go forward to catch it, make your orbit go in, or closer to the planet. To push your orbit in, thrust backwards. Which is what really fucks people up; you have to do exactly the opposite of what you THINK is right.

 

[Hat Monster]

You can also use downward pointing lights to judge altitude. Useful if landing on a night side.

 

[.劉煒]

Heh, Mortus needs to discover how to make a proper orbit .. d: At this point looks like he has plenty of thrust in both videos.

Hey, it's not the size of the launcher, it's the trajectory...

On that note, Dunar injection of the tug is complete with plenty of fuel to spare. Dunar station is almost finished as well, just need a good basic lander to bring along.

 

[Mortus]

The obvious answer is more rockets. Always more rockets.

 

[Joel_B]

Well I learnt several things from the latest Mun landing:

* RCS isn't a replacement for proper fuel.
* 150 m/s is a bit too fast for a Mun landing.
* Kerbals don't seem too worried about the speed of descent.

At least I won't have a rescue mission for stranded Kerbals...!

 

[kylector]

Magus`[/url]":nu98j91u]Scott Manley on youtube has some of the best videos for KSP, IMO.

Thanks for this tip. Last night I followed his tutorial on getting to and landing on Minmus and learned a ton. It was also my first landing. Very very helpful. Today I want to send a few more missions there and see what I can do.

Regarding navigation. Figuring out to set a target and maneuvers is making a lot of sense. What still doesn't make sense is how nav-ball orientation works. I can follow points and I understand the retrograde vector and stuff, but I don't understand how I can use it to navigate without setting targets and maneuvers.

 

[Decoherent]

Magus`[/url]":310qc59x]Scott Manley on youtube has some of the best videos for KSP, IMO.

Those were really, really helpful. They should be linked at the top of the Wiki for new user. I had no idea the maneuvers button even existed I've made it to Mun 3 times just eyeballing it, which makes me feel kind of cool. Just getting some numbers for how high the atmosphere goes, etc. was pretty epic, too, but that's my own fault. I've also been going straight up to more than 20km before even starting to bank. It's amazing how much smaller you can make rockets when you're working with physics and not against it.

I'm still waffling on a purchase, as I've gotten burned a couple times on buying betas, most recently with MWO, when I lost interest lost before they completed it (and they still haven't). How responsive/involved is the dev team? I can see the dates of the various releases, but does it "feel" like they're coming at a good rate?

 

[ferzerp]

Here's the problem with NERVAs on your landers.....

Spoiler

And after leaving the flight and coming back, it would do the weird shake itself apart thing. So now, this guy is stuck all alone on Eeloo and his ship, which landed safely after something like a 4 year journey, decided to randomly blow up. He seems so pleased about it.

Spoiler

 

[ComradeXavier]

Anzig[/url]":34ybdkxd]
What can I say, I just had to make something with the ginormous wheels!

Anzig's big-wheel rover made me want to build one of my own to drive around Mün.

You can see here Jeb's view as he (and Bill) drive the Münterhome Mk.7 to the rescue of the crew of Münterhome Mk.6. (Strangely enough, also Jeb and Bill.)

Spoiler

The first four marks drove around the launch pad to work out the details; Mk.5 came in too fast and low. Mk.6 drained its batteries driving up the first hill it saw, because it left Kerbin without any power source (the engineer said he was very sorry). At least they had some nice scenery to look at while they waited.

The Mk.7 has a longer wheelbase so that it doesn't want to pitch over forward under braking, and (crucially) solar panels that supply enough power to drive uphill at maximum speed while charging the rover's plentiful batteries.

Spoiler

 

[Blacken00100]

ComradeXavier[/url]":24evyqli]The Mk.7 has a longer wheelbase so that it doesn't want to pitch over forward under braking, and (crucially) solar panels that supply enough power to drive uphill at maximum speed while charging the rover's plentiful batteries.

It also explodes for no good reason, showering everyone with a shitstorm of death and fire.

...I assume.

 

[Joel_B]

Made a successful Mun landing on the second attempt.

By successful I mean that the lander didn't explode. Bits fell off, though. Plus there were no technical problems, apart from a miscalculation in the ladder length dept. "Once small step for a Kerbal. One giant leap because the ladder is a bit too short."

However there was sterling improv work when it was found that retracting the ladding struts made the ladder touch the ground...

 

[ferzerp]

Joel_B[/url]":y29tbisj]Made a successful Mun landing on the second attempt.

By successful I mean that the lander didn't explode. Bits fell off, though. Plus there were no technical problems, apart from a miscalculation in the ladder length dept. "Once small step for a Kerbal. One giant leap because the ladder is a bit too short."

However there was sterling improv work when it was found that retracting the ladding struts made the ladder touch the ground...

It's actually not that big of an issue on low gravity objects like mun. You can very easily jump higher than landing struts raise a craft and grab a ladder.

 

[Ianal]

Glenn[/url]":2p5oqmhb]

Magus`[/url]":2p5oqmhb]Scott Manley on youtube has some of the best videos for KSP, IMO.

Those were really, really helpful. They should be linked at the top of the Wiki for new user. I had no idea the maneuvers button even existed I've made it to Mun 3 times just eyeballing it, which makes me feel kind of cool. Just getting some numbers for how high the atmosphere goes, etc. was pretty epic, too, but that's my own fault. I've also been going straight up to more than 20km before even starting to bank. It's amazing how much smaller you can make rockets when you're working with physics and not against it.

I'm still waffling on a purchase, as I've gotten burned a couple times on buying betas, most recently with MWO, when I lost interest lost before they completed it (and they still haven't). How responsive/involved is the dev team? I can see the dates of the various releases, but does it "feel" like they're coming at a good rate?

The dev team are pretty good in my experience, although do bear in mind it's a pretty small team. The updates come at a reasonable rate and there's a checklist on the wiki of which features are planned, which are implemented and which are currently being developed. If anything the devs are almost too responsive - feature creep was becoming an issue - but there seems to have been a decision lately to re-focus on finishing off the core game.

Personally I would say that the game is worth the money as it is, the feature complete version is going to be excelllent.

 

[ferzerp]

Agreed on worth the money.

I've put 52 hours in to it since it was Steam available, and I've been playing it since late 2011, so there is no telling how much time I've gotten out of it. I purchased it right when they split it between a demo and a full version, but I played before then.

 

[Ianal]

It's been a big week for the space program...

Minmus Outpost 1 is now complete.

Spoiler

Test flights of the Mark V lander have been a complete success. The prototype touched down on Minmus before rendezvousing with Outpost 1. The first production model is currently in Munar orbit following a successful landing. The Mark V can transport 6 Kerbals to the surface of the Mun or Minmus and is equipped with parachutes for anticipated missions to Duna.

Spoiler

And finally, the engineers and flight controllers at Project Duna are celebrating unmanned landings on Duna and Ike. Caution - the staff of Project Duna are getting extremely tired of rumours in the media that the so-called 'Ike Shot' was in fact fake film footage shot at a secret location on the Mun.

Spoiler

 

[ferzerp]

Ok, looking for some suggestions. right now I'm using this monstrosity to send 1 kerbal to Eeloo.

It can *barely* do it (though it can at almost any point in Eeloo orbit, not just at the periapsis). It just seems to me that I should be able to make something more efficient. Right now, the asparagus stages are mainsails. The first stage after the center asparagus drops is another mainsail. At that point, it has escaped Kerbin, and the stage for transfer burn to Eeloo is a poodle engine. I end up landing the landing module which is a NERVA and that singular fuel tank, along with 2 gigantor solar arrays and the landing struts with only a few hundred m/s delta v left.


Anyone have any suggestions? Ideally, I'd like to get the poodle engine to do the bulk of the landing work, and then jettison it and land with just the nerva, maybe with a rover or other utility item on top. It's also so tall that it's hard to keep from tipping over, so I end up losing some efficiency to a bad path right at the top of the atmosphere.

 

[Blacken00100]

With only stock parts, you're going to have some trouble. I might look at KW Rocketry if you're not averse to non-stock; that has 3.75m tanks and engines that, while proportional to the 2.5m tanks/engines in terms of capacity/power, will save you some height.

Otherwise, I'd asparagus the shit out of it.

 

[ferzerp]

Blacken00100[/url]":29a3jz65]

Otherwise, I'd asparagus the shit out of it.

The 11 bottom engines are all asparagus.

 

[Duodecimal]

ferzerp[/url]":1cvnwfio]Anyone have any suggestions? Ideally, I'd like to get the poodle engine to do the bulk of the landing work, and then jettison it and land with just the nerva, maybe with a rover or other utility item on top. It's also so tall that it's hard to keep from tipping over, so I end up losing some efficiency to a bad path right at the top of the atmosphere.

Make your ideal system cruiser and refuel it in orbit of Minmus? You'll want nuclear engines on anything you're going long distance cruises with, so build a landing craft docked to your transit vehicle, make sure free docking port is on the main ship, and get that into orbit with a simpler rocket. Then launch a refueling tanker, top off, and go on your way.

 

[ferzerp]

swapped the poodle for a nerva. Had to strut it up a bit, but that ends up with quite a bit more delta V left. Now I should see if I can put a decent payload on top of it or not. Sadly, I didn't build it for that, so I'd have to get that mod that lets you move sections between different ships, etc.

 

[Blacken00100]

ferzerp[/url]":37uhgk10]

Blacken00100[/url]":37uhgk10]

Otherwise, I'd asparagus the shit out of it.

The 11 bottom engines are all asparagus.

Yeah, I'm talking "more than that". For that sort of long flight I've ended up with 25 orange cans and mainsails to get enough weight into orbit.

 

[grendelmk1]

Blacken00100[/url]":3itu1h3m]

ferzerp[/url]":3itu1h3m]

Blacken00100[/url]":3itu1h3m]

Otherwise, I'd asparagus the shit out of it.

The 11 bottom engines are all asparagus.

Yeah, I'm talking "more than that". For that sort of long flight I've ended up with 25 orange cans and mainsails to get enough weight into orbit.

That's pretty much why I built a station in orbit. Mine's in a 300 km orbit around Kerbin instead of Minmus, so it's not quite as delta-V efficent, but it saves the 4,500 m/s or so you need to get up there, and NERVAs are about twice as efficient as the best chemical engines.



32 orange cans lofting a payload of 5 orange cans + 4 large RCS cans, aka the fuel tankage for my station. The 16 + mainsails in the bottom stage all burn at once, along with the 16 solids. The 16 in the second stage are 4 modules where tank 1 (under one of the outer tanks of the payload) is fed by tank 2 (directly outboard) and tank 2 is fed simultaneously by tanks 3 and 4 (on either side of tank 2). Where I screwed up was in using jettisonable mainsails instead of NERVAs to power the top bit. Still, I put 155 tons at 270 km, and I only have to do it once

Total mass on the pad is 1699.4 tons with a TWR at takeoff of 1.74. MechaJeb can't fly it, either.

 

[Hat Monster]

Blacken00100[/url]"0rcvmrw]

ferzerp[/url]"0rcvmrw]

Blacken00100[/url]"0rcvmrw]

Otherwise, I'd asparagus the shit out of it.

The 11 bottom engines are all asparagus.

Yeah, I'm talking "more than that". For that sort of long flight I've ended up with 25 orange cans and mainsails to get enough weight into orbit.

To do better than that, you're going to need stronger engines than the stock game has. I'm not talking about cheating engines (if anything, the ones I use are less efficient!), so get the KW Rocketry pack.

Also try to get rid of intermediate stages. Kerbin is small enough that if you asparagus stage, your first "block" should be getting you to your parking orbit or very close. A five-way block of orange cans and Mainsails should be lofting an 800-unit tank with a NERVA attached and a payload. I don't use stock engines for that, but I doubt much efficiency would be lost if I did. On mine, the first two that drop are 1,500 thrust engines (280 Isp), then 700 thrust, the core has a mere 300 (this is a big 800 ISP NERVA and ignites when the first two drop at 10,000 metres, you can do this with multiple stock NERVAs).

That's my "Jool Explorer" rocket, which runs out of fuel right after it's done a ton of orbital insertions at Jool, then lands on Laythe. It'd piss all over Eeloo.

You are using a good gravity turn ascent, right?

 

[Cabusha]

I MADE IT TO THE MUN!!!

but.... No one's coming back alive. Images and story below!

Spoiler

After the numerous catastrophes of the Agamemnon class, I decided it was time for a fresh start. And this time, we're not just going into orbit around Kerbin. Oh no, w'ere going to the MUN BABY!! I bring you the LEGION MKII!!!

We Have Lift OFF!!!

Second Stage is a Go. So far a very stable launch

Starting our Mun Burn.

We shall soon be intercepting ze mun

Ahh, good bye Kerbin. We knew you well

After 6 hours, we're finally about there.

Very Nice

A last glimpse of Kerbin as we pass into the dark side. Jeb is having the time of his life

Now have a solid orbit at 20K

Get ready boys, we're coming in!!

Oops

In the end was coming in at 500 m/s and started slowing down way too late. Their module then went into a fatal spin and that was the end of it. I also forgot to deploy the landing gear, and wasted a lot of fuel figuring out how to get the orbit around Mun established. A good learning experience though, and by Russian standards, 100% successful!

 

[Ianal]

Cabusha[/url]":18ytbob9]I MADE IT TO THE MUN!!!

but.... No one's coming back alive. Images and story below!

Spoiler

After the numerous catastrophes of the Agamemnon class, I decided it was time for a fresh start. And this time, we're not just going into orbit around Kerbin. Oh no, w'ere going to the MUN BABY!! I bring you the LEGION MKII!!!

We Have Lift OFF!!!

Second Stage is a Go. So far a very stable launch

Starting our Mun Burn.

We shall soon be intercepting ze mun

Ahh, good bye Kerbin. We knew you well

After 6 hours, we're finally about there.

Very Nice

A last glimpse of Kerbin as we pass into the dark side. Jeb is having the time of his life

Now have a solid orbit at 20K

Get ready boys, we're coming in!!

Oops

In the end was coming in at 500 m/s and started slowing down way too late. Their module then went into a fatal spin and that was the end of it. I also forgot to deploy the landing gear, and wasted a lot of fuel figuring out how to get the orbit around Mun established. A good learning experience though, and by Russian standards, 100% successful!

Nice photography too. I guess that was Bill's work, Jeb doesn't have time for such niceties I particularly liked the dawn over Kerbin shot with your ship silhouetted in the foreground.

 

[Mazlem]

I hope you didn't expect that parachute to do anything on the Mun.

For some reason I put one on my first Mun lander too...

 

[Ianal]

I presume the parachute was intended for the 'and return them safely to Kerbin' part of the mission

 

[wilt57]

@ ferzerp

The problem with the NERVAs for landing is their extremely long length, requiring extra weight in girders to get the landing legs low enough. Depending upon the mass of your lander, the LV-909 or Poodle can be better choices as they are shorter in length and have a better TWR to escape gravity. The NERVAs are great for the voyage to Eeloo orbit, but not to Eeloo itself, at least in my very humble and inexperienced opinion. I did some testing on Mun. I built a simple lander with girders to put the landing legs down lower so I could use the NERVA for an engine. I landed a duplicate rocket with a 909. While the NERVA powered rocket DID indeed use less fuel (for the return to orbit launch), it didn't save as much as I was expecting. I didn't remove the landing leg extension girders for the 909 version, but if I would have, the savings would have been even less, maybe to the point of the 909 being more efficient, for that mission purpose. Also, the launcher for a NERVA powered lander has to be that much bigger. It's greater weight is small in comparison to the whole launch system, but every little kg matters.

For the interplanetary and Mun/Minmus voyages, I've been launching my landers and fuel/power ships separately, then refueling them at my station, then docking them together for the journey. By doing this I don't need such an extensive launching system like what you had pictured. If I can remember how to get into my Imgur account, I'll try to post some pictures of my fuel/power launcher and lander launcher, and both of them docked together. All that said, I haven't used it to get to Duna yet... I'm still trying to perfect my interplanetary injection burns before I send real Kerbals out!

 

[daishi5]

wilt57[/url]":ri1p0el4]@ ferzerp
All that said, I haven't used it to get to Duna yet... I'm still trying to perfect my interplanetary injection burns before I send real Kerbals out!

Check your operations manual at the Kerbal Space Center again, your doing it wrong.

 

[ferzerp]

Yeah, kerbals first, *then* unmanned ships.....

That said, with my slight edits, I can land on Eeloo with about 6 km/s delta V left now (without changing the heavy lifter stage). So that's neat.

I've thought about asparagusing the fuel tanks on my transfer stage for weight savings, but haven't gone that far yet.

One nice thing I did learn though, is that if you use the size adapters, the connections are MUCH stronger than just swapping to the new size with no adapter.

 

[wilt57]

LOL! I guess the point I was trying to make was I've only been to Eve and Duna so far, and only with small, light weight ships that don't have enough fuel to make it back to Kerbin. I suspect things will be much different when I'm using NERVA power to move 50 some tons vs. 5. I do actually have one Kerbal, can't remember his name, orbiting Eve right now, backwards Once I fine-tune my injections to where I can reliably enter orbits I want, I'll send the lander ship No Kerbals have been hurt on their way to other planets... yet. But a couple are lonely!

I've thought about asparagusing the fuel tanks on my transfer stage for weight savings, but haven't gone that far yet.

I know a lot of people do that, and I'm not to the point in my program where I have to yet, but my goal is to have every interplanetary ship be able to dock and refuel in Kerbin orbit. So, staging fuel capacity off would reduce the ability to reuse that ship on another long voyage.

 

[Cabusha]

Ianal[/url]":1qkcgnmy]I presume the parachute was intended for the 'and return them safely to Kerbin' part of the mission

Yup, that was the plan. I'll give it another run tonight and see if I can smooth out the transition to Munar orbit. Then the landing. Then the return. Practice makes perfect!

 

[ahunter]

wilt57[/url]":rrv94vjd]
I know a lot of people do that, and I'm not to the point in my program where I have to yet, but my goal is to have every interplanetary ship be able to dock and refuel in Kerbin orbit. So, staging fuel capacity off would reduce the ability to reuse that ship on another long voyage.

Hm, usually you don't care but if you want to get dry tankage up and still get some of the advantages of staging, then set things up so you have an asparagus fuel feed, but the stage drops only the engines once the tanks run empty... Actually, depending on how much thrust you've got, you can get better efficiency by dropping engines early on the initial ascent so that your TWR stays at around 1.3-1.5. (Once your apoapsis is out of the atmosphere, you can get away with a TWR of much less than 1, too)

Once the tanks are dry, the engine is most of the remaining weight, and mainsails are ridiculously inefficient and hard to control for interplanetary manoeuvres in any case.

On an unrelated note, youtube linked me this. I know that licensing the music would probably be expensive, but Squad need to find a way to make that their official trailer.

 

[Ianal]

Oh man. Whoever made that video just Gets It. That's why I play KSP.

 

[wilt57]

ahunter[/url]":3onulube]

wilt57[/url]":3onulube]
I know a lot of people do that, and I'm not to the point in my program where I have to yet, but my goal is to have every interplanetary ship be able to dock and refuel in Kerbin orbit. So, staging fuel capacity off would reduce the ability to reuse that ship on another long voyage.

Hm, usually you don't care but if you want to get dry tankage up and still get some of the advantages of staging, then set things up so you have an asparagus fuel feed, but the stage drops only the engines once the tanks run empty... Actually, depending on how much thrust you've got, you can get better efficiency by dropping engines early on the initial ascent so that your TWR stays at around 1.3-1.5. (Once your apoapsis is out of the atmosphere, you can get away with a TWR of much less than 1, too)

Once the tanks are dry, the engine is most of the remaining weight, and mainsails are ridiculously inefficient and hard to control for interplanetary manoeuvres in any case.

On an unrelated note, youtube linked me this. I know that licensing the music would probably be expensive, but Squad need to find a way to make that their official trailer.

I guess you specifically mentioned your transfer stage. I have no problem dropping tanks and engines in Kerbin atmo. It's just when I get my full "interplanetary ship" assembled in orbit, what tanks are there are gonna stay there. I'm not talking about so much tankage that I drop the launcher engines while keeping the launcher tanks. Some people do stage tanks (typically not engines too, just tanks alone) on their transfer stages. Many times this is done once the lander returns to the command module and the assembly is ready for the return to Kerbin. Or they'll stage the lander engine/tank off for the return, they don't need it anymore. Since I intend to reuse the lander, I cannot stage that off. Since I intend to reuse the transfer stage for another long voyage, I cannot afford to stage tanks off. Unless I can figure out a way to replace those tanks once I get back to Kerbin orbit, which really wouldn't be too hard to do. It'd just be docking ports instead of decouplers, but my experience with docking ports under acceleration, without the quantum strut mod, is to use as little as possible. My current transfer stage consists of one Jumbo-64, four FL-T200 tanks, and five LV-N engines. My plan is to methodically shut down engines to maintain center of thrust while also stretching out my delta-v. As I burn off fuel, less engines working will provide me with roughly the same TWR as all working when full of fuel. If this plan has a giant hole in it that I have not been able to account for, please tell me now!

 

[.劉煒]

Heh, my transfer stage is a NERVA with a FLT200 for the return trip, then usually a jumbo 64 for voyage fuel.

 

[gurgula]

wilt57[/url]":29v7balk] If this plan has a giant hole in it that I have not been able to account for, please tell me now!

If you don´t ditch them, then shutting down engines has no impact on your dV whatsoever, because then your mass ratio doesn´t change. 5 Engines burning vs. 1 burning and 4 being cargo only means that your burns are 1/5 as long, dV is the same. (Assuming of course that all engines have the same ISP). Might as well use them all. You can always use full throttle too, for the same reason.

Personally all my transfer stages only have 1 nuclear engine. Longest burns I had were a couple of 80 minute injection burns into Jool transfer orbit. Never a problem. Even on 4 times physical time acceleration my transfer stages were stable enough to just keep KSP running in the backround and checking in every few minutes.

 

[daishi5]

I always dream of building giant reusable space ships that will be my workhorse that is used over and over, they usually get used once. I either crash them, do something stupid, or figure out some way to do it bigger or better.