It's easier to reach high speeds by going horizontally than just straight up fighting gravity. Just slowly tilt the rocket over after you reach about 15000m. That way I can reach over 3400m/s and escape velocity with just 2 fuel tanks- liquid engine - de-coupler - tri-coupler - 2 fuel tanks and engine x3. Leave the game on over night and see the little guys still going up, never to return to Kearth.
We were tallking about the same things. I meant using that big drums as and then radially attaching 3 of the 200 or 400L ones to the side but it seems you already do this.Just to make sure we are talking about the same things, I think the small diameter fuel tanks have 200 L and 400 L capacities, while the larger "oil drums" have 1,600 L and 3,200 L capacities.
Thanks. When on the Mun, how do I select my 2nd and 3rd Kerbals to get out once the first one is out?And to launch a single kerbal in a 3-pod, I do an EVA on the launchpad, have them jump off the rocket (using their jetpacks otherwise they die in the fall), and then end the flight. Then I go to the tracking station, select my rocket on the pad, and repeat so I only have one kerbal on my flight. Then I take off and hope nothing goes wrong.
Hmm I'd have to see pictures to really guess at a solution. But I've never had a problem with connecting struts creating a tumbling problem when staging occurs.Side problem I have in take-off: since I use the connecting struts to connect the nose cones of my first-stage booster rockets to the second-stage, my rocket always tumbles after I detach the lower stage. It's really annoying, but the system has enough give that I can take the tumble and re-orient the rocket before losing my chance to orbit. And there's enough extra fuel in the second stage that it doesn't affect my reserves for the Mun.
I wish 'feeling easy' was my problem.I used to use a 3,200 L for my lander, but I switched to a 1,600 L because the lander was too top-heavy and it fell easily.
I always end the missions when I've completed or failed them so I only have this problem on the 2 missions that aren't done. I have a one Kerbal pod on orbit around the sun and a 3 Kerbal lander stuck on the Mun without fuel.So my procedure is to get this contraption into near orbit with a two booster stages (I aim to get my periapsis or however it's spelled to around 45k, then I jettison the final booster, but they don't start slowing down in the upper atmosphere like they should, starting to get too much low-orbital space junk).
I watched a Munar Landing tutorial where the guy created this awesome rocket and then jetisoned the 2nd stage while it still had half it's fuel to avoid space junk whereas you use that stage (or it's equivalent) to get to the Mun.Then, I use the 3k extra fuel to get into orbit, to the Mun, and then to de-orbit around the Mun.
I never thought of that. Does it appreciably affect performance? I get you want to leave a leg as a mark of accomplishment, but I'm curious as to whether or not it helps much. I don't want to mess with the extra staging of jetisoning legs, but I will do it if it's worth the effort.After landing and messing around with the EVAs for a little bit, I start the take-off, and once I'm barely off the ground I jettison the landing gear to save weight on the return trip.
We were tallking about the same things. I meant using that big drums as and then radially attaching 3 of the 200 or 400L ones to the side but it seems you already do this.
Thanks. When on the Mun, how do I select my 2nd and 3rd Kerbals to get out once the first one is out?
Hmm I'd have to see pictures to really guess at a solution. But I've never had a problem with connecting struts creating a tumbling problem when staging occurs.
I always end the missions when I've completed or failed them so I only have this problem on the 2 missions that aren't done. I have a one Kerbal pod on orbit around the sun and a 3 Kerbal lander stuck on the Mun without fuel.
I watched a Munar Landing tutorial where the guy created this awesome rocket and then jetisoned the 2nd stage while it still had half it's fuel to avoid space junk whereas you use that stage (or it's equivalent) to get to the Mun.
Besides space junk, he doesn't believe in ASAS units or fins or aquequate RCS/SAS systems to control it. So that stage is basically unusable once in orbit as it is impossible to steer so he just jetisons it and uses his lander stage for the injection, landing and return. You can tell he's an expert pilot to do all of that stuff and not worry about fuel.
I copied his rocket but I'm so sloppy at the controls that I really need that 2nd stage to avoid using fuel in my lander that I need to get home. This weekend I'm going to add some control systems so that it's usable.
I never thought of that. Does it appreciably affect performance? I get you want to leave a leg as a mark of accomplishment, but I'm curious as to whether or not it helps much. I don't want to mess with the extra staging of jetisoning legs, but I will do it if it's worth the effort.
I am very bad at rocket design at this point. It is very hard for me to strike a balance between thrust ratios and adequate fuel. I tend to start off with a very heavy booster and then I find that it can't even get to orbit. I have learned a few tricks with adding fuel lines to keep the central core stages fully fueled when the side boosters drop, but due to sloppy piloting I always end up without fuel at the Mun.
I have landed once with a rocket of my own design and crashed 2 other times due to pilot error with another ship type. But just from copying that one Munar rocket from the tutorial I see that it is already a much more capable rocket despite being lighter. All I really have to do is tweak it a bit and it can handle Mun landings no problem.
What I really want though is a flexible design that can handle most tasks like landing on other planets, but at this point I'm taking it one step at a time. I'm also finally ready to download MechJab after I read through the user instructions for it. It can be frustrating to royally eff things up at the last minute because of pilot error or to hit the wrong key at the wrong moment during the launch and screw up everything.
One thing that is killing me is this stupid bug where it won't let me time warp because it says I'm under acceleration when I'm not. To get around it I have to go to the space center and then go back to the flight and repeat this multiple times as the bug happens a lot.
I want to land there next, then maybe Duna. I know I can do it with my current rocket designs + the one that I copied if I learn to pilot better or get an autopilot.On the plus side, I was able to shoot this lander out to Minmus, but I did the tilt on the orbit all wrong so I didn't land.
Thanks. Oh BTW I just read that once you EVA, (on the pad) and you end the flight, then go back to it, the kerbal hanging on the ladder will be gone. You don't have to make him fly to the surface, just end it while he's on the ladder.I always go back to the tracking station, then select the lander, then EVA the next kerbal. It takes some time and my game occasionally crashes when I do this (probably because my computer sucks and KSP taxes the memory).
Interesting. Are any of your stages colliding on separation?It'd be hard to show without a video. But I get some serious tumbling. I think I just need more RCS thrusters to control the rocket at this point or I need to remove the struts (I think it's a combination of doing a gravity turn and the way the rocket is designed).
Haha that's my rule. If they end up in a stable orbit that I can later rescue them from, I leave them. Otherwise, it never happened.My rule on ending missions: if I run out of fuel on a return trip, then I just end the flight and pretend they were recovered safely. After all, nobody else will notice. But I rescue stranded kerbals on the Mun.
This may help with your stability issues (and sorry if you already know this but it might also help other players):I waste so much fuel and time trying to reorient and stabilize my craft I think the Auto-SAS is worth it. I'm not nearly as good as the guys on Youtube are.
Cool, I may just try it.The landing gear is pretty light (I think it's 0.05 weight per heavy gear, so 0.15 for the gear and a little more for the explosive bolts. Given the rest of the return pod is on the order of 10 weight units, it's marginal at best. But when I was doing my redesign for the Muny Shot, I figured every little bit would help and I've kept that element ever since because I like the look.
I do that but my natural inclination is to stack multiple 3200L tanks with a Mainsail at the bottom. At some point you aren't generating enough thrust to get enough delta-v to orbit. While adding vernier thrusters and SRB's help, I have yet to find a really good balance between thrust to weight ratios on my own. A couple of my designs do alright but they could do better. What I'm finding from online though is that the smaller tanks and smaller engines seem to work better than stacking together a huge monstrosity.My recommendation is to go with multiple liquid rockets for the core of your first stage, and if you want to get a little extra oomph put the solid boosters around it.
It doesn't unfreeze for me no matter how long I wait. It happens randomly for me so I can't predict it. At least going to the tracking center and reselecting the flight fixes it.That acceleration bug also happens when my RCS is on and the computer is making minute adjustments. I wait about 10 seconds and then I can time-warp again.
I want to land there next, then maybe Duna. I know I can do it with my current rocket designs + the one that I copied if I learn to pilot better or get an autopilot.
In fact, the first time I built a Mun rocket it failed consistently to orbit. So I decided to get back to basics and build a simple, powerful rocket to practice plain-jain orbits. Thing is, one the first launch I encountered a thrust bug where I couldn't turn down the engines. This ended up putting me in a far out orbit around the Sun before I ran out of fuel and that's when I realized I had a winning design.
I've taken that design and added to it and if I could just pilot the thing well I wouldn't have any problems. But still, that copied design that took me 5 minutes to make is much better than the one that took me hours to perfect.
Thanks. Oh BTW I just read that once you EVA, (on the pad) and you end the flight, then go back to it, the kerbal hanging on the ladder will be gone. You don't have to make him fly to the surface, just end it while he's on the ladder.
Interesting. Are any of your stages colliding on separation?
I would also suggest holding off on the gravity turn if possible until after you have staged. I have had to do this on a few designs because a turn + staging would sometimes causes veering or collisions. Also, sepatrons may help you.
This may help with your stability issues (and sorry if you already know this but it might also help other players):
The ASAS isn't an auto-SAS. The SAS is already automatic whenever it's turned on. The ASAS is 'Advanced-SAS'. ASAS does not put any torque on the ship by itself like the SAS module does. What the ASAS does do is control any fins, thrust vectored nozzles or RCS units (when RCS is on) to exert stabilizing forces.
So, if you put fins or a thrust vectored nozzle on your rocket, they will respond to manual imputs. But if you turn on SAS, but don't have ASAS, those nozzles and fins won't do anything. With an ASAS, those nozzles and fins are yoked together and work in concert with the torque ability of the SAS unit (or the capsules with built-in SAS) to stabilize.
If you have an ASAS unit and lots of fins, RCS units and thrust vectored nozzles, your rocket should fly straight and true. I've had some really wobbly designs that actually held up very well thanks to ASAS.
I do that but my natural inclination is to stack multiple 3200L tanks with a Mainsail at the bottom. At some point you aren't generating enough thrust to get enough delta-v to orbit. While adding vernier thrusters and SRB's help, I have yet to find a really good balance between thrust to weight ratios on my own. A couple of my designs do alright but they could do better. What I'm finding from online though is that the smaller tanks and smaller engines seem to work better than stacking together a huge monstrosity.
Also, don't you hate when you accidentally leave A/SAS on and your RCS thrusters on and warp 1000x for a second, then de-warp and find all your RCS tanks are empty? I've ruined numerous missions that way.
I don't know how to position them either, they have just been suggested as useful before.I don't know how to position separtrons. None of my stages collide on separation now because the lower stage (which has 7 mainsail engines in a hex around a center tower, each with 4 big fuel tanks) separates at once.
Yeah they are on whenever SAS is on.Heh, I was using it correctly (with the toggle), but wondering why I had to turn on the "auto SAS"--guess if I got the name right it would have made more sense.
Who you kidding? My Mun rocket 1st stage has 17 engines on it, 5 mainsails and 12 vernier side thrusters. I am also thinking of adding a stack of 5 large SRB's under the mainsails for an extra kick. However, this may be unnecessary for Mun trips as I got to the Mun last night 3 times with plenty of fuel last night. The game crashed 50m from the surface each time.You and your single thruster ways... my motto is go big or go home! Usually home. In a body bag.
It has proven invaluable for me when I get to orbit with a huge stack with half full tanks. It is unmanageable without RCS. They also help fine tune landings on the Mun but I haven't mastered this trick yet.I never use RCS, it's completely unnecessary at the moment (landed on Mun and Minmus countless times without it); that will change in .18 with docking
To switch between EVA kerbals or rendezvousing spacecraft hit ] or [ to switch to next/previous object (has to be close)
No need at all to go to the tracking station