Kerbal Space Program

Is that something new in version 0.21? I haven't noticed clouds showing up before.

This is the space station that I just started building. So far it has a core module and a hab module with space for 11 kerbals, though it's currently housing three.

Spoiler big image :

3gIgifg.jpg

 
I started a manned mission to Dres. I totally underestimated the amount of delta v required. I didn't considered the mid course correction burn needed tto match inclination and also I underestimated the delta v required to reach orbit around Dres once inside the SOI. I have to send a fuel tanker up there.
 
Do your inclination at orbital apoapsis or peroapsis if possible. That will cut down on fuel consumption considerably.
 
So this thing was more trouble than it was worth. I was trying to design a high-efficiency, decent delta-V rocket to send a single kerbal to fly around planets and return to Kerbin. Unfortunately, the cluster of nuclear engines tends to tear itself apart when the stage-separators fired (because the sheaths would hit the other engines). The only way I got it to work was to manually detach the stage and then quicksave-quickload to remove the engine covers.

The module with the kerbal is pretty small and light-weight compared to my other modules (I'm using the small RCS tank and small ASAS instead of the large-diameter ones). There's no long-term hab module so I'm assuming the kerbal is drinking his recycled urine and eating plenty of some kind of solar-grown algae paste.

Spoiler :
attachment.php

attachment.php


If I had to redesign the system, I would probably cut one of the nukes. I think it has more than enough fuel to get around the inner system and back but I made a big mistake when going to Moho by launching at the wrong time of the year and making a big correction burn. I have about 60% of my fuel left, not sure if it's enough to get him home. Maybe I'd go to 8 asparagus-fuel tanks instead of 6 if it turns out to be insufficient.

It also sucks I can't throw a flag out in space to leave a marker for the mission. :(
 

Attachments

  • screenshot19.jpg
    screenshot19.jpg
    65.8 KB · Views: 531
  • screenshot21.jpg
    screenshot21.jpg
    60.8 KB · Views: 521
Do your inclination at orbital apoapsis or peroapsis if possible. That will cut down on fuel consumption considerably.

I did my inclination burn at the descending node. I would probably have saved fuel if I did my burn at an apsis but I still brought too little fuel along.
 
I have some terrible glitch on Eve. I sent a habitation pod for Jeb. It lands, then violently shakes all the solar panels off. I switch to Jeb in his little lander from a while back and it shakes itself into the sky, only barely surviving the fall.

>:[
 
I now have a roommate. He's watched me play KSP every once in a while and finds it very interesting, but doesn't have time to play on his own because he's raising a puppy.. that would destroy my house if he wasn't watching it 24/7. Either way, he's been giving me missions. The first one was to send 2 spaceship to another planet - the first one the return vehicle with fuel - and the second one a lander.

I sent them both to Jool and worked on maneuvering in the system & aerobreaking.. I'd only sent 1 mission there before and everyone died. This time around neither of my ships had enough fuel to get back - I used up most of it getting in orbit around Val.. the lander needed fuel to land there and get back into orbit as well. So now I have two useless ships orbiting Val, one with 3 dudes.

So now he wants me to mount a rescue mission. I tried sending a refueling ship to Jool, but again used up most of the fuel getting in orbit around Val.. So that was a failure. I'm getting better at navigating around the Jool system and aerobreaking effectively, but I still feel like I'm doing something wrong. The next ship I'm sending there will have more fuel, but I'm not sure if this is really possible without docking together a larger ship..
 
I've been wanting to experiment with a ship design that's module in which radially situated engines around a main fuel tank would be situated at the front but extra fuel tanks could be attacked to the rear like a long chain depending on the distance of the mission. You'd essentially be dragging your fuel like a long trailer and when one tank empties, you jettison the empty tank to save on weight.

Maybe that's something you could try! Your mission payload is on the front and you'd attach like maybe 8 or 9 orange tanks to a 8 atomic engined hub?
 
The fuel line management... :scared:



That might work. Just disable flow from everything else. Crossfeed may or may not actually allow it to happen... I'm not sure.
 
Leonel, the first ship I sent to Jool with extra fuel for the return mission was essentially a nuclear powered craft with extra fuel mounted as a sizeable fuel tank attached at the front. It was a crazy single launch that used 64 of those long solid fuel boosters to get everything in orbit in one go. The plan was to get to Jool, do an aerobrake, get into orbit around Vall, discard the fuel tank, dock with the lander that needs rescuing, and then have a fully fuelled up return craft complete with lander. The absurdity of my plans then called for the landing on yet another moon before returning home.

Obviously what happened instead was that nothing worked as planned and I had to use up most of my fuel getting there and getting in orbit around Vall. It almost seemed as if my craft was so heavy that it took a lot more v to get it moving.. well, obviously that was the case, but it seemed to have a quite significant impact on fuel consumption.
 
They'd be attached via docking clamps so you could just decouple the empty tank as you go along and save about 4 tons
 
I think it would be simpler to keep everything together and just send a fuel tanker out to hook up with it later.
 
Back
Top Bottom