Kerbal Space Program
- Thread starter Leonel
- Start date
Thorgalaeg
Deity
Havent played the game since v0.18 but i am following the thread with interest. So, v0.22 is about to be released, wow! For when the career mode? I am not time to play this game now but when career mode is out i will have to find time somehow!
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
.22 will include the first, bare-bones implementation of career mode. You still have sandbox mode (what we've been playing) but if you start a new game under career mode, you won't have access to all of the parts. Instead, there is a new set of buildings called the Science center. In the science center, you can spend science points to unlock the tech tree they will now have. Each level of the tech tree will unlock new parts - which means you won't have access to many parts at first.
To get science points, you have to do science missions. You can do crew reports and science experiments and you can beam the results back through antenna (which will now use electricity) or return the results in a capsule for bonus science points. You can also take samples and do lots of other stuff to earn science points.
To get science points, you have to do science missions. You can do crew reports and science experiments and you can beam the results back through antenna (which will now use electricity) or return the results in a capsule for bonus science points. You can also take samples and do lots of other stuff to earn science points.
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
Hey guys, I came up with something to figure out how to build my Laythe mission the 'smart way'. Will you read this when you have a chance and tell me if I'm missing anything? Thanks!
I have a new conceptual framework for how I'm going to launch all of my components of the Laythe Orbital and Surface Research Complex (LOS-RC). The first point of order is to determine a reference mass to serve as a stand-in for the payloads I will be sending to Laythe. Around this reference mass, I will build an interplanetary cruise stage capable of delivering this reference mass to Laythe orbit and then I will design a launch vehicle capable of delivering this cruise stage to orbit.
Reference Mass (RM):
100tons
This figure is based on the LVL-2a lander which weighed approximately 70tons. I believe that due to the reusable nature of the landers, they will be the heaviest components sent to Laythe. I could use 70tons as a reference mass but I want to ensure that I have plenty of room to play with in case the other modules wind up being heavier. I also have to consider that the LVL-2a will have to be redesigned to offer improved deltaV, which will increase its mass. I believe 100tons for a reference mass will provide plenty of wiggle room. However, if this turns out to be an unrealistic reference mass for a launcher to handle, then I will reduce it in 5 ton increments until I hit the 'sweet spot'.
Integrated Cruise Stage (ICS):
The cruise stage will take the reference mass from a reference circular LKO of 80km all the way to Laythe where it will inject it into orbit.
The ICS will have the following system requirements:
1 Large robotic control pod
1 large RCS tank
8 RCS thrusters
8 LV-N engines
2 solar panels
2 small batteries
Decouplers between each orange tank in the stage so they can be jettisoned when empty
Fuel lines between each orange tank so that fuel can be fed 'up' the stack to the top where the LV-N's are mounted.
3 struts between each orange tank
8 struts attaching the last tank to the reference mass
The deltaV to reach Laythe orbit from the reference orbit is ~6925m/s
(12km/s for Eve orbit!
)
This design will allow the final tank of the cruise stage stack to act as a satellite at Laythe as it will contain all of the electrical, RCS, control and engine components of the stack; each of the other tanks will be jettisoned as they empty.
As this stage will only operate in space, T/W is not a major concern.
To figure out how many tanks I will need for the cruise stage, I will use the rocket equation (and use the mass of the RM + all of the components listed above) to calculate the mass of my propellant. I will divide this mass by the mass provided by 1 orange tank to figure out how many tanks I will need. Then I will add back the mass of the tanks themselves and their decouplers/fuel lines to the rocket equation and check to make sure I still have enough deltaV. If I do not, then I will add another tank and check again.
Launch Vehicle (LV):
The LV will be the vehicle that will place the ICS and RM into an 80km LKO. It will consist of the asparagus-staged side boosters and their own system requirements. The LV will need to deliver 4450m/s deltaV to the ICS and RM to get it into orbit.
System Requirements:
1 radial decoupler to attach to the ICS
1 large strut between each decoupler and each asparagus booster stack
3 struts per orange tank in each stack to attach to each other to prevent wobble
4 struts per orange tank in an asparagus stack to connect to the next stack over
4 struts per asparagus stack to link to Reference mass at top
3 struts per asparagus stack to attach to ICS
1 fin per asparagus stack
10 sepatrons per asparagus stack
1 fuel line per asparagus stack
To design this stage, I will begin with a simple 1 orange fuel tank + 1 mainsail stack. This stack will have all of the system requirements listed above. I will then calculate how much deltaV this stack can provide to the ICS and the RM.
If the deltaV falls short, I will add via symmetry, more stacks (up to 8) and recheck the deltaV. If 8 way-symmetry does not provide enough deltaV, then I will add an additional tank to the original stack and start the process over with 1 booster, adding more if necessary with symmetry up to 8. If this still doesn't provide enough deltaV, I will add yet another tank to the original stack and so on until I have enough deltaV in the launch vehicle to lift everything.
Lastly, when I have identified the number of stacks and tanks I will need to provide the deltaV required, I will check the T/W ratio of my booster. If it is less than 1, I will add additional mainsails to each stack in the LV until the LV is greater than 1. Then I will recalculate with the new mass and make sure my deltaV still meets the requirements.
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN FRAMEWORK
I have a new conceptual framework for how I'm going to launch all of my components of the Laythe Orbital and Surface Research Complex (LOS-RC). The first point of order is to determine a reference mass to serve as a stand-in for the payloads I will be sending to Laythe. Around this reference mass, I will build an interplanetary cruise stage capable of delivering this reference mass to Laythe orbit and then I will design a launch vehicle capable of delivering this cruise stage to orbit.
Reference Mass (RM):
100tons
This figure is based on the LVL-2a lander which weighed approximately 70tons. I believe that due to the reusable nature of the landers, they will be the heaviest components sent to Laythe. I could use 70tons as a reference mass but I want to ensure that I have plenty of room to play with in case the other modules wind up being heavier. I also have to consider that the LVL-2a will have to be redesigned to offer improved deltaV, which will increase its mass. I believe 100tons for a reference mass will provide plenty of wiggle room. However, if this turns out to be an unrealistic reference mass for a launcher to handle, then I will reduce it in 5 ton increments until I hit the 'sweet spot'.
Integrated Cruise Stage (ICS):
The cruise stage will take the reference mass from a reference circular LKO of 80km all the way to Laythe where it will inject it into orbit.
The ICS will have the following system requirements:
1 Large robotic control pod
1 large RCS tank
8 RCS thrusters
8 LV-N engines
2 solar panels
2 small batteries
Decouplers between each orange tank in the stage so they can be jettisoned when empty
Fuel lines between each orange tank so that fuel can be fed 'up' the stack to the top where the LV-N's are mounted.
3 struts between each orange tank
8 struts attaching the last tank to the reference mass
The deltaV to reach Laythe orbit from the reference orbit is ~6925m/s
Spoiler source :
(12km/s for Eve orbit!
)This design will allow the final tank of the cruise stage stack to act as a satellite at Laythe as it will contain all of the electrical, RCS, control and engine components of the stack; each of the other tanks will be jettisoned as they empty.
As this stage will only operate in space, T/W is not a major concern.
To figure out how many tanks I will need for the cruise stage, I will use the rocket equation (and use the mass of the RM + all of the components listed above) to calculate the mass of my propellant. I will divide this mass by the mass provided by 1 orange tank to figure out how many tanks I will need. Then I will add back the mass of the tanks themselves and their decouplers/fuel lines to the rocket equation and check to make sure I still have enough deltaV. If I do not, then I will add another tank and check again.
Launch Vehicle (LV):
The LV will be the vehicle that will place the ICS and RM into an 80km LKO. It will consist of the asparagus-staged side boosters and their own system requirements. The LV will need to deliver 4450m/s deltaV to the ICS and RM to get it into orbit.
System Requirements:
1 radial decoupler to attach to the ICS
1 large strut between each decoupler and each asparagus booster stack
3 struts per orange tank in each stack to attach to each other to prevent wobble
4 struts per orange tank in an asparagus stack to connect to the next stack over
4 struts per asparagus stack to link to Reference mass at top
3 struts per asparagus stack to attach to ICS
1 fin per asparagus stack
10 sepatrons per asparagus stack
1 fuel line per asparagus stack
To design this stage, I will begin with a simple 1 orange fuel tank + 1 mainsail stack. This stack will have all of the system requirements listed above. I will then calculate how much deltaV this stack can provide to the ICS and the RM.
If the deltaV falls short, I will add via symmetry, more stacks (up to 8) and recheck the deltaV. If 8 way-symmetry does not provide enough deltaV, then I will add an additional tank to the original stack and start the process over with 1 booster, adding more if necessary with symmetry up to 8. If this still doesn't provide enough deltaV, I will add yet another tank to the original stack and so on until I have enough deltaV in the launch vehicle to lift everything.
Lastly, when I have identified the number of stacks and tanks I will need to provide the deltaV required, I will check the T/W ratio of my booster. If it is less than 1, I will add additional mainsails to each stack in the LV until the LV is greater than 1. Then I will recalculate with the new mass and make sure my deltaV still meets the requirements.
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
Maybe emergency docking ports & lights on the ICS? For later refuelling, if it's going to be acting as a support satellite.
Other than that your plan is miles ahead of anything I've ever put together for a mission. My design process is basically: "OK, so I need a lander. Let's start building a lander that seems about the right size for what I think it should look like to do the thing I'm building it for. It has to look cool though, that's the most important thing."
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
Yeah, I need to have a docking port. Thanks!
I usually skip lights on huge launchers to cut part count and mass. I know it's just a little thing but I have to try and save everywhere I possibly can.
My save file is alive!
You wouldn't believe it but making their stuff look cool is one of the design criteria of the engineers at SpaceX according to their rep I spoke with today.
I usually skip lights on huge launchers to cut part count and mass. I know it's just a little thing but I have to try and save everywhere I possibly can.
My save file is alive!
You wouldn't believe it but making their stuff look cool is one of the design criteria of the engineers at SpaceX according to their rep I spoke with today.
Thorgalaeg
Deity
0.22 is out! 
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
"LOL"
Can't wait to screw around with the science in 0.22 tonight. After I book my Bangkok hotel of course, that's gotta come first. Priorities, right
Can't wait to screw around with the science in 0.22 tonight. After I book my Bangkok hotel of course, that's gotta come first. Priorities, right
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
Aww yeah, let those 'priorities' distract you so I can catch up and surpass your program.
Proof of the landing legs bug:
http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/53146-Landing-Legs-Ruin-Old-Saves
And it's not just old crafts that are affected by the bug:
Apparently the new legs with 'squish' (they contract a bit on pistons when loaded) are just flat-out bugged. You would think something this obvious would have come out in play testing????
Anywho, people are talking about landing on I-Beams instead of legs now. The new legs are so squishy (they squish a whole bunch under their own weight) that even brand new, properly designed landers wind up sinking down onto their engine bells and breaking them. And of course the old landers just kind of topple over and fall apart.
So don't load your save files yet!
And this post from one of the developers scares the crap out of me:
1) They don't think the new legs/old lander bug is a big enough deal to fix
2) They expect people who have the new legs/old lander bug to fix it themselves (trollololololol)
3) They don't even see that new landers don't work because the new legs don't support any weight, nor do they recognize the extreme problems of not knowing how much a leg is going to flex under load. ---> Not to mention that not all the legs flex all the time, sometimes just one or two randomly do, see the second picture above
Proof of the landing legs bug:
Spoiler :
http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/53146-Landing-Legs-Ruin-Old-Saves
And it's not just old crafts that are affected by the bug:
Spoiler :
Apparently the new legs with 'squish' (they contract a bit on pistons when loaded) are just flat-out bugged. You would think something this obvious would have come out in play testing????
Anywho, people are talking about landing on I-Beams instead of legs now. The new legs are so squishy (they squish a whole bunch under their own weight) that even brand new, properly designed landers wind up sinking down onto their engine bells and breaking them. And of course the old landers just kind of topple over and fall apart.
So don't load your save files yet!
And this post from one of the developers scares the crap out of me:
Which tells me a couple of things:
1) They don't think the new legs/old lander bug is a big enough deal to fix
2) They expect people who have the new legs/old lander bug to fix it themselves (trollololololol)
3) They don't even see that new landers don't work because the new legs don't support any weight, nor do they recognize the extreme problems of not knowing how much a leg is going to flex under load. ---> Not to mention that not all the legs flex all the time, sometimes just one or two randomly do, see the second picture above
I started a quick campaign mode and did a couple of missions just to see how the science points accumulate and you buy technologies.
I unfortunately opened my big campaign save and tried to open up the research center--but I don't think I have many landers down. Aggravating, since my save file is now exposed to teh bugz. Guess I need to wait until it gets fixed.
I unfortunately opened my big campaign save and tried to open up the research center--but I don't think I have many landers down. Aggravating, since my save file is now exposed to teh bugz. Guess I need to wait until it gets fixed.
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
Good luck with that dude.
I also just found they got rid of SAS and ASAS. It's all just inline reaction wheels, they handle both of the functions of SAS and ASAS. the only reason why they still have the 'advanced in-line reaction wheel' is to allow old saves with ASAS units to still work. There is no reason to use the advanced inline reaction wheel. In fact, when they delete that part altogether, any new designs you use that have it will be broken, so just use the normal in-line reaction wheels.
I also just found they got rid of SAS and ASAS. It's all just inline reaction wheels, they handle both of the functions of SAS and ASAS. the only reason why they still have the 'advanced in-line reaction wheel' is to allow old saves with ASAS units to still work. There is no reason to use the advanced inline reaction wheel. In fact, when they delete that part altogether, any new designs you use that have it will be broken, so just use the normal in-line reaction wheels.
J-man
Deity
The career mode is fun, they're not very clear on the mechanics of collecting "science" though.
Thorgalaeg
Deity
I just did some missions in career mode. First one was a suborbital flight which gave me 5 science points after recovering the capsule, then a orbital flight (10 points), then a mun orbital flight (25 points). I choose to unlock the lateral decoupler and so i can build more complex rockets. Next objective is to orbit minmus and then i hope to unlock some science advancement which will give me some landing gears so i can build landers since i suppose landing somewhere will give you many more points than only orbiting it.
Damn! Game is even more adictive now...
Damn! Game is even more adictive now...
warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
Wait, so you can't land on a planet now and quit the game, without your lander crapping out when you return the next day? Am I reading that right?
No, the .21 lander parts didn't convert well to .22 lander parts, so any landers landed in .21 will have issues until the .22.1 patch is released. New landers built and landed in .22 should work OK.
In unrelated news, my new standard launcher system is starting to come together rather nicely with the subassembly system. Pretty soon I'll show it off.
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
See my post above, new landers aren't guaranteed to work either. The landing legs are bugged, period, and can randomly 'squish' which can cause your lander to topple over or clip the engine.
This is a brand new, all- .22 design someone posted to show the bug:
So basically Warpus, if you load your old save file right now, your old landers that are on the surface on landing legs will break because the legs are reset to the 'undeployed' mode and so the lander automatically falls over. Building new landers is a crap shoot because the new legs don't always work properly either.
__________________
I wish they were clearer about how to perform science as well. Despite having played a bit, read threads on it and watched tutorials, it's all a bit of a mystery. There's also nothing really that compelling about career mode at this point either for me. It's kind of cool I guess to start all over, but with no other retrictions than just requiring science to unlock parts, (that isn't even user-friendy at this point) it's basically just a challenge to see how well you can do things with limited parts. Kind of boring for me; I wish they had added more parts and features but I suppose this took a lot of time by itself.
I also read someplace that the devs are never going to put in mission-oriented challenges into the career mode. So basically, they arent going to require you to 'go here, do this', 'get this orbit', etc. It will be all open-ended, just with restrictions based on science, money, piloting experience, etc, that you have to overcome to unlock stuff. I have no idea if that's true, but I don't like it. I actually want to be challenged with missions and objectives.
