It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionKerbal Space Program update 1.2 now launched! (42 posts)(42 posts)
(42 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
This is my favourite topic
Posted October 12, 2016
Receiving Loud and Clear.

<span class="bold">Kerbal Space Program</span>, the physics-based, space exploration simulator, has been updated to version 1.2 "Loud and Clear". Apart from a space rocket full of fixes, it launches plenty of neat features and additions including:

- CommNet: Build an autonomous communications network and start transmitting science!
- KerbNet: Sent out reconnaissance satellites to scan for biomes, anomalies, and other points of interest.
- A reworked Fuelflow System to better control how your vessels use their fuel.
- Wheels now behave much more dependably in all the vehicles that use them (like rovers and aircrafts).

Besides those, the game engine has been upgraded to Unity 5.4 and <span class="bold">Kerbal Space Program</span> also received a whole bunch of tweaks and re-calibrations that are guaranteed to take your space misadventures to a whole other level. Or even planet.
You can read the detailed changelog <span class="bold">here</span> or watch this nice trailer highlighting the main features:


https://www.youtube.com/embed/KJ-Mu57SNjI
Post edited October 12, 2016 by maladr0Id
Posted October 12, 2016
German language would be nice!
Posted October 12, 2016
avatar
tinyE: Honestly I just think I suck at it. I have put in countless hours and the farthest I ever got was to orbit the Mun, and get back....which I barely did. :P
avatar
Bobo_Sims: Don't be ashamed about that. I haven't gotten much further than that myself. Occasionally, I succeed at landing a craft, but most of the time, all I do is launch stuff, and manage to get them in the orbit of my own choosing. But I still have tons of fun, even though I suck at it. :P
Well if you put it like that, I've gotten really good at putting large raters on the planet. :P

AND I think I'll start playing on easy, though my self esteem is bound to take a hit doing that.
Post edited October 12, 2016 by tinyE
Posted October 12, 2016
avatar
tinyE: No, parachutes. Used to be you went up, you came down, you opened the chute, you landed. Now the angle/speed/altitude all have to be very specific. You can get around these by using secondary chutes to slow you down in order to open your main one, but it's kind of pain when I'm just testing basic builds, grabbing some spare research points, and trying out different rocket combos.

Honestly I just think I suck at it. I have put in countless hours and the farthest I ever got was to orbit the Mun, and get back....which I barely did. :P
So your problem is excessive reentry speed?
This is caused either by
a) very wrong orbit
b) very heavy craft (full of fuel) that has very little wings.

A) Let me give example of worst trajectory and best trajectory:
This is not how you want to enter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giW-Id1pke8
Not only you might overheat on entry, the atmosphere layer will be so thin that it will fail to slow you down.

Consider this to be ideal trajectory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7deV22aWESc
You will enter shallow, facing the most heat-resistant part towards prograde.

Consider this legend:
water = atmosphere,
river bed = ground,
prograde = direction where stone flies,
retrograde = direction where stone is coming from,
apoapsis = highest point where stone was,
periapsis = lowest point where stone lands

Total throw energy equals orbit size = apoapsis + periapsis.
The total orbit size equals your speed.

Means, if you come from apoapsis 1000,000,000m, you will have MUCH more energy to break than from 80,000m. So much, that you might want to TOUCH the upper layer of atmosphere (55-46km) to reduce your orbit on multiple attempts/loops, until it shrinks to become acceptable. Otherwise you will either burn through atmosphere or smash hard.


The ideal re-entry orbit is 120-80km apoapsis (highest point) and 20-45km periapsis (lowest point).
If your apoapsis is too high, aim for upper atmosphere layers to perform aerobreaking. If you want to make things quicker by diving deeper into atmosphere, you need heatshield to resist too high atmospheric heat. All Pods have basic heatshields built-in, so place a dedicated only when you need it.


B) Now not only orbit matters - the characteristics of the vehicle also matter. A heavy stone stops much worse in atmosphere than a piece of paper. All lifting surfaces (wings) = piece of paper. All fuel and heavy parts = stone. Rocket full of fuel has worst aerobreaking properties. Lightweight airplane (SSTO) with lots of wings - best.

Airplane just places itself with all wings against (perpendicular) to prograde direction - and all incoming air will stop it.

Rocket with no wings and full of fuel is worst case. You can use engine breaking here! For engine breaking, aim the rocket nose in retrograde(***) and fire engines when overheating starts. See attachment.

But do not overdo, or it will be "stop earth rotation, I need to smash into it"-style.

(***) not really retrograde, but somewhat upwards from horizon (retrograde & 25 degrees in antiradial direction). Why? Quicksave in orbit and test the two cases yourself!
avatar
justanoldgamer: I'd want to be able to override it in cases where I realise I programmed it wrong.
Kos is programmable autopilot. But autopilots are useless if you don't know orbital mechanics: gravity turn, oberth effect, rendezvous from higher and lower orbits, inclination correction, trajectory correction.

Basically the good single case for autopilots is either boring long flight in atmosphere, boring long rover travel or building massive base. TL;DR - boredom of repeating the same over and over for periodical resupply or when building something very complex.

Mechjeb is click-and-forget solution, unlike KOS, but its stick of two ends. It will solve navigational challenges, but mastering those challenges/knowledge is big fun part of the game. Without it, it will be like no man sky or "minecraft with rockets".
Attachments:
1.jpg (148 Kb)
Post edited October 12, 2016 by Lin545
Posted October 12, 2016
Ok..Cool! Now...Why can't/won't it update to 1.2. I have setting set to auto update..it still shows at "1.1.3.01289. (??)

I'll try relaunching GOG Galaxy I guess? That's what I'm using. Other then that, yeah what gives? Halp!

Edit: Currently re-syncing the Client/Game. Perhaps that is the issue. let's hope so. :)

Edit to the Edit: SUCCESS!! So if anyone else has the same problem yeah do that! :D XD
Post edited October 12, 2016 by Readman
Posted October 12, 2016
avatar
Lin545: The ideal re-entry orbit is 120-80km apoapsis (highest point) and 20-45km periapsis (lowest point).
There's also another reason why a low, circular orbit is generally a great idea before reentry - it lets you choose the landing spot. Just orbit until your chosen landing spot is roughly on the opposite side of the planet (with corrections for planet rotation speed), then slightly lower your periapsis by burning retrograde, until it is at 40-60 km.

Last time I played, lowlands were the best landing spots possible - mountains are bad because you have less atmosphere for your parachutes to do their thing. Also uneven surfaces tend to be bad landing spots. Water was bad, because if your speed is a bit too high, on land parts of your ship could work similar to a car bumper - they get destroyed, but absorb a lot of energy, and the reminder of your ship survives. On water this didn't work. I'm not sure if this changed in later versions of the game though. (though I'm sure there are some mods that affect this. KSP is simply a game where you can choose how you want to play it, by choosing the right mods for your favorite playstyle).
Posted October 12, 2016
avatar
Xinef: (snip)
Sure, all great tips! Water is actually far more dangerous than land, because it lacks surface tension. It does not slow down part on impact much - but applies big punch. This results in lots of parts going in water and blowing up, when on land rest would bounce up.


"Re: round orbits" - I love this video :) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkWtaNxwh6I
Posted October 13, 2016
avatar
Lin545: "Re: round orbits" - I love this video :) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkWtaNxwh6I
Yup, stuff like circular orbits, Oberth Effect, gravity turn etc. only apply if you want efficiency. If you have unlimited Delta-V and want to get to your destination the fastest way, things are kinda straightforward. Literally.
Posted October 13, 2016
avatar
Xinef: Yup, stuff like circular orbits, Oberth Effect, gravity turn etc. only apply if you want efficiency. If you have unlimited Delta-V and want to get to your destination the fastest way, things are kinda straightforward. Literally.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkWtaNxwh6I&amp;t=1m27s
Posted October 13, 2016
Looks nice. I think I will have to purchase once a good sale hits. Thanks for some of the the posts, images, and links here.
Posted October 13, 2016
avatar
justanoldgamer: I'd want to be able to override it in cases where I realise I programmed it wrong.
avatar
Lin545: Kos is programmable autopilot. But autopilots are useless if you don't know orbital mechanics: gravity turn, oberth effect, rendezvous from higher and lower orbits, inclination correction, trajectory correction.

Basically the good single case for autopilots is either boring long flight in atmosphere, boring long rover travel or building massive base. TL;DR - boredom of repeating the same over and over for periodical resupply or when building something very complex.

Mechjeb is click-and-forget solution, unlike KOS, but its stick of two ends. It will solve navigational challenges, but mastering those challenges/knowledge is big fun part of the game. Without it, it will be like no man sky or "minecraft with rockets".
I'm ok about having to learn orbital mechanic etc... I thought KSP would involve calculating that sort of thing, I do not want a flight computer that figures out things for me, just one that make it possible to play without stress.
Posted October 13, 2016
Great to hear that the long awaited 1.2 update is now fully baked and available on GOG

Like a lot of others I have been waiting for Kerbal Space Program to go on sale again before adding it to my collection, so it would be really nice if you would take this occasion to promote the updated version by running a nice sale on the game to boost the buzz accompanying the newly updated version.

After all KSP hasn't been on sale for quite some time, so it's about time for a sale anyway, and promoting the new updated version is as good an excuse as any don't you think???


Just a thought . . .
Posted October 13, 2016
avatar
justanoldgamer: I'm ok about having to learn orbital mechanic etc... I thought KSP would involve calculating that sort of thing, I do not want a flight computer that figures out things for me, just one that make it possible to play without stress.
There are few things where stock KSP currently severely lacks. Perhaps this is the reason.
You absolutely need:
a) Kerbal Engineer Redux (KER) (gives important data)
b) Transfer Window Planner (shows best interplanetary time frame)
c) Docking Port Alignment Indicator (gives much more informative docking interface)
d) xScience! (only if you play Career, shows all the possible science sources nearby)
e) KIS/KAS (only if you want to expand what kerbals in EVA can do, it massively expands it)

All these mods, except E - are purely statistical. They only give you more data.
You can find tutorial/review videos about all these on youtube.

The most important is KER. It does two things:
1) shows a lot of important stats for rocket/plane design, especially TWR (thrust to weight; essentially amount of thrust your vehicle can output; for example if your rocket has less than 1.8 TWR, it essentially burns fuel on gravity) and calculated DeltaV (essentially, distance it can travel). This data is important to understand if your vehicle will travel efficiently and how far.
2) shows all necessary data in-flight. Most important: apoapsis, periapsis, time to apo, time to per, vertical speed, horizontal speed, REAL distance to surface, time before impact (if applicable), temperature of most critical part.

I extremely recommend at least having A, B, C.
Perhaps you play without this. Then this is pain, because lacking important data leads to a lot of failures and a lot of gambling.
Post edited October 13, 2016 by Lin545
Posted October 13, 2016
avatar
tinyE: No, parachutes. Used to be you went up, you came down, you opened the chute, you landed. Now the angle/speed/altitude all have to be very specific. You can get around these by using secondary chutes to slow you down in order to open your main one, but it's kind of pain when I'm just testing basic builds, grabbing some spare research points, and trying out different rocket combos.

Honestly I just think I suck at it. I have put in countless hours and the farthest I ever got was to orbit the Mun, and get back....which I barely did. :P
avatar
Lin545: So your problem is excessive reentry speed?
This is caused either by
a) very wrong orbit
b) very heavy craft (full of fuel) that has very little wings.

A) Let me give example of worst trajectory and best trajectory:
This is not how you want to enter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giW-Id1pke8
Not only you might overheat on entry, the atmosphere layer will be so thin that it will fail to slow you down.

Consider this to be ideal trajectory: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7deV22aWESc
You will enter shallow, facing the most heat-resistant part towards prograde.

Consider this legend:
water = atmosphere,
river bed = ground,
prograde = direction where stone flies,
retrograde = direction where stone is coming from,
apoapsis = highest point where stone was,
periapsis = lowest point where stone lands

Total throw energy equals orbit size = apoapsis + periapsis.
The total orbit size equals your speed.

Means, if you come from apoapsis 1000,000,000m, you will have MUCH more energy to break than from 80,000m. So much, that you might want to TOUCH the upper layer of atmosphere (55-46km) to reduce your orbit on multiple attempts/loops, until it shrinks to become acceptable. Otherwise you will either burn through atmosphere or smash hard.

The ideal re-entry orbit is 120-80km apoapsis (highest point) and 20-45km periapsis (lowest point).
If your apoapsis is too high, aim for upper atmosphere layers to perform aerobreaking. If you want to make things quicker by diving deeper into atmosphere, you need heatshield to resist too high atmospheric heat. All Pods have basic heatshields built-in, so place a dedicated only when you need it.

B) Now not only orbit matters - the characteristics of the vehicle also matter. A heavy stone stops much worse in atmosphere than a piece of paper. All lifting surfaces (wings) = piece of paper. All fuel and heavy parts = stone. Rocket full of fuel has worst aerobreaking properties. Lightweight airplane (SSTO) with lots of wings - best.

Airplane just places itself with all wings against (perpendicular) to prograde direction - and all incoming air will stop it.

Rocket with no wings and full of fuel is worst case. You can use engine breaking here! For engine breaking, aim the rocket nose in retrograde(***) and fire engines when overheating starts. See attachment.

But do not overdo, or it will be "stop earth rotation, I need to smash into it"-style.

(***) not really retrograde, but somewhat upwards from horizon (retrograde & 25 degrees in antiradial direction). Why? Quicksave in orbit and test the two cases yourself!
avatar
justanoldgamer: I'd want to be able to override it in cases where I realise I programmed it wrong.
avatar
Lin545: Kos is programmable autopilot. But autopilots are useless if you don't know orbital mechanics: gravity turn, oberth effect, rendezvous from higher and lower orbits, inclination correction, trajectory correction.

Basically the good single case for autopilots is either boring long flight in atmosphere, boring long rover travel or building massive base. TL;DR - boredom of repeating the same over and over for periodical resupply or when building something very complex.

Mechjeb is click-and-forget solution, unlike KOS, but its stick of two ends. It will solve navigational challenges, but mastering those challenges/knowledge is big fun part of the game. Without it, it will be like no man sky or "minecraft with rockets".
I play games to relax and have fun, not train to become an actual rocket scientist.
Thanks, but I think I'll just adjust the difficulty settings. ;P
Posted October 13, 2016
avatar
tinyE: I play games to relax and have fun, not train to become an actual rocket scientist.
Guys like you ruined the Flight Simulator industry. XDDDDDDDDD :P
Posted October 13, 2016
avatar
tinyE: I play games to relax and have fun, not train to become an actual rocket scientist.
avatar
Vythonaut: Guys like you ruined the Flight Simulator industry. XDDDDDDDDD :P
"Take your laziest employee, give him your most difficult job, and he will find the easiest way to do it."
Pages:
1
2
3
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionKerbal Space Program update 1.2 now launched! (42 posts)(42 posts)
(42 posts)