Kerbal Space Program

[nitePhyyre]

I love it!

Can you actually get to (and hit) the sun, or is it just for show?

[Jahoclave]

I love it!

Can you actually get to (and hit) the sun, or is it just for show?

I dunno. It seemed to somewhat get closer on the run I made where I was slightly under escape velocity.

[SlyReaper]

Notice no solid boosters, this is a pure liquid rocket and fuel thing. I could attach some, but I think it just looks better without them. This baby is capable of achieving orbit, with enough Δv to de-orbit and land again. I like it, and if I did stick some solid boosters on the bottom there, it would go even higher.

I am somewhat surprised you were able to have lift off with that many fuel tanks with no solid boosters. Could swear I needed to strap some on to get it off the ground.

Note that there are three liquid boosters firing at the same time at lift-off. Set it to maximum throttle, and you'd be surprised how much lift that generates; it actually takes off quite fast. And because each of those three engines is drawing on two fuel tanks, they last quite a long time too. The trouble I find with solid boosters is that they either make the rocket unstable (if you put them at the bottom), or they burn everything underneath them (if you put them at the top).

To achieve orbit, I just had those three engines burning full throttle until they ran out of fuel, and headed straight up. Then jettisoned them once depleted. After that, there are two fuel tanks and one liquid booster to play with. After getting high enough I pointed it towards the horizon and started burning, again with max throttle, until I had about a third to half a tank of fuel left. The remaining fuel is for the final de-orbit burn once you've had enough of the view.

Oh, and I was flying this thing with John Murphy's Surface Of The Sun playing in the background. Nice.

[iamevn]

I love it!

Can you actually get to (and hit) the sun, or is it just for show?

I dunno. It seemed to somewhat get closer on the run I made where I was slightly under escape velocity.

I haven't actually checked, but I'm fairly certain that the sun is just part of the skybox.

Also getting there would take a LONG time even if you could.

[SlyReaper]

Yeah, I can't imagine it being anything other than skybox. If it was getting bigger, you were probably just getting closer to said skybox.

I haven't looked at any of the mods yet, but exactly how customisable is this game? For example, could I replace the planet with a high-resolution Earth model? Could I create an entire solar system and aim to reach other planets or moons? Or is the customisation just for creating more rocket components?

[Coin]

I wouldn't mind having a little statistics screen with the all-time highs of my Space Program.
Highest altitude, maximum gorundspeed etc. Basically the things that appear after each (un)successful landing.
Maybe even a little mural where you can see how many lives have been lost in the name of progress (rapid, rocket propelled progress).

[psion]

I love it!

Can you actually get to (and hit) the sun, or is it just for show?

I dunno. It seemed to somewhat get closer on the run I made where I was slightly under escape velocity.

lol. Assuming it's accurate it'd take you roughly 3 years for the leftover atoms of your spacecraft to collide with the sun.

[Jahoclave]

I love it!

Can you actually get to (and hit) the sun, or is it just for show?

I dunno. It seemed to somewhat get closer on the run I made where I was slightly under escape velocity.

lol. Assuming it's accurate it'd take you roughly 3 years for the leftover atoms of your spacecraft to collide with the sun.

Well, I would never have made it because I was under escape velocity.
'
I've yet to see anything that states I can't violate the speed of light though. It's just a matter of a bigger rocket!

[Dark567]

Well, I would never have made it because I was under escape velocity.
'
I've yet to see anything that states I can't violate the speed of light though. It's just a matter of a bigger rocket!

Yeah, I am guessing its programmed with the equations for newtonian physics, not the equation of relativistic physics. So I think it could be done. You might want to start looking for someone who's made a mod for an Orion engine.

....or the USS Enterprise.

[SlyReaper]

2 hours and 40 minutes into flight, and I'm 17,400 km above the planet, and still ascending at 1643m/s. I think I may have marooned my Kerbalnauts in space.

[Yakk]

So, I took off, landed ... and now my capsule is sitting in a nearby ocean, all hands accounted for. What do I do next?

Ah, hit escape and "end flight"

[Jahoclave]

2 hours and 40 minutes into flight, and I'm 17,400 km above the planet, and still ascending at 1643m/s. I think I may have marooned my Kerbalnauts in space.

Yes, you kind of did.

I've made it under power to about 3850 m/s out to about 900km. Only a shitton more power to go. Though, I think I need to revist my optimization strategy. But it seems, that, if you add two fuel tank stack plus engine for every stack plus engine it still creates enough lift to get somewhere. The annoying thing is having to add the pesky solid fuel rockets. They just muck everything up if you want to coordinate down the central tower as well.

There is a g force issue to worry about, though I don't think it hardly seems right that at the same rate of acceleration the g force keeps going up.

[Yakk]

And I think I hit escape velocity.

Something that would be a useful upgrade is a display of escape velocity at a given altitude. (as (round) orbital velocity is 1/2 escape velocity, this is also useful for that purpose).

One could imagine Kearth, Kearth system, and Solar escape velocities all being listed. Toss in some additional planets in the Kearth system, and time-stretch code and nearby stars, plus teching up, and you could have a rather fun epic.

I'm assuming you are aiming for a mission-driven plot, like "Build a ship for under 1 billion $ to carry 1000 tonnes of cargo to Kuna, Kearth's moon" opening up new technologies (or launch locations)?

Hmm -- Dollars, Weight, and Tech points. Each prototype would have a cost in each (and you'd only "spend" tech points on successful launches, to avoid traps?). You'd have access to a certain number of parts and tech points to try the next (choice of) challenges, which opens up new missions (each with budgets)... That would let you go from "try to break atmosphere" to "build a warp-ship to reach Koxima Kentauri".

[Levi]

Well, I would never have made it because I was under escape velocity.
'
I've yet to see anything that states I can't violate the speed of light though. It's just a matter of a bigger rocket!

Yeah, I am guessing its programmed with the equations for newtonian physics, not the equation of relativistic physics. So I think it could be done. You might want to start looking for someone who's made a mod for an Orion engine.

....or the USS Enterprise.

Someone on the KSP forum made warp nacelles, but they are so powerful that they break the rocket when you turn them on. There are ion engine mods too.

[Dark567]

And I think I hit escape velocity.

Something that would be a useful upgrade is a display of escape velocity at a given altitude. (as (round) orbital velocity is 1/2 escape velocity, this is also useful for that purpose).

I posted the chart above that includes escape velocity at a given altitude. I understand that its not part of the game but it does the job.

[Jahoclave]

Well, I would never have made it because I was under escape velocity.
'
I've yet to see anything that states I can't violate the speed of light though. It's just a matter of a bigger rocket!

Yeah, I am guessing its programmed with the equations for newtonian physics, not the equation of relativistic physics. So I think it could be done. You might want to start looking for someone who's made a mod for an Orion engine.

....or the USS Enterprise.

Someone on the KSP forum made warp nacelles, but they are so powerful that they break the rocket when you turn them on. There are ion engine mods too.

Yeah, but that just seems too theoretical based.

[SlyReaper]

Has anyone managed to build a single stage rocket capable of escape velocity?

[Yakk]

I'd guess it isn't possible using default components?

On the other hand, how about a huge disc of solid boosters... probably would kill the crew...

[SecondTalon]

My experiment with a huge disc of solid boosters had me exceeding 800m/s in less than two seconds.. then promptly exploding as the whole thing ripped itself apart.

I'd give you more detail, but my computer couldn't keep up with what was going on visually.

[Soralin]

I'd guess it isn't possible using default components?

On the other hand, how about a huge disc of solid boosters... probably would kill the crew...

I tried making a big hexagon with like 37 solid boosters, and it overheated and blew up. I'm not sure a solid rocket could even make escape velocity even without any payload.

Actually, I think I made escape velocity in a single stage just trying it out right now, according to the chart posted before, just barely though. Command module, triple engine connector, each of which had 3 fuel tanks and a liquid rocket engine, and nothing else. Had to be a bit touchy to keep it vertical, but made it slightly past escape velocity, at 700km now and slowed down to 2460m/s, and according to the chart before, escape velocity at 700km is 2330m/s

[Izawwlgood]

I haven't played with all the components, but is it possible to have a Space Shuttle style setup, with a fuel tank that is parallel to an engine, and can thus eject without dropping an engine beneath it?

[Soralin]

Nope, has to be above the rocket engine as far as I know.

And more single stage stuff: 3 fuel tanks and a liquid rocket engine are almost enough to reach escape velocity, but not quite, you could definitely make orbit with it, although probably not make it back down again.

Edit: Not that it matters that it wouldn't be able to make it back down. Turns out 1 liquid rocket engine can lift itself, 3 fuel tanks, and a command module, but it can't lift itself, 3 fuel tanks, a command module, a stack decoupler and a parachute.

Edit again: Spoke too soon, you can get it to take off, if you let it burn off 10% of a fuel tank on the launch pad or so, it becomes light enough to take off.

More edits: Mmm, interesting, using the above trick, I added a 4th fuel tank to my single stage triple rocket above, and was able to get to an even higher speed, 2555 m/s at 700km, even thought I had to burn through over half a tank before it was able to take off.

And made it to over 5km/s at 500km up with a 2-stage liquid only rocket, first stage being 3 liquid rockets with 2 fuel tanks, and the second stage being a single liquid rocket with 4 fuel tanks, just takes it a little while to burn off a little fuel to be able to take off.

[Xeio]

I guess I'll have to figure out how to reset the tutorial for launch when I get home. I have no idea how to throttle.

I accidentally clicked never show again one of the times I was hiding it when I first downloaded the game and was goofing around.

[Soralin]

I guess I'll have to figure out how to reset the tutorial for launch when I get home. I have no idea how to throttle.

I accidentally clicked never show again one of the times I was hiding it when I first downloaded the game and was goofing around.

left-shift and left-ctrl to throttle liquid rockets up and down.

And I think I hit escape velocity.

Something that would be a useful upgrade is a display of escape velocity at a given altitude. (as (round) orbital velocity is 1/2 escape velocity, this is also useful for that purpose).

There's a chart in this thread too, but yeah, some in-game indication of orbital or escape velocities, or even more general information about your orbit at your current speed and location might be nice, especially if you have many multiple objects that you might be potentially orbiting. (note that circular orbital velocity is not 1/2 escape velocity, it's 1/sqrt(2) (about 70.7%) of the escape velocity. )

One could imagine Kearth, Kearth system, and Solar escape velocities all being listed. Toss in some additional planets in the Kearth system, and time-stretch code and nearby stars, plus teching up, and you could have a rather fun epic.

I'm assuming you are aiming for a mission-driven plot, like "Build a ship for under 1 billion $ to carry 1000 tonnes of cargo to Kuna, Kearth's moon" opening up new technologies (or launch locations)?

Hmm -- Dollars, Weight, and Tech points. Each prototype would have a cost in each (and you'd only "spend" tech points on successful launches, to avoid traps?). You'd have access to a certain number of parts and tech points to try the next (choice of) challenges, which opens up new missions (each with budgets)... That would let you go from "try to break atmosphere" to "build a warp-ship to reach Koxima Kentauri".

Yeah, that would definitely be nice. Or modifying it slightly, you could start out with some quantity of money, and you could say, take a mission to deliver a satellite to an orbit of 250+/-50 km above Kearth, and we'll pay you $X to do so. And then you could use what money you had, and build a ship to do that, and make a profit by doing it cheaply, and you get to keep the money you have left, since you're getting paid the same amount no matter what your rocket costs. Then maybe you can use that to buy access to better tech, or to use it to take on bigger missions, since you'd have the money to build a bigger or more advanced ship (if they don't pay you in advance).

Although that might end up with doing a bunch of easy jobs and getting tech that's too overpowered for the sort of things that you're doing (Hohmann? What's that? ), so a more restricted approach of challenges and such might work out well too.

[Levi]

I'd guess it isn't possible using default components?

On the other hand, how about a huge disc of solid boosters... probably would kill the crew...

http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/ind ... opic=510.0

Extend legs as needed.

[Yakk]

There's a chart in this thread too, but yeah, some in-game indication of orbital or escape velocities, or even more general information about your orbit at your current speed and location might be nice, especially if you have many multiple objects that you might be potentially orbiting. (note that circular orbital velocity is not 1/2 escape velocity, it's 1/sqrt(2) (about 70.7%) of the escape velocity. )

Ya, half energy, not half velocity. Oops.

Although that might end up with doing a bunch of easy jobs and getting tech that's too overpowered for the sort of things that you're doing (Hohmann? What's that? ), so a more restricted approach of challenges and such might work out well too.

The idea would be to mimic a space program instead of a space company.

So you'd start off with "take off safely, then land", followed by "exit the atmosphere, and come back safe", then "land at least X km away", then "reach orbital radius and come back", then "enter orbit -- coming back is optional", then "enter orbit and land", ...

For the first while, because you are doing research, how "sloppy" you are doesn't matter. They just need a design.

Between chapters, time would pass, and technology would advance. But you'd always be the one doing the "cutting edge research", and not the person doing "random contract work". So your first satellite mission is about proving you can get a satellite in orbit, not getting it "just right", etc.

One could imagine getting new "launch pads" and the like. So you'd start with an earth-based one. After installing satellites and landing on the moon (coming back optional), you'd have to build a heavy-lift rocket, which means they'd use your design to build a space station -- allowing for space-based launches (with restricted parts, and higher costs).

A moon base, a probe launched to various planets, a one-way trip to Kmars, a beanstock, deploying solar energy collectors, landing on an asteroid, building a comet-pusher to Kerraform Kmars, a solar sail craft that does a round-trip to Kupiter, etc.

But I'm probably just crazy.

[Slpee]

Has anyone managed to build a single stage rocket capable of escape velocity?

Yeah, there's one called "The Rattle" http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/index.php?topic=549.0

The guy who made it has done some pretty neat stuff, such as igniting fuel tanks to get thrust without using liquid fuel engines. It's pretty impressive and weird as hell.

[Dark567]

After discovering that Tri-Couplers lock into themselves by clicking them again and again,
I made the coupler design that I now call the "Quadruple Tri-coupler Spiral"

I didn't know that... is that a glitch or are they supposed to work that way?

EDIT:Apparently not, its a bug.

That's unfortunate, I was really hoping there was a way to make single stage craft reach escape velocity with just the (real)stock parts.

[Soralin]

After discovering that Tri-Couplers lock into themselves by clicking them again and again,
I made the coupler design that I now call the "Quadruple Tri-coupler Spiral"

I didn't know that... is that a glitch or are they supposed to work that way?

EDIT:Apparently not, its a bug.

That's unfortunate, I was really hoping there was a way to make single stage craft reach escape velocity with just the (real)stock parts.

I did, earlier in the thread, stock parts, no mods, no bugs, no exploits. Simply just a command module, tri-coupler, each with 3 fuel tanks, and a liquid rocket, and nothing else, turn the throttle up, and let it go. (And by let it go, I mean watch it carefully to always keep it pointing exactly up, because it's not too stable if it gets too far off to the side. )

But I'm probably just crazy.

It all sounds good to me.

[JBJ]

My real question, how well is physics coded in this game and, well, once I exceed the speed of light does the speedometer just say "warp speed?"

I got up to about .4c (around 120,000 m/s) and didn't notice any time dilation or blue shift.
Not sure if it was the speed or the distance (I was about 150,000 km from the planet), but the G-Force meter was getting awfully wonky, even when I cut thrust. As soon as I applied a little thrust, even with the SAS on, I was spinning like a top.

All that on a single stage liquid rocket with two tanks. Admittedly, I modified the maximum thrust to achieve such a feat.

[Jahoclave]

My real question, how well is physics coded in this game and, well, once I exceed the speed of light does the speedometer just say "warp speed?"

I got up to about .4c (around 120,000 m/s) and didn't notice any time dilation or blue shift.
Not sure if it was the speed or the distance (I was about 150,000 km from the planet), but the G-Force meter was getting awfully wonky, even when I cut thrust. As soon as I applied a little thrust, even with the SAS on, I was spinning like a top.

All that on a single stage liquid rocket with two tanks. Admittedly, I modified the maximum thrust to achieve such a feat.

Yeah, I would have to say.

The G-force meter seems wrong to not work quite like it should. If anything, as you go faster at the same level of thrust your rate of acceleration should slow down because you have more mass if I'm not completely fucking up relativity.

[Levi]

My real question, how well is physics coded in this game and, well, once I exceed the speed of light does the speedometer just say "warp speed?"

I got up to about .4c (around 120,000 m/s) and didn't notice any time dilation or blue shift.
Not sure if it was the speed or the distance (I was about 150,000 km from the planet), but the G-Force meter was getting awfully wonky, even when I cut thrust. As soon as I applied a little thrust, even with the SAS on, I was spinning like a top.

All that on a single stage liquid rocket with two tanks. Admittedly, I modified the maximum thrust to achieve such a feat.

What force did you use? My first try was with 150000, which didn't work at all, so I lowered it to 15000, which worked if I set the thrust to just above the first notch, but then the rocket broke off, my speed fluctuated between 80242.9 and 80243, and also the G-force meter rapidly wavered in the middle.

EDIT: Lightspeed achieved. Engage!

The Kermans are astoundingly resilient. Jeb's still smiling at over 3 million g's

[SlyReaper]

Being able to go faster than 300,000,000m/s in your own frame of reference doesn't necessarily break physics, because relativistic effects will shorten what you perceive a meter to be. There's no way to see how time is passing back on the planet relative to your rocket.

[JBJ]

What force did you use? My first try was with 150000, which didn't work at all, so I lowered it to 15000, which worked if I set the thrust to just above the first notch, but then the rocket broke off, my speed fluctuated between 80242.9 and 80243, and also the G-force meter rapidly wavered in the middle.

EDIT: Lightspeed achieved. Engage!

The Kermans are astoundingly resilient. Jeb's still smiling at over 3 million g's

I used 5,000 I think. I've since set it back to 200. That gave me more than enough thrust to reach escape velocity while just sipping fuel. I got up to just shy of 100,000 m/s before the first tank ran out.

[eSOANEM]

I'm having a lot of problems with rockets getting unstable as they leave the atmosphere when they start spinning uncontrollably (even with large numbers of SAS) before eventually snapping. Has anyone else had a similar problem and if so, how did you guys solve it?

My real question, how well is physics coded in this game and, well, once I exceed the speed of light does the speedometer just say "warp speed?"

I got up to about .4c (around 120,000 m/s) and didn't notice any time dilation or blue shift.

120km/s is .4% of c not .4c so you wouldn't be seeing any relativistic effects anyway.

Being able to go faster than 300,000,000m/s in your own frame of reference doesn't necessarily break physics, because relativistic effects will shorten what you perceive a meter to be. There's no way to see how time is passing back on the planet relative to your rocket.

If you break c in any subluminal reference frame, you break c in all of them. This can't be done. Also, in your own reference frame, you're always stationary.

[Levi]

I'm having a lot of problems with rockets getting unstable as they leave the atmosphere when they start spinning uncontrollably (even with large numbers of SAS) before eventually snapping. Has anyone else had a similar problem and if so, how did you guys solve it?

Post a screenshot of your rocket. I've never had that problem (except one time when I was using some mod parts and made a ridiculously huge rocket), but it probably wouldn't be too hard to spot what's causing the spinning.

[PhoenixEnigma]

My real question, how well is physics coded in this game and, well, once I exceed the speed of light does the speedometer just say "warp speed?"

I got up to about .4c (around 120,000 m/s) and didn't notice any time dilation or blue shift.

120km/s is .4% of c not .4c so you wouldn't be seeing any relativistic effects anyway.

I would double check that. 120 000m/s should be enough to notice relativistic effects without needing to carry an atomic clock or spectrometer or suchlike. I suspect this means that FTL travel is possible, if you can get enough thrust.

[Soralin]

My real question, how well is physics coded in this game and, well, once I exceed the speed of light does the speedometer just say "warp speed?"

I got up to about .4c (around 120,000 m/s) and didn't notice any time dilation or blue shift.

120km/s is .4% of c not .4c so you wouldn't be seeing any relativistic effects anyway.

I would double check that. 120 000m/s should be enough to notice relativistic effects without needing to carry an atomic clock or spectrometer or suchlike. I suspect this means that FTL travel is possible, if you can get enough thrust.

I'd double check your double checking. speed of light is a bit under 300,000,000 m/s, or 300,000 km/s, so 120,000 m/s, or 120 km/s would indeed be 0.0004c

[Jahoclave]

My real question, how well is physics coded in this game and, well, once I exceed the speed of light does the speedometer just say "warp speed?"

I got up to about .4c (around 120,000 m/s) and didn't notice any time dilation or blue shift.

120km/s is .4% of c not .4c so you wouldn't be seeing any relativistic effects anyway.

I would double check that. 120 000m/s should be enough to notice relativistic effects without needing to carry an atomic clock or spectrometer or suchlike. I suspect this means that FTL travel is possible, if you can get enough thrust.

I'd double check your double checking. speed of light is a bit under 300,000,000 m/s, or 300,000 km/s, so 120,000 m/s, or 120 km/s would indeed be 0.0004c

So, is a double double check 2^2 or, because it's two double checks and checking the double (2x2)^2?

[Amnesiasoft]

So, is a double double check 2^2 or, because it's two double checks and checking the double (2x2)^2?

Actually, Soralin meant double Czechs.