Timeline for Sane career mode lowest tech levels
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 24, 2017 at 23:34 | comment | added | Craig Ringer | @PTwr Ah, interesting, because KSP doesn't AFAIK do surface drag, so keeping an empty booster won't cost you in drag unless it has fins or similar. Makes sense and isn't even that unphysical; you've paid the price to boost that mass up to speed, and if its mass-to-drag ratio is better than the next stage it'll benefit you to keep it. A reverse sabot. A simple booster test with a dummy mass attached to a light payload confirms this. With dummy mass: 50km. Dummy mass decoupled after boost: 30km. Very artificial, but clearly demonstrates the principle. Extra drag on top part further amplifies. | |
| Jan 24, 2017 at 18:35 | comment | added | PTwr | Given same drag (surface area) heavier object brakes slower, both on descent (aerobraking) and ascent. KSP physics model is imperfect, to say the least, but since 1.0 version mass affects aerobraking so you might be able to save few m/s by keeping empty stage for a while if you are not igniting next one yet. My guestimate is that bonus mass below 10% would not be worthy any attention, but I never tested it for ascent. | |
| Jan 24, 2017 at 5:15 | comment | added | Craig Ringer | "abusing mass during cruise stage of ascent" ? | |
| Jan 23, 2017 at 11:15 | comment | added | PTwr | I think you could go further to make this answer "Pro version" to complete my "Newbie tutorial", stuff like how to read MJ/KER for optimal velocity, dynamic pressure and abusing mass during cruise stage of ascent. Excessive thrust can be quite a waste of fuel. | |
| Jan 22, 2017 at 21:34 | comment | added | Craig Ringer | @user2702772 TBH there's a fair bit of excess in these too, but it's true that they need better piloting than "go up then turn over" style flying, you have to follow a profile to some degree. There's still plenty of dV slush for missing the mun and correcting or whatever, though. | |
| Jan 22, 2017 at 14:53 | comment | added | user2702772 | While your post is epic, and useful in a completely different way to PTrw's, it doesn't help with the initial question. Your minimal designs would be very easy for a beginner to fail with. Screw up the gravity turn, and you've not got enough dV. PTrw has massive excess built in - enough to get to orbit while still committing beginner mistakes. Still great answers though! | |
| Jan 22, 2017 at 5:42 | history | edited | Craig Ringer | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2806 characters in body
|
| Jan 22, 2017 at 4:37 | history | edited | Craig Ringer | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2806 characters in body
|
| Jan 22, 2017 at 4:25 | history | edited | Craig Ringer | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2806 characters in body
|
| Jan 21, 2017 at 13:38 | history | edited | Craig Ringer | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 87 characters in body
|
| Jan 21, 2017 at 13:31 | history | edited | Craig Ringer | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 87 characters in body
|
| Jan 21, 2017 at 13:21 | history | answered | Craig Ringer | CC BY-SA 3.0 |