First Orbit! - KSP/RP-1 - Next Small Step Episode 12
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 окт 2024
- Spoiler alert, sheesh. It took us 12 entire episodes, which seems like a lot, but in terms of game-time we made it before Sputnik or Explorer 1! In this episode, we loft our first artificial satellite, do a bunch of science, and prepare for a bold new future of space exploration.
RSS/RO/RP-1 wiki: github.com/KSP...
Official RSS/RO/RP-1 Discord server: / discord
Intro music credits:
The Ice Giants by Kevin MacLeod
Link: filmmusic.io/s...
License: creativecommons...
![ARGENTINA vs. BOLIVIA [6-0] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 10](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/C3wPtKNbAOA/mqdefault.jpg)
Yay! Orbit. There is always a little thrill in a career play-through when you achieve orbit for the first time, doubly so with the mods you are using.
Wow those visual mods look incredible once you reach orbit. I'm doing an RP-1 playthrough on 1.8.1 (my first) but wasn't sure which visual mods to install for that version. Love the video series, it's been a big source of inspiration for my playthrough!
Right?? It's so good! I just followed the instructions for RSSVE, installed high-res textures, and used TUFX/scatterer/planetshine out of the box. It's such an amazing piece of work!
Now that there are pump-fed configurations for the XLR-11, it actually gets good enough performance (due to the improved mass ratio from not using HP tanks) to be a plausible upper stage, if you feel like looking into that. Definitely better than an AJ-10-37.
Better than the AJ-10-37, reeeally? Huh! Does that require packing the full 6 minutes of fuel to make that math work? In my initial tests I found I had trouble lifting that much with the booster stage. Then again, I now have the LR79, so things may have changed yet again.
In my experiments it needed a kickstage to make orbit with a Redstone, but using an RD-108 and burning the XLR for 4 minutes could orbit 700kg, didn't try it with LR79. It also has 1/6th the failure rate of AJ-10-37.
Burning it for the full 6 minutes makes the TWR problematic, not worth it as far as I could tell.
Fascinating, thanks for that! I hadn't considered the AJ-10-37's failure rate. I assumed that based on its node placement and common real-world usage it was the holy grail of upper stages, and once I had it there was no need to use anything else. Awesome to have some alternatives to think about.
AJ-10 in general is a fairly good "low performance" upper stage, but the AJ-10-37 specifically is awful, with its reliability stats based on the extreme failure rate of the Vanguard rocket.
Really enjoying your videos! I wouldn’t mind if they were longer :)
Thanks for watching! Longer, really? I was already worried people were tuning out when I get to 30 minutes!
@@justinbright9567 I have to agree with Simon, I'd love to see longer videos
@@justinbright9567 I'm down for that too, I often watch a few back to back when I have downtime, now with covid I got too much downtime.
YES! Orbit and science all at once! Great work!
Yeah! It was a fun push to knock out both at once!
The newest master of RP-1 changes the description on the first science satellite contract to direct players using Kerbalism to complete the contract with Alt-F12. And 1.8.1 has much better performance, although it's not as noticeable this early in a career. Once you have two dozen probes and satellites all over the place, the difference becomes more noticeable.
That's good, always glad to see the intended path spelled out in contracts. They've been very good at directing me to what I should be considering for each vehicle, or even better for the historical rocket I should be researching. And I'm looking forward to that performance bump (or, just not seeing a performance decrease?) I wanted to get this migration out of the way now, before I start tossing a bunch of probes in orbit.
Finally figured out avionics, have you tried "Oh Scrap" random equipment fails based off how much you've used them. Tank leaks antenna fails solar panel power loss generated short circuits etc. Kinda like test flight except for everything . Only problem is testflight and oh scrap overlap on engines
Never tried it, I don't actually love the random failures. I just know it's part of life in RP-1. A major consideration for every engine is the reliability in comparison to other, similar engines, and being able to roll that forward over time when you've invested in one particular model. I like that part of it, conceptually - I don't love that it means sometimes my rockets just go "fsshp" and I have to roll 'em back. :)
@@justinbright9567 yeah I agree the added random fails are a pain to deal with but it keeps the game interesting, I'm enjoying the vids man keep it up.
@@justinbright9567 kerbalism has part fails included. Great with KIS/KAS
I've been struggling with getting this orbit contract completed so looked for a vid but now I'm more confused as when I follow this design, I only get 7,600 m/s dV, the only difference I have is due to not wanting to cheat the contract so I have more panels on which allow perpetual battery life (barring failures).
I am using the A-series (over burning to 2m33.5s), AJ-10-27 (over burning to 1m7.4s) and the XASR (over burning to 50.3s)... has there been updates to the engines/physics in game since you made this video to account for this 2,500m/s difference?
Sorry... another difference is the tanks but I am using the equivalent Aluminium-stringer tanks
From what I hear, the new tanks hugely change what you can do in the early game due to their mass and utilization percentages. Sorry to say it, but my vids may ALREADY be out of date. :(
@@justinbright9567 that may be why the time has been extended on the contract too then... i still have ~500 days left on the contract and have more tech nodes than you in that vid with 30 points in r&d, might have to rush to the next stage of tanks (although i think that may be over 200 days away)... have you done anything with balloon tanks?
Or perhaps it's the integrated rather than separate tanks i need to get to? But then by the sound of those containing structural elements, I'd imagine those to be heavier not lighter...
Go get those integral tanks, they're great. The three tank types basically exist on a spectrum of heavy and cheap to light and expensive. Separate structure tanks are the heaviest and hold the least fuel at a given size, but they're very cheap. Integral structure tanks actually have less internal structural elements, as the integral part means the load-bearing bits are also the fuel-bearing bits, instead of all being separate. (Correct me if I'm wrong!) They're really versatile, not super heavy, and not as expensive as balloons. Balloons are almost pure fuel, with 99% utilization, but they get expensive FAST at larger sizes.
I'd say get to integral ASAP, as they're great for highly-pressurized stages and first-stage boosters. Use balloons when you absolutely need the performance, or where you can get away with the price. They can't be highly pressurized, is the trick, so you'll need both balloons and integral.
That makes sense. Both tanks are quite expensive just to unlock and I checked out the balloon tanks first and even they only get the dV up by approx 1km/s, i think I'm going to need the next engine unlock for the orbital rocketry and the LR engines, they appear to be a vast improvement on anything else available up to this point.
** I didn't have it loaded at the time, it was the RD-108s I wanted to unlock but don't have the cash for them, fingers crossed the LR89s will do it else that's the end of this career save 😢
Nope... 8900m/s with integral tanks and the LR89 (and that's with overburning it for 4s). So glad I have a save from before accepting those contracts, looks like I'll have to grind the sounding rockets a bit longer ...
So I finally managed it, not quite legit though considering I had to half empty a tank to get under the 60t limit.
With the integrated tanks I have the standard XASR/AJ-10-27 config on top of a 2m burning RD-211 with an RD-108 'kick' stage burning for 1m.
This gives 8965m/s (after a bit of pad fuelling), weighing in at a hefty 67t... i can't help but feel I should be able to do this with a lighter rocket though... oh well, it gets my 500kg final stage into a 300km pe/3m km ap orbit so all good - in sim at least, going to need to launch at night to get the longer period in the sun so wish me luck... 🤔
How do you click anywhere on the ship and make it behave like you clicked on the root?
Is it just me or do some of the roll back and roll out times seem really unrealistic? Would it really take 5 whole days to bring the rocket from the launch pad to the VAB and then another 5 days to bring it out?
I think some of that is an abstraction of integration time, as well as the literal roll out to the launchpad. There's a tiny, easily-missable "integration cost" in the KCT window in the VAB, which contributes to rollout time. The actual crawlers take something like 5 hours to roll from the VAB to the launch pad (at Cape Canaveral), but there' s a ton of work involved in attaching the payload, final tests, getting the rocket vertical, fueling it, etc.
@@justinbright9567 ahhhh righttt right. I see so like the roll in and roll out time is kinda inclusive of everything you need to do to the rocket to get it launch ready
In the VAB/SPH you can pre-start all the science bits for Kerbalism, that way they are running as soon as the craft is rolled out and you don't have to remember to start them up later.
(Random comment on an older video: hi!)
And hey, look!, one video later you mention this exact thing.
Hello to you dwelling in the past! Unfortunately there's going to be a lot of that - I did (and am still) doing a lot of learning as I go.
@@justinbright9567 I'm several episodes further on now, and I'm trying to at least wait a while before I chime in with anything since so far there've been a few more cases of "oh hey he doesn't know you can do x, i should comment!" followed by later in the episode or the next where you say "here's a neat feature, you can do x!".