@@tommasoastaldi2513 I still use small parachutes ngl, its better to not risk loosing a probe core and multiple engines (not counting the fact you could just use saves)
@@ToastedguyigI pack drogue chutes when I’m launching something at or near the rocket’s payload capacity, just to ensure any trajectory inefficiencies don’t fuck up my dV budget too badly. I don’t often use em, but it’s a solid bail-out strat if you’re under budget for landing, which is really not ideal for a career playthrough.
If you don't plan to change game scene or can't because of your ascend profile and use the mod to automatically recover vessels entering Kerbin's atmosphere, parachutes are the way to go. Also, Kerbin's vanilla size is small enough for a near orbital booster recovery. I use that on my KNES mod Ariane 5 core stages, (also add parachutes to the SRBs, Space Shuttle style). I add a probe core and parachutes to the core stage and after Jettison, I just give a little nudge of engine power to deorbit the first stage. (400 m/s ish when above the desert peninsula), is you get it right, your core stage lands near the KSC, i even once managed to land it in front of the VAB ! ).
Finally someone who actually reuses the first stage, not that annoying save then reload that most TH-camrs do Also (though it’s not technically full reuse ability) I use a parachute or two (I’ll usually have the parachute facing east in the single chute designs)
Hey thanks for the comment. Yeah I agree with you that it's nice to have figured out a reliable way to recover the booster without doing the save and reload. This solution actually makes it worth it for career mode because you can save a lot of money when done with the larger boosters worth half a milion credits.
As much as I love powered landings, I'd love to learn how to use parachutes to tip the booster in a way that it puts itself horizontally on the ground after landing. I've done it a few times accidentally, but never really understood the "How?" of it.
To each their own. I think reusable boosters in stock KSP are a bit overkill if not useless due to the low delta-V requirement for orbit. With Real Solar System, SSTOs are still possible but they become a lot more challenging and reusable boosters are more effective at the same job.
@@leonardobonanno5115, не просто на много сложнее, а «ПИЗДЕЦ КАК СЛОЖНО», ну и если в ваниле SSTO можно сделать почти со старта, то с RP-1 это лейтгейм
Great Video, I really enjoyed it. My channel's space program is extremely un-reusable haha. You inspired to me to try to make a reusable rocket in the future! Also to answer your last question - Its hard to put a price on launching a whole space station into orbit in one piece on a ludicrously large booster - especially on sandbox mode haha
Hey I've seen your videos before! I'm glad you enjoyed this one. You could try in your next challenge to launch a whole station or base in a single, giant reusable rocket ship!
i never actually put control surfaces like wings at the top of my rocket. i always just used airbrakes up there instead. now land the booster like a shuttle on a runway with 0 fuel! xD
Practicing using a VTOL platform (ie. Helicopter) is a really good way to practice suicide burn landings. Though if you're really struggling, make use of the Radial OUT function of the SAS: it assists you in keeping the booster upright. That way you can just focus on killing the forward momentum so it wouldn't tip over when you land. Keep in mind that you have to design your craft to accommodate that (ie. RCS and Reaction Wheels).
Once I get back to my college dorm, I guess reusable boosters would be my new obsession (again) for January. I'm done doing Formula cars and Go-karts for a couple of months.
Also, last year, one study I did is if it was more efficient to just save the engines (basically the most valuable part) for recovery; ie. Just eject the empty tanks. Result: It's really only worth it if you're using the massive engines (ie. Mainsail). You could even flip it, engine facing upward, for landing for even ease of use. Afterall, that's the main goal of my study: Max% of Easy to Use version vs Cost of 100% reusable.
probably will never make a reusable rocket, but damn do these look really cool, they look realistic (not just the graphics but just general design) and stylized at the same time
I'm new to KSP, wish I had started it earlier. I'm having troubles racking up Science to progress on the career mode which led me to find your channel was great. I wish the game explained acquiring science and the quirks around gathering science better, like can a scientist pocket as many reports as it wants? I'm doing missions to mun that take several hours and I'm coming back with like 3-5 reports max. Anyways, you're doing great with these videos, I wish you luck and hope you succeed with the channel. I saw someone saying you're from Italy, but there is a lot of Leonardos in Brazil too, thought you were brazilian for a second. Latin languages I guess.
You know, I just can't help myself, but I do love a good set of parachutes on my reusable boosters & eff the fuel required for landing. I just love the straight falling down & then release of 'chutes right before the ground. I've started & stopped playing KSP multiple times over the last what, 12 years? Every time it's the same, I just go straight to 'chutes as soon as I get past the most basic components in career mode.
I would land my core stage on the continent east of the KSC so i wouldn't need to do the boost-back maneuver. It also allowed a slightly shallower ascent so I could launch heavier payloads. But i was on science mode and not worrying about funds. I also had parachutes to help slow down on atmo since the core stage would be moving so much faster on reentry.
I like your idea of landing to the other continent, it does have it's advantages. I guess the issue would be that the distance from KSC would reduce the cash return when you recover the booster.
@leonardobonanno5115 Yeah. Like I said, had been playing on science mode so didn't have to worry about funds. I suppose you'd just have to weigh which landing site would be a better for the cost of the mission.
All the boosters I build either spin when they enter the atmosphere or don't glide as the air becomes denser I often use 8 vecotr engines for 2.5 boost and get shocked when it runs out of fuel before reaching 20 km :)
I’ve always repulsively landed. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve done that. I have this one falcon nine style rocket called the Galvatron 9B. it’s a mix between two of my uncle’s favorite characters, the Guyver and the transformer character Galvatron. There was once a family of them the guyva 1 , Guyvatron 5 , Guyvatron 9, And Guyvatron Heavy. All of these rockets of which I’m sure you can already tell are basically heavily inspired analogs of the falcon 1 the canceled falcon five well technically it wasn’t canceled, but rather they just decided to add four more engines to it. Falcon 9, I even made an analog of crew dragon called the Phoenix capsule. It just had its first ever test flight on Christmas Eve. And Galvatron Heavy.If it says Galvatron, I’m sorry you know what I mean. I am currently working on a star ship analog called Stardust, which unlike starship is actually going to be a three stage launch vehicle the first stage which I call the Superman booster will have 29 engines and it’s job will be to set the vehicle on a trajectory into space. And just like real life boost back and get caught by a chopsticks like contraption while the second stage is the actual part that gets the Stardust vehicle into low curb and orbit. That way that ensures the Stardust spacecraft is already fully fueled come stage separation
The first time I tried this i added folding wings and a small cell of junos to the side to fly it back since my payload was very heavy and I had to fly the first stage very far away
Yeah, these boosters pack a really high thrust. The largest of the three uses 19 Vector engines, that's about 1.780.000 kg of thrust at sea level, crazy numbers!
@@leonardobonanno5115 Wait, what is the action group to unlock the fuel tanks, I am trying to make it so that my second stage doesn't seal all the monoprop from my crew vehicle!
why not plop 2 drag chutes? they arent that heavy or expensive and could areobreak very efficently when about to land, can save a proper 300 m/s and make it easier to kill any horizontal velocity when just hovering above ground
I think they bring many advantages you raise a valid point, you could save some delta-V for sure. I guess the only drawback is that they cannot be deployed at speeds above 450 m/s while classic airbrakes work just fine.
Now make it automated. ;p (I made a 1st stage that flies itself and lands under parachute so I don't have to deal with managing to land it myself. It also lands in the ocean, so it costs a bit to retrieve, but I don't care for how much easier it makes usage.)
Humm, I heared of KOS being a mod which makes you write code do that the rocket can land like Falcon 9 by itself. Coding is not my thing though, I'll probably follow your advice and do the parachute thing.
Этот ваш Байкал - это полумеры, товарищ. Если уж и крепить крылья к ракете, то к каждой её ступени! По этому лично я за Энергию-2. В любом случае, жаль, что когда КСП ютуберы делают многоразовые ракеты-носители, то почти всегда они делают что-то вроде Фэлконов или Суперхэви от SpaceX, на крайняк насовские шаттлы (по ощущениям, по крайней мере, всё именно так).
@@ivanmamulin2768 Да, согласен, Байкал куда лучше подходит для лёгких грузов, нежели Энергия-2. Хотя, с другой стороны, был в планах ещё МАКС, где терялся, по сути, только топливный бак, одна из самых дешёвых частей носителя. В любом случае, всё это проекты нереализованные, мир всегда забирает самых лучших...
The marker is a feature from Kerbal Engineer mod that you can toggle from the in-game window. Other than that, the rest of the mission can be done entirely with zero other mods installed.
Hey. Can I ask what mods you are using that’s not visual, Mainly about the other landing pads and the cirkle where you land? Love your videos and would like to play but is on vacation.
@@leonardobonanno5115Thanks for the reply I will defenetly check them out when home. Also love the cinematography on this video, It’s one of my favorite❤
@@leonardobonanno5115Also are we gonna get any news on how it is at ESA or is that confidential, I remember the admire I felt when I saw the chair on the beach video…😊
About the whole ESA thing, I have been negotiating to get a special permission to make some videos. This took around 3 months to just get the permission. By the end of January I hope to get the first ESA videos published on this channel. I remember your comments back on the post I made, I apologise for such a big delay.
The speed of the booster is at maximum 1.100 - 1.200 m/s in the atmosphere because it's on a suborbital trajectory. Damage would happen if it were flying from orbit (2.300 m/s), then it's speed would likely kill it.
I have to confess that when I first tried reusable rockets, I just landed with parachutes😂
Hahaha no shame, it's the best way to practice
@@tommasoastaldi2513 I still use small parachutes ngl, its better to not risk loosing a probe core and multiple engines (not counting the fact you could just use saves)
@@ToastedguyigI pack drogue chutes when I’m launching something at or near the rocket’s payload capacity, just to ensure any trajectory inefficiencies don’t fuck up my dV budget too badly. I don’t often use em, but it’s a solid bail-out strat if you’re under budget for landing, which is really not ideal for a career playthrough.
If you don't plan to change game scene or can't because of your ascend profile and use the mod to automatically recover vessels entering Kerbin's atmosphere, parachutes are the way to go.
Also, Kerbin's vanilla size is small enough for a near orbital booster recovery. I use that on my KNES mod Ariane 5 core stages, (also add parachutes to the SRBs, Space Shuttle style). I add a probe core and parachutes to the core stage and after Jettison, I just give a little nudge of engine power to deorbit the first stage. (400 m/s ish when above the desert peninsula), is you get it right, your core stage lands near the KSC, i even once managed to land it in front of the VAB ! ).
Finally someone who actually reuses the first stage, not that annoying save then reload that most TH-camrs do
Also (though it’s not technically full reuse ability) I use a parachute or two (I’ll usually have the parachute facing east in the single chute designs)
Hey thanks for the comment. Yeah I agree with you that it's nice to have figured out a reliable way to recover the booster without doing the save and reload. This solution actually makes it worth it for career mode because you can save a lot of money when done with the larger boosters worth half a milion credits.
As much as I love powered landings, I'd love to learn how to use parachutes to tip the booster in a way that it puts itself horizontally on the ground after landing. I've done it a few times accidentally, but never really understood the "How?" of it.
No matter how many and how well people explain this, all of it is still beyond me. I think I'll stick to SSTOs. No stages, no problem.
To each their own.
I think reusable boosters in stock KSP are a bit overkill if not useless due to the low delta-V requirement for orbit.
With Real Solar System, SSTOs are still possible but they become a lot more challenging and reusable boosters are more effective at the same job.
@@leonardobonanno5115, не просто на много сложнее, а «ПИЗДЕЦ КАК СЛОЖНО», ну и если в ваниле SSTO можно сделать почти со старта, то с RP-1 это лейтгейм
Great Video, I really enjoyed it. My channel's space program is extremely un-reusable haha. You inspired to me to try to make a reusable rocket in the future! Also to answer your last question - Its hard to put a price on launching a whole space station into orbit in one piece on a ludicrously large booster - especially on sandbox mode haha
Hey I've seen your videos before! I'm glad you enjoyed this one.
You could try in your next challenge to launch a whole station or base in a single, giant reusable rocket ship!
i never actually put control surfaces like wings at the top of my rocket. i always just used airbrakes up there instead.
now land the booster like a shuttle on a runway with 0 fuel! xD
Landing a booster on the runway?? You crazy man 🤣
Practicing using a VTOL platform (ie. Helicopter) is a really good way to practice suicide burn landings. Though if you're really struggling, make use of the Radial OUT function of the SAS: it assists you in keeping the booster upright. That way you can just focus on killing the forward momentum so it wouldn't tip over when you land. Keep in mind that you have to design your craft to accommodate that (ie. RCS and Reaction Wheels).
Once I get back to my college dorm, I guess reusable boosters would be my new obsession (again) for January. I'm done doing Formula cars and Go-karts for a couple of months.
Also, last year, one study I did is if it was more efficient to just save the engines (basically the most valuable part) for recovery; ie. Just eject the empty tanks.
Result: It's really only worth it if you're using the massive engines (ie. Mainsail). You could even flip it, engine facing upward, for landing for even ease of use. Afterall, that's the main goal of my study: Max% of Easy to Use version vs Cost of 100% reusable.
probably will never make a reusable rocket, but damn do these look really cool, they look realistic (not just the graphics but just general design) and stylized at the same time
as a person who catches/ lands his super-heavy booster this has a lot of great tips
Do you use a stock tower to catch the booster or is it a mod?
@@leonardobonanno5115 it a mod
@@leonardobonanno5115 it's a mod "star-ship launch Expansion"
@@leonardobonanno5115 probably Starship Launch Expansion
I'm new to KSP, wish I had started it earlier. I'm having troubles racking up Science to progress on the career mode which led me to find your channel was great. I wish the game explained acquiring science and the quirks around gathering science better, like can a scientist pocket as many reports as it wants? I'm doing missions to mun that take several hours and I'm coming back with like 3-5 reports max. Anyways, you're doing great with these videos, I wish you luck and hope you succeed with the channel.
I saw someone saying you're from Italy, but there is a lot of Leonardos in Brazil too, thought you were brazilian for a second. Latin languages I guess.
this video is like “how to not land a rocket booster” by spacex
Hahaha yeah I know which video you are talking about. I did take some inspiration from it 🤣
You know, I just can't help myself, but I do love a good set of parachutes on my reusable boosters & eff the fuel required for landing.
I just love the straight falling down & then release of 'chutes right before the ground.
I've started & stopped playing KSP multiple times over the last what, 12 years?
Every time it's the same, I just go straight to 'chutes as soon as I get past the most basic components in career mode.
To be fair, in KSP chutes are much easier to manage. Which begs the question why isn't that the case in real-life?
to be honest i use tons of parachutes for reusability, and when i used rocket engines i always did it with mech jeb because it's very hard to do
FMRS also helps a lot with this, makes landing and putting the second stage in orbit way less stressful imo
I'll look into that
Nice video, I used similar methods for my rockets. You can also try returning the first stage like an airplane (like Russian project “Baikal”)
You meam the first stage has retractable wings?
You meam the first stage has retractable wings?
@ its hard to do in ksp, so I use fixed small wings. Landing looks like space shuttle: high speed and only one attempt
@4ztt363 Do you land on water or do you need landing gear?
@ I prefer landing on ground, but water is good choice too
thankyou, i have been playing for 6 years and i nerver knew how to do this.
I would land my core stage on the continent east of the KSC so i wouldn't need to do the boost-back maneuver. It also allowed a slightly shallower ascent so I could launch heavier payloads. But i was on science mode and not worrying about funds. I also had parachutes to help slow down on atmo since the core stage would be moving so much faster on reentry.
I like your idea of landing to the other continent, it does have it's advantages.
I guess the issue would be that the distance from KSC would reduce the cash return when you recover the booster.
@leonardobonanno5115 Yeah. Like I said, had been playing on science mode so didn't have to worry about funds. I suppose you'd just have to weigh which landing site would be a better for the cost of the mission.
You are a freat KSP youtuber. Xour game looks very stunning.
Thank you mate!!
I still stick to "add moar boosters" to get my stuff into orbit. Reusable launch vehicles just don't sem to be the kerbal way...
I sort of agree, the reusability makes sense more in RP-1 with real scale planets but it's still fun to experiment.
you must make a mod list for what was used in this video, all of those combined effects and things that aren't stock come together so well.
I agree it's a good idea, at the moment I'm travelling for the winter holidays but in January I will do this for sure.
All the boosters I build either spin when they enter the atmosphere or don't glide as the air becomes denser
I often use 8 vecotr engines for 2.5 boost and get shocked when it runs out of fuel before reaching 20 km :)
I’ve always repulsively landed. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve done that. I have this one falcon nine style rocket called the Galvatron 9B. it’s a mix between two of my uncle’s favorite characters, the Guyver and the transformer character Galvatron. There was once a family of them the guyva 1 , Guyvatron 5 , Guyvatron 9, And Guyvatron Heavy. All of these rockets of which I’m sure you can already tell are basically heavily inspired analogs of the falcon 1 the canceled falcon five well technically it wasn’t canceled, but rather they just decided to add four more engines to it. Falcon 9, I even made an analog of crew dragon called the Phoenix capsule. It just had its first ever test flight on Christmas Eve. And Galvatron Heavy.If it says Galvatron, I’m sorry you know what I mean. I am currently working on a star ship analog called Stardust, which unlike starship is actually going to be a three stage launch vehicle the first stage which I call the Superman booster will have 29 engines and it’s job will be to set the vehicle on a trajectory into space. And just like real life boost back and get caught by a chopsticks like contraption while the second stage is the actual part that gets the Stardust vehicle into low curb and orbit. That way that ensures the Stardust spacecraft is already fully fueled come stage separation
The first time I tried this i added folding wings and a small cell of junos to the side to fly it back since my payload was very heavy and I had to fly the first stage very far away
That really impressive, sounds like a wacky idea that the Soviet Union could have done 🤣
So all of them are like Super heavy and not falcon 9 not how I would do it but it's a great video and I'm going to work on more rockets in ksp
These boosters are super powerful with their landing burns! How many engines does the largest one have?
Yeah, these boosters pack a really high thrust. The largest of the three uses 19 Vector engines, that's about 1.780.000 kg of thrust at sea level, crazy numbers!
@@leonardobonanno5115 Oh lol that is how many my booster uses!
@@leonardobonanno5115 Wait, what is the action group to unlock the fuel tanks, I am trying to make it so that my second stage doesn't seal all the monoprop from my crew vehicle!
why not plop 2 drag chutes? they arent that heavy or expensive and could areobreak very efficently when about to land, can save a proper 300 m/s and make it easier to kill any horizontal velocity when just hovering above ground
I think they bring many advantages you raise a valid point, you could save some delta-V for sure.
I guess the only drawback is that they cannot be deployed at speeds above 450 m/s while classic airbrakes work just fine.
i think i need this guys mod list..
he got plenty of videos showcasing the mods he uses
Now make it automated. ;p
(I made a 1st stage that flies itself and lands under parachute so I don't have to deal with managing to land it myself. It also lands in the ocean, so it costs a bit to retrieve, but I don't care for how much easier it makes usage.)
Humm, I heared of KOS being a mod which makes you write code do that the rocket can land like Falcon 9 by itself. Coding is not my thing though, I'll probably follow your advice and do the parachute thing.
А теперь повтори это с полным набором Rp-1)
И, кстати, где Байкал?)
Этот ваш Байкал - это полумеры, товарищ. Если уж и крепить крылья к ракете, то к каждой её ступени! По этому лично я за Энергию-2. В любом случае, жаль, что когда КСП ютуберы делают многоразовые ракеты-носители, то почти всегда они делают что-то вроде Фэлконов или Суперхэви от SpaceX, на крайняк насовские шаттлы (по ощущениям, по крайней мере, всё именно так).
Вообще согласен, но только Энергия-2 это тяж, а для легкого груза - таки Байкал как раз
Там вроде ещё проект Ангары с крыльями был
@@ivanmamulin2768 Да, согласен, Байкал куда лучше подходит для лёгких грузов, нежели Энергия-2. Хотя, с другой стороны, был в планах ещё МАКС, где терялся, по сути, только топливный бак, одна из самых дешёвых частей носителя. В любом случае, всё это проекты нереализованные, мир всегда забирает самых лучших...
@ Макс - очень крутая штука, но я так понял её сейчас КНДР пытается реализовать с помощью КНР. Надеюсь, что у них получится
wait do you have a graphic mudpack this is beautiful
I don't have a proper modpack but seeing how many people are requesting this, I'm considering making a video and releasing a modpack.
Why are your Fuel tanks so shinyyy, What mods are you using?
I use Textures Unlimited Recolour Depot
@@leonardobonanno5115 thx for the mod name
Is there a list of the mods youre using? The game looks spectacular
I don't have a list right now, I'll add one in the description when I'm home from the winter holidays
is that the snog from that one Matt lowne KSP series??????
Might be, i'm not sure which one you mean.
What mods are you using? How do you get the landing assistance marker?
The marker is a feature from Kerbal Engineer mod that you can toggle from the in-game window. Other than that, the rest of the mission can be done entirely with zero other mods installed.
@ thank you!
Great video!
God bless, Jesus loves you!
Merry Christmas!
Thank you, Merry Christmas!!
Hey. Can I ask what mods you are using that’s not visual, Mainly about the other landing pads and the cirkle where you land? Love your videos and would like to play but is on vacation.
Hey thank you for the comment.
The landing pads are from the mods:
- Tundra Space Centre
- Kerbal Konstructs
@@leonardobonanno5115Thanks for the reply I will defenetly check them out when home. Also love the cinematography on this video, It’s one of my favorite❤
@@leonardobonanno5115Also are we gonna get any news on how it is at ESA or is that confidential, I remember the admire I felt when I saw the chair on the beach video…😊
About the whole ESA thing, I have been negotiating to get a special permission to make some videos. This took around 3 months to just get the permission.
By the end of January I hope to get the first ESA videos published on this channel.
I remember your comments back on the post I made, I apologise for such a big delay.
It wasn’t a hurry! I just love your videos, I can see you are learning a lot at ESA in your videos
What mod are you using for the little landing pads
KSC Extended + Kerbal Konstructs
Mod list. Now. :3
How the hell is the rocket surviving the re entry
The speed of the booster is at maximum 1.100 - 1.200 m/s in the atmosphere because it's on a suborbital trajectory.
Damage would happen if it were flying from orbit (2.300 m/s), then it's speed would likely kill it.
what mod do you use for the target after you deorbit?
It's part of Kerbal Engineer mod
@@leonardobonanno5115 thanks
What mod makes the RCS plumes look like that?
That's Waterfall