Plusck

looks to me like [redacted for saving face purposes] Forget that, my bad. Only thing I can suggest is clipped parts...

They fire to orient the Kerbal to be upright, facing away from you. If you move the camera and try to move it'll reorient first. If for some reason something is stopping the kerbal getting upright, then they will continue to fire. But once it's stable that should be it (until you move the camera, of course). You can switch off auto-orientation in the settings. Wait a minute, didn't you ask more-or-less exactly the same question a couple of days ago?

Probably "tree" because if you try to say three properly and clearly, you spend most of the word blowing straight down into the microphone.

Lol. Priceless. Of course, I'm sure you also hate the fact that time warping locks craft in position so they don't drift around while you're fumbling your way toward them. Or that RCS thrusters which are badly placed on a ship will leave SAS struggling to stop you from (realistically) spinning hopelessly out of control (I think "unrealistic wobbling" is the term for bad spacecraft design, no?).

Absolutely, I've done the same tests myself. However, the reason I started dialling back the SRBs so much was because I was going through a phase of putting seriously draggy and light payloads into orbit (typically hubs for my space stations). Even exceeding 140m/s under 12km or 180m/s under 18km would make them flip. So I got into a habit of taking it extra slow and extra straight up to about 14km or so. At the same time my choices for gimballing engines were limited, so I absolutely needed to keep a significant level of thrust to keep control in the lower stages. That also meant balancing the SRBs to ensure they made a significant contribution while still leaving the main engines with enough thrust for control. It was only later that I realised that I was really overdoing it and losing a lot of precious fuel. Now that all of the stock parts are available, I'm coming back round to square 1 - the SRBs are there to do their job quickly and then drop ASAP, leaving as much of the precious fuel as high as possible so that the more efficient engines can kick in usefully, while going faster (and therefore deriving more kinetic energy) and with a better Isp.

I tend to dial down the thrust on SRBs quite often but I do wonder if it is really a smart move. So I'm starting to head the other way and consider that I want them to get my liquid fuel as high and as fast as possible before I ditch them. I too tried the OP's first design. I tried it with a noob pilot too, just in case that made a difference. 10 tries later I eventually got a stable orbit - and down again with 2 goo cannisters on the roof. However, it was with the SRBs at 100% that it eventually worked. At 90% I fluffed the Ap and got it too high. What worked was much as what HvP said. Only difference was I nudged east just a touch straight off the launchpad (i.e. got the chevron dot just off but touching the white dot), then let the prograde gently fall down to about 70° by the time the SRB gave out. I tried another few times and it seem you have to be in the 55° to 70° range at the end of the first stage, otherwise you won't make it. By the time the first Reliant is out of fuel it is massively overpowered, so I actually ended up coasting to 72km Ap from somewhere around the 42km mark after only three seconds of burn with the final stage. After trying again with SRBs at 90%, it was harder at first but equally possible. It will fall towards the horizon much more, meaning the start of the turn has to be even gentler, but I actually managed to be even more efficient. TLDR: it's ok, I just realised that Snark said essentially the same thing

Have you done the tutorials in the game? They help, immensly.

I second Hupf's advice. I generally click on the delete node button when it's down to the last few m/s of a burn and watch what is happening on the map. Removes clutter from the map view, stops me overshooting, and in most cases lets me get closer to where I was actually wanting to go in the first place. From the picture, it looks like your burn from LKO to the Mun was perfect to have you arrive at Mun's orbit just as the Mun is catching up on you. The trouble is you don't actually want to raise your Ap quite as high as Mun's orbit, but a little lower so that the Mun pulls you into an spinwards orbit (i.e. the same eastwards direction as orbiting Kerbin), or a bit higher and further ahead so that you get pulled anti-spinwards the other side (but this means you need to lose more speed to land).

I completely agree with the proposition, but then again I suppose that depends on how you play Minecraft. Having wasted thousands (probably) of hours on Minecraft, I still don't get the interest of PvP. For me it's exploring, finding neat features, building complicated traps and mechanisms and minecart systems. And doing it all within the confines of standard mode, "creative" mode also I find boring. And so with KSP. I've been messing around with the demo on and off for years, and have only recently allowed myself the luxury of buying the full game, but it's already devoured hundreds of hours and the basic fun/reward/planning/hard work profile is very silmilar. Where it really differs, though, is in the learning curve. It's a bit steeper in KSP Which is why the Dwarf Fortress comparison isn't bad either, except you really have to be a nerd not to be put off by the graphical barrenness of DF... Still, with redstone in Minecraft there is quite a steep learning curve too, which is probably why my kids (a) don't use redstone in Minecraft (b) don't understand DF and (c) haven't yet understood how excellent KSP is. But in all three, it's much the same thing that draws me in. Building, problem-solving within significant constraints, trying not to die stupidly, exploring.

Absolutely. Releasing such a probe is probably the single greatest crime a space-faring civilisation could commit.

The only thing I can think of is the fuel cell. Yes, radiators need electricity to run, but logically if there is no electricity then the drill and ISRU won't be running either. I've had red-hot engineers when they EVA to get swapped out, but no other heat problems. So I'm guessing the fuel cells tip the heat balance too far. I haven't used fuel cells because in all cases it just seemed to be wasteful. Mining on any body other than an asteroid is slow, so why compound the slowness by using up the precious fuel you just made? And mining an asteroid gives only a finite source of fuel, so there again you don't want to waste any of it when solar power is just a manoeuvre away. Since I haven't used fuel cells and haven't had serious heat problems, I'm guessing that either the heat produced by the fuel cells (do they produce heat?) or the continuous operation of your units with no down time at all, is what's causing the issue.

I considered a lot of the points here and decided... nah. So my mining vessel is on legs, it has full-sized miner and converter, a couple of tanks for ore, LfOx, and Monoprop, and an engineer's cabin. I know it isn't the most efficient set-up, but it can get up and down from all but the biggest bodies. It can easily join and resupply my orbital stations, it lands easily whether full or laden, and since it is a design-once-and-reuse element it can be sent up, dropped down, turned on, forgotten about and THEN when I need it it's all ready with fuel to supply what I actually care about. I started making a more efficient, rover-based system to drop tanks on their own and be more efficient and whatnot, but after spending time on it I came to the conclusion that it was not my aim in the game. So I'd say: if micromanaging resources makes the game truer to you, then go for the most efficient set-up possible and ignore me. If simply making sure your main missions have fuel is the main issue, then go big (because the small versions of drill or converter aren't worth it) but don't over-think the arrangement. It has to be available when you need it and forgettable the rest of the time. All-in-one, heat-dissipating and electricity-generating but still, just something you can reliably plonk down anywhere.

Ah well - didn't notice that. But I was answering Curiosity7907 anyway so I forgive myself However, since it just so happened that I had to do a complicated rendezvous, I decided to document it to show how to do it efficiently. Using 1.0.5 and manoeuvre nodes, NOT burning needlessly (well, except for a mess I made at one point), and trying to be demonstrative. So I went away and made this album: KSP 1.0.5 orbital rendezvous It's my first imgur album and I haven't sussed out the options for embedding properly and making it slideshow-ish. Hope it's useful

Cool. It's good to know for the reentry stability thing since I've never dared putting so much on the top side of a heatshield, especially with service bays at the bottom.

I'm actually 2nd step is actually the easiest because the NavBall gives you so much information. But you must NOT thrust towards the target - it's pointless. Just make sure you are switched to target mode. Now, just like when landing or whatever, thrusting at a point near to the RETROGRADE marker will make it move AWAY from where you are pointing. Likewise, thrusting towards PROGRADE will move the marker TOWARDS where you point. So to match velocities, first you bring your relative velocity to target down to a manageable level by thrusting retrograde (on target view). I like to get down to about 10m/s until I'm about 500m away, then down to 5m/s up to 150m then down to 0.1m/s while I set up docking. Then you see where the retrograde marker is compared to the anti-target marker. You want to point to a spot that is as close as possible to 90° away from retrograde on the same side of the anti-target marker while still being able to see anti-target on the navball (so drawing a radial out from your pointer on the navball would go through retrograde, then the anti-target at the very edge of the navball). Thrust away and watch retrograde get pushed over anti-target. Correct as necessary. Now you know you are heading directly towards your target at (hopefully) a slow speed. If you are already going very slow, or need to speed up, flip over and move the prograde over the target marker - this time you want to point on the other side of the target marker (so drawing a line across the navball would go through the prograde, then target, then your pointer). If you are going very very slowly, you don't even need to flip over and can use RCS and reverse thrust ("N") instead. Finally, if you're any distance away then your slightly different orbits will make the target curve away from you. The prograde and retrograde will start moving away from target / anti-target over time, so you just need to keep on giving jabs to the sides to push prograde / retrograde around (or stay pointing towards the target and use RCS and the IJKL keys) so that they are always pointing to target / antitarget.

Forgot about the "science tips" bit: Your lander has oodles of fuel (too much, perhaps? Especially too much monoprop unless you leave RCS on for all manouvering) so I assume you're going to be doing all or nearly all biomes on one trip. Therefore getting the science is going to be a bit grindy. Especially if all your experiments are in the service pods because to get the data out and reset the goo / materials experiments you need to get a scientist to them. Therefore, I'd highly recommend stacking two small lander cans and putting your experiments right by the door. That takes you down to 1.25 m scale parts (and 2x 0.66t rather than 2.66t for the habitable parts) for the lander, making it much nippier to throw around on Minmus, and it means that your scientist can EVA, grab data and board again without having to move off the ladder (though he will have to move for the materials bay anyway). Finally, return from Minmus can get a bit hot. Are you sure that your return craft can stay stable retrograde on reentry?

Yes there are a few parts that tend to clip into things all the time - especially if you actually try to hold the mouse where it should go rather than some distance away... I personally use and abuse docking ports all the time. They are weaker but since you have struts anyway, it should be fine. It also future-proofs your current missions since anything you leave in orbit with a docking port can be refuelled and/or help fulfil expansion contracts that come along later. In your case you would have to turn the lander upside down (and not forget to check where you're "controlling from" in flight) to put a docking port on it, but even as it is now a docking port on the mk1-2 command pod would let you separate the two parts fine.

In stock, last time I tried this, the boosters + OKTO core + parachutes had merely disappeared by the time I got to orbit. I had switched to them to make sure parachutes were open and all before switching back to my main vessel. So basically in stock, no you can't.

What I did was take a number of "tourist" orbit/suborbit contracts until I could upgrade facilities enough to get to Minmus. Going there will greatly increase science and cash (and hence, more over-priced science tools for even more science and cash), and will give you a few very lucrative - but potentially quite difficult - contracts. As soon as you get the OKTO core and photovoltaic panels, you can send light probes to the Mun and Minmus. That should kick-start your proper Kerbal expeditions there.

A second? Show them my pulse. An hour? Take a sundial, divide into two (day/night) then into three and into four A minute? Take an hour, divide into three and four and five. Also draw a log scale and mark the midpoint between a second and an hour.

Probably got tired of having to repaint the logos immediately after every launch. I don't suppose peeling and/or sullied and/or half-burnt paintwork is good advertisement - that sort of image kind of plays into "throwing money into space and killing trees while you're at it" mindset.

Hmmm. You're right (of course). Now I think about it, the most delicate part of getting to orbit in the demo is actually when you discard the bottom stage. So yes, it's discarding the light bit at the back which suddenly changes the relative centres of drag/thrust/mass and make control a nightmare. hmmm...

What? No way. With the "revert" option it is relatively simple to trial multiple variants of a basic design without losing any cash and with losing relatively little time. I was playing the demo just a month or so ago. SRBs and throttle limiting make a simple combination that lets you go suborbital with minimal cost, minimal unlocking of the science tree and no upgrading of any of the buildings. Admittedly my early craft were horrendously inefficient before I found out about asparagus design... While everything Streetwind said is absolutely true, it doesn't necessarily help for the demo, since you have no gimbal-able engine and no decent automatic pod. And your pilot sucks 'cos he's a noob. That leaves you with fins - but in the latest demo (I think, the version I have dates from spring 2015) that is towards the end of the available science tree. This is a problem because when you have several stages in your stack, the top of the stack is heavy with fuel as the bottom is emptying. A top-heavy rocket with poor torque control and no fins WILL flip at the first chance. And this is a valid reason for throttling back because the faster you go through the lower atmosphere, the greater the aerodynamic forces on the nose as soon as you turn in the slightest. So I went back to the demo and had a try with fairly basic parts (not the final level in the science tree). It is a bit touch-and-go at times due to poor control options, but you can get into orbit and back fine (just) with: stage 0: parachute - pod - materials bay stage 1: stack decoupler stage 2: FL-T200 + reliant stage 3: stack decoupler bottom of centre stack: 3x FL-T200 + reliant (activated in stage 5) stage 4: 2x radial decoupler 2x radial stacks: nosecone + 4xFL-T200 + reliant + fuel lines and struts to central stack 29 parts, so you only need to upgrade the launchpad. Although you should definitely start at max throttle ( T, Z, space), you have to be extra careful and slow before you hit about 12km. Just accelerate fast to 100m/s then go third throttle to get to about 200m/s at 10km. Turn a tiny amount when you leave the pad then just stay centred on prograde until you can start turning more at around 14-18km. When you can turn significantly without flipping, then you can raise throttle to 100% and watch your Ap. Shut off engines at 71km, then circularise at Ap. But of course, if you DO have the fins available, and can build more than 30 parts, add four to the bottom of each of the vertical stages and go faster. I didn't try it but I'm sure you'll have a ton more fuel on reaching orbit.

OK, so it's finally happened again. This is now 1.0.5 build 1028, with a career savegame originally started under 1.0.4. Direct download, so the save folder is the only thing (together with the VAB thumbnails) that was carried across from the previous version. I don't know if it is related, but I was switching between craft in the map view quite a bit - partly because the game was often stopping me from placing manouver nodes. Luckily I have a savegame; haven't managed to reproduce the error though. Log file: dead contracts log And quicksave not long beforehand: quicksave shortly before returning to Kerbin

For me, orbital rendezvous became easier when I finally twigged how to push the prograde/retrograde markers around. Basically, if you burn when pointed near a retrograde marker, the marker on the navball will move away from the direction of thrust. If you burn near the prograde marker, it will move towards the direction of thrust. Of course this works for landing and orbits too, but it's with targets that you have the time to really fine-tune it. With that, you just need to get within a few tens of km of your target and then push the markers around until target prograde is centred directly on your purple target. The further away you are and the faster you try to close, the more fuel you will use correcting your course but you'll get there eventually. And once you're there - cheat to dock! Align each vessel to the other as a target, but each time you switch vessels warp forward for a millisecond to stop things spinning.