ferram4

That is the velocity of the 'surface' of Kerbin, if it came out to the height of your orbit. Using Maraz\'s analogy, that would be the velocity of the tip of the 200km pole relative to fixed space. Your method of simply subtracting the velocity measured on the surface from the velocity in orbit would have worked if Kerbin were flat (), but we have to account for the fact that the surface of Kerbin is moving at 0.1746 km/s on a circle with a radius of 600 km but your ship is moving at 2.101 km/s on a circle with a radius of 800 km. As for this, I actually came up with a formula that should work for doing that, though I haven\'t tried it myself yet: t = (LKSC-LShip)*RK/Vsurf*180/pi LKSC = Longitude KSC, in degrees LShip = Your Longitude, in degrees RK = Kerbin\'s Radius, 600km Vsurf = Your velocity, using the surface number The 180/pi is to convert degrees into radians. The difference in longitudes multiplied by the radius is the arc length of the planet, and your velocity relative to the surface is how quickly you\'re moving relative to that point on the surface.

semininja: It doesn\'t. Your understanding of it is correct, as far as I understand.

Ydoow: Here\'s what a rotating reference frame is: This is a coordinate system located at the center of Earth: Wish I\'d found an animated pic. In the fixed reference frame (the one used for orbital mechanics) the X and Y axes always point in the same direction relative to the entire universe, but not the planet. In a rotating reference frame the coordinate system rotates along with the planet, so that the X and Y directions rotate about the Z axis at the same rate as the Earth spins so that the X direction always points to the same longitude. The former is good for orbital mechanics, the latter for problems on the planet. If you want to have a good idea of what a rotating reference frame is like, imagine standing on a carousel as it spins. You would measure everything off the carousel as moving because you are rotating with the carousel. When the game uses surface velocity, it\'s like you\'re measuring the velocity of things while you\'re on the carousel; when the game uses orbital velocity, it\'s like you\'re measuring the velocity of things while you\'re off the carousel. Hope that helps.

It has to do with the fact that it\'s calculating your speed in a rotating reference frame, not with respect to Kerbin\'s surface. Let\'s back up a bit. Take your velocity on the surface of 0.1746km/s and divide by Kerbin\'s radius of 600km. This will give you a rotation rate of 2.91*10^-4 1/s. Now multiply your orbital radius (not altitude!) by this and you get 0.2328km/s. If you subtract your orbital velocity of 2.101km/s from your 'surface' velocity of 1.868km/s, you get approximately that number. The surface velocity is your velocity with respect to the surface, but instead your velocity in a reference frame rotating with Kerbin.

That\'s a general problem with excessively tall rockets in this game. A picture of your rocket would probably be helpful in figuring out if you\'re doing anything really wrong. As a suggestion, abandon really tall rockets. The way that aerodynamic drag is calculated in the game gives no bonus to skinny rockets over flat pancake rockets (unlike real life) so you might want to try building your rockets squatter first. Actually, even if you want to build tall rockets, making wider rockets is the first step towards fixing your problem: make the base wider and use struts to connect the wider lower stages to the thinner upper stages. Also, I think 1.75m, 2m, and 3m parts aren\'t actually less prone to wobbling than the 1m ones. I think they all have the same amount of flexibility in the joint between the parts.

You want your ap to be greater than the Mun\'s orbit. Keep in mind that you need to be close to it to go into orbit but if you put your apoapsis at the Mun\'s orbital radius you\'ll get smacked by the Mun as it comes around. Aim for about 12,400,000~14,000,000m. This will give you a nice free-return trajectory to Kerbin if you don\'t do anything, and will make sure you don\'t hit the Mun. Make sure that once you get into the Mun\'s sphere of influence you burn retrograde at periapsis to get a nice orbit. For landing, you want to try and kill all of your horizontal velocity and baby it down. Don\'t worry about getting back the first time, just land. You\'ll get a better feel for it with practice. And if you want to come back, make sure you don\'t use a ship that\'s designed to land on its engine. It\'s very easy to lose the engine on landing.

What wired2thenet says is correct, including the part about doing it being fun. NASA also used it for the return to Earth on the Apollo missions. <on-topic>I\'ve never purposefully done this, but I have accidentally designed rockets that always leave the Command Pod around even if it explodes. Normally the result of an SRB taking a LFE with it or a rolling moment causing the entire thing to spin and making the widest stage give a nice demonstration of what happens if there isn\'t enough centripetal acceleration. I once had a moon rocket, a huge monster, that required a lot of fussing with during vertical ascent because if it didn\'t get that babying it would start to spin, and the last one would inevitably happen. No casualties from that rocket though. I think one of the updates broke it...

Take a picture while the ship is heading towards yours, at closest approach, and as it heads away. Make sure the prograde indicator can be seen on the navball on the active ship, and compare the METs. You might need to get the approach and departure pictures from some distance to get clearly different METs, but it can easily be done. I think I\'ll try this soon.

I call it the Hermes Endurer X. Underneath the main body are drop tanks, while three SRBs (already gone) are used to prop it up on the pad and help it take off evenly. Oh, btw, I flew it badly. It has many more kilometers above what I got.

I modified the craft I used earlier to use drop tanks and got this: 1,001,787 m; Proof: And I didn\'t fly it too efficiently this time. Same as before, C7 basic, experimental & beta gear w/ MechJeb.

Go to the KSP Wiki. It\'s locked down due to spambots, but the data that you\'re looking for is listed there. Btw, I\'m an aerospace major too. The game solves the two-body problem to get trajectories.

Umm... I think I broke the game. 828,665 m C7 basic and experimental and the beta wheels. Mechjeb for better piloting. :-[ Edit: added .craft