Leganeski

Reaching Kerbin orbit at 7.6x scale requires achieving a surface velocity of about 6200 m/s. No matter how much you optimize the ascent profile, there's no way to get around the fact that orbital velocity is fast. Jet engines are efficient, but their downside (apart from requiring oxygen) is that their thrust starts decreasing beyond a certain speed dependent on the exact engine, and eventually drops to nothing. The Panther engine, for instance, completely loses thrust at Mach 3.5 (≈1100-1200 m/s). Other less efficient jet engines such as the Whiplash or RAPIER are better, continuing to function until Mach 5.5-6 (1800-2000 m/s), but that's it. At stock scale, where you only need to achieve a surface velocity of 2100 m/s, jet engines can take you almost all the way there, and you can get away with having only a little bit of rocket power that pushes you the rest of the way into orbit. Since you're so close to orbit, centrifugal force reduces the TWR requirements considerably, so there are a lot of options: nuclear engines to avoid the need for oxidizer, small LFO engines for lower dry mass, or really anything with enough Δv. At 7.6x scale, the situation is completely different: even 2000 m/s is nowhere close to orbit, and you need to accelerate the remaining 4200m/s (or probably more) with rocket power alone, while fighting drag and gravity without much help from the curvature of the larger planet. The Δv requirements for the one stage practically necessitate nuclear engines, but the TWR requirements (something like 1.0-1.5 g) are difficult to achieve with the stock NERV, especially if you're also using it to carry stuff like wings and payload. There's a reason why SSTOs have never been built in the real world, and the comparatively limited selection of parts in KSP makes designing one even harder. Your 4560-km-radius Kerbin is not quite as difficult to orbit as the 6378-km-radius Earth, but I don't think that this minor decrease in orbital velocity is enough to make the challenge doable without a whole lot of trial and error, and a very small payload fraction. Edit: As @Lt_Duckweed points out, I was neglecting the possibility of continuing to remain at low altitude during most of the ascent, which would allow the plane to use lift to lower the TWR requirement to manageable levels. This requires very precise control over both altitude and angle of attack to maintain just the right amount of lift, and generates a ton of heat at high velocities. However, the somewhat unrealistic wing parts in KSP take zero damage from any temperature below 2400 K, so they might just be able to survive. I have never been successful flying an SSTO like this: either I encounter too much drag and quickly run out of fuel, lose control of pitch and spiral into a crash, or make too sharp of a turn and break my wings off. It's definitely possible, though, and I imagine that an autopilot mod would help reduce the risk of all of these problems.

Not that I know of, but here are the angles I calculated. (*The starred angles vary considerably due to orbital eccentricity.) From Kerbin Moho: -252* (i.e. Moho is 252 degrees behind Kerbin, or equivalently 108 degrees ahead) Eve: -54 Duna: +44 Edna: +75 Dres: +82* Jool: +97 Lindor: +106 Eeloo, Hamek: +109* Nara: +114* To Kerbin Moho: +76 (i.e. Kerbin is 76 degrees ahead of Moho) Eve: +36 Duna: -75 Edna: -238 (equivalently +122) Dres: -330* (+30*) Jool: -769 (-49) Lindor: -2011 (+149*) Eeloo, Hamek, Nara: none (the optimal angle varies by more than 360 degrees over the course of the planet's eccentric orbit, and even a 180 degree misalignment is relatively cheap to correct because Kerbin completes many orbits during the transfer) If you want transfer angles for the moon systems as well, let me know and I'll work on making a table.

The new bodies look fantastic, and I think that Windswept's terrain is a lot more interesting now! Are Canyon and 106030 supposed to be tidally locked? (Currently, they aren't locked but their config files don't specify rotational periods, so they inherit Moho's rotation rate from the template.)

Frontier's orbital period is 6 years 297 days (2853 Kerbin days; 1786 Frontier days; 61617827 seconds). Kronometer will let you change the calendar, but this mod doesn't have a patch for it, so you'll need to write your own configuration file if you want the year length to match the orbital period. According to this more recent post from March, Frontier is indeed still intended to have oxygen:

Congratulations on the release! There are so many unique and interesting planets that I can't believe they all fit in one system. Here is an (unofficial) table with all the delta-v information. (This may contain minor spoilers if you haven't yet looked at the physical parameters of all the bodies.)

Almost. Most* terrain only scales up by a factor of 2.5 instead of 4, so low orbits around airless bodies will still be closer than expected. This means that getting to orbit takes slightly less than double the delta-v, and transfers usually take very slightly more. By "slightly" I mean less than 0.5%, so you can probably ignore the difference without issue. *Gilly, Dak, and Tam keep their shape, so their terrain is scaled up by the full factor of 4. However, they aren't exactly the places where you have to worry very much about delta-v.

On a perfectly round airless body, your reasoning would be correct. However, Kerbin is neither of those things, and in particular its atmosphere causes a lot of imprecision. Although the scale factor increases by 4, the atmospheric scale height only increases by a factor of 1.1-1.2x, and the low orbit altitude increases by 1.5-1.6x. This means that delta-v losses from both of these sources scale up by significantly less than 2.

Hello and welcome to the forums, @destroyerofGPUs! This mod is supposed to delete the Kerbol system, so you are correct that something is probably wrong with the installation. Are you sure that you have Kopernicus Expansion working correctly? Also, AVP is a visual pack specifically for the stock system and OPM, so it will not work on other planet packs. Avalon has its own EVE and Scatterer configs, so external configs like AVP are not needed.

I don't think this is directly possible, as KSP is hard-coded around the Sun being at the center of the universe and having an infinite SOI. However, what you can do is give the Sun all the properties (including the external name) of the star that you actually want at the center, and create a new star orbiting it which has the properties of Kerbol. The stock planets can then be moved to orbit the new "Kerbol" star. Every non-Sun object has to have some kind of orbit, but it is possible to make the orbit line invisible and the orbital period extremely long, which effectively makes the object stationary.

It's not a map, but I did make a delta-v table for transfers between all pairs of currently implemented objects (not just those to or from Revan). (The table is now up to date as of version 1.3.1.)

Interesting! Those temperatures seem perfectly reasonable to me given their conditions; I was asking because the 1.1.1 download has atmospheric mean surface temperatures of 231 K for Perbi and 109 K for Heyu.

These maps and atmospheres look good, and the system layout seems quite interesting so far! I only noticed a couple things at first: Canyon, Heyu, and 106000 don't have their Scatterer atmospheres show up in game. This seems to be because Canyon isn't in the planetsList, Canyon's and Heyu's Scatterer configs have names of Duna and Eve respectively, and 106000 doesn't have a folder at all. Is the version you just uploaded to Spacedock a test version? Perbi and Heyu have liquid water oceans but surface temperatures well below 273 K. It's possible to manually adjust specific parts of the temperature-pressure curve in OhioBob's atmosphere calculator to add corrections for things like tidal heating, so would it be helpful to raise the temperatures of those atmospheres just near the surface?

For tanks, I use Simple Fuel Switch, which allows all LFO tanks to be converted to LF for pretty much exactly this purpose. If that is not an option, I usually use Mk3 fuselages, because it lowers part count a lot and the lower mass ratio doesn't actually reduce Δv all that much. I try to keep TWR in the range of 0.15 - 0.4 g (i.e. 7 - 20% of the craft's total mass is NERVs). I generally accept burn times up to about 1/6 of the orbital period at the current altitude. If the planned maneuver is larger than that, I try a few different approaches: Initially, I try using multiple periapsis kicks. (This usually works.) If the desired trajectory is so much faster than escape velocity that periapsis kicks are insufficient (e.g. Kerbin to Jool with low TWR), I attempt to find a closer large celestial body (e.g. Eve) and begin a gravity assist chain there. If no such body exists, I eject as much as I can and then finish the rest outside the SOI. In my experience, this usually happens when around a relatively small object in a very fast orbit (e.g. Hale from OPM, or Ammenon from Whirligig World), in which case the losses from reduced Oberth effect are minimal. Certainly not all of these approaches will work for everyone, but I would highly recommend Simple Fuel Switch.

In sandbox mode, all experiments (surface deployed or not) have a 0% science yield. In order to change this, you would have to start a new save in science mode and use the Alt-F12 menu to unlock all the technologies.