Rhomphaia

No it won't, If you have calculated how much fuel you need to burn from your start mass and ISP (rearrange the rocket eqn) then you have already taken the increase of acceleration into account. this is how better burn times calculates. The inaccurate method is how it is done in stock, where it is calculated using the vessels TWR.

Except for the roads and the beer.

Maneuver nodes in KSP assume an instantaneous burn for the DeltaV. Any time you are burning other than t=0 you are wasting DeltaV. the lower your TWR the longer you spend thrusting in the wrong direction and so, the worse it gets.

This used to be true back in 1.0, but not any more. A bare Mk1 pod will overheat and explode coming back from Mun unless you are really careful. A MK1 pod with a heatshield will slow down to subsonic and land with a parachute just fine.

the optimal altitude to align with Minmus is zero. Ie launch into the correct plane as KSC passes under Minmus ascending/descending node. Failing that Minmus is fairly low inclination, boosting yourself up to any other parking orbit would cost more than you would save on the plane change. Best to plane change at minmus altitude. If you need to save DeltaV and you must use an equatorial parking orbit, and don't want to wait for a window to encounter Minmus at an ascending/descending node. then your best bet would be to trade off for time, boost youself up to Munmus alt at one node then at the other, raise your peiapsis until you get an encounter on your next orbit

Even without something to target that mod will provide more accurate burn times than stock, but if you want to calculate manually then using the ISP and Current mass of your lander and the DeltaV required you can rearrange the Rocket Formula (deltaV = 9.81ISPln(initial mass/final mass) to spit out the final mass, then use the fuel flow (seen in right click on engine while burning or in VAB) to calculate how long it will take to burn the difference (1u = 0.005t)

Those are intersect markers, not closest approach, and looks like they are for your future orbit after the mun encounter.

The maps may not but Alex Moons launch window planner does. You could also check out KSP Trajectory Optimisation Tool if you really want to optimize the efficiency of your flybys.

Yes, still works.

The 2 tonnes looks to be what is north of the decoupler, It is indeed throwing off KERs readouts, since it is calculating the DV without it, should be 2550ish TWR is also off by a bit. MechJeb seems to handle the staging better than KER on this boilerplate (the Ore and monoprop tanks are partially filled for ballast) and matches manual calculation

Recording is still not playing nice, but here is my attempt

This is not a problem with Physics or Aerodynamics, but rather the issue is the digital nature of keyboard controls, when you tap the keys You are not simulating little corrections, you are in fact slamming your control surfaces momentarily to maximum deflection. Try turning on fine control (capslock)

It will work fine, I use cubic octos for the LES on my own mercury clone. You can combine them just fine too.

The satellites will be positioned using differential drag. By changing the attitude of a satellite you can increase the drag causing it to slow down more or less than other satellites in the constellation . This is not realizable in KSP Since there is no drag above 70km https://directory.eoportal.org/web/eoportal/satellite-missions/c-missions/cygnss#launch

Don't know that such an arbitrary scoring system is the best way to honor the achievements of John Glen . Perhaps would be better to look to such previous challenges as Doing it Apollo style and come up with a scoring system based on closeness to historical accuracy. My ship: Should have an entry up tomorrow. was hoping for a vid but recording is playing up.

Except Alpha Centauri has not been renamed, Alpha Centauri refers to the trinary star system comprised of Rigil Kentaurus (formerly Alpha Centauri A), Alpha Centauri B (still no official name) and Proxima Centauri (Never really known as Alpha Centauri C)

The Black Arrow had three engines, one per stage. The first stage had 8 nozzles. It is a different matter to have multiple engines.

Not exactly new, zoom in a bit further and the rocket he builds "Needs more struts"

More probably a reference to the Chevrolet Corvair. a car so unsafe it got a chapter to itself in Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-In Dangers of the American Automobile

There was this... No solid boosters, and its on the side rather than on top. but cool non the less.

Its kinda like going bust at darts. Reputation is capped at 1000, but if if a contract gives a reputation gain that would put you over 1000, you don't get any of the rep from that contract.

Atmospheres in KSP are cropped absolutely at a fairly arbitrary value. above the cutoff nothing is modeled The 70km cutoff at Kebin corresponds to 100km at Earth. Everything below is modeled on a 70% scale of the US standard atmospheric model

Kerbins atmosphere is 70% Earths so 4270m

Yes beneath the monopropellant tank you are supposed to have an FL-T100 and then an FL-T400. You should just be able to add which ever you are missing, then drain it to advance. Not sure how you are getting past placing tanks without adding both though.

Also the Mk3 cockpit is really, really light.