RocketBlam

Uh, going from low Eve orbit to the surface takes about 200 D/V... the D/V it takes to put your Peri below the atmosphere line.

I don't know how you came to 6000 D/v for Eve... I just tried it with that, and the highest I got was an Apo of 38k.

Well that's what I decided to do. It is two of one kind and two of the other, by the way (I just finished it). I don't think I've ever seen a mission like that before. But I just put both on all 4 probe cores. I didn't get to use both on every landing, but I guess it's close enough.

The problem is, I'm sending 4 probes, and the instruments are fairly expensive. - - - Updated - - - Even the icons are different. I wish they would be more clear here.

Got this mission. Half of the mission parameters require me to take "pressure readings", the other half, "atmospheric analysis." So do I use the PresMat Barometer, or the Atmospheric Fluid Spectro-Variometer?

Pol and Bop are also very uneven, so harder to find a good landing spot with resources.I almost always use Vall, but I hadn't considered that Laythe might actually be better.

My God, WHAT HAVE I DONE?!? I was clicking, I remember that. I saw the mission. "Go to Eve, do this, return these people, blah blah blah." It all happened so fast. "I've been to Eve before, I've even returned a Kerbal! It seems like a challenge! I'll do it!" I hit "accept." Of course I did not consider that returning four Kerbals from the surface of Eve is exponentially harder than one - and the one I returned was about the hardest thing I've ever done in KSP. I'll keep you posted. I hope you have a strong stomach. This is not going to be pretty.

I started some time previous to 23.5, and I guess my biggest misconception was, I didn't realize there was any kind of save function (F5). So I flew many missions, including missions to the Joolian moons, without saving at all. As I recall, I still had the recall function, but I usually crashed rather than recall.

It's been my experience that chutes will not deploy in a vehicle you are not controlling. Even if you pre-deploy them, they will never fully deploy and will crash into the ground. So, if I understand your scenario correctly, I suspect that is the problem. Although I haven't actually tried it recently, I think the last time was in .90. I had boosters that had chutes attached, and when I staged them, they simultaneously jettisoned and deployed their chutes. The system didn't work, though. Although they clearly pre-deployed, if they were not controlled by me, they never fully deployed.

Now, for your ultra-challenge: Ringworld.

I actually used a pair of fleas, with the fuel cut down, as separator rockets on a huge first stage that had a tendency to collide with the second stage upon separation. They would fire for about two seconds, just enough to pull the first stage back and prevent a collision. Worked great. Use them as huge separatrons

The thought has occurred to me.

I should point out that the most fun I had in the game was in the first month or so. This is for two reasons: - I didn't know how to do most things. - I didn't know there was a save feature. So yes, for the first month, I flew all of my flights with no saves at all. And I think I landed on at least a couple of the Joolian moons doing that. Talk about nerve-racking!

I would probably uninstall MJ if Squad did just a few things: - gave me a way to see d/V and TWR in the VAB and SPH. - Gave me some way to know when the launch window was good for each main planet.

Hmm, maybe I'll try it. My solution to lining up with the runway was to go out and plant a line of flags pointing to it.

I am. Signed, Elon Musk

Also I've never used MJs "spaceplane guidance" and I don't even know what it does.

It's actually quite interesting how little the TWR changes when you double the rockets, or increase the payload. I actually don't quite understand it. I guess it's because the payload is such a small percent of the total weight.

I use mechjeb, and would have lost interest in the game by now without it. 1. Trying to transfer to another planet by trial and error, or by having to go to a website that tells you a rough approximation of where and when to burn, is not fun. The lack of any way to know when the launch window for a particular planet is, is a huge oversight by Squad. 2. I know how to do all the things MJ does, I just find them tedious to do after 1600 hours in the game. 3. Getting into orbit from Kerbin was fun and challenging - the first 20 times I did it. Now I use ascent guidance and go read Drudge Report for a few. 4. Again, using trial and error to figure out if my rocket could reach orbit was fun and challenging - the first 50 times I did it. Now I am content for MJ to tell me what my D/V and TWR are. I do all landings manually, though, and docking.

Well, yes and no. I have no doubt that I could make a more cost-efficient launch system using staging... as I said, lower costs are not a feature of this get-up. But staged, massively-parallel rockets have been done in KSP, and frankly, they've been done to death. In beta, everyone was making these rockets, that were sometimes wider than they were tall.

After I have done it, I may start a new challenge. I need to know myself what kind of D/V is required, etc.

Little known fact, every gimballed engine has a kerbal installed in it, who can move the engine around with his little Kerbal hands, and gets very hot.

Some of you may be familiar with the OTRAG rocket. It was a system designed by a German entrepreneur, you can read about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OTRAG OTRAG was a system for massively parallel rockets. The idea was, you built a rocket out of many individual rocket lifting units, and instead of stacking them on top of each other, you stacked them side by side. That way, the same rocket would be used, just in different quantities, thus (hopefully) resulting in economies of scale. They would ideally only ever have one rocket design, and would just add more rockets for heavier payloads. The system never got off the ground for various reasons, but I've always found it interesting. Now, massively parallel rockets are nothing new in Kerbal Space Program - people have been using them for a long time to lift heavier payloads than they probably should have. But I decided to check out making an OTRAG-style launch system, using only one rocket engine type, and with all engines having their own fuel supply. My system, however, is a little different. In OTRAG, they did regular staging, it was just with parallel rockets. In my attempt, I wanted to create a launch system that used no staging whatsoever. It should all be a single stage. My thinking was, "if 4 rocket units can achieve orbit with no staging, carrying X payload, then 16 rocket units should be able to do the same, but with a heavier payload." So my two rules are: 1. All rockets must be the same type, and have the same amount of fuel. No cross-feed allowed. 2. The system should deliver a payload to LKO in one stage. So here's what I have so far: OKRAG 16 This vehicle can deliver a 16-ton payload to a 100km orbit. OKRAG 32 This vehicle can deliver a 32-ton payload to a 100km orbit (actually somewhat more). Is this a good idea, from an economics standpoint? Nope! These rockets will cost you quite a lot more than a vertical, normal staged rocket - assuming you have access to those engines. And of course the economies of scale never enter the equation, because in KSP, no matter how many rockets you build, they all cost the same amount. The one big advantage it has, though, is the ability to launch very heavy payloads into orbit from pretty early on in the tech tree. And if you wanted to make an OTRAG-style launcher with bigger engines and tanks, you could put huge payloads into orbit. You pretty much need to get to struts in the tech tree, though. These things do not fly well without some stabilization. Also, in the OKRAG 32, I had to put fins on the bottom, as it had a tendency to flip over at about 15km.

Even in 1.03 I thought the aero was better. I was able to build SSTO's that wouldn't work in 0.90. I have no complaints.

It just amazes me, the petty, trivial things people get worked up about. Stock or not stock? This is what you choose to spend your energy worrying about?