cantab

Quite a few parts mods add a probe core to the starting node, including Modular Rocket Systems. The capsule is still there but you'll at least have the option of starting out with unmanned rockets.

While the exact orbits are often weird, the desired precision is I think not. Real satellites will have their orbits chosen specially for the job they do. The game could do a better job of showing you the orbital elements though. Perhaps a UI element or hotkey that shows the AN/DN compared to the current body (as opposed to a target), and some angle markers drawn in map-view for LAN and Arg of Peri. I don't think I've seen any mod attempt to do that - KER will give you the figures but not in a visual way.

This is believable to me. I've found Kerbol Plus works fine with its bundled version of Kopernicus, but not with the latest version downloaded separately. Hopefully the Kopernicus devs can avoid breaking compatibility in future.

Last I checked the navball would give misleading information in some situations, particularly when the docking port is not coaxial with the centre of mass on the target ship.

Yes. However you will need very large rockets to launch very small payloads, because Kerbal rocket parts are heavy and low-performance compared to real ones.

As for New Horizons, could Aptur or Sonnah work instead of Arin? That way Kerbin might be visible in the background sometimes.

You can probably just copy in the relevant files from New_Horizons/KopernicusFiles/NewHorizonPlanets/ , as well as the science definitions file. You might want to tweak Arin's orbit in its .cfg too.

Docking takes some practice and a delicate touch, but I don't feel the game has made it "unnecessarily difficult". If anything the powerful magnets on KSP's docking ports make it easier and more forgiving than in reality, especially with smaller ships. That said there have been outright bugs where docking ports fail to connect; if there's no sign of any magnetism at all and no connection even with extreme precision you've probably had such a bug.

Nice job on the Urlum tilt, it's something I'd like to see in the mainline OPM. It seems to work fine in the New Horizons setting too. The Wal model is a bit glitched but I'm not sure what you could do. Maybe put Wal's orbit on a slightly different inclination and align the ridge so it misses the poles?

That's a normal glitch for me. I suspect it has something to do with the game picking a planet by number, if it isn't a deliberate New Horizons feature.

Checking your configs, you've only nudged Jool about 10% further from the Sun than in the stock system actually, and a similar eccentricity. Also, it's pretty cool that you tested the system stability out. Do you know any way to tell if there will be SOI overlaps, other than finding them in game? It's something I'm looking into but it doesn't seem easy.

I've not looked at the system in detail, but I assume Kerbin gets the same amount of sunlight as normal. Kerbin obviously retains its atmosphere, which will provide ample shielding from any radiation belts Sonnah might have. As far as science goes, even if the science multipliers aren't altered, generally the game is quite "forgiving" on that front. If anything I shan't be surprised if New Horizons is in some ways more generous, with the early game offers the Mun, Aptur, Serran, and Sonnah itself as good science targets. (I'm messing with the game balance further myself though, I have science gains at 60% but extra science parts from DMagic and ScanSAT).

Your space program starts off on Kerbin as usual, which orbits a gas giant

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/pentium-g3258-overclocking-performance,review-32974.html Overclocked to 4.5 Ghz, the Pentium compares well to a 3.5 GHz Core i3 across a range of games and applications. The results do show that Hyperthreading is useful with the Pentium being more prone to frame variations than the i3, but they also show that the Pentium is by no means "blown out of the water". Above all else the results show that for many games CPU performance hardly matters. For people who can afford a fast i3 or i5 without compromising other aspects of the build then sure such a processor is worth getting. But Cryova is not on that kind of budget.

A big, big launcher. Something that dwarfs the plane. Probably using 5 metre or larger fuel tanks and perhaps mod engines.

Ah, so by using the fairings you can create a great fitting "runner" for the wheels to roll in. Pretty neat. Just don't hit spacebar!

For future reference, can you not check whether your craft meets the conditions before you even launch it?

It might not be changed in Kethane. That mod is seeing no maintenance beyond recompiling the dll against new KSP versions. There are two workarounds for any part with this problem. Either attach it the wrong way up then rotate it using the gizmo, or go into the cheat menu and select non-strict orientation checks.

Here's one that hasn't been mentioned: ISRU. I pronounce it as an acronym, "is-rue".

Womp is one of the most distinctive bodies I've seen in KSP, not only in New Horizons but across a wide range of planet packs. Maybe it's a bit bland on the surface, I've not landed there, but from orbit it's striking. I think it would be a real shame to ditch it.

Sent a probe into Sonnah. The heating was surprisingly gentle, go figure.

A plane entering the atmosphere at a high angle-of-attack will often have quite a lot of drag for its mass, plus some lift, so it's not necessarily the harshest test. They can shed speed well in the upper atmosphere thus reducing heating.

Well since you won't be reading the game's source, it doesn't matter what if any programming languages you know. But you would want to have an idea of some of the concepts and aspects in how the game works. Making a plugin will be one way to really get to grips with that.

I believe your problem is actually being too light. In my experience rover wheels will take you to a certain maximum speed that depends in part on your grip. So even on Kerbin I've found downward-thrusting rockets increase top speed, and one of my rovers drove somewhat faster on Eve than on Kerbin despite it being in the old soup aero.

For a small ship an RCS setup will offer lower part count, with 3 RCS blocks enough for complete translation and rotation (though 4 is preferred). You'd need six Vernors just to do complete translation, and even more if you need them to handle rotation as well. For a large ship though the extra thrust of the Vernors makes a difference, you'd need to spam RCS blocks to get the same performance and that undoes the part count benefits. As far as a shuttle goes I think either can work. But you might find it easier with RCS to have downward-facing thrusters that are on the upper side of the orbiter protected during re-entry. The Vernor model makes that a bit difficult.