cantab

My plan for something interesting is "KSP Superleggera": No engines larger than 1.25m. No more than two 1.25 m boosters or one "layer" of smaller boosters. All payloads to fit in a 2.5 m fairing. (Maybe a shade bigger, I want Sr docking ports to fit). One program at a time. (A reaction to my current save where I have too many missions and seem to never finish them.) Probably FAR and DRE. Maybe Isp scaler too. Basically the idea is to focus more on small, light, elegant craft. PS: And no going overboard with jets either!

Presumably some contracts for it will act as hints. I'd like to see it include a bonus for KSC West too. If it's biome based this may come anyway, the area is listed as the KSC biome in .23.5

Radial burn on the outskirts of Kerbin's SOI to lower periapsis and then aerocapture (or just land). And you really are hooning it around with an entry speed like that.

Indeed. Coding features is easy and predictable (well, sometimes). Finding bugs is hard and who knows how long it will take.

I might give this a go myself. It's always nice to pull off some good gravity assists. Also, if I use the Kerbal X I can prove that contrary to , it wasn't the engineers to blame in that mission.

I've not checked to see if that works. Generally speaking if I'm not getting a burn prediction I just guesstimate it from my experience with the ship. But earlier I had to do some small burns (50 m/s kind of stuff) on RCS, so I simply ignored the mass reduction and went by F = ma ÃŽâ€v = at t = mÃŽâ€v/F That was good enough for this purpose. I'm not sure how the accuracy falls off with increasing ÃŽâ€v. It will in any case always be an overestimate, so you can consider it "safe" to follow, and ease off the throttle a bit if you need to.

My suggestion is to point your ship towards normal or antinormal (in an equatorial trajectory that's north-south) when decoupling the service module. That way there's virtually no risk of differing drag bringing it back to hit you.

Things to include: Real islands. Topography of the whole world down to 1 km resolution is freely available, https://lta.cr.usgs.gov/GTOPO30 , though you might need to procedurally generate the small-scale detail. The quartermaster. Quartermasters were the real power on pirate ships, able to veto the captain on all matters except battle. Perhaps if the player is to be a captain, the AI-controlled quartermaster would reign the player in. Women. They weren't common, but there certainly were some among pirate crews. Impact of global events. For example the famous destruction of Port Royal, and later the end of the War of Spanish Succession that freed up a load of sailors.

What's the current price structure? In any case, my thinking is that you should cater well for small groups. You don't want to be turning people away really.

I launched something with an upper stage TWR of .67. It took quite a few tries to get right, in the end I found the following worked: Steeper-than-normal first stage ascent, pitching around 60 degrees at 10 km and staying there. Follow orbit prograde on the upper stage until apoapsis. Once at apopapsis, keep the same heading. I did find that when I was nearly circularised the apopasis started racing away while the periapsis was still in the atmosphere and I had to make a radial burn to fix that. Not sure what the solution is there. In the end I made a stable orbit with about 6 m/s to spare, and am now rendezvousing the ship with a space station on the RCS. (It's a tug to help assemble the station so it has LOTS of monoprop thankfully.)

The Pentium Anniversary Edition is the exact opposite of a neutered chip. It's the non-K i5's and i7's, with their locked multipliers, that are neutered.Nor is the Pentium AE really a low-end processor in the usual sense. Rather, I see it as targeting the budget-conscious enthusiast: someone interested in overclocking, perhaps interested in gaming (after all a fair few current games don't make full use of a quad-core chip), but unable or unwilling to spend £170 or more on the CPU.

Basically yes. This arrangement will work fine, the struts will vanish when the cupola is decoupled from the engine.

Right-clicking a pod and choosing "Control from Here" sets the control location on the same ship. To switch control between different ships you need to use the [ and ] keys (only for nearby ships), or select the ship in map view or the tracking station and switch to it. As mentioned, you also have limited power on those things, but the right-click menu still shows up on a powerless probe. And a trick you can try for your probes: you can enable and disable batteries, including the Stayputnik's inbuilt batteries, by right-clicking them even when the craft is otherwise uncontrollable. Use this to "hibernate" probes then wake them up again when you need them. You can do stuff like Mun missions with just the Stayputnik, no battery or solar panel, this way.

I can't tell if you did or not from the pic, but you don't need to run struts to extra decouplers, they will break automatically when the main stack decoupler is fired. The strut will leave one end behind though, which can be unsightly, so check that end gets left on the launcher and the station is clean.

"Hey, you know that bomb the asteroid deflection mission had to abandon." "Yeah..." "Think it would work to start a Kessler syndrome?" "Um, yeah, I guess." "Prepare for firing." PS: Ignore the information regarding the orbit in the screenshot above and pretend this was set off in LKO.

That's one badS lander.

Agreed. You have a weak point - in general smaller diameter parts make weaker joints. You've put one strut but more would be better. Nice lifter, by the way. Reminiscent of the Russian ones with the flared-out base. You could try part clipping adapters or nosecones on top of the LFBs to smooth it out.

I'm interested in it myself. The performance will be a touch unusual; in some cases, such as KSP, it'll rival chips three plus times the price, while in others it'll be more run-of-the-mill. For a new build, like I'm planning, it seems like a good budget choice, and I may opt for it rather than pay the extra for an OC-able i5. Of course you do run the risk of getting a lemon that doesn't overclock well.

Don't worry. Make a correction later on, for example right after you enter Kerbin's SOI to deflect the periapsis down.The further out you make a correction, the smaller it needs to be, but TOO small and you can't be precise enough. In that case you just wait until later.

It's possible the final challenge involves something that will go in the game, which would account for a "Squad's decision is final" approach. For example a new stock craft or scenario.

This is a fair point. A space mining operation might well enjoy cheap freight shipments from Earth, because the freighters would otherwise be flying that trip empty. While you couldn't go overboard, adding any cargo takes fuel after all, I expect they'd receive no shortage of goodies.

I agree that the Poodle is one of the weaker engines. You need to be running something silly like 7000 m/s in a single stage for the Poodle to perform better than the LV-T30, and if you need that much delta-V you're better with nuclear engines anyway. LV-909 clusters also offer equal Isp and better TWR than a Poodle. Really the only thing going for the Poodle is the form factor (a 1.25 m engine in a 2.5 m stack looks ugly) and the gimbal range. The real Poodle was a Radioisotope rocket, akin to a mini-NERVA. It might be nice to see an engine like that in KSP.

Don't press. I prefer rabbits anyway. Press the button to get a thousand of a randomly chosen currency, but receive a bill for a hundred of another randomly chosen currency.

You spelled Skipper wrong

640 tons to orbit ought to be enough for anybody. (More than 6 words, I know).