GoSlash27

I ran the numbers for you. Transfer from LKO to your desired apoapsis is 1,740 m/sec. Inclination change at apoapsis is 2,916 m/sec Circularization to raise periapsis is 1,688 m/sec This brings the DV budget up to 6,344 m/sec in orbit. But of course you have to get it to orbit, so you're lookin' at another 3,500 m/sec This brings the grand total to 9,844 m/sec DV from the pad with no margin. Figure you pad that out to 10 km/sec DV from the pad, maybe 2km/sec per stage, so 5 stages. And .8t payload or so. That's going to be a big rocket. About a hundred ton launch vehicle with a Mainsail. You could probably get it up there for $50,000 or so. Best, -Slashy

That's about a .8t payload (give or take). My rough estimate is "no". I can work the math on it and give you a figure if you just really want to know. Best, -Slashy

That's self- evident. If you were able to see it, we wouldn't be having this discussion. How terrible that must be for you! It must be difficult to handle such wrenching disappointment, especially during the holidays! *Aaaanyway...* Back on topic. Yeah, the early contracts suck. But since you can get through the early career without them, it's not really a problem. By the time you actually need to take contracts, they'll be better. Best, -Slashy

After having made a bunch of passes through career, my opinion is that the Wheesley is dead in 1.05. Not because other engines are better, but because pure airplanes are pointless. On hard and modified careers where you are forced to build a plane, the Juno is adequate. For later career SSTO spaceplanes, the Wheesley is useless. It might be able to see some action in science mode, but I have yet to break the seal on it in sandbox. It would be nice if we had a reason to build bigger planes, but as of now we don't. *shrug* Best, -Slashy

Pecan, There is no contradiction there at all. There is no "mission generation system" in career. The player generates their own missions just like you do in sandbox, they just find ways to achieve them within the financial and technical constraints career mode imposes. Completing contracts is not required to beat career mode. At least not in the early game (which is what this discussion was originally about). Clearly, although I'd point out that being forced to operate within imposed constraints is more challenging. It certainly doesn't indicate a "lack of imagination" on my part. If there's anything I'm hung up on, it's that this thread has absolutely nothing to do with your opinion of career mode, who it's intended for, or how you prefer to play the game. You've bestowed upon us an opinion that nobody asked for, is completely off- topic, and is insulting to half the community. Best, -Slashy

True. I've often wondered why they never play test KSP with people who are actually good at it. Seems to me that'd be a good way to sort out the balance issues.

Sampa, I meant your adopted parents, not your biological parents. Although if you have the means to contact them, it would greatly simplify the whole matter. Still... I would definitely discuss it with the adopted parents first. Best, -Slashy

Absolutely. For example, executing a rendezvous with Minmus without patched conics.Rendezvous/ docking in low orbit without the benefit of target tracking. Do a low Munar flyby for science without solar panels or SAS. Moreover, the challenges of career mode are the type I'd be unlikely to consider when playing sandbox. "Return science from the Mun within this part count/ weight while using only these parts. Turn a profit, do it right the first time, and don't kill anyone". That's a pretty specific set of parameters for sandbox. There are some challenges you just have to run into before you would ever guess you'd need to be able to do them. I certainly have "lost" in the past. I learned from my mistakes and the experience of others. I would never have been able to get to this point by merely playing sandbox. Incorrect. As I said, the contracts are rarely required and completely unnecessary in early career. The point is to gather science and unlock the tech tree without going broke. I plan my missions to achieve this goal within the constraints of career, not just blindly execute contracts. When I execute contracts, that's merely to keep the lights on. *edit* I think this is where you're hung up. You presume that career mode is merely executing the contracts the game gins up for you. Not the case. You still have to devise/ plan/ and execute your own missions, same as sandbox. You just have to make it happen within whatever limitations career imposes or face bankruptcy. This requires more imagination, not less. Finally, something we agree on Best, -Slashy

^ This. You really have no idea how good you are at this game until you are forced to operate under adverse conditions. You may not even be aware that there are gaps in your knowledge and skills. Spacing is easy when you have unlimited access to all the best parts, full facilities, and a blank check to spend whatever you want. A true Kerbonaut can do it with rudimentary facilities, low tech parts, and actually turn a profit in the process. Doubly- so in hard mode, where costs are higher, rewards are reduced, and there are no quicksaves or reverts. Best, -Slashy

how do money, reputation and contracts not add complexity? They do. That's the point. In what way does an absence of manoeuvre nodes make KSP easier to learn? It doesn't, but learning how to operate without them can improve an experienced player's skills. What, exactly, is it that career mode offers to new players? Nothing useful, but the OP isn't a new player. What, if not money, reputation, contracts and exploding buildings, does it offer anyone? A challenge above and beyond what sandbox and science mode offer. An opportunity to "lose" by failing to achieve your goals. Some people enjoy that sort of thing (myself included). Best, -Slashy

The most efficient way to land is the Hohmann transfer/ constant altitude method. The easiest, safest, and most precise method is (IMO) the reverse gravity turn. Best, -Slashy

Foxster, This is a good outline of the design process. I have a couple more rules of thumb that should prove helpful: I design my upper "transstage" to orbit to have at least 0.7 t/w and 1,700 m/sec DV. No aerodynamic considerations are necessary for this stage and it uses a vacuum engine. If I have less than 1,000 m/sec to get to the next step, I fold that into this stage and crash it into the surface at the destination. If not, I jettison it when barely suborbital so that it won't be left as clutter. I always design my stages so that they don't get left floating around. The main criteria for this stage is "light" followed by "cheap". The lower "boost" stage is 1,800 m/sec DV and at least 1.4 t/w. This stage incorporates atmospheric engines and any control fins. 1,800 m/sec is the magic number here because that gets you to 30km altitude in a gravity turn, which is where aerodynamic stability is no longer important. The main criteria for this stage is "cheap", with "light" only coming into play when operating under a pad mass restriction. Best, -Slashy

I have a long laundry list of craft that were mangled by updates, and rightly so. Some were straight- up "cheaty", while others simply highlighted game engine imbalances that I believed needed eliminated. I don't lament their passing. They were examples of what was wrong in the old system. When 1.1 drops, I won't miss anything I've built up to this point. Onward to bigger and better things! Best, -Slashy

Pecan, I definitely don't agree with this... at least the second part. The OP has hundreds of hours in sandbox, but is a newbie at career mode. Career is definitely more challenging than sandbox, and I have a lot more fun playing it. I can do whatever I want in sandbox with no limits. Career imposes limits that take skill, experience, and yes, "imagination" to overcome. Unlike sandbox, it is *literally* a game that can be lost. I would not denigrate the people who enjoy it as "lacking" anything. Best, -Slashy

tater, I would expect a new player to make lots of mistakes. This is what separates them from veteran players, and why veteran players chime in and say "your life would be easier if you just ignore that for now". In your case, I can't speak to how well the stock contract/ reward system works for modified installs. I wouldn't expect it to be good for all foreseeable cases like yours. My advice is strictly for stock games with standard difficulty settings through "hard". Best, -Slashy

Frybert, You can actually pin now and move it later if need be. Best, -Slashy

Tater, Merely *doing* is sufficient to improve your rep and earn you funding. Trust me; no contracts are necessary until it's time to upgrade the facilities. Once you get to that point, the good contracts will be waiting for you. Best, -Slashy

It would, but there's not a whole lot you can accomplish for contracts in early career, and what you *can* do shouldn't pay well or else it will upset the game balance. Since you can get by (and even prosper) in early career without taking contracts, you're really better-off just ignoring them, especially when they're this crappy. Best, -Slashy

That is actually precisely the reason the Vector was made; a proper shuttle replica needs 3 Skippers for SSMEs, but the tank butts tend to stick out. The Vector was built with the intention of clustering for shuttles. It's a 2.5m engine with the (2.5m) tank butt removed. It's guts are supposed to be hidden inside the parent part. 1.0 shuttle. Note the protruding tank butts. 1.05 shuttle. Vector FTW. Best, -Slashy

I disagree. #1 you don't have to decline contracts and you really shouldn't (it's bad for your rep). Just let them expire. #2 as I said you don't need to accept *any* contracts to keep yourself funded in the early going. If you focus on collecting science and passing milestones, the money will work itself out. You will earn money far more quickly than you can spend it. For example, my normal "caveman" career had a half a million bucks in the bank by the time I was ready for facility upgrades. Never took any contracts or strategies. Same deal on hard mode, but a quarter million bucks. Best, -Slashy

Early career contracts are notoriously sucky. You simply don't have the capability to fulfill the better contracts yet and the ones you can do don't pay well. The good news is you don't need to accept *any* contracts until you are much further along if you do it right. Merely breaking records and achieving milestones is enough to keep you financed while you hoover up science and unlock tech. By the time you need to start looking at funding, you have much better contracts available. Rescues and satellites are my favorites. Satellites are highly lucrative, quick and easy. Rescues... you're basically getting paid handsomely to sign up experienced kerbonauts. Best, -Slashy

Interesting: So far there's nobody on the map who lives close to an actual launch facility. I would've expected at least a few. Best, -Slashy

^ I second this. You should discuss it with your parents. Not us and certainly not him. Having said that... I found out about a brother I never knew I had just a couple years ago (reverse situation from yours) and it turned out to be true. Even at my advanced age (get off mah lawn!) I still followed my father's lead on this one. Best, -Slashy

Actually, autonomous helicopters have been a thing for a while now. Best, -Slashy