GoSlash27

I can't speak for anyone else, but I use "obsolete" parts pretty frequently in late career. There aren't very many parts that I would consider useless. Best, -Slashy

It's career for me, with some use of sandbox for R&D purposes. I like the challenge of operating within a budget and using limited parts. Best, -Slashy

wumpus, Actually, I started KSP with the .18 demo myself and (as you point out) I *was* hooked. But even then it was about the math for me, including the DV. I walked through NASA's learning curve using a slide rule and a crash- course in rudimentary astrophysics and aerospace engineering, I learned how to orbit and recover safely, then how to intercept and rendezvous (no docking in the demo version), and then finally a full round trip to the Mun. I bought the full version the next day. None of that has changed for me since then, there's just a whole lot more places to go, things to do, and challenges to overcome. I still plan out my missions and engineer my ships same as I always have... although these days I use spreadsheets instead of a slide rule. KSP is still the same as it has always been, there's just more of it. You are always free to play it how you enjoy it most, and that's what I do. Best, -Slashy

jakeb1993, Congratulations! We knew you could do it! For future reference, Hodari had it exactly right. Do everything he said and just let the docking ports drift together at .2 m/sec. Best, -Slashy

It's got a twelve hundred kilonewton plant. NASA guidance, NASA struts, and NASA fins, and it was made before cryo fuels so it runs good on JP-1. -Elwood Kerman

Hi there Jeb what you say? Step aside Kraken it's my day Bend an ear and listen to my version... Of a 1.1 KSP excursion!

After a little google- fu, I think I understand now how this is happening. The trick seems to be doing everything "wrong" to avoid sleep paralysis. 1) Wake up in the middle of the night. I have problems sleeping through the night anyway, but I suppose a very gentle alarm would suffice if you don't have this problem. 2) Get up and drink a glass of water, but do not turn on any lights. Go back to bed immediately while you're still groggy. 3) Lie on your back and focus on your breathing. This should increase your odds of having an episode of sleep paralysis. The sleep paralysis is key (at least for me). It is terrifying at first, and you keep fighting to "wake up" because you think somebody is watching you, you can't speak, you can't move. You're having hallucinations. You're hearing/ seeing things that aren't there. It's very unpleasant, but after waking yourself up over and over, you will eventually learn that there is no threat because "you're asleep right now and dreaming this". That realization that you are asleep is what kicks off the lucid dream. It will stay with you when you allow yourself to "fall" into REM dreaming. You will be aware that you are dreaming throughout the entire dream and will vividly remember everything that transpires in the dream upon waking. In my case, I would be in a lucid dream and it would never occur to me that I could control what happens, but I guess it's also just a matter of repetition. Eventually the sleep paralysis became a sign of good news. I would simply think "I'm asleep right now. All I have to do is let myself fall into this dream and I can do whatever I want because it's my dream" and then that realization would stay with me as well throughout. So now I can dream lucidly with full control... so long as I have a sleep paralysis episode. HTHs, -Slashy

I haven't had very many lucid dreams, but every time I have it has been concurrent with night terrors. This is where I'm paralyzed and having auditory hallucinations like somebody's in my house and there's a panicky urge to wake up. The trick for me was realizing that I was in a dream state and to just relax and go with it. I would then dream with the full realization that I was dreaming, and wake up with full recollection of everything that had "happened". Just recently I have started to remember that I have full control because it's my dream and can therefore do whatever I want. Those dreams are *really* fun I haven't yet learned how to reliably induce that "night terror" state and I don't have lucid dreams without it. Best, -Slashy

I already do know That's why I said you lost the argument. Explanatory PM inbound so as not to give it away...

Haha You lose the argument "We'll take Bob's ship, go to the KSC, kill the kraken (sorry!), Pick up Bill, go to the inland space center, knock back some snacks and wait for all this to blow over. How's *that* for a slice of fried gold? -Shaun Kerman

Don't forget to clean up the monkey poo before you sit down!

Oh, yeah (derp) I was going to calculate out the DV for the high eccentricity departure, and realized I didn't actually have to! The first burn is 270 m/sec from low Munar orbit to get a 70 km periapsis over Kerbin. When you arrive at periapsis, you have 860 m/sec of "free" DV (the amount it would take to get a Munar intercept), so this can be subtracted from the total DV to Moho from LKO of 1,710 m/sec. Therefore total DV for this maneuver would be 1,710-860+270= 1,120 m/sec.

You definitely want to leave the pressure settings at the absolute minimum for Duna (.04 for mains, .02 for drogue chutes). These correspond to altitudes of 2.9 km and 6.9 km (respectively) on Duna. Remember that they will only create 1/15 the drag you would expect on Kerbin and the speed limits for safe deployment still apply. Good luck! -Slashy

Another option: A Hohmann transfer from low Munar orbit to Moho should only cost 1,535 m/sec instead of the usual 1,710. It's not much in the way of savings, but it's something. You could probably save even more by escaping Mun to swing low by Kerbin before departing, but I haven't calculated that. Best, -Slashy

6.5 out of 10. His "little friend" is little.

Jordan Kerman tries to launch her spaceplane. It careens off the runway and flips over. Mitch Kerman: (helps her up) Are you okay? Jordan: (throws helmet) No, not emotionally no I'm not I'm disappointed not terribly, but still... It should've gone much further, much faster! It's okay though I know what the problem is it's obviously the mirror symmetry I'll just have to redesign the gear I can do that no problem. I can do it here. But after the redesign I'll have to place them and that takes the offset tool and time. Do you know how much longer this transfer window is supposed to last? Ick Kerman: Maybe another half an hour. Jordan: (claps hands excitedly) Oh, that's great that's good I can do that no problem. Okay, what's your name? Mitch: (laughs nervously) Uhh..Mitch... Jordan: Oh okay well thank you for your help Mitch I'll see you later then (hurriedly shoves her spaceplane back towards the VAB) Mitch: (shouts to her) You're welcome! (turns to Ick) Who was that? Ick: That? Oh, that was... Jordan: (running back to them) I'm Jordan! I forgot to tell you my name I'm Jordan. I heard there was going to be a new Kerbonaut are you it? Mitch: (laughing) Yes. Jordan: Oh... Do you have a suit? Mitch: (confused) Yeah... Jordan: Oh I was gonna make you one if you didn't have one but you have one okay I'll see you later okay bye! (runs off again)

Absolutely, this. It's very gratifying to plan an entire mission on the back of the envelope, design the vehicle to the requirement of the plan, and then have the whole mission work out the way you expected it. KSP is sneaky like that; if you don't keep an eye on it it will teach you rocket science -Slashy

Actually, I did both. Calculated it and then executed it to make sure I wasn't nuts. Best, -Slashy

Adding on to this, going direct from one moon to another can save even more fuel, For instance, I can go from Mun to Ike and back for just a little over half the DV the maps suggest. But of course there's not an easy way to put that into a map... Best, -Slashy

Okay, so what I get from the OP is this: Too much focus on hardware and techniques, not enough focus on exploration. I think this is a fair charge... I work around it by staying within the "career" framework. Exploring the system is easy in sandbox. It's more difficult when you try to do it on a budget with a limited set of parts. Best, -Slashy

Judging by the pic, there are a few potential problems: 1) The main landing gear may be too far behind the center of mass. This means your canards are inadequate to get the nose to rotate before you run out of runway. 2) The center of lift is too far behind the center of mass. The plane will just want to lawn- dart. 3) You haven't rotated the wings to provide incidence. The plane won't fly at such low speeds until you get the nose up... which you can't do. 4) Insufficient wing area. The plane won't be able to fly until you reach a much higher speed than you can attain in the distance of the runway. HTHs, -Slashy

This question can be answered mathematically. A single NERV can generate 60kN of thrust, which can accelerate 60/9.81= 6.12 tonnes of mass at 1G acceleration, or 30.6 tonnes at .2G If your target DV is 10 km/sec, then you can plug this into the reverse rocket equation. Rwd= e^(DV/g0Isp) Rwd= e^(10,000/9.81*800) Rwd= 3.58 So the ship will weigh 3.58 times it's empty weight when loaded with fuel Converting this to fuel fraction Ff= (Rwd-1)/Rwd Ff=.721 The fuel mass will be 72.1% of the total mass of the ship The fuel tanks weigh 1/8 the mass of the fuel, so .721/8=..0901 The tanks weigh 9.01% of the total mass of the ship. Fuel plus tanks is 81.1% of the total ship mass .811*30.6 tonnes = 24.8 tonnes of tanks and fuel And the engine weighs 3 tonnes. Payload mass is total mass minus engines, fuel, and tankage. 30.6-24.8-3= 2.8 tonnes. So a single NERV can impart a DV of 10 km/sec to a 2.8 tonne payload at .2G acceleration using 24.8 tonnes of loaded fuel tanks. You can scale this linearly for whatever payload you need to move. 2 engines can move 5.6 tonnes of payload with 49.6 tonnes of fuel and tankage, and so on. HTHs, -Slashy

Kyrt Malthorn, Thanks, that's very kind of you! Be sure to check out this thread also: This has practical examples of using the reverse rocket equation, as well as incorporating thrust to weight ratio in the design process. Good luck! -Slashy

Kyrt Malthorn, The formula using KSP stats: DV = g0*Isp*ln(Mw/Md) where DV= change in velocity in m/sec g0 = approx. 9.81 m/sec2 Isp = specific impulse in seconds Mw = Mass in tonnes at the beginning of the burn Md = Mass in tonnes at the end of the burn. During the design process, I reorganize the equation to solve for Mw/Md; the "wet-to-dry ratio", or Rwd Rwd= e(DV/g0Isp) Best, -Slashy

Sqrt(-1). Master Chief approves.