Wanderfound

Fortunately, smaller rockets are easier to spin. Get up some rifle-bullet grade RPM and it's all smooth.

Stock aero is terrible (to me, in my personal subjective opinion) compared to FAR, and, yes, reality. I know what real planes look like. I had a basic idea of why they had tailfins and ailerons and things (that basic idea is now a lot less basic, thanks to my experience with the modded game). So, when I started designing, I built things that looked like real planes. They flew okay, because just about anything will fly in stock aero. But it didn't feel like flying a plane. They took forever to climb or get up to speed, glided like bricks and gripped the air as if were made of toffee. Air is fast, air is slippery; none of these sensations came through the game. Flying them to orbit and back just wasn't much fun. And then I discovered that to make them perform better, or to get larger planes off the ground at all, I'd be best off turning it into a ridiculous looking Christmas tree of parts rather than try to learn how to construct something sensible. And then I discovered FAR. Never flying stock again.

None of the options provided. Instrumentation. We need to be able to see what we're doing. Something equivalent to Kerbal Flight Data. Ideally, we'd get a stockified Raster Prop Monitor​ as well.

Not really a problem if you keep them off unless required; it only takes a few seconds of vectored thrust to correct a spin.

A old saying about workmen, tools and blame comes to mind here. It really isn't that difficult to fly without SAS; you just need to build your rocket accordingly, and be a bit conservative in your manouvres. Try it; you may find that you enjoy the challenge. And, as a bonus, once you get the hang of it you can then start sending your engineers and scientists up for solo training flights without excessive risk. One atmospheric and one suborbital hop is enough to get them levelled up; very little piloting skill is required to go straight up and down.

At least a part of this is based on players thinking that they need all the building upgrades when they really don't. Going to the Mun with all buildings still at base level is quite simple; just use the old "burn at Munrise" trick, and cut thrust when your apoapsis hits Munar altitude. Patched conics displays are a luxury, not a necessity. The most limiting initial building restrictions to me are the 18t Launchpad weight limit (which is plenty enough for a Munar flyby, but is a bit tight for a land & return mission), the EVA ban from the basic Astronaut Complex, and the 2-contract limit from Mission Control. Those are the only buildings that I've bothered to upgrade so far.

Have a look at post #2 in the Kerbodyne thread linked below, and/or have a listen to the landing tutorial I did for episode #27 of the Kerbal Podcast: http://kerbalpodcast.libsyn.com/webpage/2014/11/19 You can also see a landing demonstration (along with other things) in this illustrated tutorial: http://s1378.photobucket.com/user/craigmotbey/Kerbal/Tutorials/Hangar%20to%20Landing/story The basic trick is to get low and slow as early as you can, and come in as shallow as possible.

I wouldn't mind seeing some more two-Kerbal capsules, but I've also been having fun with non-pilots in the hot seat. Bill and Bob can go to orbit on their own; it just takes a bit more piloting on the part of the player. Tailfins are helpful (in FAR, anyway; no idea about soupmosphere flying) and spin stabilisation works. SAS is a luxury that you can learn to do without.

Although you seem to be of the view that realism is irrelevant, you must be aware that this is very much not a universally held opinion. The relatively realistic nature of KSP is what drew me to the game; if it wasn't there, I wouldn't play. I don't play any computer games apart from KSP (been a committed gamer for 30+ years, but my preferences run mostly to tabletop gaming), and I have no interest in physics-free space-themed fantasy. I have no problem with continuing to include low-realism options in the game for those that want them, but if they were the only option available I would rapidly abandon the game. All of the above.

Everyone does it at least once.

Also keep in mind that the tiny weight of a minimal satellite makes ÃŽâ€V very cheap. A lightweight sat can reach escape velocity from LKO off just a single FL-R10 monoprop tank.

Supported. I don't see any good reason not to include low-tech plane parts. The game can handle it easily, so why not?

The most common cause of this problem is that you've got the orbit correct, but going in the opposite direction to what was required.

I just used a Stayputnik probe to do the first Mun orbit in my new career save. What would normally be a boring grindy milk-run mission for me was instead quite a lot of fun. Just whack some fins on the tail of the main booster for atmospheric stability, then rely on spin stabilisation for the transfer burn. I've also been sending Bill and Bob up on solo flights occasionally for training purposes. SAS is nice, but it's not necessary. The new Stayputnik is a major improvement, IMO.

I'd also suggest having a word to Arsonide on the Fine Print thread. Not for lights, but for missions: he's still working on further contract expansion mods, and an emergency/rescue (or even International Rescue; Thunderbirds are Go...) mission pack is an obvious direction to go.

The horribleness of the soupmosphere is my main reason for using FAR, but the nerfed jets are another selling point to me. Simply packing more conventional jets onto an airplane will not make it go further into the hypersonic, in reality or in FAR. Turbojets just don't work like that. This is how it should be, IMO. Despite the massive nerf from stock, it is still extremely easy to take a FAR spaceplane to orbit and beyond (a long way beyond; I can do KSC-Duna-KSC without even pausing to refuel). Mostly, this just illustrates how insanely overpowered jets are in stock. That is not accurate. I fly by keyboard, I fly FAR spaceplanes almost exclusively, and I never use any of the FAR assistance toggles. They are not at all necessary.

For the brute-force option: Vernors. Stick a couple either side of the nose and tail, and keep 'em turned off until you need them.

Craft file at http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/90747-Kerbodyne-SSTO-Division-Omnibus-Thread?p=1610271&viewfull=1#post1610271

For ultralight probes and satellites, lately I've been using the little monoprop engines. There's a surprising amount of kick in those things.

1) The "small SAS" is no such thing. It's a reaction wheel; it provides torque, not SAS. 2) You do need some torque, though, and the Stayputnik hs none. So, yeah, add the small reaction wheel or some RCS. 3) Although it's nice to have, you don't need SAS. Keep it on target manually. Spin stabilisation can be helpful.

1) Deorbit burn, set your periapsis to about 20km, above the continent to the west of the one that KSC is on. 2) Use your wings to arrest your descent and transfer into controlled level flight as soon as you can. 3) Descend to about 30,000m. The lower you go, the faster you slow, but go too low and you'll fry. The Kerbal Flight Data mod is very useful for temperature monitoring. 4) Wait until drag pulls your speed down to about 1,500m/s. 5) Gradually descend further as you slow, keeping just above burn-up altitude. 6) Once you're down to 1,000m/s or so, begin S-turns to scrub the remaining speed. See post #2 in the Kerbodyne thread linked below for more detail.

Probes are good: they're cheap, light and expendable. You can send a probe a very long way for very little fuel when the payload is only a few hundred kilograms. Plonk a probe core and a small amount of science gear on top of a 1.25m fuel tank and an LV-909, and you can send it anywhere in the Kerbol system for under √20,000. Use SRBs or a spaceplane to get it to orbit, then fire it off when an approximate transfer window appears. The actual interplanetary burn requires less ÃŽâ€V than the initial climb to orbit. I use the Mechjeb porkchop plots myself, but if you insist on playing unmodded, http://alexmoon.github.io/ksp/ is very useful. Going interplanetary isn't significantly different from going to the Mun; the key difference is that the orbital hub you're doing your Hohmann transfer around is Kerbol instead of Kerbin. So, if you're dropping down to an inner planet (e.g. Moho) you want to burn on the Kerbol side of Kerbin, thrusting retrograde relative to Kerbin's orbital path; if you're heading to an outer planet (e.g. Jool), you want your exit burn on the dark side of Kerbin, accelerating along Kerbin's orbital path. The main key is just to minimise your payload. Kilograms on the top of the rocket can save tons at the bottom.

Alternately: use your mousewheel to zoom in. It is possible to zoom inside a part, and then select something that you've clipped into it.

The Environmental Visual Enhancements mod.

I had some Mk3 cargo bay textures disappear recently; they reappeared when I removed E.V.E..