ElWanderer

I think the first is the launch rail, not the spin stabilisation. Scott Manley mentioned the Japanese rocket in his kOS video, but I don't know if he named it.

Do you have any mods installed e.g. RemoteTech?

Aye, in science mode you don't have to fund your programme via contracts, so usually the quickest way to progress through the science tree is to prioritise the nodes in the bottom branches that unlock new science parts. That way you don't have to repeat missions just to run a new experiment. It's handy to have as many science parts as you can before you land on the Mun and Minmus. You don't have to go all-out, though. As suggested, it depends what you want to do next. There's plenty of science to be had in the system, so feel free to unlock whichever parts interest you the most.

A prograde orbit is in the same direction as the rotation of the parent body. A retrograde orbit is in the opposite direction.

Good: you have an encounter with the Mun Bad: I don't see a periapsis at the Mun, implying you would be on a collision course if you burn accurately. Bad: You have two manoeuvres plotted (not necessarily a bad thing), the second of which alters your course a lot more than your typical mid-course correction. This will use up more fuel than a single manoeuvre in low Kerbin orbit. It is also more awkward - small inaccuracies in your first burn can have a big effect on your orbital track by the time you reach the second node. Fixes: Right-click on the second node and delete it. Select the first node and add more prograde until your apoapsis is about 12Mm. Then click-hold on the middle of the node and drag it back and forth around your orbit until you get an encounter. Alternatively, adjust your second node until your orbital track near the Mun shows a periapsis. I don't know what adjustments you need, but try more prograde first.

According to my notebook of transfers calculated by myself (assuming 25km prograde equatorial orbit around Minmus) for playing around with kOS automated transfers: Phase angle: -151.3 degrees (may be a bit of a wait, especially if you want to be at a node at the same time) Delta-v: 79.7m/s Ejection angle: 135 degrees to retrograde Transfer time: 74 hours Going the other way is awkward as the ejection angle calculation I use throws an error - to get to Minmus you don't need to enter a hyperbolic escape orbit of the Mun. I get a 200m/s burn when the phase angle is 90 degrees. The online transfer planners should give you a whole range of options. I can't remember if Alexmoon's site will do Minmus-Mun transfers, but try there first.

Are you still focused on Kerbin? I think the view has to be focused on the appropriate body (the Sun in this case) to see contract locations/orbits.

I'm pretty sure it's Kerbal Alarm Clock that has the option of killing time warp on killing the throttle (x key). It doesn't take into account that you might not have any time warp going. You should be able to turn it off in the KAC settings if it is annoying. To add to the above (that you can't see the trim if someone or something is making control inputs e.g. if Mechjeb is flying) do you have a joystick or other flight controller that might not be centred properly? Random thought: can Mechjeb adjust the trim itself?

For me, Kerbol : Cur boll, to rhyme with Sol Kerbal : Cur bull, to rhyme with herbal

To be pedantic, I shouldn't have said the orbital velocity wouldn't change as that is a vector. If you burn to normal, the orbital speed (magnitude of velocity) won't change but the velocity vector will, as you will be going in a slightly different direction (i.e. you've changed inclination). If you burn, you will change your velocity! Steering losses don't mean your burns are having no/reduced effect, it's that you will end up spending more delta-v than necessary to end up in the final orbit.

10m/s per second. If you're pointing to normal, you're not increasing or decreasing your orbital velocity. Not at first, anyway (a large enough burn will pull your orbit around and change the angle). But if you're pointing to normal that's likely to be deliberate (i.e. to change inclination) so it's not really a steering loss. If you were to launch vertically and keep going up until above the atmosphere, then pitch-over 90 degrees, that would count as steering losses. They would be significant as it's a really inefficient way to reach orbit.

That says Isp 421s for the second and third stages. It also says Isp (sl): 200s, but the sea-level Isp is fairly meaningless considering the altitude at which those stages were ignited.

Gah I read a 5 as an 8. Plus I can't seem to type and edit on this tablet very well. The BBC say the investigators won't start looking at the flaperon until Wednesday. Guess there isn't really a great rush at this point.

I've not seen that reported, yet. Meanwhile the BBC have announced the discovery of a second potential piece of the plane - a door. The Telegraph had an interesting interview with one of the beachcombers, where he said all kinds of stuff had washed up recently, including suitcases and a seat, and he had burnt it (as his task is to keep the beach clear) so valuable evidence may have been lost. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/mh370/11777921/MH370-Plane-seat-found-washed-up-on-Reunion-Island-three-months-ago.html Edit: ninjas by Camacha's edit.

I've seen this done as a party trick at festivals. Put a tea light (a very small candle in a metal holder) on the camp fire, wait for it to heat up, then tip a bit of beverage onto it... and whoooomph. And then try not to look too guilty when security wander over and ask what you just did. I had never really wondered what the cause of the jet of flame was before. The Wikipedia page on Boilover links to this, which has a video clip (gif I presume) : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wax_fire

Quoth wikipedia: "Note that there are two standard methods of specifying [axial] tilt. The International Astronomical Union (IAU) defines the north pole of a planet as that which lies on the north side (defined by Earth's north pole) of the invariable plane of the Solar System; under this system Venus' tilt is 3°, it rotates retrograde, and the right hand rule does not apply. NASA defines the north pole with the right hand rule, as above; under this system, Venus is tilted 177° ("upside down") and rotates direct. The results are equivalent and neither system is more correct." (the right-hand rule is as per ZetaX's description, as I understand it)

http://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/Key_bindings The usual mappings are: H - translate forwards N - translate backwards How do you mean I,J,K etc. don't work? They should translate you up, left, down etc.

Hail pixelated Hydra! Will there be anything more detailed in the full dataset (I'm watching with the sound off)?

The BBC live update page is teasing, saying that the first images processed from the flyby are "spectacular" (according to the scientists). Three hours until the news conference where they're expected to be shown.

I wonder if anyone is printing I <3 Pluto t-shirts... Under half an hour to closest approachype.

On my second mission to Jool, I landed successfully on Tylo at the first attempt. Intact. With plenty enough fuel to reach orbit again. I sat back more in shock than anything else! (my first mission to Jool had many, many reloads before I landed on Tylo in one piece. Back then I didn't know about the constant altitude landing technique)

Are these all happening to the same ship design or lots of different ones? If it happens to multiple ships with no design elements in common it's unlikely to be part clipping. All I can think of is a badly-behaved input device or mod.

RCS thrusters output a lot less when in fine control mode (I.e. hit caps lock). If you have four 4-way blocks you can right-click disable two of them, assuming you only need translate forward/backwards. Mounting an ant or two spiders and limiting the thrust to 5% (I think that's the minimum) may allow for even finer control, though I've not tried it.

By take control do you mean you're right-clicking and choosing "control from here"? That only works for parts on the current craft so if you've separated/undocked, you won't get the same results for clicking on parts on the other craft. Do you know about using the [ and ] keys to switch between nearby vessels? A picture or a more detailed description might help if the problem is something else.

One possibility: In orbit, your craft face the same the direction relative to the universe, which means they rotate around relative to Kerbin (or whatever else you're docking in orbit of). For example, if you're pointed prograde at one point, half an orbit later you'll be facing retrograde. This can mean you end up having to make lots of small corrections as you try to dock. The usual suggestion is to point your crafts' ports at the normal and anti-normal directions (e.g. North and South if in an equatorial orbit) as there is no rotation in that plane - the docking ports will keep facing the same way.