BillWiskins

Well, you might have to start being more specific... Here\'s the basics. 1. Build rocket. 2. Launch rocket. 3. At around 10-20,000m (varies dependant on craft, and these are not absolute limits) start to slowly pitch over to 90 degrees on the nav-ball. 4. When your AP reaches your desired height for orbit, cut throttle and coast to AP. 5. When you are almost at AP, burn to raise PE. Establish orbit. 6. When you see the Mun rise on the horizon ahead of you, full throttle. 7. When your AP reaches ~11,400,000, cut throttle. 8. Time warp to Mun intercept. 9. Burn retrograde at PE to prevent escape (assuming you find yourself with an escape trajectory, which is quite likely) 10. If you want an orbit, keep burning retrograde until you get one and then adjust it to your liking. 11. If not, burn to reduce lateral velocity and then make a powered descent. 12. Land. It won\'t win any prizes for accuracy or efficiency, but it should get you there.

Not sure what you mean by \'yawing in a weird way\' - are you using the nav-ball? All I can think of is that you\'re watching the ship itself - the controls are always accurate relative to the nav-ball but can seem \'off\' when looking at the ship - so use that for manoeuvres. There currently 46,448 tutorials on the subject of Mun landings with stock parts, and you will find them with a quick search (from the How To... board page) for \'Mun landing tutorial\' or similar.

If you attach the .craft file (it\'s in the folder KSP > Ships somewhere) then someone wise and knowledgeable will be able to make a clearer diagnosis. That\'s a heavy rocket, though. I\'d hazard a guess that the linkages between various engines have failed, and the engines have separated \'in place\' rather than actually broken.

The generally accepted method is to bank in the direction you wish to turn in, and then pull back on the stick (raise the nose (the \'S\' key, by default)). If your aircraft isn\'t handling smoothly, it\'s probably due to an imbalance or design flaw somewhere.

It might be an obvious suggestion, but: hit CAPSLOCK to enable precision mode if regular inputs are too much.

I don\'t think so. I\'ve been after an option like that as well - I even took a look in the part.cfg files to see if there was a parameter for that. Would certainly make things a lot easier, in certain construction situations.

I don\'t honestly think it needs it - never had any serious issues with this myself (well - not since I found out about PgUp and PgDn, anyway).

Yar, it is more the concept I was after as well, though I will not deny a certain desire for aesthetic similarity...

I tried to do this last night. It\'s probably unbalanced by the enormous rocket...with stock parts at least, I found it very difficult to accurately copy the design. A major issue for me was that, launching vertically, it was very difficult to balance the thrust (thrust from the shuttle versus thrust from the enormous rockets) to stay pointed skywards. It can be done, but getting it into orbit is a whole different bottle of cats. That\'s my guess. Post a few images or the .craft file and someone clevererer than me will be along shortly to tell you what\'s wrong.

Sadly, until some kind of brain hat interface is developed to enable the game to know what you want, you will have to use the WASDEQ keys. You can right-click and drag to move the camera, as well as the + and - keys to zoom, and the PgUp and PgDn keys to raise/lower the camera.

Edit: I believe this is known as being \'ninja\'d\'. Do you have control surfaces attached? It might sound like a stupid question, but I\'ve forgotten them a number of times (you see a wing, you assume it\'s all included...). Further to that, make sure it\'s not too heavy. Stability is helped by having the wings further back, behind the centre of gravity. It took me much, much longer than I expected to build a stable, reliable plane - but that\'s why this game is so great. You know it\'s possible, but the challenge is in figuring out how. My best advice is to get back in the space-plane hangar and get experimenting.

I have been working on making things a little more efficient, so I took a shot at this challenge. I have yet to try anything smaller (although clearly it can be easily done) but, bearing in mind that I used to use 10 extra LFTs and an additional LFE just to get to the Mun, I\'m pretty pleased. Clocks in at 28 parts, unless I\'ve missed something. The struts could probably be taken off, I reckon. I also make a humble request for extra credit for the fact that even though I knocked one landing leg off during landing, I was able to land with the remaining two anyway....

It\'s broken? I thought that was a feature, heh. Kind of a \'search all forums\', \'search this forum\', or \'search this particular thread\' sort of deal, depending on which level you\'re viewing at. Ah well

I find the easiest way to solve this complex task is to spend four seconds typing the phrase \'Mun tutorial\' into the Search field at the top of the page, or even use those eyes of yours to locate some of the fourteen thousand other threads with the same exact question as yours in the topic title. Honestly, I don\'t mean to be rude, but the answer to all of the questions you have and more are literally a few clicks away.

Do you mean the way in which you press \'S\' (theoretically, \'down\') to raise the nose of the thing you\'re flying? I think that\'s the norm for flight-based games, as it refers to the way that you pull back on a control stick in an aircraft to climb. Once you\'ve thought of it like that it makes the other configuration seem totally wrong (or it does to me... )

I think the Mun\'s sphere of influence is around 2,400,000m.

There are lots of guides and tutorials hanging around here, have a look back a few pages and you\'ll find about forty different \'getting to the Mun\' lessons. Quickly: did you fly straight up literally from the moment you launched? It can be done that way, but it is a lot easier to turn towards 90 degrees and park yourself in Kerbin orbit first, then shoot for the Mun when the time is right (if you burn prograde when you see the Mun rise over the horizon ahead of you, you\'re more or less guaranteed to intercept). I\'d say that mission you have there in the first pic is pretty much lost - unless you have a lot of fuel to rotate the orbital plane (just for a start). Come home, have a biscuit, and try again... In the second picture, you will meet the Mun eventually if there is some difference in your orbit compared to the Mun\'s - if your Pe or Ap are more or less than 11,400,000m you\'ll get within it\'s gravity at some point. Might want to time warp, because it will take a while. Also, pedantic note: you\'re not in Mun orbit - you\'re still orbiting Kerbin there, you just happen to have a similar orbit to the Mun. When you get near to the Mun, your orbit trace will change, and then you\'ll be in Munar orbit. Good luck..

I\'d guess that those stages contain parts that don\'t \'do\' anything when the stage is activated - things like struts, or fuel lines?

I think it\'s worth mentioning that for best results, remember to position the RCS thrusters on the ship so that their effect is balanced - for example, don\'t group them all at the top, or when you thrust sideways you\'ll give yourself a rotation force. But you knew that.

Well, there are some fine musicians hiding in here. That\'s a pleasant surprise. Mr \'Triassic\', I am a fan! I am, of course, a music person as well. And here is what you could call proof (or evidence against, depending on your tastes...): http://www.soundcloud.com/arthur-2 The first two tracks are very poor quality live rehearsal recordings from my band (me on drums, recorded on an ipod wrapped in a hat, not really for public consumption). The rest are pieces of nonsense I threw together with an old strat copy, an out-of-date Ableton Live and Guitar Rig 2... My instrument is drums, but I have been known to pick up a guitar (or a bass) when pushed. I had a kazoo, but it broke.

That is an interesting concept, but it would be very un-aerodynamic. It would also make the craft very unstable, unless you symmetrically mounted another little girl from the Exorcist on the other side, to balance it out. Kerbals

I\'m not familiar with the peculiar, alien land of Mac - but in my home town of Windows, you can open a part\'s .cfg file and edit the values using a basic word processing program like Notepad. I\'m guessing there is a Mac equivalent - but be warned, some programs are more likely to mess the file up and cause it to not work correctly, so back up the file first.

It took me almost four minutes of solid searching to find out what that \'hotlinking disabled\' .gif was, but yeah, that\'s about right. And it even works in the map view! It\'s saved a lot of tiny green virtual lives, that has.

Based on the fact that I posted it elsewhere and at least one person didn\'t know about it: Use [ and ] to cycle through orbiting or landed craft when focused on another orbiting or landed craft. This allows to to focus on (and End the flights of) debris, as well. Also, I did not discover this until recently: < and > switch between Time Acceleration modes (where available). And \'X\' kills the throttle. And you can mount decouplers on decouplers. Useful if your spent stages aren\'t clearing the rest of your rocket (and you can\'t/won\'t redesign it so it is BETTER). Or, you know, mounting things differently, ruining your thrust/weight ratio, or doing very silly things.

Ha, you are not wrong. I felt like throwing a street party when I found out that X cut the throttle.