AndyMt

This is so helpful! Thank you very much.

Come on guys - everyone shall use the mods he or she wants... I'll definetly use MechJeb in 1.2 when it is available again - just not for launches...

Thx :-). Yes, spare time is always an issue so I won't make any promises. If you like to help, just let me know.

A matter of personal taste maybe? Some consider it more efficient? And MechJeb is not ported to 1.2 yet. And recompiling that - I gave up on. Anyways: you don't have to use it .

I plan to look a bit more into this addon in the future and started a thread in the "Add-on Development" forum: GravityTurn continued Please comment there .

I've always been a fan of @Overengineer1's GravityTurn (see original thread). Unfortunately it wasn't updated for a while, so I thought to take care of that myself . Also thanks @sarbian for all the useful MechJeb code of which parts were/are incorparated into this plugin. So this is what it does: Launch a craft into a low orbit with a few customizable settings. Performing a Gravity Turn is arguably the most efficient launch procedure. The plugin will take care of the entire ascent for you by maintaining a strict hold to prograde (as much as possible) and varying the throttle to keep the desired ascent curvature. The circularization burn will be up to you, but it's normally less than 50 m/s. The "First Guess" button tries to find the best settings for a particular rocket. After the trajectory reaches the destination height and the vehicle leaves the atmosphere, you can revert back to launch and use the "Improve Guess" button to get a better set of parameters. Do this multiple times and you will get a very efficient launch. Download the mod here Source on GitHub License: GPL V3 V1.7.7: recompiled for KSP 1.4. ATTENTION: not compatible with 1.3.1 or earlier any more! Feature requests are welcome, but of course subject to spare time restrictions and personal taste... Disclaimers: This mod does not work well with Realism Overhaul because of the way GT uses engine throttling. For scaled up solar systems the calculated launch parameters (and iterations) might not be suitable, so don't expect it to work unless you know how to "guestimate" the parameters yourself. Next on the plan: Reworking UI Adding KSPedia support (maybe) Storing an loading a set of default launch parameters.

I've recompiled this mod for the 1.2 preview. There are quite some substantial changes I had to get around: Download I just did a very basic check and launched a basic rocket into orbit which worked well :). License: same as authors, GPL V3 I'll try to commit the changes to GitHub this weekend - in case anyone else wants to fiddle around with it.

@JSO: thanks a lot ! I'll update my Excel sheet accordingly.

Volume is pretty easy, you can calculate this based on dimensions. I would just substract 10-20% for structural things like bulkhead domes etc. But then you have to translate this into "Units" and there I don't recall the factors for LF and Ox. But I have an Excel sheet at home I used to do these calculations. I'll try to remember to post it this evening... As for the Mass: that's a bit more difficult. You can't just calculate this linear or quad or whatever. It depends on the construction of a tank IRL. But for the stock tanks that is not always the case, so dry mass sometimes is good and sometimes really bad compared to real life... In my Excel sheet I did some assumptions that resulted in similar figures if you enter the stock 1.25m tanks dimensions, but not for the 2.5m parts.

I'm more into rockets actually than spaceplanes. Spaceplanes look cool and are hard to engineer. And I must know - I've even 3D modelled and modded one... But I'm so bad at piloting that I've given up on them. My crash landing percentage is at about 90%. And it doesn't matter which flight simulator software I have used over the last 3 decades... So I stay with rockets... Regarding costs: I allow myself to use the "Stage Recovery" mod, which fixes the "bug" of the too small physics bubble and the inability to switch between vehicles inside the atmosphere properly. With stage recovery rockets can be almost as cost efficient as spaceplanes.

For me: achieving orbit with the 0.18 Demo - and bringing Jeb back unharmed. Then bought the game and continued with 0.24 and then it was: My first munar landing! One of my most rewarding moments in the last few years! Honestly!

Well - let me distinguish... needed: ModuleManager MechJeb (for dV and TWR calculations) Stock Bug Fixes (if needed) Appreciated but not mandatory: KIS Trajectories Nice-To have, because we will have 64-bit and better RAM usage: Scatterer Environment Visual Enhancements Ven's Revamp Lot's of other parts (finally)

A "lock this parameter" button at each (or some) of the values would really be nice. Specifically: - destination height - Sensitivity (I prefer not to throttle down too much). - Inclination - Roll The latest update is really fantastic! The learning system makes any launch extremely efficient. Even with the wierdest rocket designs.

Kind of... I just ordered the top-notch Surface Book. But of course not for the sole purpose of playing KSP. It will be good enough for KSP and with Unity 5 and KSP 1.1 it will be even better.

While we are talking about a space game, read this ;): [url]https://plus.google.com/+TheSpaceXFanClub/posts/bKzSoTimHEH[/url] So I just call it "Kerbal Space Program" :).

@Streetwind: I fully agree with your arguments about the differences in the tech tiers. We might also consider the costs of the engines, compared to their other stats. I can't check now, but I think the Vector engine is considerable more expensive than the ones it renders obsolete. A way to solve this could be to add more parts during progression with better stats, but otherwise using the same models/parts. This already happens with one of the probe cores if I remember correctly?

For me: - 1.875 m parts, including a 2 crew capsule - a 350kN engine for 1.25m - a smaller RCS block. The stock one is too big and powerful for 1.25m vessels. Other than that I'm very happy with what we have. Too many spaceplane parts for my taste, but I just don't use them, so no problem.

It's hard to explain... Each time this music starts playing when your vessel escapes the atmosphere... Little green aliens jumping around in their cute space-suits ... that's the moments I forget about real live and am in the middle of my dreams. Strange... I'm adicted to it and I know it - but I don't care.

I think I know exactly what you mean! Glad to hear it seems to help you with your situation, too! And be assured: the developlers will notice your post. I proudly admit: I' really moved by your words...

My very first Kerbal-Into-Orbit mission... I made it into orbit on the first try! I was so happy... only to discover that there was no dV left at all for de-orbiting. At the apoapsis I decoupled the upper stage retrograde... which brought periapsis down to 70'002 m! Just not enough! I almost wanted to "revert flight", but ... as it was a sandbox game back then (0.24?)... Jeb did an EVA and RCS'ing bumped into the pod as often as necessary to push the periapsis down to 69'something. And after a few weeks Jeb was back on Kerbin.

I actually like the form factor and the model side of the antennas. Just as some others I don't like the dark grey colour. Personally they seem just too dark, you won't see much of them while in space... Have a little shiny effect on the inside of the dish and make both sides lighter - the stick part as well. I'm fine with the orange/brown and red elements. We need some colour on the parts, otherwise our spaceships would just be shades of grey ...

I know these. But I don't expect them to work for a while in 1.1. Especially "Precise Node" as they redo the patched conics and orbital displays. Same for Trajectories - whichs latest version wasn't very accurate anyway. So I try to do everything in stock. But if Kerbal Engineer won't work, then I'll probably have to wait anyway. I'm just too lazy to calculate TWR and dV myself.

Abort action group? I use that one during "basic action group support" for deploing the fairings... And who needs escape towers? They just lower dV and TWR. So - my vehicles are Kerbal rated by default . Then I "simulate" ascents and landings using F5 and F9. Or in other words: I cheat.

I started a stock career 1 week ago. No mods except Kerbal Engineer for TWR and dV readings. For the very first time I fly all my maneuvers manually, including rendezvous and docking. Until now I often "cheated" with MJ for the fiddly stuff, although I always created my maneuver nodes myself. I am (was?) really bad at flying things. Improving this is a challenge, and not having the Corvus pod to have a scientist with me for restoring the materials bay and goo containers is really hard... By the time I will have done Duna and Eve, I hope 1.1 will be out. I do this to be prepared for 1.1, because almost no mods will work in the beginning. This way I will start a new career without being tempted to cheat...

I second that!