Gaarst

1.0 mods are usually compatible with 1.0.1 and 1.0.2 patches. For older mods, most of them won't work, especially due to big parts of code in 1.0 being rewritten. If you try to use a, say 0.90, mod on your 1.0.x game, there is a vey small chance that it will work, but most of the time, effects will range from mod simply not working, to save/game getting corrupted in most extreme cases. If you're patient, then just wait for the mod authors to update their mods; if you absolutely need the mods, then download an older version of KSP and play on it (0.90 FAR and NEAR mods can enhance aerodynamics similarly to 1.0, if you want to keep that in a 0.90 game).

Try pressing V to switch between camera modes until you get to Auto again, it may reset camera settings

Press ALT and scroll in the other direction ?

First, welcome to the forums You can only refill a Kerbal's monoprop by entering a ship and you can only grab a Kerbal using the Klaw. If a Kerbal is stranded without monopropellant, try to move the ship to the Kerbal so that the ladder or command pod can be reached by the Kerbal unable to move (basically touch the Kerbal with the ship). If you're really desperate, using the debug menu (Alt + F12) and toggling infinite EVA monoprop might help you, although I'm not sure if it would still work with an empty jetpack.

A few hundred thousands depending on your computer. When outside physics range (22.5 km for atmospheric trajectories, 2 km for physical ship simulation) crafts are just points on a set orbit thanks to patched conics. Every crafts trajectory, when in tracking view for example, is just described by a conic equation and a fixed trajectory (on rails). Therefore they barely require any resources to be simulated and the game can manage a great number of ships easily. Your problem probably doesn't come from this.

There is no direct relationship between drag and position but one can be established related to height in idealised atmospheric models. For low speeds, drag depends on speed, fluid density and other constants as follows: D = 1/2 * p * A *Cx* V² A is the area exposed to airflow and Cx is the drag coefficient which depend on the ship itself and its orientation. It is very hard to determine precisely in KSP. V is the velocity relative to the fluid you're travelling into. p (rho actually) is the density of the air. It is related to height in static atmosphere as follows: p = P0 * e-z/H / (Rspec * T) P0 is the pressure asl (1013.25 hPa for Kerbin and Earth); z is the height above sea level; H is the pressure scale height which varies with temperature and therefore altitude but according to the wiki, for Kerbin: H = 5600 m; Rspec is the specific gas constant (287 J.kg-1.K-1 for Kerbin and Earth); T is the tempeature of air. TL;DR D(V,h) = A * V² * e-h/B with A and B approximately constants

Fuel tanks are excellent heat sinks as their thermal mass is very high: they can absorb a lot of heat without getting too hot. Smaller parts require less energy to increase in temperature so they will heat faster. A good way to manage heat is to put you engine right next to a big fuel tank (full is better) and add radiative parts (wing parts work well) if necessary.

Buy the science parts to get more science. You should then be able to make enough science staying around Kerbin to unlock bigger parts to explore Mun and Minmus and from then, you can complete the science tree without ever going out of the Kerbin system.

Inclination is the angle with Kerbin's equator. To get it set the Mun as target, as it has 0° inclination, then look at ascending/descending nodes in map view. To modify it simply burn normal or anti-normal (purple triangles on the navball) at these nodes (this get more complicated for high angles), this will modify your inclination but not the position of the nodes. Longitude of ascending node is the position of the ascending node on the orbit. It is hard to find as stock KSP doesn't show you your coordinates unless you're landed; but as Starhawk said if you match all the other requirements, it will be at the right place. Normally you should see the required orbit in map view which makes it easier to get to the orbit. First get an approximately round orbit, then match the inclination (and longitude of ascending node if you manipulates your inclination at the right place), then match apoapsis and periapsis.

Use science to unlock science to get more science. Unlocking the science parts will give you opportunity to get even more science using them. And you can almost complete the science tree without leaving the Kerbin system if you explore the different biomes of the Mun and Minmus and get science there.

Or you can download and install Deadly Reentry updated to 1.0.x

IMO, a slightly elliptical orbit is easier for docking as you can figure out Ap and Pe of target easily. For a refueling station, it depends on the ship you use to get to your destination: a lower orbit requires less delta-v to reach the station, but a higher orbit requires less delta-v after refueling. If you plan on using it for further destinations, I advise getting it into a lower orbit to have a less massive launcher, but use big tanks. You'll still have to keep a margin for rendez-vous manoeuvres (obviously docking a ship in a 70x70km orbit isn't easy). An orbit between 100 and 150 km should be fine, but it will also depend on your personal preferences (mine is in a 250x350km orbit which makes it easier for direct rendez-vous, without circularising first) Keep in mind that you can go almost anywhere and back without refueling and without huge ships (except for an Eve return mission and maybe Tylo). A mission to Minmus can easily be achieved without refueling as it requires about the same amount of delta-v as for the Mun. Something that will be useful for later missions to do is to get an orbital refueling station and ore extracting station at Minmus that will refuel big ships going to other planets. Any manoeuvre around Minmus requires few delta-v so moving large fuel/ore tanks around is very cheap in fuel.

Docking mode has been changed with 1.0, some keys now have two functions. There are two things you can do: 1- Try to remove double functions in the settings but I've heard it's not that simple (or go directly to settings.cfg) 2- Use the translating keys while in staging mode, default configuration is: I: translate up K: translate down J: translate left L: translate right H: translate forward N: translate backwards

Title says it, which one of your rockets will always keep a place in your heart ? Which one are you the proudest of ? Which one took you everywhere ? Which one was simply the best that you ever made, to your eyes ? Whatever it is, a 5000 ton lifter, a simple probe or even a plane; it doesn't have to be over-engineered, it can come from the depth of alpha KSP or from the brand new 1.0.x; just share your favorite rocket or plane (or rover, base...) and why you love it. (I apologise if there's already a similar thread somewhere in the forums) ---------------------------------------- I'll start with mine: BlackDog VI On the launchpad: Under the fairing: It is a medium interplanetary rocket coming straight out of 1.0.2 and it has already taken me everywhere, from Moho to Eeloo (and back). It sits 2 Kerbonauts, weighs 735 tons on the launchpad, is completely stock and costs only 276k kredits (I'm quite proud of this: twice cheaper than the previous ones), so it's not the biggest rocket ever, but is enough to plant a flag pretty much everywhere with no atmosphere (except for Tylo). Its name comes from the Led Zeppelin song "Black Dog", and most of my other rockets are named after rock or metal songs. So far, it took me to Vall, Moho, Dres, Gilly, Ike and Eeloo and one is on its way to Bop and Pol. I really like this rocket more than any other for mainly three reasons: 1- I think it looks really good, it could exist in the real world and take off from Earth. 2- My previous class of interplanetary rockets was a pain in the a** (not exagerating here) to fly: heavy, took ages to turn around and (really) liked exploding. On the other side, this one is extremely easy to fly around (though it may be because of 1.0 aerodynamics) and will not explode unless you crash in on the ground. 3- It is simple: a booster stage, 2 stages and the payload; no fancy clipping, 1 engine per stage / booster and that's it. It is not my first rocket, not my last, not the most advanced, not the biggest but my favorite by far.

This is strange, chutes shouldn't overheat with reentry, it usually works fine. Can you please post a screenshot of your capsule ? There may be some clipping that generates excessive drag and heat whatever entry profile you try, but that's rather unlikely.

Have you tried turning it off and on again ? (Seriously, I already had a similar thing, and the best way to fix it is to quit the game and launch it again, it may do the job)

It depends on the rockets you use to do it. You can always make several types of rocket and calculate the cost per ton of fuel to the station for each type, which will tell you which way is the cheapest.

Rovers are the best way to determine which between the centrifugal force and gravity is the strongest while trying to turn right angle at 20 m/s (FYI, centrifugal often wins)

This is my previous interplanetary rocket Dragonaut VI, weighing 1229 t on the launchpad, capable of orbiting 170 t to LKO: It never really flew for any mission because of 1.0. The previous model, Dragonaut V, was lighter (1135 t) and took me to Dres (and back) in 0.90; but this one suffered a lot from 1.0: Rhino was throttled down to 1 MN so TWR was <1 and I had to add 4 Kickbacks, aerodynamics forced me to add a heavy fairing, for some reason it became as controllable as a mountain, and clipping caused sudden and unexpected explosions of the rocket. (Note that Dragonaut V could put almost 200t to orbit without any radial boosters, in 0.90) Still, after quite a few failed tries, I managed to put it to orbit in 1.0.2 so it is the heaviest thing I've successfully launched and orbited. And it is completely stock and looks like a real rocket, not a huge pile of Kerbodyne S3-14400 like others

I'd say to land normally, your rocket facing upwards and letting it fall down to the side (using landing legs or RCS). And for take off, if your lander is not too heavy, use RCS to get it back up and take off normally. This would solve the problem of landing stability as you want to make your rocket fall down but at the same time, no radial engines needed outside RCS (most radial engines in KSP are bad anyways)

Practicing moon landing on Kerbin is a bad idea because gravity is 6 times stronger on Kerbin than on the Mun. You accelerate at a rate of ~10 m/s² on Kerbin which makes landings very delicate. Hovering won't work because you consume fuel with engines on. Suppose you get a TWR of 1.00 (hovering) on the Mun at a moment, then say 20 sec later, you lander will go upwards because of your TWR going up as fuel is consumed. Anyway hovering is extremely fuel inefficient and will waste huge amounts of fuel. The most fuel efficient technique to land on a body is called suicide burn (basically falling and full thrust right before landing to brake), but there's a reason why it's called that way. It is very difficult, requires practice and not recommended for your first landings. A good compromise is to let the ship fall and gain some velocity and brake every so often to maintain a reasonable speed of descent. Then when approaching the ground (you'll know using your shadow on the Mun, radar altitude in IVA or KER) brake to a few m/s to land softly and cut engines at touchdown to avoid bouncing. It may not be the most efficient way of landing, but it is rather easy and is what I used myself for early Mun landings without problems. If you're not confident with landing on the Mun, try landing on Minmus first: gravity is far weaker (1/20 of Kerbin's gravity) and it has huge flat regions at sea level (0 m on altimeter) which are easy to land on.

Are you in career mode ? If yes then some probes are not "advanced" enough to place manoeuvre node (like low-leveled pilots). You may also have to upgrade the tracking station to unlock patched conics (I think this should unlock nodes in career mode).

No, it won't if you cut thurst. If you keep controlling your ship, it will gradually cool down. If you go back to the KSC or to another ship, it won't explode and probably won't cool down either as ships are not simulated if you do not control them (and if you are far enough from them, a few km I think) Although, parts that have lower heat tolerance may explode even without thrust due to the heat being conducted inside the ship.

Can you please post a screenshot of your rocket ? Xkay7 is right, there are some serious clipping issues with service bays which can cause wobbling of the ship (or sudden disintegration if you're lucky). However, SAS has never been perfect, and tends to go crazy in some situations; here are a few common issues: - If the wobbling occurs when burning, reduce the gimbal of your engine(s) to 10-25% according to the "strength" of the wobbling. - If _____________________ you are using SAS on anything else than stability assist, go back to stability assist and move your ship around by yourself; other holds are less stable than stability assist for some obscure reason and are more likely to cause wobbling. - If _________________ even on stability assist, you probably have too much SAS devices on, thus creating a positive feedback (similar to the Larsen effect); I suggest deactivating a few SAS devices (reaction wheels or command pod torque). It may also be because of too much SAS torque too far from the CoM, then either deactivate some SAS devices or redesign your rocket. Hope this helps

I find the tricoupler actually pretty useful: you can fit 3 Mk2 sized tanks without clipping which works great with LV-N on a ship that is too light/small to use Mk3 sized tanks. It is actually the best way I found to make lighter ship efficient with LV-N: I get >8000 m/s of delta-v on a 30t ship, the 6 Mk2 jet fuel tanks weigh approximately the same as 1 Rockomax X200-32 and 1 X200-16 which give me only 5000 m/s of delta-v