Gaarst

Laythe still has a dense high atmosphere, so this is not 100% safe either. Best thing to do is use Tylo (or Laythe/Vall, but they are less massive) to do a gravity assist that will put you in orbit around Jool. That requires a bit of tweaking at your initial burn though.

Wishing myself for a big power up or a bigger dual-mode engine. Trying to make at least a suborbital spaceplane in RSS is not easy with the current engines available (design based on Skylon, which uses SABRE engines having >2MN thrust)

1.39 GB (1430 MB) for my RSS game, 1.36 GB for my main ~15-mods game. A bit high, isn't it ?

Interesting, very interesting...

+1 on this. Also, I don't know if that's possible with the current format/engine/whatever-shapes-the-forums, but a quick way to filter threads by tag (without going to advanced search) would be really useful ! If that's already possible, please help me cure my ignorance

Putting 100t of raw materials in several launches or 100t of spacecraft in one launch to orbit is not that different: payload fraction is about the same for any launcher mass (something <5% for LEO) so launching many rockets instead of one is not really better. Also, as said above, it is way easier and cheaper to orbit a craft assembled on the ground than to assemble a craft in orbit.

Terriers have terrible Isp asl. In other words, they produce very low thurst in low atmosphere. Your TWR of 1.2 was probably predicted for vacuum use, and therefore completely false for atmospheric use. EDIT: ninja'd

Any tips on a decent laptop for a budget of up to €800/£600/$900 ? Kinda getting more and more annoyed by my current cr*ppy 4-year old laptop...

Don't lie, your Dres landing you used to fake the Mun landing was itself faked on Moho !

I don't know much about this engine's Isp, but if it's Isp asl is not too bad, its high thrust and reduced size would make it a pretty good Eve ascent engine, IMO. Although it might be a bit heavy, almost 4t for a 1.25m engine is a bit high...

If you're not afraid of challenges, I'd suggest Real Solar System and RSS Planets and Moons Expanded. But, seeing you're new to the game, that might not be the most appropriate for you Anyway, take a look here, in the "Universe/Planet Alterations" section. It gives you a few mods which change the Kerbin system. If your current mods are not working, make sure you have installed the Kopernicus mod, most of solar system modifying mods (if not all) require it, and some do not have it included, so you have to download it by yourself. EDIT: after a quick check, NH requires Kopernicus and it is not included in the mod files, so you do have to download it yourself. Also, I couldn't find anything related to Planet Factory less than 2 years old, so the mod is most likely outdated and dead; please put the link from where you found this mod.

You do know the distance between the Earth and Mars is not constant right ?

Chutes deployment mechanics have been changed with 1.0.x versions. In Beta, defalut setting for parachute full deployment was 500m above the ground, and the deployment speed of the parachute was high enough for it to deploy and slow down the craft in those 500m. With 1.0 though, deployment is slower so default setting was raised to 1km high, so that the parachute would have time to deploy and slow down your craft. When you create a new parachute in the VAB/SPH in 1.0.4, it automatically has a deployment altitude of 1km. The thing is, if you're importing a craft from Beta (copy/paste the .craft file or save folder), the parachutes will keep their old 500m height and therefore will not slow down your craft enough and will lead to a tragic end for your crew. So even if you didn't change the settings from your old craft, the chutes can be faulty.

Probably not a lot higher than your average PC, since KSP doesn't support multi-threads or multi-cores (I can't remember which) and supercomputers are basically hundreds of really powerful 8-cores (mostly) CPU. Though this should change with Unity 5, as I heard it would enable multi-whatever support for KSP. Don't quote me on that, I have close to no idea what I'm talking about...

Je parle de clipping, j'avais un design de rover lunaire avec un siège, mais même en utilisant le "offset", soit il clippait par le haut ou le bas dans la service bay, et le Kraken passait dire bonjour, soit je remontais mes roues et j'avais une garde au sol de F1, ce qui est pas très pratique quand tu traverses des cratères lunaires Au final, j'ai décidé que marcher un peu ferait pas de mal àmes kerbonautes.

At this point, I think you'd be better off with a ladder to space...

De manière générale, les contrats, stocks ou non, ont toujours du mal avec les véhicules qui s'amarrent ou se détachent, et ce pas seulement avec des rovers moddés... Aussi, d'après tes images, le contrat ne mentionne pas explicitement d’intégrer des expériences spécifiques donc ça ne devrait pas être ça le problème. J'ai 3 idées (j’appellerais pas ça des solutions) pour t'aider: 1- Vérifie que le RoveMate soit bien la "root part" de ta fusée. Sinon, utilise l'outil "root" du VAB (touche 4), clique sur une partie au pif de ta fusée, puis clique ànouveau sur le RoveMate. Quand tu bouge le RoveMate ça devrait bouger toute la fusée. 2- Essaie de mettre un decoupler pour détacher ton rover au lieu d'un docking port (Jr ou pas), le jeu devrait pas considérer que tu changes de véhicule. 3- Triche, et change la catégorie ton atterrisseur en rover sans sortir ni séparer le rover. Vu que ya des roues et tout, ça devrait passer. BTW, mettre un rover dans une service bay c'est très, très périlleux: j'ai moi même perdu pas mal de fusées àcause de ça (sans compter le nombre de crashes du jeu)

Ion engines have an Isp asl of 100 (at Kerbin) and, if I remember well, solar panels are terrible inside Eve's atmosphere and do not like being moved around in atmosphere. So I guess you'll have to look aroung for mods to do the job, there probably are quite a few out there offering what you wish for.

My lunar rocket (yes, lunar) "Alba", weighing 3297t on the launchpad, using 5m parts, courtesy of SpaceY:

What are you calling "freaking slow" ? If it's a loading time of a few minutes, it is (somewhat) normal in lower-end PCs, talking from experience here.

Ou sinon, pour la lancer, tu le fais Energia/Bourane-style: tu fais une énorme fusée, et tu attaches ta navette a l'arrache avec 3 boulons sur un côté (ou comme la navette américaine aussi... ). Blague a part, vu la taille et la masse supposée du CRV, ça m'a pas l'air dur de le lancer comme une des 2 navettes IRL: il va a priori pas trop déséquilibrer le lanceur.

First, welcome to the forums ! Then, seeing your screenshot, I wouldn't call the game unplayable, put on some ol' Red 'n' Blue 3D glasses and you will see what is your problem (just turn off 3D anaglyph somewhere in the settings). Actually, I don't remember ever seeing a 3D option in the KSP settings, it may be an issue from your PC's graphical settings. I'm still wondering if I was supposed to answer this seriously or not... EDIT: ninja'd

Go tell that to Ike...

Yeah, I guess that non-spaceplane SSTOs are possible, fairly easily, but I doubt the payload fraction would be big enough for the thing to be worth the trouble. IMO, I think you're better off with a regular rocket, even though that might be more expensive in the end. And about spaceplanes... Well, that would indeed be quite a challenge ! Making a plane with >9k m/s dV in vacuum, able to orbit at 130+ km and withstand a >7 km/s reentry and capable of taking some payload seems quite not very possible, IMO... Anyway, for this kind of SSTO, you're definitely better off with a rocket. Still, waiting for challengers...

These kind of unexpected encounters are fairly common in the Jool system, where, basically, if you have an elliptical and equatorial orbit, you will visit one of its major moons (Tylo, Vall and Laythe) at least once per orbit, though that sometimes does not end up like you'd like... But I haven't had any of this kind of encounters in the Kerbin system, well done