NASAHireMe

"That's no moon... It's a Class Z asteroid station!" After eons of gazing wistfully at the Mun and Minmus, the Kerbals stuck on Kerbin are getting bored of seeing the same two rocks in their skies. They long for something more. Something that proudly reflects their vast interplanetary reach and the can-do spirit of the great Jebediah. In other words, Emperor Kerbaltine wants a new moon. An artificial moon, crafted from Kerbal steel and as many asteroids stuck together into one continuous station as possible. Rules: The asteroid station must be in Kerbin orbit, with a Pe > 70km and an Ap < 500km Mods and parts packs are allowed and even encouraged. MJ, Kerbal Alarm Clock, KER, FAR, bring it on! Exceptions: Hyperedit. You must perform the asteroid rendezvous and retrieval like any other asteroid mission. Exotic propulsion or exotic parts packs. Mods and parts that physically ease orbital construction Representative examples: Quantum Struts, Kerbal Attachment System, Lazor System, Infernal Robotics, tractor beams Mods like Docking Port Alignment Indicator and Kerbal Joint Reinforcement are allowed if they’re not abused. [*]Reasonable part clipping. Read the “Eve Rocks Challenge†section on part clipping to understand what I mean. [*]No infinite fuel or debug console. [*]No exploitation of glitches, or anything else that a reasonable person would consider ‘cheaty’. [*]As many launches, vehicles, funds, and Kerbals as you want [*]Any version of KSP [*]Any configuration of the station is permitted, as long as every asteroid and part is physically connected to each other. Stations that are aesthetically pleasing (e.g. uniform sphere of asteroids like the Death Star) are preferred, but not required by any means. It could be one straight line of connected asteroids, for all I care. I ain’t gonna answer every single question about whether something is permissible. I (and the Kerbals) are more interested in getting as big a moon as possible in their skies. But if you push the boundaries beyond what a reasonable person would expect, you will be met with a moderate slap on the wrist and some shaming. Scoring: Two scoreboards for total station mass and total # of asteroids docked. You can aim for either objective or both. All entrants must provide: Screenshot of the total station massâ€â€asteroids AND parts Screenshot(s) of the entire station in orbit, with enough viewpoints that I can verify how many asteroids are docked together According to the Wiki, the formula for asteroid classes is: Mass in tons = e(1.5x), where x=1=A, x=2=B ... This means that an E-class weighs between 1,808t and 8,103t, an F-class between 8,103t and 36,315t, and G-class beyond 36,315t. By the way, according to that formula Gilly is considered a U-class asteroid, at 1.37E14t. Every successful constructor of an F-class, G-class, or beyond; OR a station with more than five docked asteroids, will receive a special banner (like the Jool-5 banner; currently being designed) appropriate to their achievement. Before you ask, yes, I have tried this challenge myself. I will post pictures of my attempt after I repair my broken laptop fan. But this challenge is really a continuation of other challenges asking for asteroid orbital assembly, so it can be done. Leaderboards: Total Asteroid Moon Mass: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Total # of Asteroids Docked: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Happy asteroid hunting, and happy holidays.

Thanks for the snark. Again, this is simply a condensed version of the sticky, so people wouldn't have to click through 17 pages of posts. Sure, you can find most of the tips on the Wiki, but who reads an encyclopedia front-to-back? No one.

Hey all, I love this sticky. I've learned a lot of great tips for construction, flight, and mission planning. But I was frustrated by reading through over a dozen pages of replies, debates about MechJeb, and a lot of repeats, so I compiled all the tips and advice into one summarized list [LINK] Thanks for contributing, and keep 'em coming!

No, Liowen isn't saying that KER gave him/her a 10606 value for a full journey to Moho, but rather that when building in the VAB, the 'Total DV' of his ship was 10606. He understands that 11190 is an approximate target for that trip. What he's asking about is, occasionally, KER (and MechJeb too, I've witnessed the same phenomenon with MechJeb and that's why I recognized his question) will change DV values in-flight. I wish I was on my home computer, b/c then I could provide screenshots to prove it. Best way I can describe it is, you have a typical three-stage asparagus rocket, with all fuel lines and decouplers properly organized. Let's say the Total DV calculated by KER or MJ is 10000 dV, split among the stages 2000+2000+6000. Upon launch, with MJ's delta-v window open so I can see the readouts, the first stage burns through its 2000 dV over a period of X seconds. But while this is happening, the second stage will 'magically' begin to GAIN both vacuum and atmo delta-v. Usually the gains are very small-- somewhere around 5%, or a few dozen dV by first stage burnout and second stage ignition. The third stage will also show gains, but to a lesser extent. Together, these 'additional' gains may be enough to push the total dV to the 11190 for Moho. Theoretically, this shouldn't happen. Any mass above the first stage ought to be considered as static payload weight, as per the Rocket Equation. I have a few guesses as to why the delta-v creeps upwards during flight, all related to HOW MJ and KER calculate dV. Obviously, the physics are right, it's the estimations that are 'wrong'. 1. Engines have different ISPs depending on atmospheric pressure, and the change in ISPs is a smooth curve, not an instantaneous jump. KER and MJ only utilize vac and atmo ISPs in their calculations, ignoring the first 300 seconds after launch when those ISPs are changing (in the case of the nuclear, quite drastically). 2. MJ and KER don't know your exact launch profile. They have to make estimates based on a standard gravity-turn flightpath. But if your flightpath deviates significantly from that assumed path, then its calculations are messed up, because of reason #1 above. I have a few more guesses but I'm at work and shouldn't be on here anyways, so it'll have to wait. BTW, this is a good enough question for a separate forum post.

Metaphor has a great map with those max and min delta-v figures as well. The thing to realize, however, is that in most cases your best bet is to consult Ksp.olex or, even better, Alex Moon's Launch Window Planner and don't even both with an interplanetary transfer except for one of the ideal launch windows. At this point I've pretty much abandoned the subway-style map available on the Wiki in favor of Metaphor's map. It's a lot more accurate, if a little less aesthetically pleasing.

I LOVE the stickied thread, "What are the most important things about KSP to pass on?" I wanted to give back to the community by compiling all of the tips and advice from that thread into an easier-to-read list while taking out all the duplications and the debates over MechJeb. 90% of this list is from the authors of the original thread, so first and foremost I want to give them all due credit. Thank you. The list is broken into categories. 'Tips' are practical information, 'advice' is, well, advice. They are not sorted within the categories themselves. Links to important things are included, and [MOD] when the tip refers to a mod. Standard abbreviations (LKO for low Kerbin orbit, AN for ascending node, etc.) are used. Some tips are for advanced players, but most are for all. Without further ado: Rocket construction tips: MechJeb or KER for calculations [MOD] Reduce payload weight Modularize/ construct modularly Shift-Click selects the entire craft Shift-AQWSDE changes the part by 5-degree increments Alt-Click duplicates the part selected Build your rockets radially (ie outwards) rather than upwards SRBs for high launch thrust MOAR BOOSTERS. MOAR STRUTS. MOAR PARACHUTES. All are cheap. Struts break after decoupling Cubic Octagonal Struts open up a whole new realm of creative rocket designs You only need one strut at the top of a booster, and one at the bottom, usually. The big orange tank tends to overheat easily. Place a lone strut to absorb heat. Strut ‘inwards’ from a booster (place the first end of the strut on the booster, then the main rocket). This way, you can easily duplicate the booster with Alt-Click without having to reattach multiple struts. Use this work-around to enable clustered engines in upper stages 400v batteries and an OX-STAT solar panel so you never run out of juice Navigation lights [MODâ€â€B9 Aerospace] Lights, in general. They are physicsless and never hurt. Place reaction wheels are close to CoM as possible, RCS equidistant and as far from CoM as possible Reaction wheels aren’t strictly necessary, but can save a lot of time. Use asparagus staging for launch if you're trying to minimize mass, but SRBs if you're trying to minimize cost Radial decouplers are expensive. If you need multiple SRBs, stick one on the other, then connect it to the rocket with one decoupler, vs. having each SRB with its own decoupler. Stick to one size of docking ports for your fleet as much as possible Stick a Small Docking Port on every craft, so you can always perform an emergency refuel if necessary. Small Docking Ports weigh very little, and you can attach them radially using a Radial Attachment Point Large Docking Ports are directional. Don’t place one upside-down. Use the same action groups as much as possible across your fleet (e.g. pressing “3†always toggles the solar panels) Ladders save the headaches of finicky EVAs More RCS ports, the better. They are massless, so having more doesn’t hurt. Sepratrons can help if used and angled correctly. Don't point them directly at the stack, or else they may blow up the main stack's engines and tanks. Angle them 45 deg. or so away from the main stack. Don’t inadvertently place things on capsule hatches (make sure you don't inadvertently place one by symmetry, too). Calculate the amount of parachutes you need with this Parachute calculator Double-check the following before launch: electricity, hatches, docking port alignment, staging order, fuel lines, crew, action groups, struts Fins may be useful at launch, but are useless in the upper atmosphere and space You can launch ‘empty’ and refuel at a refueling station in space Name your ships and save them. Save good copies of rockets, landers, rovers, stages, etc. as subassemblies and use prior subassemblies as much as possible rather than designing from scratch every time. If you don’t like excessive ‘revert flights’, make some way to abort your mission and save your Kerbals. Monopropellant may be all you need for very small crafts in orbit. [0.90 Beta] Stick an Octo probe core on every craft. They weigh almost nothing and you get SAS. Plane/spaceplane construction tips: Center of Lift (CoL) ALWAYS behind Center of Mass (CoM) Rear landing gear too far back will prevent plane take-off Front landing gear too far back will cause plane flippage on take-off Place control surfaces as far away from CoM as possible Lift is more important than thrust At high altitudes, throttle down jet engines to prevent flameout while still picking up speed Assign intakes to action groups and close them to prevent excess drag, or open them for more intake air Spam intakes if you want Small Gear Bay is physicsless, whether deployed or retracted Don’t forget Center of Thrust! If it’s too far above, below, or to the side of the CoM, your spaceplane will be very hard to control during the rocket portion of its flight to orbit. Translate your view in the Spaceplane Hangar w/the middle mouse button Flip the plane upside-down to make placing landing gear easier. Interleave engines and intakes to prevent asymmetrical flameout, per Kasuha’s technique. MechJeb can handle intake management and throttling for you [MOD] Rover/landing tips: Rovers/landers should be wide and low to prevent flipping Landing legs on topside of rovers to re-right flipped rovers Remap your SAS keys from your motor keys to prevent accidental flipping, or drive your rover in Docking Mode Rover CoM should be at wheel axle, not attachment point Disable steering on rear wheels for better high-speed handling Use roll and turn controls to ‘lean in’ to a turn When going up steep slopes, put more traction of front wheels w/SAS or thrusters Use downwards thrusters to soften falls Disable front brakes so you don’t flip when braking suddenly Use trusses as bumpers to guard during crashes Structural girders make for great lander legs Use a mod or switch to IVA for radar altimeter readout for landing [MOD] Use drogue chutes for heavy landers (the red Mk parachute) You can make a very durable box with stuff inside using structural panels (good for cheap probes) Landing directly on wheels can be risky because they have low impact tolerances. Better to land on landing legs, then retract them to settle onto your wheels. On bodies with low gravity, a nuclear-powered lander may be more efficient and easier than a manned rover. If landing on a hill with a tripod leg configuration, position a leg downhill and lock its suspension. EVA tips: Kerbals can survive falls from great heights, but not explosions. Fall head-first; their helmets are very, very strong. Or activate the Jetpack and thrust forwards and up. Pressing ‘Shift’ makes your Kerbal run during EVA You can collect science even when their parts accidentally break off during a rough landing, either through EVA or the Tracking Station You can land and return to orbit with just the EVA Jetpack on Gilly, Bop, Pol, and Minmus If you run out of fuel, you can use your Kerbal on EVA to push the craft from behind, indefinitely All of the crew modules refuel your Kerbal’s EVA jetpack, EXCEPT the Command Seat Switch to different view modes by pressing “V†during orbit or EVA. Really helps during EVAs. Kerbals can open solar panels, repair legs, and repack chutes while on EVA by right-clicking. Useful if you forgot to extend your panels before time-accelerating Press ‘L’ on EVA to turn on Kerbal helmet lights Kerbals can survive some take-offs by holding onto the ladder outside the craft. Be very, very careful. This may come in handy if you want to hold extra copies of data, but you've already got one set in the command module. General/ flight tips: Alt-“.†and Alt-“,†forces physics acceleration! Burn an equal amount of time before and after a maneuver node To use a maneuver node, burn towards the blue ‘X’ Use maneuver nodes and play with them Navball switches to ‘Target’ mode when you’re within 50km of the target If you align your vessels at perpendicular angles, you can dock using only the Navball and engines Alt-Right Click to transfer fuel between two tanks, even without fuel lines Place a maneuver node near the surface to estimate your suicide-burn times Use multiple gravity-assist flybys by placing your crafts into resonant orbits with the larger body Launch heading east (90 degrees on Navball) for cheapest orbital insertion It’s cheaper to perform an inclination change at launch rather than when you’re already in orbit Stick a probe in equatorial LKO to help you plan launches. See metaphor’s technique (which is used for real-life missions) for reducing interplanetary delta-v. Performing an inclination change greater than 45 degrees, by Alexmun: extend your AN/DN, perform your inclination change, reduce your AN/DN and recircularize Maximize Oberth Effect by performing burns at your highest orbital speed (aka at your periapsis) Press F5 and F9 to undo screw-ups. Alt-F5 is ‘Quicksave As’, but don’t accidentally hit Alt-F4! Drop your heaviest stages first You only need one or two engines to gimbal. The rest can be disabled by right-clicking. Switch to the Tracking Station or to a stationary, landed craft to time-accelerate, then switch back to your active craft Launch an efficient ‘tug’ and use it for laborious assembly tasks in LKO You can ‘freeze’ the AP or PE readouts in Map view by clicking on them Use aerobraking/aerocapture whenever you’re around a body with an atmosphere to save delta-V Parachutes tear off in timewarp To visualize successive orbits, place maneuver nodes one-behind-the-other (useful for encounters/gravity assists) You can’t switch vessels while you’re in an atmosphere You can only store one copy of each piece of science data in a command module. Use labs to store multiple copies of data (useful for maximizing the science returns) Use RCS, or limit your engine thrust by right-clicking, for precise orbital maneuvers. Be careful on long interplanetary injection burns that you don’t accidentally reenter the atmosphere. Divide your long burn into several short burns. Land on the ‘day’ side of the body, especially if you don’t have lights. Science labs don’t automatically start with Kerbals in them. You have to add them manually before launch. ‘Closest Approach’ pointers only show when your inclination respective to the target is near zero, or your AN/DN directly intersects the orbit somewhere Turn off batteries by right-clicking when you don’t have solar panels in early stages of Career mode. When staging, rolling your craft will help ‘spin-away’ the boosters MechJeb has a pretty good aerobraking calculator under its ‘Landing Prediction’ window [MOD] Make sure your periapsis is above the highest terrain for a planet. Some moons like Gilly and Bop have mountains sticking up to 22,000m above the ground. Be consistent with your orbits. For most cases, this means your crafts should be in an equatorial, zero-inclination, prograde (counterclockwise) orbit. Nothing’s more annoying than rendezvousing with a craft, only to realize it’s going the exact opposite direction In Map view, hovering over the top edge of the screen will display the types of objects, just like in the Tracking Station. You can turn on and off debris and asteroids, for example. Have an escape system bound to ABORT, or the Backspace key. Mods advice: Play w/ MechJeb and learn from it [MOD] Play w/o mods and learn from it. Please don't get this "MechJeb-or-not" debate started again. Play w/ additional parts packs like B9 or KW Rocketry [MOD] Play w/ Ferram Aerospace Research (FAR) for spaceplanes [MOD] Install Protractor to help w/ interplanetary maneuvers [MOD] Install Kerbal Alarm Clock to manage multi-ship fleets [MOD] Plan interplanetary missions with Ksp.Olex or Alexmoon’s Launch Window Planner or a Trajectory Optimization Tool and Alterbaron's aerobraking calculator [TOOL] Plan multiple gravity-assist flybys or synchronous orbits with a resonant orbits worksheet [TOOL] Install Precide Node or MechJeb to make more precise maneuvers [MOD] Install Kethane or Karbonite for off-Kerbin refueling [MOD] Install Kerbal Attachment System (KAS) for post-Kerbin construction [MOD] Install a visual enhancements mod or Chatterer for aesthetic effects [MOD] Install a docking alignment indicator mod for easier docking [MOD] If you have coding experience or really love KSP, contribute back to the community by making your own mod or tool! It doesn’t have to be complicated or advanced. Concepts advice: Understand and perform Hohmann transfer orbits and bi-elliptic transfers to the Sun Learn the Navball and how to move indicators Perfect rendezvous and docking without MechJeb Learn and understand Tsiolkovsky’s Rocket Equation Performing a burn ALWAYS affects the OPPOSITE side of the orbit The earlier you perform a burn, often the cheaper it is. “There are no straight lines in space†“A smaller orbit is a quicker orbit†Learn Kepler’s Laws to understand the interplay between semimajor axis, orbital period, AP/PE, etc. Learn and understand the holy trinity of rocket design: ISP, TWR, and delta-V TWR is most important at launch, ISP and Delta-V are most important during orbit Learn the different types of staging (parallel, asparagus, sequential, etc.) KSP is a two-body simulation, so only one body’s gravity can affect you at a time. Orbits ALWAYS revolve around the center of the parent body (unlike real life, where objects revolve around the barycenter. Radial burns ‘twist’ or ‘rotate’ your orbit by reducing or increasing your time to periapsis/apoapsis Performing your burn at a different point in your orbit is analogous/equivalent to performing a radial burn When nearing your target destination, radial burns are more effective than pro/retrograde burns Aerocaptures/ aerobraking can save buckets of delta-V Gravity-assist flybys convert radial speed into pro/retrograde speed by bending your trajectory. Remember, velocity is defined by both speed AND direction a planet can change your velocity simply by changing your direction. Learn basic aircraft dynamics (yaw, pitch, roll, thrust, ailerons, rudders, etc.) Understand “terminal velocity†and how it applies to launch, TWR, and throttling Understand phase angles and have some way of calculating them [MOD] Clustering engines can often give you better parameters than a single, larger engine. Midcourse corrections can be very cheap and have very large effects Polar orbits are good for probes and science, since they will eventually cover every latitude and longitude Burning anywhere other than pro/retrograde will incur mild-to-severe steering losses The only time two objects in space are perfectly stationary with each other is when they’re docked Oberth Effect: burning at highest orbital speed (aka at periapsis) yields 'extra' delta-v. It's better to maximize this effect by doing burns at fast speeds as much as possible. EVERYONE GETS THIS WRONG. Or at least not wrong, but very, very sloppy. Oberth effect is related to speed, not orbital height. Obviously, there's a relationship between speed and height, but for the sake of the newbie, please be consistent. For example, if I'm in an almost-perfectly-circular orbit, the difference in orbital speed at PE and AP is almost negligible, so Oberth effect doesn't really matter. I can start my burn anywhere along my orbit. If you're in a more eccentric orbit, the speeds will vary more, so Oberth will vary more. PLEASE BE CONSISTENT. Duna and Minmus may make good refueling stops, especially with Kethane/Karbonite. But it is always more efficient (but more difficult) to launch in one go with all the fuel you need. Gameplay advice: Spaceplanes are the key to lifting things to orbit for cheap b/c they're reusable and get oxygen from the air, but they're harder to design Having high part counts on your rockets will cause your computer to lag The color of the time in the upper-left box indicates physics lag/time. If the color is green, your computer is handling the physics calculations fine. If yellow or red, your computer is getting overtaxed with calculations. Send flotillas of smaller craft rather than one gargantuan craft Understand why things happen rather than follow rules rigidly In the stock game, parts generate drag no matter where they are placed on the rocket The scary red flames on reentry are harmless in the stock game Engine overheating is also meaningless, unless the Overheat bar becomes completely full. Change your to something that suits you and your computer Consult the different orbital heights for time-acceleration speeds via KSP Wiki. No one likes to be stuck at only 10x acceleration. Print out and consult a Delta-V map CONSTANTLY when designing your missions. Metaphor has a great one with max-and-min plane-change delta-v's included Print out a keyboard mapping diagram like this one. There are TONS of key combos you probably didn’t know! Plan missions in advance. Planning is key. Set both small, short-term and hard, long-term goals Build things that work in KSP, not things that work in the real world. KSP physics aren't a perfect mirror of reality Contracts often have long completion deadlines but provide money up-front. So if you’re really short on cash, accept a bunch of contracts and worry about fulfilling them later. Experiment and test things out (on Minmus for Gilly missions, Mun for Dres missions, Kerbin for Laythe missions, etc.) Always have a way to recover Kerbals to Kerbin alive Don’t worry too much about a perfect gravity-turn/pitch program launch profile, but better to be too steep than too shallow-- too steep, and you waste a bit of fuel; too shallow, and you might be held up by atmospheric drag so much that you don't make orbit. When in doubt, simplify and aim for smaller, less complicated rockets Play the game at your own pace Watch Scott Manley videos for inspiration, NOT practical advice Expect bugs in gameplay. This is Beta When in doubt, consult the Internet, KSP Wiki, YouTube, and the forums Be yourself and play your way. This is a GAME. Having fun is priority #1. Make things as efficiently or inefficiently as you want to. You can always slap on MOAR BOOSTERS, for example. Don’t worry about Kessler Syndrome. The chances of debris hits are incredibly rare. But excess parts in orbit may slow your computer performance. Keep space clean by deorbiting stages, colliding it, etc. to speed up computer performance and be aesthetically pleasing Design your mission backwards: what do I need at my destination? What’s the simplest rocket that can get to my destination from Kerbin orbit? What’s the simplest rocket that can get the payload to Kerbin orbit? Take notes and learn from your mistakes “Think outside the box". There’s many, many ways to conduct a mission or solve a problem Use checklists There’s lots of science near the Launchpad Minmus is a lot easier than the Mun. May be a little harder to reach because of the distance and inclination, but it’s far, far easier to land and return from Minmus, and there’s easier and more profitable science. Use subassemblies as much as possible to save time during design. Make lifters that can lift a certain payload to LKO (10t, 25t, 50t, 75t, etc.), save them as subassemblies, and use them rather than custom-building each rocket. This saves time at minimal extra cost. Backup your save folder and craft files b/c the game can crash and mess them up. Back them up in an entirely different location than the save folder. Don’t worry about being a ‘completionist’. Especially with version 0.90, there’s more biomes and science than a sane person would collect. It’s tedious to try to collect every science point in every biome. Contracts that stipulate a station "Supporting 'X' Kerbals" don't require you to fill those seats in the station. You can satisfy a contract for a 5-Kerbal station with a station that has the capacity for 5 Kerbals, but only two onboard, for example. Thanks again to the authors of the original posts, Squad for finishing 0.90, and Jeb for being Jeb.

Another comment on the difficulty of the 0.90 career mode: For someone just beginning to play this game, who doesn't understand how orbits work or why TWR is important at lift-off, etc., I would highly recommend that they play Sandbox first. This seems counterintuitive-- wasn't the purpose of the new career mode to gradually teach people how to play? The truth is that learning all the orbital dynamics stuff is hard. Hard even with a plethora of tutorials and unlimited funds. Even though my day job is very close to aerospace engineering, even MY first orbiting rocket was something like 80+ parts. My first Mun lander took two real-life days to build and fly. Of course, people rightly watch Scott Manley videos in which he gets to Jool in a 9-part rocket or read Forum postings in which experienced players like myself tell newbies, "You shouldn't need 80 parts for a basic orbiter!", and then they wonder why they're so dumb. They're not. EVERYONE GOES THROUGH THIS LEARNING PROCESS. Everyone's first spacecraft are always overengineered, poorly designed, stupidly planned. That's why I liked how generous the 0.25 career modes were. They gave you lots and lots of cushion (by way of very generous funding) in the early stages of gameplay so that you could build and experiment your way to knowledge. The very worst part of playing Kerbal for me was wanting to experiment with different rocket designs so that I could understand how they functioned, but not having the funds to do it. So I had to fulfill annoying and frustrating contracts like "Test this part at 15000m" that didn't do anything for me educationally but I had to do so I could do what I really wanted to do, which was learn through experimentation. Anyways, that's my rant. I hope that experienced players remember that we were all inexperienced once, and that sometimes the best advice is advice that's 'technically' wrong but may serve to illustrate a concept better.

Yeah, totally agree. If the game wasn't bafflingly confusing for an absolute beginner, it's somewhat worse now. Actually, who knows, maybe it only looks that way to us because we've already been playing and have to start over again without our 'bad habits'. Regardless, I second the idea that most, if not all, of the tutorials (video or text) will have to be rewritten again. Obviously, tutorials that explain basic orbital dynamics and concepts are still relevant, but many are not.

Has anyone compiled the full list of biomes for 0.90 yet? I know it just came out yesterday, but this is The Internet, where anything is possible. +100000 reputation to the first person to come up with all the biomes, multipliers, and maps for 0.90. Actually, more like +1 trillion reputation. I don't have time to go through the code myself.

I'm regularly performing interplanetary missions now, mostly to Jool (establishing stations around Laythe and Tylo, a swarm of probes just for fun, etc.). I've found the most tedious part of gameplay now to be the Kerbin-ejection interplanetary burns. I hate burns that take more than 5 minutes, even with forced 4x acceleration. Mostly because I generally start in a 100km orbit and the time it takes to perform a 9 minute burn with 2 LV-Ns on a big orange tank + payload can significantly alter the true trajectory, if not accidentally enter Kerbin's atmosphere and get destroyed. For my latest flotilla, I used the 'multiple burn' approach, dividing the total Joolian transfer delta-v of about 2000m/s into several smaller burns at periapsis. But each time this raises the apoapsis and throws off your transfer window by delaying the final ejection burn (admittedly, not a big deal for Jool, but may be for other destinations), and you have to be careful that you don't raise your apoapsis so much that you exit Kerbin's SOI. All told, this is a MASSIVE pain to execute. What's a good solution to get the 2km/s burn done in one short, blissful burn? The solution I've come up with is to use an 'interplanetary booster' that consists of a large docking port, an orange tank, and a Mainsail that I connect to the main ship and use to give me that 2km/s ejection burn. Once I achieve a Jool transfer orbit, I immediately undock the ship, turn the booster 180 degrees and burn back into a Kerbin orbit (with aerobraking assistance) so that I can use it again. Does anyone else use this method? It takes a lot of fuel, but gives you a quick and painless interplanetary burn. But then you also have to take the time to bring the booster back into a Kerbin orbit, so probably the overall time savings are minimal.

Docking Port Alignment Indicator

YES. Great idea. I second the need for a generator, or else some way to 'draw' a mission profile without using Paint or an image editor, perhaps with a standardized series of text or symbols so that we can use a regular-old keyboard.

I like Jool missions, just because it feels like I put on my big-boy pants and did something cool. Another tip is to turn up your graphics settings as high as you dare and installing something like Environmental Visual Enhancements or the Astronomer's Visual Pack and just enjoying the scenery. I like to put a craft into a really, really low orbit (like "just skimming over the mountains at insane speeds"-low) over the Mun, Dres (and its awesome canyon), or Tylo and just watching the visuals. Zipping over the ground with lens flare and all that jazz is the closest we'll ever get to seeing an Earthrise in person. Using the cupola command module or the mod that has a nearly-transparent bubble command module is a must. Wish that I could turn this into a screensaver for my computer or something.

Oh yeah, as to your original plan for completing all of KSP stock before moving on to harder difficulty levels and mods, I'd STRONGLY suggest allowing yourself to use at least SOME mods once you move past the Kerbin system. Namely, Kerbal Engineer (or MechJeb, solely for its engineering data and not its other functions) and Kerbal Alarm Clock, so you don't accidentally time-warp past your objectives, which happened to me all the time. Once you move to interplanetary missions, calculating delta-v and thrust-to-weight ratios becomes pretty much essential. You can do all of these by hand, of course, but that is a royal pain in the ass. Maybe do it by hand once or twice, just to get a sense of how DV and TWR work, and why they're important. Or you'll be stuck with launching a mission to Dres, for example, and finding out after two real-world hours of construction and piloting that your ship doesn't have enough delta-V to capture. Oops. Could've avoided that by looking at a delta-v map and Kerbal Engineer. Also essential (in my opinion), are SelectRoot (to change root parts during construction) and a bug-fix for the radial decouplers, which haven't been working properly since 0.23.5 or something.

Agree with all the above who say that you should aim for a smaller vehicle for Mun or Minmus. Second, funds are actually pretty easy to obtain in KSP. In fact, most discussion around funds concern it being too generous (check around; there's a few threads in these forums). Even in the early-game, running out of funds is unlikely; by mid-game, it ceases to be a factor, as you usually have over $10mil+. This is intentional so that you don't have to spend your entire KSP experience chasing contracts that aren't fun or fulfilling, and allowing you to build things you want, like a space station around Eve or a rover for Dres. My tips: 1. Most contracts have a VERY long completion deadline, if any. On the other hand, they always give you an immediate injection of $ on accepting the contract. So if you're really desperate for $, you can always accept every contract to get the $ and worry about completing the mission later. 2. Kerbal rescue missions are easy because they're always near 0 inclination and 80-100km orbit. It's good rendezvous practice and you can build a rescue craft for less than $50k funds 3. You shouldn't need a refueling station around the Mun. Frankly, you may never need one ever; I find that establishing a depot often takes way too much effort and time for what it's worth. 4. Testing parts 'landed' or 'splashed' at Kerbin takes literally 15 seconds per contract, so they're easy money. 5. Send a small probe into Mun orbit. Boom, anytime you need money, accept a 'send data from around the Mun' orbit and use that probe. 6. Even better, send a one-man lander to the Mun. Don't even worry about getting him home at this point. Just use him to 'plant flags' or 'send data from surface of Mun'. If you keep him there, you can milk those contracts until you have enough money for your next big project. I currently have one probe and one lander on every body in KSP, pretty much ensuring that I will never run out of money.

A more interesting question is not HOW they get arrested, but IF. Specifically, how jurisdictional laws apply in space. I have a moderate background in international space law, enough to give a hastily-thought out answer, at least... Space law derives primarily from, and has many parallels to, air law and sea law. Territorial sovereignty under air law extends ad coelum from their territory's surface to infinity. So if you're flying above Guinea and someone commits a murder, Guinea has the jurisdiction to prosecute you. But so does the country under which the plane is registered (similar to the flag of registration, for ships). And so does the country of the murderer, AND the country of the victim, if those countries decide to invoke the custom of extraterritorial jurisdiction. In practice, it usually defaults to the country of registration, but enough custom has occurred supporting the other jurisdictional claims that they are part of customary law. Space obviously poses a unique jurisdictional question because spacecraft in orbit necessarily cross national boundaries thousands of times a day. The current corpus of space law (consisting mainly of the five outer space treaties) doesn't explicitly define a new jurisdictional regime. Fortunately, there have been so few incidents that the jurisdictional question has never fully been settled. Everyone has (more or less) acted responsibly in space, enough that some scholars argue a new customary tradition has been formed. But others argue, can space law really have 'widespread, commonly-accepted, time-tested practices' (which is the most common basis for customary law) when we've only been space-faring as a species for less than 70 years? Especially when only a handful of countries have any sort of space capabilities at all? In order to get around these jurisdictional issues in the handful of cases where it really matters (namely, international human spaceflight projects like the ISS, Mir, Space Shuttle, etc.), the criminal liability statutes are hard-wired into the Memoranda of Understanding's (MOUs) and international treaties like the 1998 ISS treaty. See an example here: http://web.archive.org/web/20060913194014/http://portal.unesco.org/shs/en/file_download.php/785db0eec4e0cdfc43e1923624154cccFarand.pdf Whether these hard-wired jurisdictional outlines are enough to constitute a 'custom' that will endure and be applied in other cases, is still unknown. TL;DR: space jurisdictional issues are in their infancy and unsolved; click the link to see how the ISS handles arrests.

For me, India's Mangalyaan (to prove that space can be done on a budget) and Philae, for obvious reasons. Last week's Orion test doesn't impress me that much because, well, it's not an orbit and it's not THAT much cooler than what we did with Apollo. Also, Air Force's OTV-2 landing, simply for the mystery of what it is. I have my own opinions, and so does everyone else, but it's still undeniably cool.

I don't know your experience level, so the exact answer may vary. But in my opinion, it's a LOT easier to travel to Duna first and use its atmosphere to aerocapture and aerobrake into an Ike-crossing orbit. You can theoretically transfer from Kerbin to Ike's SOI 'directly' without first establishing an orbit around Duna, but you will be carrying a lot of speed at Duna-and-Ike SOI entry that you will have to negate by burning retrograde. Since Ike has such a small mass, this burn will be pretty lengthy. By using Duna to aerobrake to the correct apoapsis, you won't have to burn retrograde as much to capture around Ike. Conveniently, Ike is pretty much on the same plane as Duna, so you don't have to worry about a large inclination change like with Gilly or Bop. Anyways, try either strategy (or both!) and tell us how it goes.

After you achieve orbit, I found the easiest science to attain is from easy contracts like testing components 'landed' at Kerbin. Literally create a one-part 'rocket' and 'launch' it on the pad to test it. BAM, easy science. Also, once you progress further, I'd suggest skipping the Mun and aiming for Minmus instead. It's a LOT easier to land and takeoff from, with its flat lakebeds, and you can get a lot more science in one trip. It's only a bit more challenging to reach than the Mun. Also, I'm from Montgomery, so we're pretty much neighbors!

First post to the forums! I've been playing KSP and reading these forums for about 3 months now, but only just got around to making a forum account so I can post this. I found a need for a compendium of resonant orbits of the different bodies in the Kerbolverse. I checked 'The Drawing Board' as well as doing a few Google searches for "Kerbal resonant orbits", and didn't find anything that met my needs, so I made one myself. Here's a link to the Google Sheets, so you can view on either mobile or desktop: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Uwapdg0oNEIiX0R0fUwqQvl5PhtOZ87KO-9Or6MIvGM/edit?usp=sharing First sheet is a table of common resonant orbits for all bodies in the Kerbol system, from 1:7 to 7:1 resonances. Orbits are displayed by orbital period (in seconds, and in Kerbin-time y-d-h-m-s, which is MechJeb's format) and semi-major axis. 'Smaller resonances' means your orbit is quicker and smaller than the parent, whereas 'larger resonances' means your orbit is longer than the parent. Obviously, there are an infinite number of orbital resonances, but resonances beyond 7 (like 9:13) start to get unwieldy. Who wants to time-accelerate for 13 Eeloo orbits of 17 years each? If there is demand, I can easily extend the spreadsheet to cover more resonances. Second sheet is an orbital calculator that converts your 1) apoapsis and periapsis to semi-major axis and orbital period, or 2) orbital period to semi-major axis. Also included are the gravitational parameters and radii for the planets. All data is taken from the KSP Wiki as of December 2014 (presumably, KSP v. 0.25). I mostly use the orbital resonances to string multiple planetary flybys for gravity-assist purposes. Often, one gravity assist is not enough to raise your orbit from Kerbin to Jool, for example. But TWO or more gravity assists will usually get you there. By knowing the resonant orbits, you can adjust the resultant trajectory of your first gravity assist so that you can perform a second flyby gravity-assist down the road. There are plenty of other uses for orbital resonances, especially if you use ISA MapSat, Kethane, or RemoteTech. I'm working on converting this into a stand-alone tool for a website. My JavaScript is a little rusty, but I'll get around to it eventually. Message me if you want to help me. Any and all comments appreciated.