Starhawk

This is exactly correct. I hadn't paid enough attention to your ascent profile when I first looked at your opening post. I believe that @bewing's advice will net you much more dV on orbit and make it very easy to achieve even a retrograde orbit. Happy landings!

Well, the longer it takes your spaceplane to get to orbit, the longer you spend fighting drag. I imagine the losses come mostly from that. I once actually toyed with the idea of creating a 'Go West Young Kerbal' challenge for launching spaceplanes westward into orbit. I've done it myself and been surprised at how large the loss was, but that was quite a long time ago and I don't remember the details. If my analysis is mistaken I am sure some helpful forum member will come along and correct me. Happy landings!

When you launch eastward you already have the rotational velocity of Kerbin added from the point of view of the orbital frame of reference. When you launch westward you lose that and, indeed, start with negative velocity from the point of view of the orbital reference frame and your desired orbital direction. Since Kerbin's equatorial surface velocity is 175 m/s, you need twice that or 350 m/s extra velocity to achieve a westward (retrograde) orbit. Happy landings!

This topic about creating an add-on for KSP has been moved to the Add-on Discussions subforum. KSP Moderation Team

Hello @WhichwayJanus and welcome to the KSP Forums! Yeah, any instruction which tells you to set your periapsis to 1.5 km makes no sense on the current Mun. Many versions ago, the terrain was very much flatter. In any case, if you set the periapsis to something in the range of 5-8 km (depending where on the Mun you are) you should be good. I use map mode to look at exactly where my periapsis is and decide exactly where to start my braking burn based on that. I usually want to try and land on the most boring patch of the local area possible. I certainly look for the flattest terrain I can find under my orbital trajectory and try to time my burn to kill my horizontal velocity over that. If I have a bit of altitude left to descend, I usually don't sweat it. One doesn't build up too much speed in a kilometer or three. Anyway, there are tonnes of good tutorials in the Tutorials subforum. If you take a look, I'm sure you'll find some other helpful hints in there. Happy landings!

I'm pretty sure, based on reports I've heard, that simply copying the part files over does not work. Beyond that, I do not know. Happy landings!

This thread has moved rather far from the original topic of discussion and has devolved to the point of requiring moderator intervention several times. This topic is now closed.

Some off topic content has been removed from the thread. Please try to at least stay within the SOI of the topic at hand. Thank you for your understanding KSP Moderation Team

Some content has been removed. Do not allow the discussion to descend into personal attacks and insults. There is plenty of room for respectful disagreement here. Thank you for you understanding KSP Moderation Team

Hello @Saturn5tony and welcome to the KSP Forums! Even the most recent demo is very old now. We are currently on version 1.8 and I think the most recent demo version was 1.0. That was released in 2015! Anyway, I'm glad you are enjoying the game and our little corner of the internet. Glad to have you aboard. Happy landings!

Hello @PuffleFuzz and welcome to the KSP Forums! There are a lot of space enthusiasts here, as you might imagine. Glad to have you aboard. Happy landings!

It seems likely that you are destined to perish with questions unanswered. Happy landings!

Since this is a question about how to use a part from Breaking Ground, the thread has been moved to Breaking Ground Discussion. KSP Moderation Team

Hello @Dean_The_Machine and welcome to the KSP Forums! Happy landings!

Overlapping threads have been merged. KSP Moderation Team

Lowering my periapsis as near to the surface as possible from an already low orbit is always how I do a Mun landing. The Mun's topography usually limits how close to the surface I can set the periapsis, though. Since I often want to land in one of the larger craters, I often can't go lower than 8 km or so without danger of crashing into the crater rim. Happy landings!

Please see this announcement:

You've run afoul of one of the most common difficulties with these contracts. As Geonovast pointed out, you're going the wrong way. The inclination reading of 180 degrees means that the orbit is equatorial, but the craft is moving in the opposite direction. It takes a lot of dV to essentially stop a craft in its orbit and get it going in the opposite direction. It's usually just easier to launch a whole new satellite in order to complete the contract. And, as 5thHorseman says, the required part is the Science Jr., also necessitating a new craft. The words 'materials bay' appear somewhere in the part description for the Science Jr, I think, and that's why the phrase got picked up. One Two of the truly annoying bits in the contract system. Happy landings!

Some content has been removed from this thread. Please do not allow discussion to devolve into argument and personal attacks. Thank you for your understanding, KSP Moderation Team

Some content has been removed. This is a friendly message from the moderation team reminding you not to take your frustrations out on each other. Name calling and rudeness are not going to solve anyone's problems and they're certainly not going to improve the thread. Also, they're not allowed. Thanks for your understanding, KSP Moderation Team

Helping folks out is my favourite part of being a moderator. Good luck with your mod. Happy landings!

Hello @tom300zand welcome to the KSP Forum! I just wanted to let you know that when posting an add-on release on the forum, there are a few requirements which are spelled out here: Add-On Posting Rules The basic upshot is: Your post above needs to specify which license applies. It also needs to provide a link to the mod's source code. The download file needs to contain the full text of the license. Please make the necessary changes to both the post and the download file. Thanks, KSP Moderation Team

Broccoli is awesome, but brussel sprouts are inedible in my experience. Happy landings!

I must disagree with this statement. As @Snark pointed out above, there are other possible explanations for other players in their own head canons. While I get that you don't view it that way, that does not mean that others are simply wrong. The various ways that players fill in the gaps using their imaginations is one of the great attractions of this game. Happy landings!

I have to disagree with this point. I certainly imagine that the corporate world on Kerbin has become interested in space after it has been explored by the player and that they eventually try their own launches and that is what results in stranded kerbals in need of rescue. But my particular head canon has nothing like a competing space program to the one I am operating. As @Snark keeps pointing out, there are so many different ways to play this game and so many different things that players want/expect/enjoy that the designers have a real challenge on their hands. As far as the different ways of enjoying the game, one thing that comes to mind for me is the concept of time. I am still surprised that so many players don't just time warp until the current mission reaches it's destination. I have played some careers filling the time with other missions, but for the most part I like to play one mission at a time and I don't even bat an eye at warping ahead several years if that is the next interesting point in the mission. It always seemed to me that the designers had that in mind when they put the game together. From what I read, I am in the minority as far as the way I think about time and time warping. I am very pleased that the game allows for both play styles and is open enough that it accommodates players who enjoy approaching the game in very different ways. I always thought that if time was to become a more significant factor, the economics would be a way to do that. For instance if there were monthly operating costs for KSC or even for each of the facilities. That would definitely force the player to fill time during long missions with missions that would keep the lights on in the meantime. I wonder if time will matter more in the new 'progression mode' of KSP2. Happy landings!