fourfa

I use this format for all named saves: (WW)y (XXX)d (YY)h (ZZ)m. Sometimes with a useful descriptor ('duna mission ready to depart', 'etc). Replace the letters and parentheses with the actual values, obv. This way they line up in alphanumerical order, never have to hunt around to find the right one. Note you need to use two numerals in Year, Hour and Minute, and three in Day. I haven't yet needed three in Year though I'm sure that's happened!

I kind of love this style of re-entry. I have a bunch of colossal ISRU vertical SSTOs. Most of the rocket parts are only good for 2000 degrees, which is a big problem on re-entry. I give it massive reaction wheel power, hold radial out, and spin as hard as I can through the whole re-entry procedure. Then orient retrograde and land propulsively. Works great! It does take a lot of design work to keep your CoM stationary, and keep the CoL very near it

As usual, there's a mod for that

I've had the same problem with a few other 1200 temp parts. Micro landing legs, RCS blocks, etc. For a Mk2 cargo bay spaceplane, RTGs at the front of the cargo bay attached to the cockpit explode, at the rear is fine. For any spaceplane at all, I will always have a service bay for things like this (usually at CoM with all my RCS thrusters protected inside) because drag. For rockets - ironically, the tank next to the main engine often seems to be the coolest part on the whole ship. Try there...

I keep toying with stock Apollo style missions, adding tons of unnecessary equipment so I actually need three lift stages in the stock solar system. I kind of dig the cute little ascent stages! This mission with zero reaction wheels, so lots of RCS fuel and thrusters. Zero reaction wheel is kind of a fun new challenge, if you're looking for a different way to play for a bit

You should provide more detail about your CPU than just "i5." Most likely you'll get much, much better bang for your buck improving game speed by upgrading processor clock speed - and more powerful cooling to stay at higher turbo settings.

Without EVA fuel, there is zero orientation control of the Kerbal. Ever tried docking with a spinning, tumbling target ship with zero attitude control? Not so simple. Same problem here (actually worse, because no magnetic port) Maybe I'll try a cargo bay capture, then work out the details from there. Or actually - getting a command chair within right-click range might not require orientation control...

Let's say someone emptied all the monoprop from their spaceship before launch (by habit - no docking required on the mission), went to space, did a quick EVA and accidentally let go of the ship... What would you do next? Asking for a friend

That does make sense. I have been using that plane with different cargo loads.

As anyone else seen the deploy direction change seemingly at random on successive launches of the same plane? I have one with three sets of ailerons on the big airliner wings (outer one for roll control, all three as action-groupped flaps) and the deploy direction seems to change every time on at least one pair of flaps.

Strictly speaking, the answer is a qualified 'no.' Assuming you're making a vacuum landing (or Duna, which is essentially vacuum), it's possible to make a ship powered completely by monoprop, Puffs and RCS thrusters - even on Tylo. Therefore the dV obtained is more than the hit of transporting it. But the better answer is - RCS engines/thrusters have the very worst efficiency in the game, so your best option is have no monoprop or RCS whatsoever. You should only consider having RCS if docking is an explicit part of the mission plan - and there's no reason it should be for many basic missions. Even if docking is required, only one of the two vehicles needs to have RCS. Try to use a single set of thrusters at the center of mass, Apollo CSM style. Deactivate yaw/pitch/roll controls in the right-click menu to save monoprop. Then make a point to practice docking maneuvers until you can dock with very minimal amounts of mono. With some practice, the default amount in the crewed pods is usually enough all by itself. The reaction wheels will keep it straight even if your CoM wanders around some through the mission. If you're not opposed to mods - RCS Build Aid is a brilliant tool for seeing what happens to your CoM, and how the RCS thrusters are placed relative to it. Most other players' ships I see have way, way more mono than they need, and at that point is really is just dead weight with a big dV hit. If perhaps you're reliant on MechJeb to dock - know that it is egregiously wasteful with mono and you'd do well to learn to do it yourself if you're looking for efficiency. If it's a larger vehicle, have a look at the Vernier thrusters instead, and get rid of all the mono and mono tanks to save some dead mass. At a minimum you need four - three radially at the CoM (or four for a bit more efficiency), and one pointed retrograde. Use a blip of engine for prograde. (And yes, it is possible to dock with zero RCS but based on the question, that's probably too advanced right now)

Heh @Syntax VTOLs are hard Probably easier than landing on that d$^$%ed glacier though

What does the text say in that GIF? I can't make it out

edit - missed the answer to my question when I first read through the thread

Mk2 cockpit exploding from heat on launch or reentry? Stick an antenna on the nose. (The Communotron-16). You'll have to stick it on at an odd angle and use the rotate/offset gizmo to put it precisely on the tip of the nose. Presto chango, never worry about heat again. This trick is so OP it will probably get nerfed at some point.

Alternatively, Editor Extensions Redux allows you to surface-attach any part you like, including engines. Effectively the same thing as using octags (see above) but saves part count.

This was fun... made a plane with a downward facing cargo bay. Stuck a Mk1 pod with chute on a decoupler in the bay. Put the copilot in the pod, flew slow over the summit and dropped him. I missed pretty bad - the red 5.2km on the right is the pod. No matter, hiked him to the summit and flagged (after landing the plane in the grasslands 20km away). Then I managed to land the plane on the glacier below the summit to rescue the copilot (took many explody attempts) after I realized how long it would take to hike down to the grasslands. Good fun!

Watched Apollo 13 on a lark last night, and today had to build an Apollo-style mission for the first time - it's pretty fun. LES jettison is hilarious. Pulling the LM (MM?) out of the S3 fairing. Crashing S3 into the Mun. Flying a wee lander can ascent module to Munar orbit rendezvous. Nearly having the SM crash into you on re-entry. Just curious, did they retro the LM ascent modules into the surface, or are they still in orbit up there?

I've been having good luck with monster-class cargo planes using a pair of steerable medium nose gear. Not the prettiest, maybe, but the big planes rarely are anyway. Besides, seems like it's the rear gear that cause more problems. Playing with the spring and damper settings really does make a difference in peak force transmitted to the airframe. If you're having parts blow off on landing, it's more likely due to that, than non-steerable front gear. Hard to tell since there's not much detail about the ultimate problem you're having during landing

Why bootcamp? There is a native Mac application I'm not really sure what your question is though. Are you asking something like how many FPS can you expect running those mods on that hardware?

Started missions from the Interplanetary Mountaineer contract pack. Built this overpowered plane to get to K1 quickly. Moved the copilot into a Mk1 pod in the cargo bay, flew high and slow over the summit, opened the bay door, staged the decouple & parachute. Circled around to stay inside 2.5km until he landed (the red 5.2km icon - not a very direct hit LOL). Landed the plane in the grasslands nearby. Hiked the copilot to the summit, planted a flag. Started to hike down to the plane, got bored, and took ~20 tries at landing the plane on the glacier just below and left of the summit. Lots of explosions, a few crippled landings with broken landing gear, and finally nailed it with inches to spare. Picked up my brave mountaineer, hucked the plane over the cliff with not enough speed to fly, picked up speed in the dive, flew home without drama. Mission success

It's definitely possible in stock, but very advanced and full of critical caveats. It usually involves a vessel being divided into several independent sections, which interact by carefully controlled collisions between caged parts. Things sometimes explode upon loading physics when returning to the scene. If you ever timewarp without docking everything together, the vessels will just drift apart. There's usually a ton of wobble. All in all, it's a terrific and fun challenge in KSP sandbox, but probably not something you want to live with in a play save.

that's perfect! Seems to work great. I put your caveat in the comment field in case I forget with some later part pack.

This is so epic. Interested in sharing the craft file? I bet I can land it on top of the VAB Thank you HarvesteR for the best game I've ever played