Zephram Kerman

On the other hand, any of the mods that aren\'t plugin-powered will work just fine in the demo version. 8) So you can download all kinds of extra parts.

Finally found it! In case anyone else doubts there really are five on Kerbin and three on Mun, I\'ve put screenshots of each one into a DropBox slideshow. I was careful to keep the angles away from anything spoiler-ish. The slideshow

Sometimes when testing a lander at KSC, I\'ll use the legs to help un-stick from the launch pad.

Wow, that was fun!

'The Ultimate in Viking Technologyâ„¢ This cannot fail!' mk 4 XD

Hey, that\'s pretty good! We have some graphic artists in the KSP community, but I think yours is the first musical contribution.

@imnotacanadian: That plane-change adjustment could be done at step 3, by passing Mun north or south of its equator. @togfox: You forgot two steps, 7) ????? 8) Profit!

This is my favorite configuration! Having all engines running at launch really helps with efficiency. Basically, they are liquid boosters attached radially. I think it may be ok to have extra engines for a little while. Above 12km, most KSP rockets can\'t keep up with terminal velocity anyway. But if all the original engines are still running with only 1/3 the fuel, that\'s quite a powerful craft. Certain maneuvers are most efficient if done in a short burst. Because of this, I\'ve been trying to work out a way to keep the engines but stage the empty tanks.

I did this in a cart. No hovering required. I like your method of getting the bearing. Instead of this, I brought the long-range detector down to the surface on the cart. By driving in a circle, I could get a pretty good idea which way to go.

Found it: Oberth Effect Basically, the same chemical energy does more effective work because the craft starts with more velocity. If it seems counter intuitive to you too, read the proof in the Wikipedia article. So, if I understand correctly, my inefficient 45° burn that got the right trajectory was compensated for by low altitude and high escape velocity. While we were using the 0.13.3 demo, this was a nice way to do a quick Mun shot. Nowadays, it\'s better and easier to time warp on the ground until Mun is in the right spot, then do a proper launch to TMI, burning prograde the whole way.

I\'m very impressed! Out of the whole flight, I can only think of one change to suggest. On the way back to Kerbin, it is much more efficient to decelerate at apoapsis instead of periapsis. So once you pop out of Mun SOI, just 'stop and drop', the same way you did to land at the Mun. (Or, figure out your PE, and then Hohman transfer from AP directly to 30km aerobraking altitude.) Yes, a video of this flight would be very interesting and useful! 8)

In the 0.13.3 demo version, every launch starts at the same time of the same day. So we could launch directly to TMI and skip the Kerbin orbit. The Mun is a little bit high in the sky at that moment, so my personal method was to interrupt the gravity turn at 45° and hold it there until AP is at the Mun\'s orbit. It seems like this should be inefficient, but the fuel penalty was only slight. There was one video tutorial where I watched the guy waste fuel fiddling to make his orbit perfectly circular while the TMI window opened and closed. Arg! ;P I think it helps to do a burn closer to Kerbin, but I forget the name of that effect. Anyone? Anyone?

Can anyone confirm 5 KMA\'s on Kerbin? I\'ve had a radar orbiting the planet for about 15 hours, and only found 4 of them. That\'s after scanning the entire planet at least twice. If there is a fifth one, there had better be something extra weird about it. Anyone?

If you\'re comfortable editing the file down to just one craft named after the feature, that would be very helpful. If not, don\'t worry about it. Please edit your OP to include the file, just to keep things tidy.

It\'s one of my favorites.

Confirmed, sort of. I got a slightly different figure on my hardware. Using McJeb, the slightly modified downloaded ship consistently reached a height of 33,558 m. (I repeated it two more times, just for good measure.) Using 2x time warp, the peak altitude was 33,586, an increase of 28 m. (I also repeated this two more times.) This seems to confirm that there are measurable differences in performance between computers. Since your result was right in the middle of mine, I\'m curious if you used time warp or not?

I\'ve noticed when attaching fuel lines, the connector will jump to any part that gets in the way. Since the decouplers are a bit wider than the fuel tanks, this might be the problem. Can you connect the tanks diagonally, to get the hoses clear of the decouplers?

Seconded. I keep watching, because you do things I hadn\'t even thought of trying. Oh. Oh. Oh. How about a quick expo of the Wacky Wooden Parts mod? I suspect you\'d have fun with that one. It\'s planks, junk, and barrels full of booze. It\'s unbalanced. It\'s explodey. It\'s lacking duct tape. It\'s very Kerbal. I don\'t bother with many mods, but I had to play around with that one.

This thread and video will get ya going.

By the way, we used interior paint for the controls. It\'s water-soluble. That\'s why you\'re not allowed any fluids for the duration of the flight. Also, the absence of beverages saves a lot of weight.

Same song, different vid: I made this a few years ago for Orbiter.

An elegant solution. Nice!

Make a copy of the stack decoupler part folder, and then edit the .cfg file to disable fuel crossflow.

If your lander has a wide base, it won\'t mind moderate hills.

Bah. Humbug!