Blaarkies

I absolutely agree, but "realism" adds a lot to immersion ...thats why KSP didn't end up being a 2D game with linear gravity(relating to real life physics certainly made me lose my mind over this game). I mean don't make stuff silly just for the lols, rather make it have a grounded reason(arbitrary even) which leads to wanting to use crewed missions. Thats why i say kerbals need better abilities(to have an advantage over probes), or probes need disadvantages(stuff breaks down over time and no one's there to fix it)

That's kind off why IRL humans have not been further than the Mun, but probes have been all over the solar system, and probes are already handling most resupply missions. Humans are slow, fragile and cause a much worse reputation hit to the agency when things go wrong. Should crewed missions in game be vastly superior to probes then? Need some useful things for kerbals to do

You can already do this. Right click on the control surface and set it to pitch only. You can invert the direction of positive pitch as well...there are canards in the stock game, they are specifically made to be elevators at the front You want to explore Kerbol system before everything is unlocked? Play with 30% reward settings, you will really enjoy that. Don't bring up the "science tree to be re-balanced" topic, it usually summons that career-overhaul guy

I am certainly up to changing it, if i hadn't already written down so many words supporting it You posted a question/suggestion to get some feedback on what is good/bad about it, i told you the obvious flaws i found with it. Did not mean to offend or shoot down your idea, I just wanted you to think about the other consequences that need to be handled for this idea to be possible.

modules with wheels are bad for scalability(unless you can decouple them wheels) because part-count leads to lag. Crawler design is good(rover fits underneath the modules), but i suggest using a claw on the rover(instead of docking ports). First, it's less parts, second you can pivot the module on top of your rover a bit, this gives you some freedom to nudge the position for docking. I just went ahead an put claws on everything(modules connect to others using a claw). I tried the all docking ports thing once, and its pain on the Mun. You need extensive testing, but the KSC grounds are far too flat to truly test the design My older method was a class 1 lever forklift with a claw at the front, some aeroplane gear at the front(in addition to the rover wheels) and a 9ton fuel tank at the back and some reaction control. Drive up, claw a module, pop the aeroplane gear and drive around. The modules had docking ports, but this forklift had enough reaction control(and Vernors) to nudge itself untill the docking port fit. It was cool, but a hassle to get into orbit in the first place

Folding rovers anyone? Using 4 Jr docking ports, antennae/truss hinges it is easy to build a stock folding rover that will easily fit inside a MK3 cargo bay, but unfolded to double it's width. It could work in fairings too i guess, I only tried it with dropships

About the space elevator craft floating on Kerbin oceans? Do you want me to change my opinion on that idea?

Least effort: Have an array of small engines. Turn off a few engines on the side of the ship that has the least mass. This will move your center-of-thrust inline with the center-of-mass. Some complication: Get fuel from many fuel tanks, but set their fuel flow priority so that they alternate using tanks from left and right...in the end you should have the same amount of mass of the left side as you do on the right side The cargo being off-center brings up a new problem. My solution was to have the cargo in the center of the ship. With B9 HX parts thats easy. With stock parts, play around with the 3.75m Payload Faring's truss sections. You can build really strong structure with it, without even adding much to the part count.

Try staying in the SPH. You can build any usual rockets there as well, just turn them up right before launch...much better camera control and space to work in compared to the VAB

Please don't use double negatives, the meaning of your sentence is now very ambiguous. Are you not asking me not to not change my not opinion now, no?

So, it does not run on batteries only? Anyway, pitting your arguments against each other is totally off topic. For the boats you need new parts. The water physics is already there(submarine players very validly disagree though). The space elevator is the tricky part, since craft in KSP longer than 1km become very glitchy. Sure it will be a cable instead of truss segments, but it is still attached to a ship craft, and also to a counterweight craft over 2 000 000m away in space. In KSP a craft is only rendered(for physics) up to 2.3km away, but some mods increase this...but not to +2Mm away. This leads to ALL the craft in kerbin orbit also being rendered(because they could maybe have something to do with the elevator...this hogs all your systems performance). What happens in time warp? A space elevator counter weight is by definition not in a free fall orbit, so it cannot be shortcut-time-warped like other craft. You do know that ascending by space elevator is much, much slower than rockets? Even on a Kerbin scale, it takes over 3 hours to climb a 2000km cable going at 166m/s(mag lev rail speeds). And we though Ion propulsion in KSP was boring and slow...

Additional post launch delta-v of over 290 m/s (1,000 km/h; 650 mph) is provided by a 77 kg (170 lb) internal tank. I am not sure who to believe, because someone is lying. That same someone is going to tell me that 290m/s dv means nothing in terms of a real solar system. Or they will tell me that if they had a space elevator, they could've put more fuel into new horizons. That someone will definitely never admit that they were wrong because they did not do any research on what they said. They will probably just say that they mistakenly believed it was true at that time.

Then refueling at Kerbin is the default, since the ship is still close to Kerbin and easy to refuel. It's like saying the Mars ITS ships are refueling for a long range mission...no, they are going to the closest other planet. New Horizons had a long range mission (to Pluto), and it didn't refuel

i believe that was added on the 1.1 change logs? A long range mission, fueled at Kerbin?...not very long range now is it

The extra TWR from Reliants come at a price of poor Isp and a much larger size. The aerospike has great TWR and enough Isp to compete against Terriers, even though it has 5 Isp less it also needs less engine mass to deliver the same thrust. What makes the Aerospike great is it's ability to be used both in atmosphere and in space...but when using it for only one of those it loses against highly specialized engines.

I found that the MK3 tail section creates an excellent nosecone for mk3 size parts...yes, the cargo bay tail ramp part

OK, how do I know?

I haven't had any more problems modding my steam games than i had on non-steam games. At least for KSP, it is absolutely DRM free on steam(you can copy KSP out of the steam folder if you like, it doesn't care...you just handle the updates yourself then()) Time to move away from Cobol and try out the new stuff bro

Map view, focus planet(double click planet, or press tab until you find the correct planet). On the right hand side of your screen is some buttons, one give more info about the planet, the other give resources/ore info. click it, click on the Ore type(...it's just Ore in stock) and it shows again, from anywhere really, you dont even need a craft in that SOI anymore. Scanners work ONLY in polar orbits, right? At least the M700 does, but i guess you could leave the hex spinning scanner there to pinpoint some good ore landing site so the relay dishes are an excellent idea. There are some interesting ways to send a M700 to another planet and reach a polar orbit without using many orange tanks worth of fuel

Transfer should be based on crafts as well (not just single tanks). Like that fuel pipe transfer mod of DMagic. With big ships, its frustrating clicking on every single tank to fill up the ship

Maybe he is doing a role-playing playing mission, adding some story to what he is doing and why he is doing. Kudos to @Biggen , its a lot more challenging that way. Playing career with the minimalist approach of sticking a kerbal alone in a mercury capsule for years at a time really feels like cheating, i mean even official hard mode career is laughably easy when doing that. As for OP, try a gravity assist at Eve. Sure gravity assists are finicky, but the one you need is for this isn't all that advanced. The end result will be a Pe at Eve, and Ap/Intersect at Kerbin...thats roughly 3300m/s re-entry at Kerbin, a lot easier since you only need to slow down about 150m/s to reach an elliptical orbit around Kerbin

Yeah the current system is bad, Viva la Revoluzione!!

Sorry i might have lied. When zoomed out one can see black space and blue atmosphere at the same time(different places on the screen of course). The sky color looks to be based on altitude, but i have no idea how this is rendered(by what type of code) to achieve the results we see

They are also the cure to VTOL aircraft

Just look at the thrust values. Once the sum of RCS thrust values on one side is greater than that of a single Vernor, then it is time to make the switch. This would be at 12kN, but I make the switch much sooner, because RCS needs those heavy ugly yellow tanks to function...and those need to be topped up after you forgot to refill them, with an ISRU basee that wasn't designed with MonoProp fuel storage in mind.