Blaarkies

At the moment, icons are decided upon the type of command module. Probe cores become "Probe", lander can becomes "Lander", ...so why not just let the cockpit become "Plane"? We all have built special craft that the game identifies as "Lander", while it is actually a massive Jool ship. ("Crazy kerbals want to land Hermes 1 ?!"). But in the end we just rename the icon and it doesn't bother anyone too much(even if we built a cockpit Mun lander)

Because of that, I believe all probe cores should be surface attachable by themselves. Why should it be necessary to tax CPUs with 2 parts for a single probe core?(this goes for most other parts as well)

He must be high, that makes a lot more sense than anything else on this thread. Don't mean to be rude, but he constantly questions? and "quotes" his own sentences...I give up

I hope you get paid reeeeally well for that...on the bright side, anything past 90' inclination doesn't matter anymore, but i imagine lining up your escape trajectory with the correct timing is going to take a lot of patience. 50-90Gm, that is well past Dres? a Jool slingshot could help, if you don't mind timewarping that much

Kuddos! Really well done test, thanks for taking time to do it I am quite surprised by the +- 50m difference that a little adapter made(especially on such low altitude). The game probably finds "draggy" section the same way that it occludes part with re-entry, so shape will definitely matter. I wish adapters had a bit of fuel though

Step by Step Mining Guide -by rhadamant You might want to take a look at that, it explains everything around mining. There are some forum threads about a "crawler rover" modular base, and also some calculations about fuel cell powered ISRUs If your lander is more than 40ton, then the added ISRU mass shouldn't worry you...Otherwise you should split it up to an ISRU-drill-depot station, and Lander that claws onto the station. I use a modular lander(I leave fuel tanks on the station, and connect the type of fuel I need to the lander it needs to take back to orbit) And remember, the big ISRU is powerful, it will easily beat 2 drills at converting ore faster than they can drill. On a 4.6% ore concentration spot, I had to use 6 drill to keep up, but a level 3+ engineer will reduce that number a lot

@Plusck That is certainly true for FAR, but does it apply to stock as well? Last i heard, stock calculates drag by the "open" nodes towards the front of the vessel(so im guessing a 2.5m front section, covered by the 0.625m nose-tip would be effective)

The requirements are not as exact as they seem at first, sometimes the satellite just needs to be in a "similar" orbit. The difference between the contract orbit and the satellites actual orbit could differ by 10km and like 5' inclination(approx numbers). As Madscientist16180 said, you just have to line up kerbin's center and the contract's AN/DN node in your map view(overlap those spots). Now, if you cannot get focus to Kerbin just press TAB. This will cycle camera focus through the planets/moons of the solar system. Press BACKSPACE to reset focus to your ship.

That is doing it the hard way. I started out doing the same method and quickly realized my folly: - You need to land with enough leftover fuel to lift 30ton of ore - To do that, you need more fuel to do the landing(so that you have some left over) - In the end you need to use some of the ore(after ISRU processing) as fuel for the next batch, this cuts into your profits Build a refinery on-site on Vall with ISRU, drill and electricity(Fuel cells work if the ore concentration is above 2% i believe?(someone did calculations on the forums)). Then send a lander with near empty fuel tanks to land there, connect to the ISRU base station and start filling up...take full tanks back to orbit(only needing drop of fuel to land for the next batch). To connect, the easy way is The Claw(2 of them on a rover, or have a claw on station...you'll find a way). The hard way is docking ports(I use a crawler rover that drives stuff into position). EVA Resource Transfer - v3.0 is a lot easier(connect a yellow pipe between independent vessels with an engineer, in real-time) but keep in mind the ISRU can only process if it has an empty output tank(LFO fuel tank, or MonoProp tanks, etc.) To take it a step further, use a modular lander: -Design a lander that can lift a dead 30ton payload into orbit -Leave a docking port on top -Bring different fuel tanks and leave them at base station(like a LFO tank with a docking port and some RCS control) So one lander can bring up any type of fuel efficiently(without carrying empty LFO tanks while we actually want MonoProp back in orbit)

That makes a lot more sense, thanks! See I just eyeballed the dv/mass plot's derivative, and made a judgement call about at the point of where "the dv per 1ton" gets too low for my like. Isp is just linear multiplier added to whatever the Ln(wet/dry) outputs. To be clear, I am working on the assumption that you can just keep adding stages...because in stock its not that much of a problem. So the ideal solution is probably something nearing infinite stages, but that is unpractical. This all started when I was building an Eve ascent lander that doesn't use asperrigus staging. This was a pure stack rocket, about 50ton to get a probe+command-seat into orbit(inside a fairing ofcourse :P). 5 Stages got the job done...very nearly.

Try taking inspiration from real planes. I have been trying a lot of things that works well in my mind, but is barely controllable in-game. So I tried building a Skylon. I was forced to modify slightly because of tech tree limitations and parts, and on the second test flight I got orbit. I was a strange feeling since it was way easier than it should be...made me worry about re-entry. But no, on re-entry it held a 30' Angle of attack with no problems(later test flights i got it up to 60' and it still didn't feel flippy). Needless to say it became my default launcher for getting 5ton payloads into space...gonna try a bigger one next

Stock/Vanilla ksp: I realized it helps to build stages so that, the bottom stage is about twice as heavy as the top stage(2 stage rocket). So a 1ton payload gets pushed by a stage with an additional mass of 2ton...that gets pushed by a bigger stage with additional mass of 2x3ton(the 1ton top and its own stage is considered the payload of this bottom stage)...and so forth. What bothers me is that, this 2/3 stage ratio is pulled out of thin air(i cannot get a definite point on a dv/mass plot, Ln is really smooth, even at 1st and 2nd derivatives). Do you know of any way to calculate this?

The EVA kerbal should get his EVA fuel from the ship, but it doesn't so if you have the patience you can EVA-push your mk1 lander to Jool. But does the kerbal's mass not count when inside a capsule? I know it counts for command seats, but i never tested it for capsules though. I agree with you on most of these, but I am skeptical about the ISRU. That is like saying coal miners exert more energy to mine the coal, than the amount of power the coal plant generates. ISRU is a lot different, but how much more energy is used in changing the chemical structure from ore to fuel? Is it possible that Mun ore is in a high-energy state instead of the realistic low-energy state that Moon ore is in?

I think surface attach limits should be removed all together(every single part should be surface attachable). With the new gizmos, it really is just a hassle that you have to circumvent in every design. As soon as I unlock the Oscar tank, I can "surface attach" anything, anywhere(use gizmos on ISRU to make something "look" attached to the unattachable ISRU sides). It's fine at the start of the tech tree, it limits where parts can be placed and that is great, until tier 3-4(?) Anyway, VTOL engine sounds good. In the meanwhile, use a Panther in afterburner mode. Real good (and sponsive)thrust, its not super heavy...but use Verniers on the far edges(wing tips, nose, tail), just turn on RCS and maybe CAPSLOCK for precise control(it help a lot for RCS stuff)

Structural Pylon or Small Hardpoint does not leaves those ugly 6 square bolts on the parent part. I use them everywhere on "permanent" craft(mining base rovers, tugs, stations, etc) because I am uncertain whether those left over bolts count as another part eating away my FPS. Ideally, the Stability Enhancer should create a variable horizontal section long enough so that the vertical stand far enough away from any actual craft part. Same way that it automatically adjusts its height...nope, nope much easier said than done, no other part acts like it, i bet the code for them are real special

Use them as actual loading screen tips...although, I hope 1.1 will make loading times slightly less than 2 eternities

I made a Module Manager config that removes almost all wings pieces(I use B9 Proc Wings instead), so I find browsing the aerodynamic category much more pleasing...but I cant get access to them without removing my config first(cannot use stock pre-built planes, all have stock wings somewhere). So, what if their category is just changed: -"PotatoRoid" is the part name corresponding to asteroids. If you search around in sandbox mode, using the special filters(i think "surface attach" type parts) you will find it, and be able to launch an asteroid from the launchpad(default size though) In the same way, wings could be hidden from plane...ehm, i mean plain sight. It is a lot of hassle to find them again, and a MM config can do this...but it needs to happen dynamically by user action, in-game. Is that correct?

That is true, most players probably did do the "get to Kerbol orbit and then rendezvous to the planet"...but what about a "skill" setting. So you choose you destination, the dv map gives the minimum dv needed for the mission and then you choose your skill: -Beginner -> adds 100% extra dv to that minimum figure -Intermediate -> adds 50%... -Pro -> adds 5%... -Manley -> adds -30%... After 2 failed attempts, a player will quickly learn their actual skill level. This is not a perfect solution by any means, it actually needs to teach Oberth to new players...gently

That will be amazing, like a scale tool(5th gizmo) that scales any part? But rumor has it, that SQUAD tries to steer away from procedural parts. I guess it fits inline with the no-random-universe concept as well: "Hey you should see this awesome ship i built with these parts" ..."yeah? how did you do it, mine doesn't work" -because the friend didn't scale up parts to the same amount. It a stupid example, but I understand why(if) SQUAD doesn't do it. I agree with you, but some stuff dont have clear answers for fixes. Like Ion engines are always going to be the odd ones, until some thrust-fast-timewarp becomes available...even as overpowered as they are, I hate myself when burning through 2 big 1.25m ion tanks, with 1 ion engine(that fits a comfortable section of the dv/mass curve)...if I have to sit and watch a burn, on 4x timewarp for 5-minutes RL, I give up and do "MOAR BOOSTERS!!"

@Pds314 Good suggestions, but some of them have a pretty good reason as to why they are...they way they are. #3: Because it takes nearly 12 000m/s dv to get into low earth orbit, but that much dv in Kerbal universe could easily do a grand tour of the Kerbol solar system. The ridiculous fuel tank wet/dry mass ratio is design to limit the amount of dv attainable. As for heavier aircraft fuel tanks, that makes sense, it stops player from using them in space where they shouldn't be...but what else are we gonna put up there since LF tanks are so rare at the moment? #5: Snacks!, It's not a fix to all the problems, but it is a step in the right direction. Remember, Squad wants KSP to be accessible by everyone...and if games are loaded with info you need to know before hand, it's going to frustrate a lot of new players(mostly because kerbals committing suicide is not as cool as explosions) #6: B9 Proc Wings, Yes it is fun building Lego style, but that simply does not work for wings, also i know about marvelous stock planes showcased on youtube, so through clipping it is possible to build perfect wings...but 100+ part spaceplanes don't fly as nice as a 30 part, 20ton payload spaceplane. Not sure if this is what you meant with "Widget-based procedural wings and tanks" though

Realism Overhaul players will love this for the fuel ullage motors stuff...i will love it for starting VTOL engines mounted inside a cargo bay

Pluto is not a real planet! Get over it... just kidding, still think we can make an exception for Pluto. To be a planet, it must have: -cleared its orbit -have a circular orbit -etc -unless it is Pluto

That sounds suspiciously like Spore

What about a tiny help button, that open up a "KSPedia" page about that scene, showing all the tips & tricks and cool shortcuts that is usable at that moment. Mention this in the tutorial somewhere and all should be good. We vets probably wont go doing the tutorials again, and might miss out on noticing the "help" button, but most of us found those feature by watching the release update's videos

Slightly of topic, but if I ever do this again I will be using Davon-throttle-control-systems. It is a light mod that gives independent throttle control over multiple engine. The coolest feature is the center-thrust mode that throttles engines so that all thrust is always behind the center-of-mass. Control rockets like the N1 using differential thrust instead of fins and SAS(no gimbaling even required)...or build a VTOL. I played around with it yesterday and it's really powerful, I think its easily possible to plop a tiny "tower" on the highest mountain peaks without risk.