bewing

You want the lowest possible Pe to maximize Oberth, but you'll probably need a bazillion m/s of dV to lower your Ap (unless you were really clever with your launch window), so you probably aren't going to get anything more than a flyby no matter how you do it. Check it with a maneuver node at your Pe to see how bad it will be.

That would depend entirely on which version of the game that you are running. Not everyone is running something recent.

OK, OK, I think it's more fun to do it experimentally!

Are you sure you want to calculate it? Or would you be happy enough to just figure it out experimentally? I usually find it's faster just to create a savegame, cheat the craft into a very high orbit, note the orbital velocity, burn every bit of fuel on board, note the new velocity, and subtract. Then restore the savegame.

Absolutely yes, it needs to be a craft with full control (in hibernation is OK). A relay antenna + probe core is enough, though -- just so long as it has some electricity left.

For some types of fuel yes, for others no. Monoprop does not obey crossfeed rules, AFAIK. So that should always be available to transfer, no matter the design of the ship.

Well, it basically means that you either (1) are mistaken about the Level of your R&D building, (2) you are playing a modded game that is interfering with fuel transfer, (3) your game download is slightly corrupted, and you need to do a file verification.

You can do it in stock KSP. You use a part called an "Advanced Grabbing Unit" -- that we also call Klaws. Plus some decouplers.

Mostly, yes. It's in the settings, called "Internal Camera Wobble", or something like that. If you set it to zero, the effect you are talking about almost completely goes away. Except for some cockpits/pods. IIRC either the Hitchhiker or the Mobile Lab always have camera shake, no matter what you set the slider to. Maybe also some of the other cockpits and pods -- I don't remember.

Inclination = latitude for the most part. And the dV required for a smallish plane change is approximately linear with inclination. Or at least that's going to be your best "first approximation" result. Which means the answer is just an average. Add the latitudes of the 3 launch sites and divide by 3.

I think AHHans has it right. You might be under the impression that wheels in KSP are circular, so it doesn't matter which part of the wheel touches the ground. This is incorrect. Wheels have a very definite "orientation", and if the "wrong" part of the wheel is touching the ground, you may easily get stuck. The suspension of the wheel is supposed to be vertical, and above the wheel. The suspension on your wheels is obviously horizontal in your screenshot. Therefore, I wouldn't really expect your wheels to work. Additionally, there is the matter of the orientation of your control point. When you open the menu of one of the parts on your rover, and click "control from here", that part needs to be pointing in the "forward" direction. You can tell this orientation at a glance by looking at the navball. The center of the navball is the direction the rover considers to be "forward". Your navball is aimed at the sky. This is very likely to mess up the control algorithms for the wheels. If your wheels spin in opposite directions when you push the W key, then your rover will not go anywhere. The control point can change in flight, and there are usually several parts on a craft that can serve as a control point -- which I think includes the command seats. So if you click on a command seat and select "control from here", then I think your rover may work better.

To make something aerodynamically stable in a particular direction, you need the CoM at the front, and the drag at the back. So if you want it to fly tail first through atmosphere, you want the drag at the very "top".

Shrouds cover engines before engines are staged. They are almost purely decorative and do nothing except slightly change the drag of the engine they are covering.

A shroud is a different thing than a fairing. I assume you mean a fairing. I have no idea what would happen if you put an air intake inside a fairing. If it still sucks in air at all, then that could easily reduce the drag of the intake, and increase its heat tolerance. You should test it once and find out. It would be easy to test on the runway or launchpad -- you don't even have to get into the air.

That coordinate is impossible, but that's most easily done with KerbNet. Open the KerbNet screen, zoom out as far as you can (to see one entire side of the CB), and start clicking around on it. It'll give you the coordinates of the spot that you click. If you understand what you are doing, you should be able to locate your destination and set a waypoint on it.

To test landers with no atmosphere, use SetOrbit to teleport them to the Mun or the CB destination of your choice. Be careful of hacking gravity in your actual game, rather than in a separate sandbox. The trajectory of every single current craft and asteroid in the game will be modified if/while you hack gravity. It's a global thing, and it can really mess you up if you don't realize that.

If the proposed rover is big, then I turn it into a spaceplane and launch it that way. If it's medium-sized, then I mount it horizontally (so it sits on top of the rocket like it sits on the ground) and launch straight up -- no orbits, just a direct launch to my destination. To do that, you need large control surfaces on your booster, and a decent amount of reaction wheel to keep your rocket from flipping in the atmosphere. I don't bother with fairings, they are a waste for 99% of your flight. You also need to know the magic numbers: lead the Mun by 45 degrees, and Minmus by 30 degrees. If the rover is small, it isn't going to work anyway. The Mun is really slippery, and you will need to climb some steep slopes.

Yes, many things have changed a bit. But what it all ends up meaning in the case of your question is that there is no best or proper way. A rocket needs to be launched with an efficient gravity turn -- but that depends heavily on the drag. For spaceplanes, it depends even more on your exact drag, design, engine performance, and wing area. There is no single best way.

Oh, maybe it was. Maybe I failed to pay attention to that one.

I'm not sure if those non-stock cockpits are different, but in stock there is no mass change for empty/full cockpit seats. Only for external command seats.

How tall are your landing gear at the front? You'll get moar control by adding an additional set of canards at the front than you will by doing anything else with control surfaces. With your current design, I'd mount them vertically and displace them toward the centerline a bit. But that probably won't work with your landing gear. So the next choice is to place two sets of canards in a reasonably shallow X on the nose (so that they don't touch the ground during liftoff -- they need a kerbal cubit of clearance or they will scrape the ground). That will get you an overabundance of pitch control at the front, but it will also get you some yaw control, which sounds like the thing you need most. And then you can play games with turning that cwazy tailfin into perhaps 3 or more smaller tailfins at the back end.

As far as landing goes, once you burn off most of the fuel your craft will either become unstable and crash, or it will land much easier than it takes off. Additionally, landing and takeoff depend a lot on wing lift. And the wings you stuck on that thing are the very worst wings in the game. They are really only in the game as a cruel trick that the devs play on airplane newbies. They mass twice as much as they should for the lift they give -- relative to all the other wings in the game. Your plane would fly/take off/land better with any other set of wings than these.

Have you looked in the FAQ on this forum? Runway veering is a very common airplane issue, but it has many possible causes. Please note that this is not a bug -- all of these issues also happen in real life airplane engineering. As far as I'm concerned, the most common problem that causes "ground instability" is that the "ground drag" on your front end is bigger than the drag on your back end (when calculated in terms of torques). And the simplest and easiest way to fix that is to go into your landing gear context menu, switch your front wheel from "auto" to manual friction (not traction control!) and then reduce the friction on your front wheel down to .5 or less. If that doesn't do it, reduce it further.

Eve is closer than Duna. So if you've been to Duna, then Eve is exactly the same thing as far as commnet goes.

I like to lock SAS to "stability", and then tap F whenever my AoA gets over 10 degrees. Light the rocket engines when the airbreathing speed just starts to drop. And that's all there is to it.