Hannu2

You can use odd resolutions in windowed mode by editing settings file (at least if you use stock DirectX or OpenGL modes). I use it always so that there is small area around window.

Great. I like trains too, but unfortunately I am so hardened realism nerd that I can not enjoy KSP as a train game. But if there were rails, straight, curved, clothoids, switches, doubleslip switches, signals, tunnels, bridges, catenary parts, traffic control systems etc. And wheels, trucks, pneumatic brakes, electric, diesel and steam engines and other building blocks for locomotives, cargo wagons, coaches, etc. You could begin with small and inefficient steam engines and advance to high speed trains. And you could play kerbal way and save money by using light and cheap cargo wagon trucks and undersized braking systems in high speed coaches and have increased probability to crash and lose reputation points. But It may be another game. But remember that it is cheating to override emergency braking of traffic control device and drive through red signal relying on that it is impossible to crash with oncoming train.

Kerbal Alarm Clock mod can give you alarms based on real time.

It seems to be a poor man's version of Kerbal Alarm Clock mod. I know that SQUAD loves that kind of deficient functionality, but why should anybody intentionally ask for such instead of fully functional tools to manage flights? But basically I agree. I will certainly not stop use KAC before stock management tools give more options but probably overhaul of tracking station would give something useful.

I just hope that devs will not become inspired to such useless eye candy and use significant resources to it. Maybe in version 6.0 at about 2040 when there are hundreds of procedurally generated planets, moons and asteroids with incredible details to centimeter level, realistic physical interactions with gravitation, atmosphere, surface and fluids, millions of interesting things to find and game engine can handle 100000 part ship at 60 fps.

There are infinite number of such trajectories if you plot porkchops up to longer travel times. They are near Hohmann orbits but instead of encountering the target after 1/2 orbits they encounter after integer + 1/2 orbits. There are some practical uses for such orbits, both in real space exploration and in KSP. Sometimes they can save dv if target is on inclined orbit (Moho). They are also often necessary in slingshot maneuvers because dv change during an encounter is limited and it is not possible to get many encounters at optimal positions in first orbit (suitable positions of three planets can happen once in thousands of years).

I use Rhino in second stages to put payloads of 100 t or more to orbit. I prefer large launchers and packed payloads over laborious and boring orbital assembly or flotillas of many smaller ships which needs tens of maneuvers and hours of time to achieve target. I use Rhino in career after I have unlocked all tech I want and begin to make large explorations to more distant planets. I think that Rhino's performance is well balanced. http://i.imgur.com/wlOZvKg.jpg

I think that I got best feelings from my first manned Duna mission. Version was pure stock 18.something. I had to learn to do in practice many things, making and launching of large rockets, rendezvous, docking of wobbly and massive ships, landing on larger planet, using approximate Hohmann orbits. I had 2 launches, docking on Kerbin's orbit. I had separate lander and I visited on Duna and on Ike. Everything went near perfectly. My ships had enough margins but was not too overengineered. It took couple of days to, calculate, plan, make, test and execute everything. I have visited on every body after that but have not got same feeling of success. My first Mun trip with overengineered craft was too easy to give such feelings. Maybe first Eve manned mission was near. It took even more time but most of it was relatively straightforward testing of crafts.

I think that it is the point when sandboxlike end game begins. It is quite difficult to change because there are not any real achievements than put the flag and collect science. I have some visions but they are suggested years ago and it seems that they are mostly against Squad's principles. I use TAC life support system and rolegaming to give challenge to interplanetary phase. You can also choose your way to play. For example I make first Duna launches with quite primitive ships when I get largest launchpad and VAB. I know that it is possible to unlock tech tree in Kerbin's SOI, but it is boring to repeat same things tens of times. It is more interesting to leave. Actually it is one thing why I like career. It forces me to use primitive crafts, take risks and have difficult but interesting situations. In endplay phase I have tendency to plan and calculate everything and overengineer so that all missions go flawlessly.

Is it impossible to get suitable balance by adjusting science and money sliders? I think that it is possible to get game very demanding. In my opinion consuming of science points to maintaining things are very artificial. It would be more natural to demand money, presence or visits of engineers and some kind of service resource (as a model of spare parts, tools, consumable chemicals) to maintain stations. I like Station Science mod and hope that its idea could be use in stock game. There are a large laboratory unit like stock MPL and small experiment modules which can be transported to lab and then back to give full science points. There are also other heavy units which give possibilities to execute more advanced experiments if combined with a basic lab.

Is it right or realistic to make laziness of player a true reason of choosing chemical engine instead of nuclear? It is always possible to use rendezvous trajectory on which there are not problems. It is not very difficult technically, but just laborious, time consuming and boring task to repeat every time when two ships dock. I think than LV-N is now quite well balanced, at least with stock fuel switch mod. It is a workhorse, actually only practical solution, for medium and heavy interplanetary use. I never use it in landers. I could but other engines are more practical. It is very unrealistic but realistic performance would not fit in small solar system and KSP's idea to demand near low energy transfers between planets. Tractor designs are also practical solution to inaccuracy of game physics and lack of proper control systems. In real world there would not be a problem to make rigid ship or active stabilizing or use very low thrusts, even burn times of years. But such things would need better physics and control systems in the game. I think that there are many things which gives "more bang for the buck" (also in realism sense) than program such very technical and expensive details just to move feasible position of engines from front of the ship to back.

This would be realistic, but not entertaining way. It would not be difficult to learn, but just laborious and time consuming to execute every time. In real world there are very large safety margins to avoid collisions even they do not have nervas. It takes several orbits (hours, even days) to rendezvous and dock a spacecraft to a station. Would executing of such procedures (by hand or automatically) really give some value to game? At least I do not like this kind of time consuming piloting tasks or any other kerbal work activities. This could be a mod for them who like this kind of piloting but I do not want it to be stock.

In Part 8 a large tanker ship with 2 rovers and another crew lander and the third crew are sent to Dres. At next time new rover will be tested.

My best trajectory has been about 200 m/s over predicted. It took much fine adjusting and even more luck. It is good idea to pack prediction+500 m/s or even 1000 m/s. Re-entry from Moho is very challenging. In your case braking velocity is about 2500 m/s. It gives 3900 m/s at top of the atmosphere with Kerbin's escape velocity. It is better to make sure that return capsule is able to do it.

I play multiple missions when I came to interplanetary phase. However, I try to keep amount sane. When I firt got KAC I had tens of missions and game begun to feel like work on conveyor belt. Execute maneuver, plan next, set alarm and repeat with next craft. Now OPM mod have increased number of missions but they are typically send and forget -missions. It takes so many years between maneuvers. Actually I have sent a probe to Neidon in all versions since Neidon came in OPM but I have always changed to next version and started a new game before probes have arrived. I do not even use Hohmann like orbits but it takes near 10 years to get fast flyby with 4000-5000 m/s ejection.

Is that DV at orbit? It takes about 5000 m/s from 300 km Kerbin orbit to 100 km Moho orbit. With 14400 m/s you get there and back and have very good margins. Moho trajectories are very sensitive to errors. Error of couple of m/s at Kerbin's SOI can lead to 1000 m/s larger orbit insertion burn. Therefore you need a proper porkchop plotter. Alexmoon's is good. You see that differences between windows are large. But for example at Y01 D269 there is quite good one. If you start from 300 km orbit you need 1441 m/s to ejection and 3540 m/s to insertion at 100 km orbit. At this time inclination is near zero so you can leave from equatorial orbit. Otherwise you can save up to couple of hundreds of m/s by using parking orbit with correct inclination and LAN. You need also some precision node mod. Stock maneuver node is simply inadequate to accurate trajectory planning. You can begin from values porkchop plotter gives. Typically they are not perfect and you have to make small adjustments. With Moho you have to adjust 0.1 m/s and 0.1 s resolution. Of course it is impossible to make burns with such accuracy but it is good point to start. When you get an encounter be sure that Sun orbit's periapsis and apoapsis are correct. If they are not, you may need 1000 m/s more to brake on orbit (if you really have 14 km/s it is not necessary but your next craft is larger and does not have such massive overengineering). Then execute the burn. It is better to have at least 3 m/s^2 acceleration and altitude at least 300 km to minimize errors. Check trajectory immediately after leaving Kerbin's SOI. Make correction to get right orbit. It should take less that 100 m/s. Then you may need midcourse correction at about halfway. It may be 100-200 m/s. Next correction as about 7 Kerbin days before encounter. Then you can adjust periapsis. It should not take many m/s. Next correction is about 2 days before encounter. You can finalize periapsis and make sure that you are on course. Sometimes there are strange errors on Moho trajectories. I do not know if they are fixed or not in current version. When you enter into Moho's SOI check periapsis, save game and calculate approximated time to braking. Formulas of basic mechanics work but if you are not careful you need sometimes quickload. In my opinion it is best to burn to retrograde and time burn so that it ends soon after periapsis. Target about 100 km because periapsis falls during long retrograde burn. Stop the burn when apoapsis is well in the SOI. Wait until you are at AP and adjust PE and possible inclination. Circularize at PE and you are ready to begin exploration or landing preparations.

I had a little break but Drew project continues now. There is two manned surface operations in part 7. At next time I send more stuff and more kerbals.

This assumes that orbits are circular and inclinations are zero. It works for most planets but those in inclined or eccentric orbits may be problematic. Optimal trajectories may differ significantly from Hohmann orbits. Moho is an extreme example but also Dres can take 1000 m/s more if Window is far from optimal. DV requirements of windows from Kerbin to Dres vary between about 2900 m/s and 3600 m/s (from 300 km circular orbit with near optimal inclination to 100 km circular orbit). I recommend Alexmoon's porkchop plotter. There is also a mod based on that, Transfer Window Planner, which is very practical. They are somewhat more complicated to use but they take into account true orbits and give much more accurate predicions. I need typically 10-30 m/s for corrections from Kerbin to Dres. Worst cases are about 100 m/s.

I think that Kerbals are about as intelligent but more scientifically curious that humans. They want to explore space because it is interesting for everyone and it is not just business or propaganda tricks of leaders of superpowers. Loss of kerbal does not cut money and cease program for several years. They have same attitude than humans had at time of great expeditions. Space exploration is dangerous pioneering work. Astronauts, politicians and citizens know that but someone want to be heroes and most of typical kerbals want to pay taxes so that they can see heroes in media. If some ship does not return, leaders do not despair and lose their faces. I think that humankind can not achieve anything great in space before we get back same attitude. Work of astronaut can not be as safe as work of office bureaucrat at this phase when technology is new.

Part 6 Transport of Surface Refinery I make second part today so that I do not forget things when I play forward. This part tells about two crafts sent at launch window at end of the year 6. At next time crews will be sent to refinery and base.

Yes, it is extremely difficult to get nuclear bomb to explode. It needs nanosecond level timings and very special detonators and control electronics. However, there may be lot of other problems if thousands of nuclear bombs are spread out on large area. If Orion does not fall on deep ocean it is practically impossible to prevent that wrong people get bombs. That would give very neat possibilities to terrorists, criminal organizations, rogue governments and even insane individuals to find loads of more or less damaged nuclear bombs. Also some normal people could not resist their curiosity and they would make experiments or keep nuclear material stored.

Part 5 First surface operations It is time to do first surface operations. I do not follow strict chronological order. Instead I collect pictures from separate operations. Operations can go parallel. Especially transports from Kerbin does not need any attention in hundreds of days and it is time to do operations on Dres. KAC window with universal time is shown on most pictures. Part 6 will deal with transport of surface refinery unit.

It seems to be bug which does not hit to everyone. There has been discussions about it. I do not remember are there solutions because I had never experienced it.

Dead. Current aerodynamics makes beginning of first two pilot's career extremely dangerous. Fortunately Valentina still lives.

I do not know performance of that mod, but as far as I know real Orion have dv of hundreds of km/s. It has suggested to real interstellar traveling. It does not need small correction maneuvers on accurate Hohmann orbits. You just turn nose to the target and open full throttle. If it seems that you do not hit, you burn radially until you are on course. 20 km/s does not destroy your dv budget. Trajectories are slightly bending hyperbola around Sun. Gravity is just a small perturbation and not dominant factor. Why you and so many other are so worried about cheating? This is single player's game and everybody makes their own rules, for example rolegame things. Someone ban nuclear devices totally, somebody think that kerbals can be years without food and are immune to cosmic radiation because their metabolism is based on nuclear reactions and somebody destroy KSC and kill kerbals by exploding modded nuclear bombs. Everybody are right, they all have fun. It is main objective of gaming. Everyone should try mods and rolegame rules and decide if they are too overpowered or restrictive in own gaming style. Many people like Orion and if you feel it may be interesting why you have to ask permissions from us. Mod is free to download and simply to install. Make a copy of your save and you can return back to this point if you do not like Orion mod.