Spricigo

Are you using precise mode (CAPSLOCK) ? Ok, something to keep in mind: you only need to be 'perfect' at the moment the docking ports touch each other, before that you have time to corrections. Most docking tutorials (including the training scenario and the video I linked) tell to kill relative velocity at some point. That pause is useful while learning, you did the rendezvous and now will start the final approach. In any case is not necessary and often make the rookie worry to much about it and slowdown to an unecessary crawl. You cannot reach the target if you always stop before reaching it. Instead I prefer to suggest controlling your velocity. This control is twofold: direction and intensity. 1) Direction is done by maintaining on top of (and consequently, on top of ) , experimenting a bit you will get the hand of to "move the marbles", the point is: if those markings coincide you're moving directly towards the target if not you will just pass next to it. 2) Intensity is done by burning (either with engines or RCS) in and directions. You don't want too slow because your maneuvers to change direction become easy to overdo and thus require corrections (waste of fuel), also we want to meet, more velocity less time to meet it. But we don't want to meet the target at dozens or hundreds m/s. The sums up to what I call 'maneuvering time rule': velocity should be low enough to allow maneuvering but not lower. Notice: lower velocities because a safety margin are ok, in fact highly recommend, specially while you are learning. The rule is intended to make docking fast and simple, not some kind of time challenge. Now, you are struggling with docking, it's possible your craft may be not very well balanced and your engines too powerfull, so let's start with a maneuvering time of 30s. That is plenty of time to make errors and corrections, adjust it if you feel overwhelmed or confident to proceed quicker. Now get an intercept as you already did and when you are about 10km (a safe distance for a rokie, with experience and confidence you may get much closer, among other things because you setup better encounters and you need much less time) away from the target. Make sure the navbal is In target mode. Keep your eyes in the navball, the only re reason you have to look elsewhere is to check the alignment and distance to target except that, all info is in the navball. At 10km if you are slower than 300m/s you are within the maneuvering time. Make the markers coincide and proceed. As soon as you can switch to the target and align it properly (If you feel necessary slowdown a bit more for this) As you close distance you will notice the markers moving, just keep maneuvering to maintain it in the same place and burn retrograde to keep the velocity within the time (200m/s at 6km; 100m/s at 3km; 30m/s at 1km...) . While you are far away (10-3km) the main engines are precise enough for the maneuvers, as you get close (3-1km) start to control from the docking port and use RCS, and for the last bit (1km-0) use precision mode. There will be moment where you will be well aligned and slower then the 'recommended' velocity. Technically you could accelerate, but that is not very wise because the unnecessary fuel expent, so use timewarp instead to advance to where further maneuver are needed. Some considerations: -I'm not saying this is "the best" method, rather is a different methods that I prefer. And I share hoping it may be useful. -That post contains a lot of 'words' about something much easier to understand with 'images' preferable moving. I still suggest you watch some videos to see the real thing. -Docking is actually 'simple' after you 'figure out' what's happening and get used to some techniques. It's really something that depends on the 'student' take practice and have insights. -Learning is difficult when you ate tired and frustrated. When you feel like that go do something else, relax and try again later.

How about cheating a replacement?

Line of Sight is necessary for communication. If you don't have relays, try to stay in the near side (relative to Kerbin) for the necessary maneuvers. And have some extra fuel for the eventual unavoidable occlusion and adjustments. If you are going to aerobrake, I recommend the Antenna Sleep mod. (IMHO should be stock) If you have the [requires signal for control] option disabled a probe without communication can still orient itself with SAS and you can burn at 100% throttle.

I don't say the current scheme is unacceptable, but wouldn't mind a [quit game] along with the [quit to main menu].

Maybe a videotutorial may help you visualize (pun attempted)

You should notice in my post 'direct' only means 'no gravity assist'. Because the only point I referred is the use or not of gravity assist. Your idea don't prevent a previous gravity assist and as result diminishes the effect of a gravity assist. Anyway, the thread have enough info for someone just considering gravity assists. Time to talk about something else.

You can burn at 100% throttle and turn to whatever direction you probe SAS allow. As explained by 5thHorseman that's more than enough to make orbit. But if that is still too difficult to you, I already pointed the solution: disable commnet.

I read your post and noticed that is the only reason the player @Geschosskopf would consider. No withstand your preferences, other options exist. You conclusion that a direct transfer is cheaper comes from you ignoring those options and thus is incorrect. [snip] you ... think the 2nd heavier celestial body will not be able to provide a meager extra 7 degree of deviation.

My advice: don't use RCS for orientation, let reaction wheels deal with this. Have your RCS thrusters set to only respond to translation commands. (Needs advanced twekables enabled in settings, on context window click show activation toggles) The advantage are: 1.No monopropelant used to steer the vessel. 2. Rotation commands don't cause unsolicited translation.

Where Kerbin is conpated to Moho AN/DN is irrelevant. Make the gravity assist when Eve is at AN/DN and enjoy a free inclination change. The arguments that takes time and is more difficult to plan remain. But there is no question a well planed and well executed slingshot is the cheaper option.

A idea that requires a huge amount of work and will catter to a very small niche (inside the niche)... I wouldn't hold my breath.

It's up to the player plan and execute maneuvers. The fact you are planning something impossible to execute don't change that.

Well, there's always the option to get gravity assistance from Eve and Kerbin. Eve is not in between but is easy to get a strong enough boost to justify the detour. In any case there Is the question of complexity and time. Going directly to the target is faster and simple.

Yes @Hay, regardless of whatever else may be added, Kerbin would still be my favorite real life analog.

Earth

If you know how to setup a maneuver node you already know the language. In fact you already program in the language. But instead of it being automatically executed is up to the player to do so.

As other said, reduce dead-weight. I agree with Aegolius, the Mammoth is the only real option for the main engine of a Lifter Rocket of this size. Jets would require an impossible flight trajectory and nuclear engine are just not suited for high thrust aplications. The core stack can be helped by a pair of Twinboars or Vectors but is at least dubious the weight will not overcome the benefits in the way to orbit. If going to make boosters disposable kickbacks can offer much more bang for your bucks, they can also be combined with 1,25m drop tanks to shave a bit mass from the core stage.

I don't think we need either a scroll bar or a expand button. We need both.

That is his point. When it get integrated into stock the option to not have it is gone, while nothing was really added.

The average players already use a simple events(maneuver nodes) to "program" the flight. It's fairly simple yet powerful. The supposed issue is the inability of probecores to run the 'script' by themselves, regardless of communication status.

Something to keep in mind: KSP gives you all the pieces you need to make a vessel that looks like the real life shuttle but the vessel that looks like the real thing probably don't fly like the real thing (used to). PS: for craft specific question, craft specific pictures.

If you think my post is stupid, just ignore it and focus on the suggestion you are defending. Expressing your lack of faith in my intelligence will not convince anyone about the merits of your idea. In fact may give the impression that you are not prepared to deal with criticism. Still, I think you should consider my two points: 1.many of the KSP players have little to no interest in the game becoming 'more challenging'. And their opinions are as relevant as that of any other player. 2.Your idea will need a non trivial amount of work to become reality. If you don't have the skills and/or experience to do it, you also don't have the skills/experience to say how hard it may be. Saying it " would not be so hard to do" is futile, will not convince prople people that can do it.

Because is virtually impossible to lose. One don't need to worry about 'playing well' if he enjoy doing It poorly. If so, do it yourself.

Which movement you talk about? There's no movement Also, the hypothetical 'thing' separated by those ever increasing distances cannot observe each other (as you hint) and don't interacte. That is 'as good' as non-existent. Like the dragon in Carl's garage.

The engines are of the correct size, the plane is oversized. The option in stock game are flexible enough to you build an oversized spaceplane.