Spricigo

On normal settings and no strategies is 'only' 563.000 R&D building is the most expensive with 1.690.000. In any case, at some point it comes to personal preferences and choices, more than one option will make sense. And even if there is some 'best' course of action, the player may be aware of it.

Opportunity cost. You'll be really 'wasting' time doing anything other than the best* option available. It could be different if we needed to stay in real time while waiting for planets to align. With KAC, I can setup an alarm, hit warp and go grab some snacks. Snacks is a very good option. *Since it is your game, whatever you consider best.

Oh well some spacecraft is very unrealistic, despite existing in real life. e.g: NASA Space Shuttle is as Kerbal as it can be.

I agree with that. However, pragmaticallyit makes sense to not take those difficult contracts in the first place. The rewards will be about the same of an easy contract of the same type. E.g: Testing a Terrier engine in orbit- fine. Testing a Thumper in orbit- NO.

Should may be open to debate but one surely can do it. Just take a look at the Ōsumi challenge

If by "that" you mean controlling multiple craft at the same time and issuing different commands for each. Then no, there is not a mod for that. Controlling multiple craft at the same time issuing the same commands I think is possible but I don't have a link (or even the name ) for the mod which supposedly do that. Finally there is the mod @lemon cup linked, it allows coming back in time and control the craft you previously "abandoned" after the other craft is safely landed/put in a stable orbit. I have FMRS installed but i don't use it often. Flying the carrier back to base is an ordeal more often than an advantage.

It goes the other way around, getting access to the parts/facilities unlocks the contracts. It may be the case of a contract being difficult because of "RND Rage" picking some weird combination of requirements(e.g. testing something at very high speed and very ow altitude (heat become an issue)) but, at least technically, you have all the parts required for completing the contract if it is offered.

There is any landing legs/gears in the craft? If memory serve me well, there was an issue with legs/gears that prompted the creation of autostruts as a fix, and those are always strutted to heaviest part (may it be the engine in your craft?)

One alternative is the EVA resource transfer Mod. PS: I'm afraid it may not interact well with the inventory system, tho

Personally, I'd rather have only backwards/forwards thrusters.

The whole point of RCS is to allow for application of very weak (but precise) forces. Piling up thrusters is self-defeating for that purpose while probably also not the best option for some different application you may have in mind. anyways, Without seeing the craft I have no idea about the specifics. ? As a general rule it need a strong enough torque to flip it (reaction wheels, robotic parts, engines that are not aligned with CoM, etc..), a wide enough base and a flat enough ground where to stand.

Unfortunately, crater are quite common on the Mun. But there is plenty of flat areas in between. Just make a quicksave before committing to land and go for it.

I just design my lander to be able to land in less than ideal spots and hope the spot I end up picking is not terrible.

Worth noticing how performance chances with altitude. To the point is often not only viable, but desirable to use a "vacuum engine" while still in the atmosphere.

It can be done with stock parts, but shuttle alike are more difficult than both conventional rocket and conventional planes(/spaceplanes). Also, much like the real life shuttle, the KSP lookalikes are not practical in the long run. You may consider it cool enough to accept the compromisse, but there will be a compromisse. anyways, point is: you need to take your time to learn the basic stuff otherwise it will keep causing issues. Because more complex craft/situation just have more simple things that can go wrong.

sure

Sometimes the easier solution is just plan some contingency for when the issue happen. Wait for a new satellite get into position, check if there is one that can provide control before committing to land with a unmanned craft and so on. Of course, extra satellite will make less likely to be out of signal. But I have serious doubt that you will need more than 6 for each celestial body, let alone a thousand.

Why that many? You don't need an individual craft for each contract, and you don't need that many to relay signal around Kerbin.

You can try look in the folder \Kerbal Space Program\saves\yourgamename\backup those are automatic saves. But you those may be quite old and you will lose the progress. So, what happened? It is possible that dealing with the consequences turn out to be the lesser of two evils.

No can do. Your last quicksave overwrites it. No can do. Your last quicksave overwrites it.

That is quite small symbol for all the meaning you want to transmit with it. Please, try to formulate a bit more so we can have a chance of understanding.

You only have a regular quicksave. You may do a named quicksave or try to load an automatic save

In the end it's up to you. But I suggest to only orbit the mun, then go to Minmus to orbit and land there. (Minmus is slightly harder to reach and much easier to land.)

Sorry, I don't speak cryptic.

Nope. Consider a sphere around the satellite, from how much of that sphere a solar panel cannot be seen? For a single panel you are correct, there is an entire hemisphere the panel cannot be seenm 2 panel in opposite sides reduces it to a narrow circular band. 3 panels reduce to 2 spots "above" and "below" 4 panels (tetrahedral disposition) eliminate the blind spot altogether. Now, those are the chances to be in the shadow at a given moment. Expand a slight chance, let's say 1%, to dozen maneuvers of hundreds of crafts and it starts to seem more like a sure occurrence than a manegable risk.q