Zeiss Ikon

Exactly what 5th said. When you have an orbit track that is no longer closed, and is clear of the Mun and Minmus, you're on an escape trajectory. I keep doing it accidentally when I'm setting up my nodes to go to Minmus -- only takes a couple hundred or so more m/s than a Minmus intercept.

I'd have Principia, if it were available for Linux. Chaotic orbits, multi-pass gravity assists, LaGrange points -- all that stuff that patched conics and spheres of influence can't model. I wonder if asteroids have (or can have) teeny little gravity wells (gravity dimples?) with Principia?

Been almost forty years since I heard that the first time. Thirty-seven since I attended a showing wearing a bathrobe and brought a newspaper, a small bag of rice, and several slices of toast...

That's one of the many uses of the Klaw: sucking those taunting stages dry. And Minmus is one of the few places where it might be worth the effort to do so.

For those following along, Lufrid managed to get the second pair of tanks docked to Minmus Station Alpha last night -- only to find the station about 300 units short of the 6000 Lf requirement (only partly due to failing to draw enough fuel from the payload, leading to an incomplete matching burn to rendezvous with the station -- requiring another intercept burn and matching burn). Mission Planning has been going 'round and 'round, trying to decide whether to send a probe with an FL-T800 to transfer enough fuel to meet the contract, or send Lufrid back for a third time and leave the station with a full "snowflake" of tanks (there's a persistent rumble in one corner of the planning room about setting up a fuel mining operation on Minmus, but no one's ever made fuel and oxidizer off the surface of Kerbin before, which makes it sound expensive -- an argument met with the counter that the Program currently has more than five million funds on deposit and has been profitable from day one). While the brass down on the ground try to make their decision, Lufrid is enjoying the time in microgravity, knowing she's at least five days from Kerbin, ten if they try to save delta-V.

Over the weekend, I built the largest launcher so far in my career save (3.75 m tanks unlocked in the last couple batches of science from Minmus and the Mun -- cluster of 9 Bobcats on an engine plate, with six of the Skiff powered 1.25 m boosters used in the previous generation launchers). The Duna flyby crew are still en route, now about 150 days from their Kerbin intercept correction burn. Lufrid got the nod to take two 3200 tanks (each composed of a 2.5 m 1600 tank, two of the 2.5-1.25 adapter tanks, and Jr. docking ports on both ends) along with a second pilot, intended to complete the contract for Minmus Station Alpha. The tank train, pushed ahead of the Mk. 1-3 Command Pod, was a bit cranky to fly; somehow, it coupled roll with both pitch and yaw as well as taking forever to turn (not unexpected) in pitch and yaw. Still got it docked -- and the contract didn't complete. Cupola, check. Accommodations for fifteen, check (actually twenty with the Mk. 1-3 docked). Antenna, power generation, check. Docking port(s): 6 Jr. and 5 standard Clamp-o-Tron. Opened the contract widget -- what do you mean I don't have 6000 units of liquid fuel aboard?! I've got a bit more than 7000 of Lf/O including the transfer tug's return fuel. Oh. Wait. They mean actual Liquid Fuel of 6000 units, not 6000 Lf/O total. Sigh... Undocked the second tank from the first, redocked on the opposite port, then, leaving Adeny aboard the station, undocked and burned for Kerbin, only to turn around with a new launcher and another pair of tanks to make up the Liquid Fuel requirement.

I started with the 1.0.0 demo. Built a rocket. Flew Jeb a few tens of kilometers up. Built a bigger rocket, flew Jeb into space -- but lacked the dV to get to orbit. Looked up on the Internet how to get to orbit in the demo; built a rocket with a lot of those small tanks and actually got Jeb into orbit and back again. As a long time science fiction reader, model rocket hobbyist, and general science geek, I mostly understood rocketry and orbital mechanics to begin with -- even the part about how you have to decelerate to go faster in an orbit. Or so I thought, until I started doing it in game, on a routine basis. now I often fly rendezvous with just a single revolution of phasing orbit and a high angle intercept, having learned that the amount of dV to match velocities at intercept isn't any worse than the two orbit changes (and sometimes a plane change) to do it with an osculating maneuver. I routinely fly suicide burns for Mun and Minmus landings, having installed a tool (Better Burn Time) that makes it possible, and when I rendezvous, that same tool makes it easy to park at closest approach, give or take a few tens of meters. I recently learned just how much I'd learned, when I sent a Duna flyby mission with eyeballed transfer window, and no need to hang around at Duna for most of a year to let Kerbin come back into position -- I just let the return orbit dip down between Eve and Moho, and I'll have a high angle intercept with Kerbin -- and I'll be virtually out of propellant -- but Kerbin has that nice, soft, deep atmosphere to slow my Kerbals down in their tough, resilient capsule. The first time I did a Duna flyby, it took Val four years just to get home. This time, it'll be under two years for the round trip.

And that's orbiting Moho, as I recall, so not just enough dV to get there, but enough to capture, at least with NERVs (or presumably ion propulsion). I was actually thinking of chemical propulsion, but a Spark or Ant and a Bagel tank (formerly called a Round 8) under a low-mass probe has a startling amount of dV and weighs very little. If you can launch a Twin Boar, you probably also have the stuff to make a probe that can go where you need to go.

The beauty of a vertical launch SSTO is that you can generally reenter with retrograde hold, and the engine bells will keep everything else from overheating. I've built this kind of SSTO, originally by accident ("Wow, look at that, I have orbit and haven't had to stage yet!"). A Twin Boar (with a second 6400 tank plus a 2.5-1.25 adapter tank on top) can loft at least 15 T to LKO, while also carrying a probe core and its batteries, reaction wheel unit, six heavy landing legs (mounted for horizontal landing) and twelve parachutes (also mounted for horizontal recovery) -- and reserve enough fuel to deorbit. Pay attention when you reenter, and you'll be landing within 50 km of the Space Center by the time you've flow the lifter a few times. Now, 15 T doesn't sound like much, but you could send a direct-launch lander based on a Mk. 1 Command Pod to either the Mun or Minmus with less mass than that. You could probably get a probe of that mass to a flyby almost anywhere in the system (Moho is a maybe).

I think @bewing's point is that, especially with a small, easily rotated ship, it's quite possible to dock without RCS. I haven't done it, but I've seen video of the feat.

"Where's his neck!?"

And made a non-qualifying entry in the "Photoshop My Selfie" game.

Took a little digging around, but I found that an unmodified SS-520 weighs 2.8 T at ignition. This is the sounding rocket basis (to which a third stage was added for the orbital launch) for the recent "smallest ever orbital launcher" that launched the Tricom "picosat" earlier this year. Cutting that weight by more than half seems unlikely in RSS/RO. And I don't see anyone with an actual Won Ton launch in RSS/RO so far. I don't think you need to make it harder. Even at Kerbin, it's a real challenge to get a rocket that's actually under a ton into orbit with any sort of payload.

Still depends on what you're planning to do in orbit. If all you want is a Gagarin or Glenn mission, you need enough dV to deorbit when done (if you're just launching a Sputnik or Vanguard, zero is the correct dV to reserve). For anything else, look at the subway map, and add an appropriate figure for on-orbit maneuvers that might be needed at either end (which will often depend on your level of skill and experience; I recently made three different rendezvous in LKO for under 300 m/s total -- six months ago, that would likely have required three times that dV or more). Generally, every time you change your orbit it costs you some dV, and if you raise or lower your apoapsis, then circularize, the second maneuver will cost nearly the same as the first. Change plane, you spend some dV (and the faster your orbit when you do it, the more you'll spend per degree of change). In the end, unless you want to leave your spacecraft as orbiting junk when you're done, you'll need to reserve enough dV to bring your Pe down in to the atmosphere (and then follow your craft down to burn-up or crash, else it'll just continue to orbit even with a 10 km Pe).

Drifting to Grannus with only reaction drives and finite fuel? No warp drives or reactionless drives, not even a nuclear pulse rocket to get some real velocity? You've made us all curious, now.

You're wrong. The only mod I use is Better Burn Time, which does nothing for docking (it makes parking the rendezvous easier, though). I dock almost entirely with the nav ball, barely even look at the vessels, and find docking in the dark only a little more difficult than docking in sunlight (because I hardly look at the vessels). Further, I learned to dock without help, after a few tens of hours playing the game (started with 1.2.2). If your target is stabilized, docking isn't hard. If the target has active piloting (a probe core, even with only heading hold, or any pilot at all), docking is fairly easy. If the target is unstabilized, docking is fairly difficult. A couple times, I've successfully docked with an actual tumbling target -- it requires only only skill, but timing, but it is possible if the tumble rate isn't too rapid. I start with a dead-still rendezvous within 200 m (rendezvous is the first skill, and it's pretty easy too, once you know how to approach it), point the two craft at each other (don't forget "control from here" on the docking port you intend to use on the active craft, and target the docking port on the target, if your game version doesn't do it automatically; 1.4.0 and later seems to do so), use either RCS or the main engine (at very low throttle) to give yourself a couple m/s closing velocity, then use your RCS translation controls to adjust your target velocity marker so it's centered on the target marker . Keep adjusting for drift as you approach; when you're 20-30 m away, cut your closing velocity to under 1 m/s and keep adjusting for drift (which gets more pronounced as you approach, because geometry). While you have time (more than 50 m out) you can also momentarily shut off RCS and readjust your actual heading (the wing symbol) to center its dot on the as well. Keep everything aligned, and when your two craft bump, they'll dock. Done. I can' t talk to docking without RCS -- it's going to be a very slow process, because all your maneuvers have to be done by rotating the active craft to thrust in the direction of the correction you need and then rotate back to point to the target docking clamp, and this takes time. I understand how it's done, but I just don't leave the RCS off anything that's got the slightest possibility of needing to dock, or even to EVA transfer a Kerbal (as in rescue ops). A 20 m rendezvous is far easier to deal with than a 200 m distance, when you're trying to fly a Kerbal across on his EVA pack. Back on topic: Over the past couple days, I launched (and docked!) the first two modules of my new Minmus station. In the end, it needs have an antenna, ability to generate power, a cupola, a docking port, room for 15, plus three pilots and 6000 units of Lf/O aboard for acceptance. At present, I've got four Hitchikers and the cupola (total capacity 17), one 3200 tank a bit less than half full (the command module positioned itself in Minmus orbit), seven available Clamp-o-Tron Jr. and five full-size Clamp-o-Tron ports. Two more launches, the heaviest of my career so far, ought to be able to bring up enough additional fuel tanks for acceptance (and their pilots will fill that clause). I also flew tourists on a science gathering mission to a new biome on the Mun; the tourists enjoyed the flight (and paid well), and Tridin brought back almost 500 science as well. AND, I rescued two Kerbals in one launch (one from LKO, the other from a very low Munar orbit), and deorbited two debris objects (one from LKO and one from around the Mun) on the same launch, and on another launch, relieved the commander of Kerbin Station Alpha, deorbited the station, then rescued a Kerbal from the surface of Minmus (he had to fly his EVA pack 2.7 km to make his bus, but he didn't seem to mind -- he'd been there for 255 days as I was ignoring things back home to watch the crew flying past Duna and Ike). At present, the only remaining open contracts I have are completion of the Minmus station, and one more pair of tourists who want to go to the Mun (one wants to land, the other will have to put up with landing). Looking forward to the science haul when the Duna flyby crew get home...

I've done this and gotten very good results. Instead of two groups, I used three (six boosters total), set to 60%, 80%, and 100%, for one of the earliest Mun launchers in my current career (didn't have fuel ducts yet, and hadn't yet understood the utility of decoupler crossfeed for asparagus staging)

Yes, my four-tank version of One Ton Tony got off the pad without problems. I guess I just wasn't turning early enough or aggressively enough. I'll have to give it another try; for repeatability, I'm likely to pre-tilt the rocket on the launch clamp. Of course, if I dump enough fuel to get under the weight limit...

I was going by the description in the OP for this thread; I must have missed the Amazon listings. For that I apologize -- most of what I posted about making a better telescope by tossing parts of that one were based on believing it to be a different kind of telescope often sold with similar description. I agree, a 25 mm Plossl would likely make that a very acceptable starter scope for the Moon (that'll give 16x, which is just about right for basic Lunar observation). Get a 10 mm Plossl as well, and you'd be able to see anything in the usual realm of Solar System observations (when it's clean).

From the original description, i suspect the telescope doesn't have removable eyepieces like a "proper" astronomical scope; rather, it's a zoom model with internal erecting optics, intended for terrestrial targets. As others have noted, the optics in a telescope of that type that sells new for $40 are likely to be pretty bad. Fortunately, the Moon is a very forgiving object for observation. You can make your own telescope and get pretty good views (Galileo did that, four hundred years ago, and learned enough to almost get burned at the stake). In fact, if you know what you're doing, you could make a better telescope than what you have from the lenses in your telescope (first step would be to eliminate the zoom and erecting lenses, cut down to just the objective and eyepiece). However, if you're not an experienced telescope builder, I'd keep the scope you have for watching the beaches (even 10x can get you views you'd never get if you were close) or birds (you've got some truly amazing birds in Hawaii), and try to save up $100 or so to get a scope that's designed for looking at the Moon and planets. Do keep an eye on thrift stores; I've picked up a number of small Newtonian reflectors for next to nothing at Goodwill (though you won't find them there, now, everything really good goes on their auction site). I've got one with a *two inch* primary mirror that can still give creditable views of the Moon, show the four biggest moons of Jupiter, give a hint that Saturn isn't just a ball in the sky (you can't really see the rings at low magnification, but you can get what Galileo did -- an idea that, perhaps, Saturn might have "ears"), and show the phases of Venus. This instrument was originally sold as a toy in the 1970s, but the makers put real optics in it, and it does work. If there's a Costco near you (I think there are a couple on the Big Island, and at one near Honolulu, but I could be wrong), watch them when they approach Christmas. Every year I can remember, they've had some kind of telescope for sale in the $200 range, and they're usually quite acceptable instruments for the money. Last time saw one (3-4 years ago) it was an 80 mm wide field refractor with diagonal and automatic mount (go through a setup process, and the controller can find any celestial object in its catalog in seconds), selling for $200. It'd be a near-perfect instrument for Lunar observation, and should do a fine job with the planets, as well.

Assuming that Core i3 has two cores, you should be barely okay. You've got enough RAM, if you don't load too many mods; your VRAM won't make much difference with Intel graphics; you could even gain by cutting down your total graphics memory in favor of system RAM, assuming they're both coming out of the installed 8 GB. Where you'll run into potential issues is thermal controls. I have a Thinkpad T430, with Core i7-3520 (2 cores, 4 threads at 2.9 GHz nominal, turbo to 3.4 GHz), 8 GB RAM, and I can barely play the game because the CPU overheats and the system automatically throttles the clock as low as 350 MHz to let things cool. This is great for not cooking my CPU, but not so good for trying to cut off a burn at a precise time (when the system clock speed can change without warning). Generally, I'd say if you have two systems with identical specs, one desktop and the other laptop, the desktop will always win, because it's better cooled. If the laptop is what you have, be sure the cooling system isn't clogged with lint, and go for it. It'll run -- it just may slow down unexpectedly from time to time.

I mostly use the Twin Boar with a variable number of strap-on Lf/O boosters. Disclaimer: I'm not a fan of solid rockets; bad memories of the Challenger disaster might have something to do with it. If you make a booster with a Reliant or Skiff (the latter from Making History) and three 800 1.25 m tanks, add a Sepratron on the nose cone, use crossfeed in the decouplers, and watch your booster tank levels, you can use anywhere from zero to six of them around a Twin Boar and tailor things so the Twin boar runs out of fuel just before you make orbit, hence avoiding adding trash to the part of LKO you use most -- the lowest altitude equatorial band. I recently launched a crewed Duna flyby with that setup (six boosters, upper stage was a 6400 tank with a Poodle pushing a Mk. 1-3 with a lot of science aboard); with six boosters, it can haul a relatively large payload into LKO. The only places I've used throttle limiting was in the early days of my career, when I only had a Flea and a Mk. 1 and wanted to keep the G load under control, and when I need to make correction burns long enough to shut down fairly accurately.

If you can land direct (without orbiting first) precisely enough to get the Kerbal on the surface, do that first. Then, when you launch from the Mun, launch northeast but just make a "hop" that will barely keep you above terrain until you cross the other orbit, then make your plane change at the same time you turn your suborbital into an orbit. From there, it's a standard rendezvous from below. If your aren't confident you can land direct in the right spot (I wouldn't be), then get the one in orbit first. Wait until the Mun rotates to put the Kerbal on the suface as close to the southern end of your orbit as possible, then make your deorbit with a side vector to push your landing point enough further south to reach the one on the surface. Any time you can combine maneuvers, you save dV -- in this case, you're combining your plane change with your launch from the Mun or your deorbit, thrusting on the diagonal instead of two maneuvers at right angles to each other. With no atmosphere, you only have to compensate for the Mun's rotation in setting your landing point from the maneuver node -- and a six day rotation doesn't move an impact point an hour out very far, so you should be able to land pretty close to the Kerbal on the surface. Hopefully, the surface isn't too rough there...

@TheFlyingKerman Okay, I don't get it. I tried launching a Spark with four Oscar B tanks, Okto 2, Small Inline Stabilizer, and 200 battery, plus the smallest nose cone, and couldn't get anywhere close; the Spark loses too much thrust at sea level, and I kept running out of fuel at 20-25 km. That's why my craft had the 4x Sepratron booster -- to get the Spark stage high enough for the engine to work as designed. Yet you seem to have done it with at least one solar panel, and antenna, and a presumed thermometer (to have some data to transmit).

I recall there was a surface collider bug affecting asteroids in 1.4.2, possibly 1.4.1 as well -- the symptom was that a Klaw docked vessel would seem to be submerged in the surface of the rock instead of hanging on by the Klaw. This might also prevent a drill from working, if it seems to be on the surface, because it might not reach the actual collision surface.