SiliconPyro

Haha, not a slip. I have no expectation of ever accomplishing it given my current lack of rocket design or piloting skill.

Hahaha. I think it would be cool if there were some kind of calculator so you could plan and automate burns. Basically something to calculate how long you would have to burn with your current configuration to accomplish a given Delta-V. I know there's Kerbal Engineer and MechJeb, so it might be redundant, but I was thinking of something built into the IVA.

Basically, if you are in an orbit of a given altitude and want to change to an orbit of a different altitude, change your speed. Going faster by doing a direct burn will increase your apoapsis. When it reaches your destination altitude, stop burning. When you reach apoapsis (just before actually) burn direct again to bring your periapsis up to circularize. Conversely, you can burn retrograde to decrease your Periapsis to a lower target orbit, then when you reach periapsis, burn retrograde again to bring your apoapsis down to circularize.

A trip to the Mun wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility, but Minmus would be more challenging and interplanetary would be insanely difficult. With mods to give you a little more information inside the capsule, it would be feasible. My personal goal is an IVA Mun landing, 100% stock. I'll be sure to post when that never happens.

OP said as much in his own post. He's pointing out that it's a Munar eclipse, but that Minmus is near eclipsing Kerbol. He's asking if anyone has seen a Minmus eclipse.

What nose cone? You're looking at a one man pod and a three man pod from the empty crew-able mod, which is what the rescued Kerbals are riding in.

This is me ascending to my 1.5Mm Ap. I attempted a rescue, but as usual, I ran out of fuel on the return from the Mun. I've been playing since 0.14 and have never returned from the Mun successfully. My Periapsis is 45k, so hopefully I come in slow enough that my chutes don't get ripped off.

I backed Scope Creep Hack-venture. I just pre-ordered The War Z (please nobody hijack this with ripoff hate). I'm also looking forward to the DayZ standalone. Hopefully ArmA III will get back on track if they can get their boys back from Greek prison.

Well, I've been using MechJeb (mostly for true altitude) and I just downloaded Kerbal Engineer. I also downloaded crewable empty pods, but won't be using that for this trip. I've been playing since . . . 0.14 I think. I just don't play often and I'm really quite awful at rocket design.

Alright, I'm going to make another shot at Duna. Now I just need to build a proper craft.

I landed particularly hard because my intercept with Duna was quite direct. I didn't settle into an orbit first. I found myself trying to retro burn with a NERVA and it just wasn't slowing me down fast enough. I dumped it and tried my landing stage with parachutes, but the chutes just popped off. It just wasn't a very careful and deliberate approach. I don't have much experience with the capabilities of the NERVA engines.

Yeah, my parachutes didn't do me much good on Duna, hence the 500m/s impact. I've done powered landings on Kerbin though, so it shouldn't be too much trouble. If you have the fuel for it, I think more gravity actually makes a powered landing easier.

I've landed on Mun and Minmus plenty of times. I suck at building rockets, but I'm ready to head to another planet. I did borrow a .craft and made it to Duna, but I touched down at a brisk 500m/s. M question is, which planet is easiest to get to? I'm not dead set on a round trip, just want to make it there and land safely. So I guess a planet that's easy to land on and requires the least Delta-V would be ideal. Or should I aim for another planet's moon first?

My Thrustmaster works great. The throttle is the best part, being able to really feather it.

I have this same problem on some of my designs. I haven't managed to isolate what design element causes it so I'm very interested in a solution. It's maddening to nearly reach orbit with plenty of fuel and to have your craft tear itself apart.

I found a free solution. I'm using GameBooster 3.5 and it has a video capture function. Things seem to be running a bit smoother as well, so that's a plus.

Are there any free or open source options?

I'm not really sure what you mean by letting the "apoapsis get within about 3km". As you rise your apoapsis constantly moves away from you.

I know it can vary greatly from one rocket to the next, but are there some general guidelines? I've seen some who start their turn gradually at 12km and gradually turn toward the horizon as they rise while others wait until much later, make a 45 degree turn and hold that until AP reaches 85+ km. Is one vastly more efficient than the other? What about ship design can affect which profile is best?

http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/10/that-smooth-spacex-launch-turns-out-one-of-the-engines-exploded/

"Hey, why are there footprints all over the place?"

SAS modules use torque to maintain course. So more can be better if placed in positions where they have leverage. Only the ASAS uses thrust vectoring to do it's job, which is why it is less useful without thrust vectored engines.

The intent of the craft is a round trip to the Mun. A visit to the stranded Kerbals near the arch to be specific. I actually got my craft there, but there is definitely not enough fuel to get home, let alone make Mun orbit.

A wiki, by definition, is edited by users. So if you've got something helpful to add, add it. I'm sure the community would be grateful. The wiki could use a little love in my opinion.

My rocket has evolved a bit and if I could keep it under control, I'd be making orbit with plenty of fuel, but I've still got problems. Here's my craft file. Have fun.