Linkageless

The little ones built into your command pod or some probe cores. They still use electricity. Some other ways: 4. Vernor RCS thrusters (using LF+Ox) 5. Additional engines mounted in different directions, perhaps controlled through action groups. 6. Jeb getting out to push. (Yes, it can work!)

There is a wiki page that gives an approximation also. https://wiki.kerbalspaceprogram.com/wiki/CommNet You should be ok if that's what is on your lander and it's on the kerbin side of duna. Beware of the potential for aero forces in Duna's thin atmosphere, they might be enough to snap off the deployed antenna, in which case you'll be stuffed without a backup. I tend to prefer fixed ones for anywhere with an atmosphere.

* I should add, I forget at what level tracking station and if you need anything above basic SAS on the probe core. The small Remote Guidance Unit is a good choice if you have the tech. This is all assuming you want to control from KSC.

Correct, as long as the probe has line of sight to the relay, and the relay has line of sight to a Kerbin ground station or another relay that does have line of sight. I'm assuming you've upgraded your tracking station a bit, but Duna should not be too much trouble with the larger relay antennas.

I'm glad you achieved a rendezvous, that's essentially the hardest part done. I can't speak for console but on Linux/windoze the default is to have forward thrust away from you no matter which way the camera is pointed, but only on the orbital plane, as displayed on the navball, as I recall. Up and down are effectively normal and antinormal. I must say it is a little confusing compared to vessel manoeuvring, but I expect they wanted to somehow highlight the difference of context with a jetpack with this weirdness. I recall seeing an option to change this in the controls setup but haven't tried as I was already used to it. If you are able, from the EVA kerbal, set the rescue ship as target, and use the 'target' speed display (rather than orbit speed). Point yourself at the rescue ship and thrust only a little. Try to trim your prograde indicator with left/right up/down so you're heading directly for it, and trim off any excess speed with a bit of reverse thrust. Less than 1m/s is probably adequate. When you're a couple of meters away, try to bring yourself gently to a stop, then point at the appropriate ladder/hatch and thrust forward very slightly, with any up/down that might be needed. Be ready to grab, then board. An advantage of external command chairs is you can board them from a little distance, while you have to be pretty much touching a pod hatch before you can board. As for which controls for forward/back and sideways, I can't help you other than suggest looking for the controller setup in the main (initial startup) setup menu.

The relay antenna is for communication with KSC, which is the place from which you remotely control the probe core. The presence of Jeb on this mothership/relay is regrettably irrelevant and doesn't help you. Perhaps there is a mod for the sort of pilot based remote control you're imagining.

On my part, I'd been too lazy/preoccupied to investigate. I didn't start using RCS translation until I was regularly docking large vessels at which point I realised I was putting myself through hell for no reason. In the real world, my astronauts would be frozen corpses heading for an eventual reentry viking funeral!

Thanks, @5thHorseman . I am pretty sure you're right, and I stand corrected that for a rigid object it makes no difference. Having thought about it I think I established the practice of putting reaction wheels in CoM before finding autostrut. Absolutely with @Foxster on saving the RCS, those are excellent tips for economising on monopropellant. I tend to only turn on RCS (if I have it) once I'm pretty much stationary and lined up with the target maybe 100m away, but disabling attitude adjustments as he describes is undoubtably more efficient. Targeting the docking port on the other vessel is the next useful thing to do once you have come within 100m or so (double click, or right click on it). Switch your navball mode from 'orbit' to 'target' if it hasn't automatically, and select the target SAS mode, if you have it. To give yourself time at that point, ideally you should be as close to stationary as possible compared to the target (0.0m/s). At this point excess weight (like spent tanks as Foxster suggests) should have been shed or you'll be having to manage their momentum also. If you can turn the target so it points to your Docking port in the same way, that often helps ('control from here' on the port's right click menu will be necessary if you have it anywhere other than on the nose). Be sure to select a docking port of equal size, I once spent an age trying to use the inflatable Docking port from making history not realising it was 'Jr' sized. After this, quicksave, and approach very slowly, perhaps only 0.1m/s for the final few meters. Tiny bursts from your RCS translation controls while keeping the prograde circle and target in the centre of your navball. Actually killing all speed when ~0.2m away is possible, at which point if you're perfectly lined up the two ports will magnetically attract each other. With luck, they will be docked now, but if they are just gently touching at a slight angle, you can turn off SAS to see if the magnets pull you together. If you bounce off, you've come in at too much of an angle or two fast, try again more slowly. Don't be afraid to abort by backing away if you're not satisfied it's perfectly in line. Good luck, it's very satisfying when it all comes together! Clearly and succinctly put, @VoidSquid I missed that! I think in future I may set this up on new craft in the VAB as the only things I want RCS attitude on are captured asteroids. It plays havoc with sensitive orbital rendezvous too!

The majority of your attitude control is definitely coming from your pod reaction wheel and the Advanced Inline Stabiliser below it. While thrusting, the swivel will provide a little bit of attitude control, but nowhere near what the (supernaturally effective) reaction wheels do while they have electricity. Ignore this... [For future construction, I'd suggest placing any Stabilisers closer to the middle of the stages you wish to control. Ideally they should be at the centre of mass of those stages. The slow, awkward response you've experienced is due to lack of leverage, a bit like trying to lift a ladder from one end, rather than from the middle.] Actually this is irrelevant as long as the vessel is rigid.

It does seem a shame that many of the existing parts, like batteries and fuel cells aren't usable as part of deployed science setups. The whole DeployedScience parts category appears disconnected from the rest of the game and it would be great if it could be closer integrated by providing some interconnectivity.

Correct. Hence the need to be compact with good reaction wheels. Tiny adjustments are needed, so I would usually bring the thrust limiter on the engine right down. This is how I initially learnt to dock, before I even knew the RCS did anything more than attitude control. Compact and agile aren't even definite requirements. I have docked my 4xLV-N powered asteroid harvester hauling a 2000t asteroid to my high kerbin orbit station with only 2 advanced reaction wheels. It required patience and plenty of quicksaves. The Kraken loved this. I later sent up 4 vernor propelled + reaction wheel + Klaw RCS drones to make life a LOT easier. Also, sticking a Klaw on the end of my station lets me get away with gently shoving the asteroid at it. In short, you'd be mad to rely on engine+reaction wheel only manoeuvres for anything larger than a single lander can-size runabout. It can be done, but the RCS translation controls make life so much easier.

Docking without any RCS is very possible, but much much easier if the vessel approaching is compact and has good reaction wheel control. Reducing the thrust limiter on your main engine helps. Low orbits will almost certainly shift you out of line if you are making a slow approach over a longer distance. Even in a high orbit, don't expect to stay perfect alignment if you leave two adjacent vessels for a period of time.

You mention getting larger projects to space, I take to mean LKO and beyond. I'm my opinion, the single most useful thing for launching large things into orbit (after moar boosters) is autostrut. It's safe to set this to 'Grandparent' on everything you can, especially everything in your main stack and any other heavy items. (I recall there is a mod that has this as a feature.)

Some experiments produce more data, so require more battery charge to transmit. As suggested, be sure that at least your choice of engine can generate power for you and ideally carry enough battery to cover longer transmissions. Be aware that some antennas are more efficient so will use less battery to transmit a given experiment. If all else fails, you can set "allow partial" on the antenna, and run your engine (assuming it is a model that has an alternator) to generate power while you transmit on your way to your next destination.

Without trying the craft myself, I can only speculate that the upper end of the payload has much more angular drag than any other part when you venture out of the prograde marker. The leverage of high drag so far up is likely the problem. The F12 display should indicate this drag the moment you start to pitch. It's likely that spent fuel and/or discarded stages will be raising your CoM, but at the same time loss of any discarded parts may raise your centre of drag. First, I would try to slim down the width of that top lander to reduce the diameter of the fairing you need. Then, see if you can make the mission work with it below the rest of your payload. Rotate it all 180 degrees may be a quick way. With your new slimmer and less top draggy fairing, you will need less fuel for the same DV and can get away with much less TWR, so reduce the number of engines and perhaps thrust they are set to. (Solid boosters can still be useful burning slower for longer. ) Less TWR = Less speed in the thicker parts of the atmosphere, so less drag at that critical moment you wish to make a gravity turn. Another approach may be to get your pitch set before you gain much speed, practice or launch clamps may help you achieve this..

I've found that when I was unsure of the retro thrust capability of a mun lander, to circularise at roughly 10km then descend from there usually did the trick. These days, the non-console stock version includes a TWR stat revealed by clicking in the staging display that one can check. Perhaps that is also available on conse versions. I'd work hard to keep your final descent surface speed very low if you have less than a certain amount, say TWR of 1.5.

I'll point out that it is feasible to EVA across to a rescue ship at 10m/s or higher. If you do attempt this, I've found targeting the rescue ship a big advantage, especially in a low orbit situation where angles will change rapidly. Timing is everything in such a scenario, as your stranded kerbal can only coax so much acceleration from their little jet pack. Quicksaves are your friend here!

+1 on that. It's very simple in essence and rather than being a cheat takes away the grind of manually running each experiment. The art is knowing when to turn it off.

If I were to choose the single most important subject area to prioritise, it would be - learn the effect of burns in various directions on an orbit, together with the importance of timing ie - Pro grade, Retrograde, Normal, Antinirmal, Radial out & Radial in. I found understanding these the most important stepping stone towards effective astro navigation.

Hello everyone! I've been quietly enjoying KSP for some time (since 1.3.1) and been a regular reader of forum topics in the search for answers to technical and gameplay questions. After gaining so much, I feel it's time to at least participate if not attempt to give a little in return. I'm a long time Linux user and was drawn to KSP for its multi platform support, among many other attributes. A big thank you to all those who regularly post helpful advice and solutions, particularly the one that features time and time again, @Snark

I can also confirm this exactly as pictured after 1.8 upgrade, with an (admittedly ancient) Ubuntu 16.01 on an i5 laptop with Intel chipset. This has not affected my gameplay but is disconcerting.