CFYL

Some of my personal trial-and-error experience. To save DV 1. An insertion aided by Jool's moons (Layth/Tylo, not the smaller ones) is possibly the easiest gravity assist in stock KSP. 2. To save more DeltaV, your ejection burn can be aided by the Mun, and then perform Kerbin flyby(s) to raise ap to Jool orbit. IIRC there are dedicated challenges for only burning to Mun capture and then let gravity do the rest of the mission. To create MOAR DV 1. MOAR BOOSTERS / MOAR ENGINES (not recommended) 2. Apollo style landing? seperate your lander into a landing stage and an ascent stage to dump excess mass on ascent. Very useful for bigger moons. 3. ALWAYS make a very lightweight payload. TWR doesn't matter in orbit, so NEVER use engine clusters for orbital maneuvers. For smaller moons it doesn't matter that much. For bigger moons, the size of Vall or bigger, an ending TWR of 1.2-1.5(local) is good enough for a fine-tuned descent profile. more engines = more dead weight. so use a single, efficient engine for orbital maneuvers. You can actually use the terrier for full-throttle TWR down to 0.05(Kerbin) (or lower, if you have the patience) in Kerbin orbit. Just burn "a bit" longer. (You have to seperate an ejection burn down to several parts with low TWR tho) some of these are mentioned above by @Geonovast@Admiral Fluffy@Nazalassa and many more

-8

What about slowing the train down, and build an airlock on the track? It would cost less to vacuum a smaller room. Someone once proposed an idea of line, starting from US west coast, passing Canada, across Bering Straight, passing east Siberia, passing Beijing to Shanghai. That's, (more or less a coincidence,) almost a "large circle" on the Earth. So it only bends towards the ground, with little sideways bend. Of course it has to tunnel into some mountains. Point is... even passenger jets can't have all their seats filled on intercontinental flights, which is a major reason of abandoning further A380 production. Antonov 225 is gone, Airbus 380 won't be produced any more. We simply don't need such giant passenger jets. (although cargo jets can be useful) For such a maglev, it would cost a lot to maintain its state of vacuum, whether you run it or not, because re-vacuuming it can cost even more. The total amount of passengers of intercontinental travel is more or less a fixed number. Of course a cheaper way of travelling can harvest more passengers, while a higher cost can discourage some passengers, either way it's not gonna be a great change. I doubt that this maglev is more costly than an airplane although it's faster. This makes it even harder to squeeze enough money out of it to make ends meet. Also about safety. As of 2021, we have seen 146 launches (51 by the US and 55 by China), of which 92.5% are successful. 22 astronauts have lost their lives in accidents, and more casualties are recorded for ground crew. 1960 SS7 accident killed half of USSR missle experts. 1996 CZ-3B accident killed 8 and injured 57. The 2 Space shuttle accidents killed 14. Rockets simply aren't safe enough to be used by the lot of people--even if the cost is minimal. In contrast: As of 1959-2016, Boeing 727 records an average of 1.24 hull losses per MILLION departures, and 0.73 hull losses that kills passengers/crew per MILLION departures. That means, one accident which causes penalty per 1.4MILLION departures, or a total success rate of (1,000,000-1.24)/1,000,000=99.9999876%. Each nine stands for decades of hard work, and thousands of lives that are lost in previous accidents, which warns us of safety, and pushes us into making new rules and coming up with new safety measures.(Data by Boeing.) It takes a long time to make a new means of tranportation as safe as established ones. An accident on a vacuum maglev would possibly be as fatal as a rocket failure -- high speed, poor maneuverability, in vacuum. How to stop a maglev from hitting the walls of the tube when its moving at 1km/s and out of control? Also a single accident will cause the entire facility to be out of service--breaks the tube and fills it with air. What about the train that leaves a few minutes after the one that suffers an accident? stop it. How will passengers come out of the tube? I don't know. Scatter airlocks along the tube and spend another billion dollar for this.

-8

-9

-9

-9

-9 though different name

-9

Granted: you can know it from nowhere by asking King of nowhere. I wish to know what is Balsa on spacedock.

-9

-9

by moving at a speed of ic on the light axis. What's the distance between these two countries?

Water is evaporated by

If you were standing on a ray of light, moving away from an illuminous object, then you will never be able to leave that object. Your time axis is perpendicular to other people's (who aren't moving at lightspeed) time axis and you will be beaten into a plane with no height. Your time also stops. You can't do anything.

-9

Nope. The temperature here won't even melt Phosphoric acid. TUBM lives under the Apollo 17 descent module.

Banned because your craft on KerbalX are too beautiful and useful.

I'm popping up now and then. What about @kerbiloid?

-8

2242

was almost sleeping in class but yes awake. TUBM has been to all four hemispheres IRL.

-10

-12. I'm... OK remote learning. The Internet links me to the school lol.

-14