UmbralRaptor

I've never understood the needing NASA engines for a practical SSTO argument. A 0.21-0.23.5 Skipper (which was distinctly underpowered) plus an orange tank could reliably get up to 3.5 tonnes into LKO. Not reusable, but then there were no funds at the time. A cluster of aerospikes can also be viable as a reusable rocket SSTO.

This should probably be in questions and tutorials. I'd lean towards 0.5 atm for lower stages, or 0.2 atm if you're building SSTO rockets. I would also argue that it's more important to consider payload mass relative to launcher mass (and cost). That said, within the constraints you were aiming for, it looks like a good analysis.

There's a longstanding heat transfer bug, especially with tall tanks. The Mainsail's heat production was reduced a few versions back to compensate, though. That said, if the engine isn't exploding, the overheat bar doesn't matter.

F1 will take screenshots in game. I would very much lean towards a Mk1 pod, and trying out direct ascent over munar orbit rendezvous. While undersized for serious science gathering, I like this craft as an example of simple (if not cheap) design:

It hits several biomes, right? Because otherwise I'm going to suggest downsizing significantly. (Pictures would help) Science returns (you can transmit it, and 0 value science is accepted) and flag planting are reliable if somewhat silly methods of raising funds. The proposed interplanetary mission architecture is probably best done in science mode or especially with some sort of ISRU (Kethane, Karbonite, Regolith etc) mod.

Brushing off the equation as excessively complicated seems like a bad approach -- it's only excessively complex if your rockets are. I would lean towards introducing formula first, the major consequences, and then mentioning MJ/KER/VOID/whatever.

I would lean towards an alternate tech tree and science mode. Or perhaps KSPI?

It does affect what contracts are offered, but I'm unclear of the exact details. Negative (or at least deeply negative) prestige rep tends to result in missing out on exploration ones.

I still stand by my argument with SSTOs in the lower end of on-pad TWR (<1.5), and that anything with a TWR above 2 on the pad is under-burdened. Sure, you can spend less ÃŽâ€V to get to orbit, but in my experience, the large mass of the engine gives you a lower overall payload fraction. (Less true with the changes in 0.23.5 and 0.24, but still...) edit: I also used a weasel word ("most"), so I can justify brief throttling down for something in the 1.5-2.0 on-pad TWR range. >_>

For most craft: 0) Press Z (or previously hold down shift until 100% throttle is reached) 1) Press space to fire engines (and launch clamps if relevant) If you're not spending most of your ascent at full throttle, you either have too much engine, or are doing something silly.

After 2100, but since there's no choice beyond 2040... Various programs that ultimately failed to get anywhere. eg: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_DC-X https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_X-33 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constellation_program I'm going to guess that ARM will get cancelled in 2017 or 2018. That's not the only thing the SLS can do, so it might survive longer.

I think engine placement is a bit of an issue... (This also kills the thrust on those jets)

The picture isn't particularly helpful. Perhaps ones of the craft in its entirety with the resources tab open? (If it's a complex craft, the map view overall mass also.)

High ÃŽâ€V low TWR missions. (Though the PB-ION has so much TWR you can land on smaller bodies with it...) As for the electrical requirements, see sal_vager's post.

The problem with talking about it in terms of ÃŽâ€V is that jet ascents are very different from rocket ascents. It's quite possible to burn 7-10 km/s getting a jet into an unstable orbit (eg: 80 x 30 km), but this doesn't matter much due to their absurdly high effective Isp. The trick is to use turbojets, have semi-decent TWR (~1 on the runway), enough intakes that each engine effectively gets 0.03+ intake area, and a lowish angle of attack.

Bug plus trajectories look weird when you see them from another frame of reference.editing settings.cfg and changing CONIC_PATCH_MODE from 3 to 0 will produce clearer (if uglier) orbits. While you're there, I would suggest upping CONIC_PATCH_LIMIT to something like 6 to see more SOI crossings.

A reasonably efficient Duna mission only runs ~8 km/s. This means that if you have a Mun capable craft with much in the way of ÃŽâ€V and TWR margin (quite possible, especially with asparagus staged launchers and Toyota Corolla type landers), you already have a Duna capable one. And if you have a Mun capable craft without much margin, getting it to Duna might be as simple as strapping on a few boosters.

Brickodynamics because I'm lazy about these things. Remind me to install FAR and pFairings when 0.90 comes out.

The big problem with this one is that there's not much ÃŽâ€V margin for Mun landings. Expanding the lifter stage from 3 to 5-7 engines, or strapping on some boosters might help. I would like to point out that the first stage is an SSTO, and the second goes from LKO to the Mun (or Mimus) surface and back. From older versions of KSP. The MJ numbers are wrong in that they're now higher performance: (Lander TWR for both, ÃŽâ€V for the Skipper-based one)

If you assume SSTOs and ÃŽâ€V vs TWR follows a convenient path (as low as 4400 m/s for craft with >1.5 TWR, more like 4600 m/s for craft down around 1.2)...

There are definitely parameters that can be changed in persistent.sfs (eg: pretty much everything in the first page or so of the file is related to difficulty settings.) Just fire up your favorite text editor, and alter as-needed?

Formally: (A non-unicode version would be vF)Informally: And if you're feeling silly: ¤ (the symbol for an arbitrary currency)

I'm guessing that the navball is being based off of the facing of the cupola. Try clicking on the docking port at the top and selecting "control from here"

The changelog is in KSP/readme.txt

Parts quantity and stats are somewhat in flux. Even moreso with mods.