UmbralRaptor

I *think* he means the other space center on Kerbin.

Yes, things like the navball are used in real life

Blender is pretty commonly used 3D Studio Max if you have a student email address

It\'s just like establishing a Münar orbit. Once you\'re in Minmus\' SOI, burn retrograde until you have an elliptical orbit. (Ideally at periapsis.)

Some of the Mün\'s craters also show evidence of water erosion. It must have had an odd history?

So I took a few extra measurements to knock down random errors a bit: I suspect that getting much more precision will require reading data directly out of the game.

What kevinlacht said for quicksave/load. Additionally, make sure to choose tracking station or the like when you leave a probe, rather than End Flight. (I know that I\'ve lost a few missions that way. >_>)

If the limits are terrain related, they\'re probably also to reduce crashing from excessive heap size. But as that\'s a unity bug...

The 'avionics package' (yeah, it\'s a nosecone) under Command and Control.

Okay, some data from a mission in orbit around Minmus. (ignore my terrible spelling) Including the 60 km radius (which seems accurate, when I compare altitudes with in-save SMA), I get: a = 74007.5 m T = 2380 s r = 80216 m v = 179.6 m/s To get the gravitational parameter, I averaged the results from: T² == (4?²/?)*a³ v² == ?*(2/r - 1/a) yielding: 284747099.7197 m³/s² Using 6.67384e-11 for G gets a mass of 4.23257e19 kg. Actual precision for ? and m is probably 2-4 significant figures. I\'m still curious about the rotational information, though. >_>

Data provisionally added to the (temporary) wiki. I\'ll want to try a few more orbits to confirm things. >_> Minimal? =P

It\'s full of question marks because that\'s all the data I had. Kosmo-not\'s mass and gravitational parameter figures seem right for one way I tried to get them, but I got 1.35e19 kg from another way. o_O The 60 km radius was mentioned in the forums, and I\'m measuring something similar. @Candre: er, the map screen figures are altitudes. Don\'t forget to add Kerbin\'s radius. (So the SMA is 47e6 m)

I think that effectively makes it an 84,000 km drag race. A rocket accelerating the whole way would be impractically large, so it might end up effectively being max ?V.

Huh. I was expecting a few hundred m/s difference, actually. Objection withdrawn. edit: Apparently with MechJeb, Kerbol escape with my ship is easy enough. edit 2: I wonder if this is the smallest stock (aside from mechjeb) single stage to kerbol escape?

The use of FL-T250 tanks when FL-T500 are more efficient? His craft\'s performance is otherwise reasonable. I expect that this will hit Kerbol escape when flown with MechJeb. (I tried it manually, and was perhaps 200-250 m/s short in the end.) edit: if going for the smallest possible craft is too boring, how about boosters only, or single stage only?

The craft file is most likely in /KSP/ships/ (Assuming you didn\'t stick your /KSP/ folder under Program Files). ninja\'d! For the rocket itself, my ?V estimate is that it may be able to perform a munar landing/return. It in principle has enough first stage thrust, but wasn\'t lifting off due the the 'stick pad' bug. Raising the first stage up on decouplers is a sufficient workaround at this time. Alternatively, drag the engine from stage 6 to stage 8, giving a bit more thrust in the early part of the flight. Also, you may as well remove one of the ASAS modules. There\'s no real need for more than 1 per ship. (Though stacking multiple SAS can make sense in some cases) It sounds from your comments like you\'re not especially familiar with orbital mechanics. Perhaps a tutorial like this is in order?

Correct me if I\'m wrong, but isn\'t $100 billion the cost of the Apollo program in today\'s dollars? Also, NovaPunch is far from realistic -- part performance is comparable to stock. (Ignoring for the moment that the realism of a planet less massive than the moon with a density more than double that of osmium is questionable) Finally, I\'m fairly sure that NASA sen the Apollo missions to/from the Moon on hyperbolic trajectories. (a Hohmann transfer from ~200 km to 384,000 km looks to take ~9-10 days, and seeing as they did it in ~3...)

It\'s about as fast as you can go with Hohmann transfers. The current (hyperbolic) record is 42 minutes, though.

http://kspwiki.nexisonline.net/wiki/Kerbin (and for something a bit out of date at the moment: http://184.154.141.114/~kerbalsp/wiki/index.php?title=Kerbin)

Kerbolith, Munolith, Monolith. As long as we know what we\'re talking about... Apparently with enough monoliths, even grass can have a space program?

The only way (that I know of) at this time is to go into the part CFGs. Comment out everything under // --- FX definitions --

You should. 176 is a decent starting point (it is the classic one, after all). SCPs 087, 093, 140, and 966 are also good in my opinion.edit: hrm. I haven\'t been in #site19 in way too long...

It got linked on slashdot, apparently.

It seems like there are a fair number of ascent trajectories that use 4309 m/s ?V. I can\'t find anything more efficient, though.

Sort of. The search is semi-broken will only generate useful results if he backs out to the forum index first. Otherwise, it\'ll only show this thread. More useful threads: http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/index.php?topic=8278.msg120302#msg120302 http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/forum/index.php?topic=9767.msg144811#msg144811 For posting pics here: 1) Take a screenshot (F1 using KSP\'s built in functions) 2) upload the pics. Yfrog, imgur or whatever you want. 3) use the following forum code. [img=Some_image_url][/img]