MilkTheFrog

Hmm, i may be getting confused with the terms here, but i thought direct ascent meant having one continuous burn from launch to get you to your destination. What i'm describing involves being in an orbit, then doing the burn to put you in a transfer orbit into the target body's SOI. I thought that was how most people get to the Mun? I've never seen anyone get to the apoapsis of their transfer orbit then burn to put themselves into the same orbit as the Mun... am i missing something here?

Ah, i'd just assumed it was like that because of some less than accurate diagram drawing. No, another circular orbit would not be possible

Perhaps not what the OP was getting at but i wonder - what limits KSP the most hardware wise? GPU, CPU or RAM? It does seem to use a bit of RAM, but if i'm not running anything else it's rarely at 100% of 2GB. I'd have thought the CPU would have helped with the physics calculations, and reducing that pause you get when you go to start a flight. But when i watch videos from people with much better hardware than me it doesn't look that much better (E2140 @ 2.6). And i wouldn't have thought the graphics would be that taxing...

It's my understanding that with the Hohman Transfer, unless you're actually changing your orbit (say to get into a geostationary one) you don't actually want to do the second burn. You want the first burn to put you on a path that intersects your destination body's SOI then you want your second burn to be one that puts you in orbit... or not, depending on the mission.

Actually, Wikipedia says no. Although i highly doubt it would be possible with much more massive bodies.