Eric S

The trick to efficient transfers from high orbit is to drop your periapsis down to 75-100 km, then burn to the desired velocity at periapsis. You'll find that by doing this, you save about 500-600 delta-v post refueling compared to refueling in LKO. Think of it as doing most of your transfer burn, then refueling and finishing the burn on the next orbit (with some delta-v burned to match orbits with the Mun/Minmus/your refueling station). I've never had a problem with hitting transfer windows from high orbits, as transfer windows tend to be several days wide with minimal delta-v differences. The timing can be tricky, but it's always possible unless you're going to Moho, those tend to be narrow (but frequent) windows. If you have problems hitting windows from Minmus (12 earth day orbit), try it from the Mun, you won't save as much delta-v, but the orbit is just over one and a half earth days.

RVR can mean realm vs realm, but it can also mean risk vs reward. Yes, I thought it was the first for a few seconds at first two, and was rather confused. OK. Let's say you have 5 stats, where the "goodness" of each engine is represented by U, V, W, X, and Y, the first three to Z1 for sandbox and all five should all sum to Z2 for career. If U+V+W+X+Y=Z2 and U+V+W=Z1 for every engine, then X+Y=Z2-Z1. Which means that X and Y can only vary with each other. There's no way to change X without changing Y, and the reciprocal is also true. This really restricts what can happen in career mode with those two variables. I don't have a problem with parts that are a strict upgrade statwise over some other engine as long as there's a compensating drawback in career mode. That said, I think the ARM engines may be a bit too much of an upgrade. I don't care about sandbox balancing, because the concept of sandbox is to eliminate certain restrictions, and balancing is going to have to be one of those restrictions or else you wind up having to balance two separate sets of stats within each set with no option of trading off one set for the other.

I'll second this. It's not an issue with non-command-pod parts because you can rotate those, but if you rotate the command pod, you're rotating the controls as well, so where the RCS thrusters would go in respect to the pod orientation doesn't change.

I'll go against the common thought and say no, or at least not very well. The only difference between Career and Sandbox mode as far as part balancing engines/fuel tanks is that Career has one or two additional "values" namely the amount of research necessary to unlock the part (including prerequisites), and the cost to purchase the part (not currently implemented). If all the other values were balanced properly for Sandbox mode, then these two values would have to balance each other in order to keep them balanced in Career mode, and "engines that are higher in the tech tree are cheaper than other engines" doesn't sound like a very interesting mechanic. Then again, that is how the 2.5m engines are balanced against the smaller engines currently, so it may be more viable than my simple analysis indicates.

What's actually there is the ability to rearrange the tech tree, and a few nodes that aren't used in stock KSP. The devs have said that they're not against having the ability to create custom tech nodes, they just didn't want to try throwing them in until they had a good handle on the tech tree and how to program it.

The DTS-M1 is slightly faster overall than the -16. Other than that, no benefit unless you have one of the communications mods (RT2 being the main one but not only one) or just like the way the M1 looks better.

Agreed, any attempt to make asparagus non-viable based on reality needs to go after the fuel lines, either making them expensive, capping their maximum fuel flow, or something like that. I don't like the idea of just making them expensive because the same fuel lines that enable asparagus monstrosities enables drop tanks which I don't think anyone has a problem with. I though about making different fuel lines with different flow limits, but I don't think we need to add to the number of parts. Maybe if tweakables can adjust the max fuel flow and affect the cost (or maybe even give them a mass based on fuel flow), then that would resolve the whole thing in my mind. Asparagus staging is the natural reaction to the combination of 1) low TWR engines, 2) high dry-mass fuel storage, and 3) low cost infinite flow, infinite reliability fuel pumps. I don't think changing the balance of the entire game to get rid of Asparagus staging is worth changing #1 or #2, and I also support the devs on their infinite reliability of parts, so that doesn't leave much to attack. Aerodynamics really isn't the way to go about trying to nerf asparagus staging. You might manage to reduce the number of wider-than-tall rockets out there, but I'd be willing to bet that across the general KSP population, that would account for a fairly small percentage of asparagus rockets. I know that for me, it would be close to 1% of all asparagus launches.

Last Monday, many of the streamers mentioned surface samples being possible, but that that was the only science possible.

I agree in theory, but in practice people have shown that they do have an impact (or at least did in the version of KSP tested). I'll see if I can find the thread where this was discussed.

Well, it is optional, so you can keep the current behavior.

I know that they've done one point-release on a Saturday, but that was because there was a serious bug in a release on the preceding Thursday (maybe Friday). I've never seen a major update on a weekend.

Not a full circumnavigation, but I hit all 15 biomes in a single mission with a hybrid lander/rover. Hit most biomes by driving, but did a few suborbital hops when I had a long way to go or a nasty obstacle to bypass. All told, probably 200-300 km or so of driving.

I disagree, they stated that tweakables would solve the problem of a liquid-fuel-only atomic engine needing liquid-only fuel tanks without needing to duplicate all the different tanks, and the current implementation doesn't solve that issue. I think it's possible that this was the first pass on tweakables, and that the more complicated tweakables will come later. It's also possible that they changed their minds on the liquid-fuel-only atomic engines, so they feel they don't need the more comprehensive tweakables.

I tend to use a lot of solid boosters early on in career mode, but stop using them completely on manned flights as soon as I get fuel lines. I continue using them on light probes if I need a little boost but not a lot.

Dwight_js is correct. basically, the longer range the dish, the more focused the transmission strength. Some dishes have fairly wide cones, 45 degrees or so, so half a right triangle, but some have a width of 0.01 degrees, so you wouldn't want to use that for the Mun or Minmus, because even at 47 Mm, the beam width would be less than 2km across, so you couldn't target Kerbin and expect to hit satellites in orbit around Kerbin with any kind of consistency. For that matter, Eve at it's closest point to Kerbin is about (wild guess not taking inclination into account) 3800000 km, which with a 0.01 degree spread gives it a spread that's still narrower than Kerbin itself even at that distance.

1.5 million meters would be 1500 km. This is low enough that the satellite could contact KSP with an omnidirectional antenna, and satellites can talk to each other provided you have four satellites 90 degrees apart instead of three 120 degrees apart. However, it's not at an altitude that would produce a synchronous orbit, so you'll need multiple satellites. Actually, unless you're just communicating between places on Kerbin, you'll wind up wanting multiple satellites. With a single geostationary satellite, there will be times when the satellite is on the far side of Kerbin from whatever it is you want it to communicate with unless what you want it to communicate with is also in a geostationary orbit. Also, if what you want it to communicate with is either not in Kerbin's SoI or has an apoapsis above the Mun's orbit, it's quite likely that at some point the Mun (and other bodies as well) may be blocking line of sight between the geostationary satellite and what you want to communicate with. In early career mode, I usually do three satellites each with a Communotron 16 and three or four of the DTS-M1 dish in identical circular orbits in the 650-800 km altitude range. At that height, one of them can always see KSC (though not the same one), they're close enough that the other two can communicate to the one that can see KSC through the Communotrons. The dishes on the satellites target the active vessel, the Mun, and Minmus. That gives me reasonable coverage within Kerbin's SoI, though sometimes I also put up three satellites around the Mun or Minmus, with just a Communotron 16 and a single DTS-M1 dish, with the dish aimed at Kerbin. When I start entering the solar SoI, I usually either put up another three satellites with a Communotron and two long range dishes, or just replace the three existing satellites with satellites with four dishes, two short range and two long range. By this time, I'll have Communotron 32 antennas, which means that I can place the satellites at a higher altitude (though still not geostationary if I'm doing a three satellite constellation). Finally, I believe a dish can communicate with an omnidirectional antenna, though you don't get the full range of the dish. Depending on the version of RT2 you're using (and possibly configuration settings), you may only get the range of the omnidirectional antenna.

If we were emotionless automatons, BERTY. What BERTY is overlooking is quality of life factors. Morale is going to tank after this, and probably even more so if no rescue/recovery attempt is made. Morale may well become a deciding factor at some point in the mission, so it's possible that the mission could fail precisely because BERTY made the "logical" decision, ignoring factors that aren't logical. This could be the case even without Jeb reaching the point of mutiny or other forms of disobedience. Humans, and Kerbals by extension, are not machines, and our mood affects our job performance. This is ignoring the factors that affect things beyond the mission. While having the knowledge that could come from this mission would be good, how many people back on Kerbin are going to be OK with the fact that this knowledge came at the price of making no attempt to recover people that died acquiring that knowledge. At least in this case, it's a passing thing, eventually, people will get over it.

Basically, any biome that has both land and water can generate two sets of science, but only while on the surface. EVA reports and such that benefit from biomes won't benefit from this. As near as I can tell, it's because experiments while splashed down are counted separately from those while landed.

Yeah, there's quite a few "interesting" corner cases in the KSP fuel flow logic. One of the KSP regulars has done a tutorial on the quirks, but I can't remember his name.

There's a few reasons that could happen, the most common being that one fuel line is getting placed backwards. Another possibility is that the fuel line isn't connecting to what you think it is, but is clipping a solar panel or something like that. I had that happen recently, and it was quite annoying. Anyway, I'll take a look at it if you get the craft file up somewhere.

Two things: First, you can get around that. Take a crew report, EVA a kerbal, "take data" on the capsule twice. Reenter the capsule. You can now do another crew report, though you'll want to move to a different biome/altitude before you do that. Second, the DTS-M1, which you should have, has the range to reach the Mun and Minmus. If you're patient and have enough life support (if you're using a life support mod), you can wait for KSC to come over the horizon and transmit directly to it without needing a relay network. Note that if you're on the Mun and you can't see Kerbin, it's not going to appear, the Mun is tidally locked to Kerbin.

Methodology really depends on your piloting and design abilities, but here's my general path: T1: No decision, take it T2: Take them all (I disagree on the TT-38K radial decoupler, it's the one I use the most on my earlier craft, and it's lighter than the TT-70). If I had to pick an order (I usually get 130+ points from my first flight, so I wind up taking them all together), I'd probably take Survivability, then General Rocketry, then Stability. At this point, I stop doing things by Tier, and focus on goals. Science Tech (SC-9001 Science Jr.) -> Electrics: Basic solar panels. Nice to have, but not as important as they were in 0.22 unless you play with a life support mod that requires electricity. General Construction - > Fuel Systems: Fuel lines enable me to do landers with drop tanks, cross-fed launchers, etc. At this point, I can do manned launches to the Mun (hitting multiple biomes), Minmus (hitting all biomes), and Duna/Ike, so it stops becoming about what I need to go somewhere and becomes about having the ability to get more science from the trip. Space Exploration (Thermometer) -> Advanced Exploration (Barometer) Advanced Electrics -> Electronics (Accelerometer) -> Advanced Science Tech (Negative Gravioli Detector/Computing Nose Cone) At this point, I can pretty much finish the tech tree without entering the solar SoI, or I can do manned missions to Duna/Dres/Gilly, or I can drop probes on Eve/Jool/Eeloo, so past this point, it depends on what I'm in the mood to do.

I think the point they were trying to make is if you're doing a constellation instead of a single satellite, there's no reason to use a synchronous orbit for the constellation, especially if you do it at an altitude that all the satellites can connect to each other via omnidirectional antennas. At that point, other than one omnidirectional antenna, the outbound dishes are the only antennas the satellites need. You've still got 100% coverage of the equatorial regions, less coverage elsewhere, with the amount of coverage depending on altitude and number of satellites.

To be honest, I always push for all the science parts before I bother with the larger engines. The negative gravioli detector benefits from biomes even at "High over" altitudes, so that's 27 experiments for Minmus, 45 experiments for the Mun. With that, especially now that Minmus has biomes, I tend to be pretty close to maxing out my science before I go to Duna, and even Duna I usually do with the 1.25m parts.

Those numbers included the delta-v needed to get from the surface of Duna to orbit, but your original question sounded like your limit was after returning to orbit. If that's correct, then you should have had a margin for a trip to Ike and then return to Kerbin, especially if you return to Kerbin by departing Ike with a low Duna periapsis, then burning prograde at the periapsis to achieve the proper ejection velocity. The timing might be a bit tricky, but it's how I leave from any moon if I'm heading out to any planet other than the one the moon orbits.