AndrewBCrisp

If I may recommend a couple of sources: There are some real life groups looking into the challenges of interstellar travel. The British Interplanetary Society has been conducting a number of case studies over on its Icarus Interstellar website, including Project Hyperion, which has been looking into world-ships in question: http://www.icarusinterstellar.org/projects/project-hyperion/. Covering a wider field, the Centauri Dreams blog examines several areas of starflight, from exoplanet research to propulsion concepts to more exotic science and technology and even the philosophical perspective: http://www.centauri-dreams.org/ Since there are a lot of topics, I'd recommend using the site's search function for "world ship" and that should give you a fair bit of material. As for my personal opinion: I suspect that - if you want exploring and colonizing the target system to remain the goal - you should probably plan for a travel time of roughly 2-3 generations, with a dedicated culture centered around completing the journey and seeding a new home for humanity. 2-3 generations should help to keep cultural "creep" to a minimum. For the nearer stars, this would work out to a maximum velocity of around .1-.2 c for the ship in question. I would also recommend a small crew (~200) with a sizeable gene bank as an insurance against inbreeding, with room aboard the ship to grow. Don't count on the ship's livable space being very large - a cylinder roughly 100 m across and 500 m long should be sufficient, given the travel time (I'm doing a quick-and-dirty calculation here, so check against the above sources for better numbers). I'm personally against the idea of "uploading" - whether or not the result is sentient and self-aware, I'd rather see flesh-and-blood humans seeded across the stars to evolve and diverge into a million new civilizations, than have something that remembers being human and perhaps decides to discard its heritage wholesale. Final note for now: many world-ships in story and film make the assumption of on-board cultures and governments that make concentration camps seem like vacation spots. I would caution against such an approach - if we want people to travel aboard world-ships, they should be appealing to some extent. We've had some sea-faring cultures in our past - I'm thinking of the Vikings and Polynesians in particular - and I would expect that future world-ship cultures might be similiar. A spacefaring people with adventure in their hearts and songs on their lips, who's hands are never idle... you get the picture. Just my thoughts - all errors remain my own.

On a very special You Will Not Go To Space Today, Canadian Thanksgiving edition.... Taken during my testing of a MegaLifter-V heavy lift vehicle. After the rocket crashed I looked at the flight report; apparently the errant booster disconnected from the radial decoupler, leaving the decoupler behind. This has never happened before; I've accidentally separated boosters before, but never had one shear off in flight like this. No pogo-ing or shaking of the craft before; I had three struts anchoring each booster to the core stage. Could this be a nibble from the Kraken?

I think the closest approach I had was back when I first got the game. My first attempt to put a satellite in orbit (no calculations, just slapped engines and fuel tanks together into something resembling a rocket) had the rocket go retrograde. I was on my last stage, looking morosely at the trajectory that wasn't even going to get higher than 30 km from the surface. By accident I hit the space bar. Please note the last stage was still boosting at full thrust at the time. So I watched the satellite separate from the booster, the distance widening to a few meters... then the booster caught up to the satellite. When the smoke cleared, all that was left were a couple of antennae in very low orbit. It was my only satellite loss by collision. I had future failures, but nothing that spectacular.

The rover gifs gave me a good chuckle. *sigh* indeed. Casting my vote for a rescue mission as well. Let's bring them home... so we can send them out again, of course!

Preamble With the recent successful completion of the KerbalLab 1 mission, proving Kerbals can stay in space for extended periods without getting (too) bored or running out of snacks, the Kerbal Space Program decided that now was the time to attempt a Kerballed mission to the Mun. A first attempt was made with Kerbal 4, but not 3 minutes into the launch, a malfunction caused the Service Module engine to fire while the core stage was still boosting. Thankfully, the new emergency abort systems worked flawlessly, and the Kerbal 4 crew (Henfred Kerman, Geofvey Kerman, and Corbo Kerman) escaped with no injuries. The same could not be said for their underwear. After tracing the flaw to improper wiring and stage-control programming, KSC decided to try again. Kerbal 5 was prepared with a new crew. Bill Kerman was selected as Commander, with Dilfel Kerman as pilot and astronomer Sigdorf Kerman as mission specialist. This would be Bill's second space mission. Reaching the Mun Kerbal 5 launched on Day 180, and achieved orbit with none of the problems that plagued Kerbal 4. Liftoff! Kerbal 5 separating from the KerbalLifter-III core stage. Despite suggestions from some scientists that Kerbal 5 should employ something called a "free return" trajectory, KSC mission planners opted for a more direct approach. Kerbal 5 took a little over 5 hours to reach the Mun once it completed its trans-Munar injection burn, and entered into a prograde orbit. Here the first real concern manifested itself when Dilfel reported the spacecraft's fuel consumption. As a result, plans to place Kerbal 5 in a 100 km circular orbit, inclined for maximum coverage of the Mun's surface were scrapped, and the spacecraft settled into an elliptical orbit with a 350 km apoapsis and a 150 km periapsis. Kerbal 5 conducting its Munar orbital insertion burn. Nevertheless, the views of the Mun were superb. Sigdorf: "So many craters... They should have sent a poet." After a few orbits, Kerbal 5 made the return trip. However, while conducting the burn to place the spacecraft into Kerbin orbit, Dilfel's worst fears were confirmed - the spacecraft exhausted its fuel supply before it could complete the burn. Kerbal 5 was trapped in an elliptical orbit, 194 km Pe / 445 km Ap, with no way to return home. Fortunately for the crew of Kerbal 5, help was a lot closer than they could have dreamed. Supporter 1 under construction in the VAB. The next scheduled mission to KerbalLab would have involved a mid-mission resupply of the space station by a robot supply ship. This vessel, Supporter 1, had just cleared its ground checks when Kerbal 5 was stranded in orbit. As Supporter 1 was designed to carry 4 tons of fuel, and another 4 tons of RCS monopropellant, Flight directer Gene Kerman ordered the supply ship to be launched at once. Supporter 1 approaches the stranded Kerbal 5 Saved! "The supply ship took close to 4 hours to rendezvous with us, and docking was nearly flawless," Bill Kerman reported shortly after Supporter 1 began to transfer its vital cargo. "Nobody tell Jebidiah that a robot beat his docking record." It's job complete, Supporter 1 burns up in Kerbin's atmosphere. With a fresh supply of fuel, Dilfel was able to circularize the spacecraft's orbit, and even attempted to bring the capsule down near KSC. No previous returning spacecraft was able to accomplish this, and Dilfel sadly wasn't able to change that. Kerbal 5 splashed down safely in the ocean over a hundred kilometers west of KSC, and was recovered with no further incidents. Kerbal 5's triumphant return. Aftermath and Lessons Learned Supporter 1's excellent performance helped save the lives of three Kerbals, and demonstrated the utility of robot supply ships to aid Kerbal exploration of space. However, the rescue has pushed back the KerbalLab 2 mission, as a new Supporter spacecraft must be built and ready before the mission can be attempted. As for future missions to the Mun, the fuel issue has forced KSC mission planners to rethink their approach. Among the options being considered to solve the problem are: Employing a Munar Transfer stage for the trans-Munar injection burn, thus saving fuel for the return trip, Employing Supporter spacecraft for refuelling, either in Kerbin orbit on return, or even in Munar orbit, Employing the til-now neglected Free Return trajectory for future missions. Gene Kerman has stated that future Kerbal missions will take a "belt and suspenders" approach to safety, suggesting that possibly all of these options will be used.

My program was stalled due to a few IRL issues (including my current cold *achoo!*) but here's what I have so far: Kerbal program - Crewed capsules to orbit and elsewhere. Kerbal 1 - 3 kerbal capsule to orbit, returned successfully. Kerbal 2 / Kerbal 3 - orbital rendezvous and docking. Both capsules returned successfully after switching mission commanders. Kerbal 4 (planned) - Munar orbit and return. Further missions yet to be determined. KerbalLab - Experimental orbital habitat to study long-term exposure to microgravity. KerbalLab 1 (in progress) - 3 kerbal crew to spend 15 days in orbit. KerbalLab 2 (planned) - 3 kerbal crew to spend 30 days in orbit. KerbalLab 3 (planned) - 3 kerbal crew to spend 60 days in orbit. Future missions TBD. Supporter - uncrewed supply craft for orbital operations. Supporter 1 - for launch to supply KerbalLab 2 mission at halfway mark. Supporter 2 - for launch to supply KerbalLab 3 mission at 14 day mark. Supporter 3 - for launch to supply KerbalLab 3 mission at 49 day mark. Mun program - uncrewed orbiters and landers sent to the Mun. Mun 1 - satellite deployed in a 45 degree inclination orbit around the Mun. Mun 2 - lander (successful) Mun 3 - lander (successful) Mun 4 (planned) - second satellite for increased communication coverage of Munar surface. Mun 5 (planned ) - lander Minmus program - uncrewed orbiters and landers to Minmus. Minmus 1 - orbiter. Minmus 2 (planned) - lander. Kerbol Observer - sun-observation satellites placed in high solar orbit. Kerbol Observer - first attempt (failed; booster stage flamed out after achieving orbit despite having sufficient fuel. Satellite now in low Kerbin orbit). Kerbol Observer 2 - Satellite successfully deployed to an orbit between Kerbin and Eve, returning data on Kerbol. Kerbol Observer 3 (planned) - close orbiting satellite, to gather data within 1,000,000 km of Kerbol's corona. Planet - uncrewed probes to objects outside of Kerbin's SOI. Planet 1 - orbital mission to Duna. Initial Hohmann transfer failed, necessitating a correction burn at mission day 76 to achieve a potential capture. Mission success still uncertain. Planet 2 (planned) - orbital mission to Eve. And that's it for now. I'm hoping the .22 update won't be save-breaking (as some rumors suggest), so I can build on this with science modules and sample-return missions. We'll have to wait and see, I suppose.

Since "Homeward" has already been mentioned on the argument of Why The Prime Directive Is Bad Bad Bad, I won't add more to it beyond to state that the episode in question was very badly written. If we're going to use Star Trek in this discussion, I'd recommend the 2nd season TNG episode "Pen Pals" as a counterpoint - it was perhaps a much better treatment of the Prime Directive and the ethical baggage it carries IMHO. That said, the Prime Directive as imagined in Star Trek was bungled by writers more often than not, and I personally suspect the amount of thought that went into it was along the lines of "How can we throw some big legal obstacle in the way of Our Heroes?" than on any serious attempt to consider how we should deal with alien cultures ethically. It makes too many assumptions along the lines of human-alien contact, including: that we'd be able to understand the alien culture to the point that we can recognize a problem, that we are more advanced than the alien culture in question (or: should we worry about our effect on the Organians or the Q?), and that our Superior Advancement is only a few centuries or millenia ahead of the alien culture in question. Personally, I suspect the chances of a "Prime-Directive-Problem" ever arising in our future is so small as to be not worth considering. Given the vastness of space, the large numbers of planets, and the likelihood that our ventures will be slower than light rather than faster, the chances of us running into a civilization "sufficiently less advanced" than ours is remote. A more likely scenario - and a better foundation for a Prime Directive kind of law - would be finding a planet that bears life, but not sentience. Do we settle and develop the planet, or leave it alone? Settling a life-bearing planet would certainly create a new human culture and give us an extra bulwark against extinction, but could also mean we would preempt the development of a native sentient species. If interstellar travel becomes commonplace - and that's a big "if" - there's also the concern of cross-contamination. While humans might not pick up alien diseases, the chances of an alien lifeform finding a niche on Earth (or other settled human worlds) is higher. Modern space exploration already has planetary protection protocols to prevent accidental cross-contamination within this system, and I'd expect we would expand them as we venture to other stars. Ultimately, the best ethical development might be to leave life-bearing planets (and the systems they occupy) alone, save for dedicated scientific colonies designed to remain isolate and easy to remove if necessary. There should be plenty of lifeless planets we can terraform or asteroids we can convert into habitats, that this should not be a problem for our descendants. The only time I'd imagine a need for a Cultural Prime Directive would be if and when we encounter another starfaring culture. However, it's likely said culture might be more advanced than we, and so the concern would be over how they would affect us, rather than the other way around.

KERBALLAB 1 - LAUNCH REPORT Date: 124/101 K.E. (Kerbal Era) Crew Roster: Mission Commander: Bob Kerman CSM Pilot: Jebidiah Kerman Mission Specialist: Mungel Kerman (engineer) Launch Transcript Begins: T-00:00:01:00 CAPCOM: KerbalLab 1, this is CAPCOM, you are GO for launch. T-60 seconds and counting. BOB: Roger, CAPCOM. CAPCOM: T-30 seconds. Retracting fuel lines. JEB: Roger CAPCOM: Engines nominal, tank pressure is nominal. Engaging SAS. MUNGEL: Is that normal? Shouldn't we use that after launch? JEB: Relax, Mungel. I've flown these capsules before. CAPCOM: T-10...9...8...7...6...5...4. Engine Start... 2...1...LIFTOFF! T+00:00:1:30 JEB: CAPCOM, this is One. First booster pair separation complete. CAPCOM: Roger, One, separation confirmed... checking ascent profile now. BOB: How are you holding up, Mungel? MUNGEL: Nnnnn... Didn't feel like this in the simulator... JEB: You're right, somethings off. CAPCOM, this is One. We're showing reduced thrust, can you confirm? CAPCOM: Roger, One, we see the same. Thrust is 75% of optimal. Stand by. JEB: Roger, CAPCOM. Uh, make it quick, okay? BOB: Jeb, can we still make it to orbit? JEB: If we can get the engines back up soon, yeah. If not-- Oh. Ha. Hahaha. BOB: Jeb? CAPCOM: One, this is CAPCOM. We're registering zero errors on our end. What's your systems show? JEB: CAPCOM, this is One. I've found the problem. Ah... heh-heh... I think the thrust control got stuck. Giving it a shove... There we go! MUNGEL: NNNNN! This is worse! CAPCOM: One, we are showing 100% thrust now. Good job. Recalculating your flight profile now. BOB: "Got stuck", Jeb? JEB: Heh. Sorry about that... T+00:00:5:00 JEB: Final booster seperation complete. Gravity turn looks good. 25,000 meters and climbing. CAPCOM: Roger, One. T+00:00:9:00 CAPCOM: One, this is CAPCOM, we read your orbit as stable at 75,000 meters. JEB: Roger, CAPCOM. Core Stage separation in 3...2...1... Firing bolts. CAPCOM: We copy your separation. Assuming control of core stage for deorbit burn. Have a good trip to KerbalLab, guys. BOB: Roger that, CAPCOM and thanks. Whew. Zero-gee. Feels good, doesn't it, Mungel? MUNGEL: Yeah. I... I can get used to this. Oh, wow! Guys, look at Kerbin! JEB: Awesome sight, isn't it? MUNGEL: Yeah... This was worth the trip, alright. JEB: Hey, Bob, Kerbal 2 and Kerbal 3... they managed their rendezvous in, what? 20 hours? BOB: Yes...? JEB: Well, a dinner at the Astronaut Complex says I can get to KerbalLab in just ten hours. You in? BOB: I don't bet, Jeb. CAPCOM: One, this is CAPCOM, you've got a hot mike up there. Flight wants to remind you there are to be no wagers during the mission. Copy? JEB: Ah... Copy that, CAPCOM. BOB: See? T+00:09:35:21 BOB: Mungel, how does it look? MUNGEL: Almost there. Jeb, we're drifting a little off axis. JEB: I got it, Mungel. Relax! MUNGEL: Nnnn... BOB: Mungel? MUNGEL: Less than 5 meters now... Contact in...3...2... JEB: Capture! RCS off. Engaging clamps... there. BOB: Kerbin, this is KerbalLab 1. We have hard-dock. CAPCOM: Copy that, One. Nice going. BOB: Well, Mungel, you helped build this habitat. Care to be the first inside? MUNGEL: I want to inspect the outside first. BOB: Okay then. Helmets on, everybody. MUNGEL: Exterior check is complete. Everything looks good, Bob. I'm entering the habitat now. MUNGEL: Okay. Life support is active. Computer is active. Switching communications from CSM to Station now. BOB: Capsule communications are off. Kerbin, you still copy? CAPCOM: We copy, KerbalLab 1. Signal's coming in strong. Getting station telemetry and all systems look nominal. BOB: Mungel, how's our consumables? MUNGEL: We've got enough food to last us for a full 30 days. We'll only be here half that time, of course. Oh, yes, and one other thing. Hah! BOB: What is it? MUNGEL: I had the launch crew stow a couple of packages of chocolates aboard in the instrument bay. They made it through the launch just fine. JEB: Hahah! Well, that's another first for the Kerbal Space Program. First contraband in orbit! BOB: Our thanks, Mungel. Looks like our fifteen day mission is off to a good start. Mission Clock: Day 1 Start

Preface As Kerbals began to set their sights on conquering space, it soon became apparent there were a number of questions that must be answered. Questions of physics and engineering - can spacecraft be launched, travel to their destinations and return safely - were the easiest to answer. However, questions of biology, medicine, and psychology - how will Kerbals adapt to freefall, and how will long-term exposure to the space environment affect them - were not so easy. As a first step, KerbalLab was launched: From the spacecraft description: An orbital laboratory designed to study how Kerbals respond to microgravity, and to prepare for long-term presence in space, KerbalLab can house up to 4 Kerbals for 3 months. Because boredom is expected to be the biggest danger, a sizeable supply of board games have been placed aboard, and all sharp objects have been removed prior to launch. KerbalLab was placed in a 150 km equatorial orbit courtesy of the KerbalLifter-II launch vehicle, the current workhorse of the KSP. The first crew is currently being selected and will fly up to the orbiting habitat for its first mission shortly. Full reports of their activities will be provided in this thread.

I believe Brabbit's point was that we didn't *have* the manpower, even though we would have wanted it. As for stopping the portal storms, I don't think we could have. Consider: 1. Inter-dimensional teleportation is largely unknown to humanity. While the Lambda project allowed for exploration of Xen, we didn't venture any further into the Combine's territory before they took note of us and tried to invade Black Mesa. I expect that further research into inter-dimensional portals may have resumed after the Black Mesa incident, but any project that started to halt the portal storms would have had to start from scratch because: 2. Most of the scientists involved with the Lambda project did not survive. Yes, Issac Kleiner and Eli Vance got out of there, but a lot of scientists did not - either they were killed by the aliens, or by the US military. Furthermore: 3. Black Mesa itself was destroyed. At the end of Half Life: Opposing Force, the mysterious G-Man detonates a nuclear bomb, destroying the facility. It's a safe bet all notes and equipment were lost in the explosion. If the G-Man - or whoever he's really working for - had further knowledge and technology, he withheld it for his own reasons. As for the concept that Earth's militaries could have defeated the Combine during the initial invasion, let me be extremely skeptical of that assertion. Yes, our best weapons could probably stand up to the Combine tech. However: 1. Our soldiers and generals would not have known this beforehand. Even assuming the Vortigaunts were completely candid about their knowledge of Combine technology (and given the way they speak, that's questionable), we would need to perform tests against Combine materials and train against Combine tactics in order to be effective. That all takes time. 2. The Combine attacked all regions simultaneously. Given the account above on how the Seven Hour War went down, our military forces went from having to defend against headcrabs and bullsquids to fighting overwhelming forces and weapons pouring from within our city centers. Even if some areas managed to respond fast enough to get a few hits in, other areas would have folded with soldiers dying before they even knew they were at war. 3. The Combine attack caught us by surprise. It's one thing to deal with the occasional random portal spitting out a bunch of antlions. Having multiple portals popping open and spewing out intelligent, armoured, trained forces is quite another. 3. It's likely the Combine had help from the inside. Dr. Breen was in contact with the Combine during the war, but how long was he in contact with them before the war? Chances are he would have fed them intelligence on where our military command centers would be, as well as locations of major population centers and national capitals. With such information, the first shots from the Combine invasion would likely have beheaded most military forces, so that even if one tank or fighter squadron learned how "easy" a gunship or strider could be taken down, that unit might never have been able to inform the others. 4. Our collected military forces were probably not on speaking terms with each other before the invasion. Even assuming the world recognized the portal storms as a global problem, chances are most nations would not cooperate with each other to the extent needed to present a united front against the Combine. Militaries within NATO as well as other international alliances would certainly have some ways cooperate, but how easily would, say, American forces accept orders from Chinese commanders? Or South African generals to advise Swedish troops? In the Half-Life world, the cards were stacked against us from the word go. We could certainly fight back, given time to organize a resistance and make preparations, but against the initial invasion? Not possible.

Been a while, but today I successfully put the first part of my Mun refueling and research station into Munar orbit and docked the Mun Lander to it for future missions: A second fuel tank and a Mun Geology Lab (essentially a Hitchhiker module dressed up to be all science-y) will be added to the station later.

I finally landed on the Mun! Commander Scott Kerman (pictured left) of Kerbal 5 was the first Kerbal on the Mun, with Specialist Dunlock Kerman (pictured right) his partner. They spent half an hour on the surface, collecting rocks and experimenting with using the RCS pack to get around on the Mun (pretty good, although they skidded a lot on the ground due to improper landings), before returning to orbit. I actually had to spend some time reloading quicksaves as I was having trouble first landing, then taking off again. But thankfully I had no design problems - only piloting ones. As with Kerbal 4, I'm leaving the Mun Lander in orbit for future landing missions - but next mission will likely be to refuel the lander: I almost drained the main fuel tank getting the lander back into orbit. Plan to post a full After Action Report (with pics) in Mission Reports when I have a chance to write it up.

Well, I suppose my next questions would be: how big do you want it to be? How much gravity are you looking for? If we have a number, we might be able to work forward from that. I've been doing some reading and there does seem to be a clear relation between the mass of a planet and its radius. The details can be found in this PDF: http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~jackson/pdf/SotinJacksonSeager2010_Exoplanets.pdf but I'll skip to the essential component for our discussion. This equation determines the relationship between the mass and radius of a planet: R/R(Earth) = a * (M/M(Earth))^b The variables "a" and "b" are coefficients that change depending on the kind of planet. If you look at the PDF, Table 5 carries the coefficients for Terrestrial planets, ocean planets, and "super-mercury" planets. There are other equations in the PDF - some of them quite complex - but this one should serve our purposes for now. One other thing: one of the reasons why planets higher than 10 Earth masses are likely to become gas giants (even miniature ones like Uranus and Neptune) is because their higher gravity will trap lighter molecules like hydrogen. On worlds like Earth, hydrogen rarely sticks around; once it gets into the upper atmosphere, it can be excited to speeds exceeding escape velocity just by being exposed to sunlight, and so it's lost to the planet forever. Heavier worlds can trap hydrogen (and helium, and other light gasses) and so accumulate thick atmospheres.

After spending some time landing probes on the Mun and Minmus, today I took a huge step towards putting a Kerbal on the Mun; designed and tested a Mun Lander / CSM stack. Kerbal 4 ran through almost all the basic maneuvers for a Munar mission - travelling to the Mun, separating the lander from the booster stage, Munar orbit insertion. Everything worked perfectly. I left the Mun Lander in a 30 km equatorial orbit around the Mun and returned the Kerbal 4 crew back to Kerbin. Kerbal 5 - either tomorrow or Friday, not sure when I'll have the time - will be the big event!

According to Wikipedia, the basic definition of a Super-Earth planet would be a planet with a mass between 2 and 10 Earth-Masses (some sources suggest 5 Earth masses as the proper lower-limit for a Super-Earth world). While I don't think there is a proper convention for the radius of a Super-Earth planet, I suspect even the more massive worlds would have a radius not much larger than twice that of Earth's. So, assuming 10 Earth-masses and a radius of 2, you'd get an approximate surface gravity of 2.5 gees. Heavy, but there's no technical bar to life evolving in such an environment, provided it has enough energy. Expect a thicker atmosphere, though, and likely a higher air pressure at sea level. Beyond that, conditions could vary wildly, from mostly dry all around to a global ocean. No idea how plate tectonics would behave on such a world or even if plate tectonics would still work on so massive a planet. Others can probably tell you more than I, but I hope this helps.

Conducted two Munar probe landings, and a successful test of an upper stage to deliver Kerbals to the Mun. Both Mun 2 and Mun 3 employed a technique I saw described elsewhere on this forum to deposit the probe lander where I wanted it. Specifically, I adjusted the orbit to have a periapsis of ~5 km above the landing site, then used my probe's upper stage to kill as much horizontal velocity as I could before jettisoning it. Was able to guide the lander down and still have some fuel left in the tank. Oh yes, Mun 3 found this south of its position: I now have a good idea where my first Kerballed landing will go... once I design and test a lander.

By "first stage", do you mean the vehicle explodes when the boosters separate, or is the vehicle exploding on ignition and liftoff?

I think this project is a mistake for now. It's too soon. We have a LOT of questions that we need to answer before we can set up any permanent base on Mars, be it 4 people or 4 million. The technical questions (building the spacecraft, landing on Mars, building the base) are the easiest ones. Other people have mentioned the need for constant supplies from Earth, as well as the psychological problems of sending 4 people to another planet with no possibility of return. My personal thinking that this is also planned as a reality show is also a warning sign. Reality shows thrive on drama - a Martian colony needs as little drama as possible. To found a colony in less than 10 years hints of hubris of the highest order. If and when it fails - leaving 4 or more people dead on the Martian surface - the backlash against private human spaceflight could be huge. A more incremental program to put a colony on Mars would be safer. The Inspiration Mars flyby mission would help answer a number of questions about human interplanetary flight. With those answered, we could go to a Mars landing, then a temporary base, and then set up a permanent colony. It'll take longer but I think would have a better chance of success.

Had two failed and one successful mission today. First failure was my Planet-1 mission to Moho. I got the probe and its booster stage into orbit just fine, and launched at what I thought were the optimum angles needed. Ejection burn occurred without problems, and I was able to perform a proper correction burn to put my probe in the same orbital inclination as Moho. That burn - and the time it took - told me two things: 1. My choice for Planet-1's booster engine (the LV-909) was a poor one. More thrust would be needed for faster (and hopefully more accurate) burns. 2. While I factored in enough fuel for Kerbin orbit ejection and Moho orbit capture, I didn't factor in the inclination orbit correction burn. I wasn't going to have enough fuel to complete the mission, leaving the probe to circle the sun for eternity. I also think I missed the launch window by a small margin, meaning I would have needed more correction burns to get Planet-1 to its destination even if I had the fuel. Well, better luck next time. My second failure was the first test launch of my Sigma-V Medium-Lift launch vehicle. While I think I have enough fuel for ascent and orbit, I had problems with control during ascent (rocket started to roll as soon as it cleared the launch clamps, and started to yaw a few kilometers up) and the six external boosters flexed on ascent. Solution: winglets on the boosters to control the roll and more struts to keep the boosters still. Sigma 4 will launch in a couple of game-days to test these improvements. The success, though, was my Mun-1 orbital mission. The Mun-1 probe now sits in an 80 km polar orbit, instruments happily collecting scientific data for future Mun missions. Not my best track record so far, but progress nonetheless

Hm. In all honesty, I doubt that the existence of a Kerbal space program with lots of willing volunteers and (seemingly) unlimited funds says anything about their government at all. What it does say is that, at this point in time, space exploration is a Priority for the Kerbals. We can safely rule out nationalistic competition or conflict, since there are no weapons in the official game (and no plans to introduce any). This leaves us to consider non-nationalistic reasons why the Kerbals would seek to conquer space. To quote Carl Sagan: Sooner or later, even with no Space Race, no international conflict, no nationalistic posturing, the Kerbals will come to this realization. I doubt they'd throw everything they have into space exploration - though we get to play with almost unlimited funds, we really have no idea what percentage of the Kerbal Gross Domestic Product goes into space - but even a modest investment over the years can produce a program similar to what we're playing with. Any government and economy can do this, so long as they recognize the need. And even if they don't, I expect even the most utopian Kerbal society will engage in space exploration to keep parts of its society busy. Scientists and engineers will have ideas they want to see developed, and every society will have its misfits, its people who just don't conform to the social standard. Space exploration is one way to keep such people busy, because the alternative is to let them become so disaffected with society as a whole that they would start plotting its downfall. Give the misfit and malcontents a constructive outlet for their energies, and the Kerbals gain new knowledge of the universe, an insurance policy against cosmic disasters and increased peace and stability at home.

I tend not to think so much in milestones as programs; but I do have a progression in mind. Kerbal program - crewed orbital, transMunar, and interplanetary missions. Usually a "there-and-back-again" approach of launch, accomplish the task, and return. The current stage of the Kerbal program is primarily limited to Kerbin orbit, testing hardware for future Mun missions, though I have attempted a Munar orbital mission (almost drained the tank getting back to Kerbin :/) Expedition program - crewed missions to the Kerbal Space Station I've constructed. More for bragging rights than anything, given Kerbals are currently immortal/immune to microgravity effects, but these are long-term habitation missions. Mun program - uncrewed missions to the Mun. Starting with orbiters, but later missions will be landers at various spots on the Mun in preparation for crewed landings. "Sample return" missions are being considered. Planet program - uncrewed missions to other planets. As with the Mun program, starts with orbiters and progresses to landers and sample return. Currently waiting for my first launch window to start this program off (Moho will likely be the first target, given my current planet positions). Sigma program - uncrewed test flights of my Sigma launch vehicles, in efforts to improve existing designs or build larger models with heavier payload capacity.

Just finished delivering two improved solar arrays to Kerbal Space Station One.

It's also helpful to note that action groups combine when assembling larger craft. For example, if you're building a space station, and you assign certain actions (e.g. toggle comm-antenna) to custom01 to one station part, and different actions (toggle solar panels) to custom01 a different station part; when the two components are joined in orbit, the actions for custom01 become grouped together. So that when you press "1" while controlling the station, both solar panels AND comm antenna will extend or retract depending on their previous state. This can be useful some times and annoying at others.

I'm not sure whether the game engine will allow you to break the laws of physics. Essentially, what you're looking for is a reactionless drive (a.k.a. a "space drive"). I've heard of some theoretical work being done on space drives (for example, the work of Dr. Marc Millis) but nothing near practical application. Others more savvy with the game engine would have to speak up, but I think you might have to modify the engine itself to allow such drives in the game. The only other alternative I can think of would be a solar or magnetic sail, but again, I'm not sure if the game engine would allow for it as things stand. Those are my thoughts on the problem; all errors remain my own.

Hello again all: SUCCESS! Weighing down the cupola was the key. I whipped up a suitable module and a more robust upper stage, and because the mass of the new payload exceeded 15 tons, put it on my Sigma-II launch vehicle. You can see the completed unit in the screenshot below: Liftoff and staging went as well as before, and I started my gravity turn at 10 km. This time, control was near-flawless. I was able to turn the craft and stop the turn as easily as if I had any other command module on board. Once I got the craft into orbit and deorbited the last stage of the launch vehicle, I conducted a few tests of the now much-lighter craft and control remains good. I think we nailed this one. Thanks again to everyone who helped! Now to dock the module to the station, which will be a challenge in and of itself...