magnemoe

Have an bussard ramjet runing on the file server

I start around 70% before, only exception is then the burn take you to far inside the atmosphere. Do not aim for perfect accuracy but do an correction burn afterward, this you want to be accurate with, you might want to do an late adjustment burn, 3-5 times the distance to sphere of influence, this to get into either equator or polar orbit and and good attitude, this is rarely needed for mun or minmus. Finaly inside SOI adjust for correct attitude and set up the burn to get into orbit.

Yes, its proven that the stars are not other suns far away but probably lights on the plane who is the inside of the sphere. Main question is how far away the inside is and that will happen if you hit it with something real fast

Eve, LV-N probe transfer stage with three probe landers and isa mapsat. Looking back it was an noob mission, get into solar orbit then burn for eve, the side mounted probes had the decopler the wrong way so the engine did not work. Dropped second probe on eve by doing an deorbit burn with the transfer stage and then burn back to orbit and managed to land. Run out of fuel on transfer stage Doing the Gilly transfer so I just let the transfer stage impact it and decopled the top lander. After switching to it I pressed space and decopled the engine and fuel from probe and parachute. All three parts impacted Gilly who is pretty impressive.

Pretty much this, mods worked well from 18 to 19, one option might be to put mod parts on dockable struts. this also let you upgrade mechjeb to 2 and add new functions in orbit. On large ships I always have an docking port for this. However changes like adding reentry damage will break existing games, this will break them independent on mods if you are incoming to Jool and has to aerobreak to get into orbit.

Use the orion to get up in speed and then activate the bussard, Jeb approve of this solution. Only downside of this is the lack of other star systems

Was thinking fuel economy, saving fuel so you can make an smaller missile. I know they don't expect to shoot many of them. Going low would also make you harder to intercept as you would has less time from lock on target to impact. Thinking of it they high angle is probably to increase accuracy, you burn upward in an angle instead of messing with gravity turn. You can not depend on GPS or ground stations during an nuclear war. it also make it easier to use multiple warheads. Before KSP I would never think of it

That is very impressive and efficient. You have an ratio of 0.16 who is pretty extreme. Did an launch My largest regular is 150 ton spare parts, on an around 2400 ton launcher. total weight to LKO is probably 250, as its reusable and with an upper stage only for docking.

Yes benefit of sas is that it keeps an jumping rover level, you need to turn it on and off the driving in hills, but overall I found it usefull

That is high, would it not be more economical do do something like an gravity turn towards target. Do this then doing suborbital jumps with landers.

Aerobraking asteroids into LKO is about as kerbal as you get.

Had they made it three man the 4.5 ton weight would be ok, but not for one kerbal. I use the cupola as bridge for large ships, having room for three and I can send on on eva and still have it manned.

The Poodle is nice for larger landers like an kertane miner, main downside is that it's to heavy. Newer used the aerospike much, for small rockets I tend to use jet first stage. Never used the ant engine, however have used the radial ant from kspx many times. Have used the 55 sometimes, but now uses the home radials however the 55 is probably easier to put on end of struts and draw pipes to. Putting 55 on radial decoupler and pipe from fuel tank is an nice way to get an 150 ton nuclear powered ships into orbit easy. Use them to get more twr during gravity turn.

Using an 180 liter tank and an typical probe payload, iso mapsat, small kertane detector and science parts you get the around 4200 m/s dV from two 24-77 and 4400m/s from the 909. the LV-N gives 4300. If you go down to an 90 liter tank, the 24-77 win with 3400m/s while the 909 gives 3150 m/s. Going up to 270 liter and the LV-N start to win with 5700 against 5400. One benefit of the 24-77 is that it's nice on landers and skycranes, one flat 2.5 meter tanks and 2-6 engines and you are set.

Is not the Alt-L just an safety against pressing space during flight. Decouple the pod from fuel and engine then inbound for an Jool aerobrake has some downsides.

For the impact it will be mostly dependent on the hit angle, hit square on with earth sized bodies and you get very little, hit on the side with not to different speed and you might get lots of the impactor in orbit. For light bodies most will end up in solar orbit.

Add that an submarine with ballistic missiles is harder to find and destroy than anything in low orbit. If you use an smaller single warhead you could even put the missile on an truck launcher as the Russians do, also hard to destroy and a dirt cheap system. As for anti satellite weapons and other weapons who are not WMD they are legal. You could put up an laser able to destroy ground target if you could make it. Main issue is that blowing up things in obit create a lot of orbital junk who is not nice, doing testing in very low orbit where it burn up after a week and few complains. Last US test was against an satellite about to crash, excuse was that the fuel tank could reach ground with toxic fuel.

Note, you can make an multi stage fully reusable rocket. Long term SpaceX plans involves this. This design has the benefit that you don't have to carry all the mass to orbit and only the small upper stage has to be hardened to survive orbital reentry. You also has the option to do more things, going to GEO or behind don't take the upper stage into orbit but increase the size of the transfer stage. You might want to launch this in south asia to give more landing spots in the pacific. For heavier loads you might want to use an single use upper stage. You can test this yourself in KSP, make an SSTO rocket, then something with two boosters who can land and a main stage, this has many times the cargo capacity of an SSTO. My record is an huge main stage and four boosters who is dropped at 10km, this can take 180 ton to LKO. I could increase this if I did most of the circulating with an upper stage.

I had an mod with flat pack parachutes who could be put below escape towers or docking ports. Worked just like the regular ones except having an top attachment node.

This is more relevant as you can use nuclear engines instead of mainsail after the gravity turn increasing efficiency.

found that the easiest way to do eva is to point camera against target, this will orient the kerbal, use left shift and control to go up and down, A and D for left and right, W and S to speed up or slow down. Do not go to fast, just point your kerbal at the hatch or ladder and press F then close. If hatch is on backside its often best to pass the target and turn.

7400 might shave it, you use 5000 getting into orbit. 1000 to get to Mun, 400 to get into low orbit and 800 to land. Not an huge margin of error, upside is that LKO is over halfway to everywhere. If you do the burn right its cheaper to land on Duna than Mun,

Yes, it let you expand the scale a lot, also more realistic, first manned mars mission will not be an pod with hitchhiker module.

This ship I used on the grand tour, it uses 6 large moded nuclear engines. TWR without the miner and lander is actually larger than one, follow put craft had 8 engines but lower twr as it carried more onboard fuel. The grand tour ship had less fuel capacity than the miner.

They only publish play time and achievements. They also collect information about hardware but this is not connected to you, (you still get adds for games your computer can not run) however useful for developers as they see the most common hardware.