transcendentape

There's too much that could be wrong for anyone to answer your question unless you provide more information. Wobbly rockets, too little or too much SAS torque, too little or too much control surfaces, excessive thrust, etc. Please post a craft file and a list of the mods needed to load the file. Or, if your design is rock-solid, try changing ascent profile values and judge how they affect your final orbit. If your rocket is solid but the ascent profile is off, you should still get to space but you could end up off of your target orbit. The autopilot doesn't learn, and is remarkably consistent with a stable rocket.

Try installing BloodyRain2k's patch. This fixed all the 0.21 issues that seem to be linked to mechjeb for me.

darkstrike- try this craft file: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B14T_txmzYaSeW5aak0xRmc4LXM/edit?usp=sharing. This should show that the problem is in your design, not mechjeb. I correctly oriented mechjeb (you had it upside down), corrected your rcs, removed excess SAS torque, reconfigured your ship a little, and provided a stable launch platform. Since you didn't include your launch platform in your craft file, I don't know if your having problems with it as well, but this one should give you a decent starting point. On ascent, limit acceleration to 20m/s, prevent overheat, begin turn at 10k, end turn at 75k, and orbit altitude is 75k. Should have just enough fuel to get you there. Let me know in PM if you've got any issues. This has been an interesting exercise in NP appreciation, thanks. More on topic, with this fresh install I had only two mods loaded, mechjeb and editor tools. I still noticed the map screen shaking that messes up the kethane mod, so it's either a game bug or something mechjeb is doing, as I've recreated the problem without kethane. Jeb says "Hi".

I'm gonna play with your craft in a fresh install of 0.21.1 with mechjeb as the only mod as I use FAR, NP, and some other mods and I don't want to make a craft file that you can't use. However, on first glance, you've got WAY too much SAS torque. By my count, you have a total of 50 for a craft of only 23.2 tons. For comparison, I just made a rebuild of my 270 ton (at LKO) tanker with a total of 16.5 torque. At launch, it's a 1500 ton behemoth and only has 46.5 reaction torque. Again, I haven't played with it yet, but first glance seems to me that you should remove both the ASAS module and the inline reaction wheel.

A number of people in the past few pages appear to me to be blaming poor attitude stability on mechjeb. My findings are that the old way of building rockets with SAS modules is no longer valid. I don't know how you build rockets, and unless you post a craft file or at least a pic, I can't even begin to imagine what your problem is. All I can say is that the 0.21 SAS is distinctly different from previous versions, and if you haven't changed your builds, then I don't think you should assume mechjeb is your problem. I no longer need any RCS for controlled flight; I only use it now for docking maneuvers. SAS reaction wheels, when used in the appropriate amount for your craft, will, I think, solve all of your attitude problems. However, it is possible to have too much of a good thing. Experiment, redesign, and experiment again. If you suspect mechjeb is the problem, turn it off and see how your craft reacts without it.

The problem is that you aren't placing the mechjeb part on a vertical surface. Either click on the command pod and select control from here, or place the mechjeb part on a vertical surface.

What you need is http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/18-1-kerbal-crew-manifest/ You can add/remove/edit kerbals on the launchpad.

Some mods that I'd suggest adding to your list that greatly improve game play: Editor Tools makes the VAB larger and adds functionality. Subassembly Saver/Loader allows you to save groups of parts as a subassembly to be recalled later, greatly streamlining the design process. Maneuver Node Improvement allows exact editing of maneuver node details and eases cycling through and recall of maneuver nodes. Haystack is very helpful in managing more advanced space programs, allow you to either target or switch to other active craft without having to click on the map. Actions on the Fly allows you to change action groups even after a craft is launched.

The Nova Punch parts pack has 0.5x, 2x, and 3x larger RCS ports for use on ships with widely different masses and also some jumbo size monopropellant tanks. Also, you only need RCS on to change attitude, keeping it on throughout the entire maneuver is a waste. Say you're prograde and want to point retrograde, turn RCS on to start moving, then turn it off. When you start getting close to retrograde, turn RCS back on until you settle into your new attitude and then turn it back off. Mechjeb wastes RCS ridiculously.

It's called "Editor Tools" and the original thread was lost in the forum wipe. Here's a recent thread that discusses the mod and has a download location.

Not sure if it's a problem with your craft or your game. Can you test by making a new craft with nothing but a capsule atop a hitchhiker and try it on the launch pad? If it doesn't work there, then you know it's game related at least.

Left-click on the crew hatch for the hitchhiker and it should open up a window that allows you to EVA them.

Assuming the rocket the kerbal is in does not change its acceleration, no. The presence or absence of air in the rocket is irrelevant. The kerbal's jetpack provides .75g of thrust as measured inside the rocket, and the kerbal makes a leap into the air similar to you jumping off of the ground. The effective gravitational force (my term, not sure what the correct term to use here is) which includes both the gravitational force felt by the rocket and the pseudo-gravitational force due to acceleration of the rocket has not changed any more than you jumping changes the gravitational force you feel on Earth.

We are not even remotely dealing with relativistic speeds here

I'm not sure why you're finding throttling down to be more efficient. It likely may be drag, or wobbly rocket construction, or too much gimbal. TWR does not decrease as acceleration increases, unless the acceleration is due to gravity. Thrust to weight ratio is simply what it states, and so is directly proportional to thrust and inversely proportional to weight (mass times acceleration due to gravity). The weight of the rocket does not change under acceleration. If you could imagine putting an accelerating rocket on some fantastic contraption that could match its acceleration and not burn up in order to weigh it, the rocket would not weigh any more than it does at rest. Objects inside the rocket do weigh more, since the rocket is accelerating and pushing against them, applying a force which is indistinguishable from gravity. So twr does change for a rocket inside the accelerating rocket. For instance, say you constructed a situation where a kerbal had a jetpack with twr ratio of 1.5 inside of a rocket accelerating at 2g. Now, because the rocket is pushing against our jetpack kerbal at twice g, his effective twr is cut in half, and at a twr of 0.75, he won't be able to lift off of the floor.

Precisely. Rather than assuming the terminology in use for years is incorrect, it may be helpful to first consult basic reference resources like wikipedia. It's called thrust-to-weight ratio for a reason.

Here's a few shots of my 2 kerbal rover. It's based on a wing section as I didn't find the stock rover body to be large enough for my needs. It is very durable and has the ability to right itself when flipped. The rover and lander took about a week of intense design to work out all the bugs. I highly suggest using mods for a parts pack and subassembly saver/loader to help you in your design. Rover seeing the sights on Mun. Rover righting itself. Rover and lander Rover backing into clamp-a-tron jr. for docking and takeoff.