Tex_NL

Your CoG is not exactly centered. You got lights, ladders and seats on one side that you don't have on the other. But that tiny off-set is easily compensated by the gimballing and SAS. I believe your true problem lies in the clipping between your rover and lander. Try placing your engines a bit further out so the thrust does not hit the rover.

Don't be afraid to fail. Sooner or later it WILL happen. No amount of planning can totally exclude failure.

Go to the R&D building, select the node the command pod is in, click the pod on the right side on your screen and 'purchase' it.

Hephaestus Space Dock (WIP) It's still in the design phase but you get the idea: The eight arms can be opened and closed for easier docking or to allow bigger vessels. The Gantry crane can run roughly half the length of the bay. Still need to think of a nice way to add some kind of power supply but so far it looks pretty good.

Flying on both Eve and Duna is very doable but there are a few things you should keep in mind: - Both Eve and Duna lack oxygen, regular jet engines will not work! You'll either have to use a rocket, ion engine, a Kethane turbine or electric propeller. - Eve has a very thick dense atmosphere and high gravity. You get great lift but also a lot of drag. You'll be flying slow and sluggish. - Duna has a thin atmosphere and low gravity resulting in poor lift and relative high speed. Your plane will be highly maneuverable but prone to stalling.

Try the Firespitter mod. It has pontoons allowing you to build seaplanes.

Everything you're talking about can be done by MechJeb. MechJeb can setup and perform the bruns but you can also do them manually if you want. (Pretty sure MechJeb isn't the only one. There are other mods you could use too.)

Not only that but one started just yesterday: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/58161-The-Drag-Race-Contest

The early '90's game Tie Fighter had a build in record function. It was able to replay your entire mission and allowed you to view it from pretty much any angle. It was always on and did not impact game-play. If a 486 PC with just 8MB memory was able to do it back then, I am sure a modern PC can do the same.

Not unwanted, just done a few dozen times already.

Plus ... when you're killing your final relative velocity you ARE matching planes. Doing it sooner rather than later just makes the entire rendezvous a lot easier.

Please show where SQUAD says they plan "random failures/malfunctions". It is common knowledge (excluding a few people) that SQUAD is NOT planning random failures. And I do believe vexx already said exactly that. (If you're referring to http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/36863-What-not-to-suggest than you misread. It's just there because this has been suggested dozens of times already. That does not mean it is a planned feature.)

I decided to throw up a new station while waiting for interplanetary launch windows. Bit by bit it grew into this: 200*200km equatorial Kerbin orbit. Permanent crew 9 (only 3*3 seats in the escape pods), max crew 26. Can do science and refuel visiting ships.

Never used NovaPunch. But I do use KW Rocketry a lot so there is only one option for me: KW.

If your plane can't make a simple turn like that it's your design that's flawed. Not the direction you take off in. I've build truly massive planes and each and every one of them was more than capable of making a turn like that. Agreed, some did it a bit easier that others but they ALL could.

I understand why but what is wrong with taking off and making a turn?

Chances of a piece of debris actually hitting a person are negligible to the extreme. The damage a piece of debris can cause is only partially dependent on speed. We all know F= m*a, mass is just as much a factor as speed/acceleration. A penny at terminal velocity might cause some skin damage but a bowling ball traveling a few m/s can kill.

Your Google-Fu hasn't just failed you. It has completely left you. Try googling for images :https://www.google.nl/search?q=Gimballed+Rocket+Engine&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=EZ5-UvKwOsic0QWdlIGQBA&ved=0CD8QsAQ&biw=1204&bih=932

Both the Firespitter and B9 Aerospace mods have airbrakes. Both work (nearly) identical and attach to any surface. Folded up they have almost no drag, once deployed a few of them can stop a small plane dead in its tracks. I don't think there is a 100% stock solution to this.

Looks like Bill, Bob and Jeb are coming home after all. It turned out that pumping all remaining fuel to the lander and discarding the interplanetary booster resulted in more dV than using the nuclear engine on the booster. I now have a direct Kerbin intercept with roughly 300m/s dV left in the tanks Edit: They've made it safely back home. The chutes did rip the crew pod of the lander but they landed safely.

Didn't think about that option. I might be able to use Jool or Duna to slingshot them back to Kerbin and still have fuel left for a safe landing.

I accidentally stranded Bil, Bob and Jeb in low Dres orbit. Their lander did rendezvous successfully with the booster stage but the total amount of fuel is not enough to get home safely. Time to plan some kind of rescue mission.

If you've never been to Jool before why not send a pathfinder first? The dV requirements for a small unmanned probe are identical to those of a megaton multipart ship. The most Kerbal solution to your dilemma is to just go for it and see what happens.

You're so very close to my own opinion. I only clip for aesthetics. I too clip RTG's, batteries and MechJeb's into the fuselage or turn clipping on when parts just don't want to attach where I want them too. I've also clipped tanks into otherwise empty structural pieces such as nosecones. But I will not place tanks inside other tanks. I only clip when there is room inside the other object. So my answer is both yes and no. Clipping for aesthetics is OK. Clipping to achieve 'the impossible' is not.

You can say that again. Even IF we would be able to build such a ship and accelerate it to 200x light speed it would take 135 years just to reach the galactic center. (Earth is located ~27,000±1,000 light-years from the galactic center.) To reach the 'other side of the galaxy' you'd need another 135 years. Conclusion: This idea is nothing more than a sci-fi fantasy.