Specialist290

That idea is absolutely brilliant. Kudos to you. Meanwhile: I've landed the central habitat module for what I'm hoping is going to be a permanent base on the Mun. It's almost dead center between a small formation of five craters with some interesting features nearby, so I'm planning on sending a long-term rover out there and get some scouting done.

Pushing the Play button on that video is the second worst decision I've made today.

Very interesting. I didn't buy KSP until after 0.18 came out, but it's always interesting seeing how the game has evolved over time.

If you took that from the page I think you did, then I don't think that's from an official source.

And now everyone knows why I don't play online multiplayer.

Is his rocket pack equipped?

Fair enough. Figured I'd ask to see if it's possible, but if it isn't... Well, I suppose comparing the flight's velocity at periapsis / apoapsis with the planet's escape velocity makes for a decent enough "worst-case" estimate, and that's simple enough to do by hand. Nice to know. Thanks for the info! (And yes, the recent forum update seems to have broken a few things regarding formatting.)

Glad to see the update, plus the planned features list. Keep up the good work! One feature suggestion I just thought of: In addition to the Departure Information for a given interplanetary transfer burn, it would be nice to also see an estimate for the hyperbolic arrival trajectory at the destination, as well as delta-v for the circularization burn at periapsis. Also, I've been wondering: How does the scoring system for the Flyby Maneuver Sequencer work? What criteria does the program use to evaluate the projections?

To date, I have crashed pretty much every spaceplane I have ever flown. Most of those crashes were fatal. Feels bad As for my single most frustrating experience: Getting to Moho and finding out that the delta-v charts I was using gave no real indication of how difficult it would actually be to establish an orbit.

EDIT: Bah, misread the question. Disregard.

Nope. Barring outside forces acting on it, a given object in an orbit has a constant amount of orbital energy. If it came into the SoI above the planet's escape velocity, it'll travel around a hyperbolic or parabolic curve and travel out of the SoI at the same velocity at the equivalent point on the other side of the orbit. Now, in theory, if the planet has a moon that's large enough and you timed things just right, you could possibly slow down using a gravity assist from that moon to alter your trajectory in such a way that you ultimately end up around the planet, but I certainly wouldn't rely on hitting that by fluke. EDIT: Ninja'd by RoboRay.

^ You could just set your uppermost RCS tanks to "In" while still on the launchpad. That should do exactly what you described.

I don't need Viagra to get my rocket powered up and ready to launch, thank you very much. ...Sorry. Couldn't resist. But seriously, I don't really see much call for in-game advertising of real-world products. A few pastiches here and there for the sake of flavor I could accept, but I'm not a huge fan of seeing product placement in video games.

As for how to transfer fuel from one tank to another: Right click on one tank, then hold Alt and click on another. That should bring up the options for transferring fuel and oxidizer between the two.

Hope I'm not loading you down by adding yet another feature request, but I'd like to see a way to balance fuel by using numerical inputs if at all feasible. For instance, in addition to the "In," "Out," and "Balance" toggles, you could type in something like "50 liters" or "25% full", and the Fuel Balancer would do its best to maintain the fuel in that tank at that level. That said, as it stands, I've found this mod to be incredibly handy for making fuel transfers quick and convenient already.

The main benefit would be that the rockets launching the individual modules from Kerbin's surface wouldn't have to be quite as large. That said, unless you're planning on doing something like mining fuel from the Mun's surface using the Kethane mod, your refueling station would probably be more beneficial to you in Low Kerbin Orbit to begin with.

I don't see why you went to the trouble of bumping this long-dead thread when we have a Post Your Rover megathread that's still active elsewhere on the forums.

Nicely done! Out of curiosity, what did you use to record the .GIFs?

And at any rate, if you're only going to be messing around within the influence of Kerbin, the LV-N is overkill for the amount of delta-v you'd need. It's mainly intended to be used as the transfer stage on interplanetary craft.

I'm curious. What's your reasoning behind the reversed engines on top of the lander?

I was personally wondering if you had ever seen it go green

Currently running Deadly Reentry, and while it doesn't exactly live up to its name as much as I'd like, it has added an extra bit of challenge. I like "stress testing" my designs to see how much I can get away with without using a heat shield. I'll probably check out TAC Life Support once it gets a little more fleshed out. Ioncross is good in concept, but the fact that there's no persistence is what ultimately turned it off for me.

Seconded. There was a nice little debris cloud, but the capsule wasn't part of it.

There is, actually: Lithobraking. No, seriously. There's an actual, legitimate, non-ironic meaning for that term.

EDIT: Nevermind, the comment wasn't really warranted.