Matt56

I'm not sure if this is your problem, but I have noticed that the game seems to decide whether to use mirror symmetry or radial symmetry based on what part you are trying to attach to. I'm not sure if there is a way to switch between the modes or if it is a bug.

Ya, as cantab pointed out, there is actually a precise mathematical definition for clearing an orbit. Just as there is a mathematical definition of the neighbourhood of a body's orbit. It's not as wishy washey as the IAU's wording makes it sound.

My Jeb is sitting in his SSTO Spaceplane on Laythe transmitting the final mitts of scientific data I need to finish my tech tree!

Very difficult to achieve because of the Coriolis effect.

I liked ion's the way they were. I think the money mechanic (which seems to be coming in .24) would have made them worth it compared to just building bigger rockets.

You might also want to consider the mass of the engine. Assuming 1 unit of KSP mass is 1 metric ton (1000kg) then the ion engine is 250kg, which is pretty heavy. NSTAR, of which there are three units on the Dawn spacecraft, is about one tenth of that mass.

It was Clarke himself who said "A sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic," but for me when it gets to that point it's more fantasy than science fiction. That's why I stick devoutly to hard SF myself. I'll take this opportunity to plug a couple of authors from my own city, Toronto. Peter Watts and Robert Sawyer are the only SF authors I've ever read who actually have a list of scientific references at the end of their books so readers can study the themes of the books further. They're both worth checking out.

Haven't heard from Artyom in a few weeks. Is he ok? Or is he just working on something top secret and awesome?

@Jduchock: I always use a gravity assist as well, but you have to do it at the right time. You don't want the Mun to fling you down toward Eve when you're trying to get to Duna. Other than that, I wait for launch windows, but I don't use any mods for that. There tends to be some error, but practice makes perfect!

I have played largely without mods. I have nothing against them, but I find that some mods don't really fit in well with the stock parts. I've messed around with KW rocketry and B9, but found that when I use stock parts with the mod parts they just don't look right together. I was hoping when Bac9 joined the Squad team his artistic vision would influence the stock parts, but that hasn't happened yet. I also find it frustrating when a new update comes out and you have to reinstall your mods and sometimes wait for them to be updated. When people make suggestions for new parts or game mechanics there are always people who will reply by listing all the mods with relevant features. This can be great, because I see people respond sometimes saying, "thanks, this mod is exactly what I was looking for," but I still think it can be a bit of a crutch until that feature is included in the stock game. Take subassemblies for example. I used the subassemblies mod for a while and found it invaluable, but when flags came out and the flag button replaced the subassemblies button, it kind of broke the mod. A short time later it was updated and I reinstalled it and moved over all my subassemblies into the right folders, a small inconvenience but still tedious. Now that subassemblies are in the stock game, I won't have to worry about loosing all my standardized launch stages in the next update. I like mods, and I think they add a lot of interesting features to the game. I just think that many of them would be better as features developed within the stock game, with all the artistic and functional continuity that entails.

When they were first talking about science and the Kerbal Knowledge Base that first came out with .20, there was something mentioned about come up with some kind of planet discovery mechanic as mentioned above and that they wouldn't be announcing new planets when they added them.

So after a day or so of playing .22 I thought I'd share my first impressions. First of all, I'm very stoked about this whole feature. The constraint of having so few parts at the beginning has turned reaching orbit from a routine task to an interesting challenge again. I was thrilled when Jeb logged his first crew report during a sub-orbital flight, and I have not felt so proud to land on the Mun since that first crash landing several versions ago. That said, there are a few things that just don't feel right. HarvesteR has posted before about how he wanted to implement science and career mode in general without imposing a certain style of gameplay on people, and while that sentiment is obvious in this first iteration of R&D, I find it still promotes a particular kind of mission. Because of the way specimen containers work and the fact that most experiments can only be done on planetary surfaces, there is a bias towards missions that land on other bodies, do some experiments, and return to Kerbin. That might seem to be the obvious way to go about exploring the universe, but it leaves out some styles of gameplay that are not only realistic in terms of real exploration, but also just fun to do in the game. For instance, I always like to set up large bases on other planets with infrastructure to allow for crew rotation and such. But there doesn't seem to be any incentive to stay on a planet for longer than a minute. Just do a few experiments and then head on home. There's also still no reason for permanent satellites around any body. I know that HarvesteR has talked about setting up some kind of communications relay system, and i think that there will probably be some kind of space-base telescope parts someday. Currently though, there is a serious lack of science to be done in orbit. Most of the experiments don't even work in space. I was also hoping there would be more for the kerbals to do. What I really wanted to see was a lab module, rather like the hitchhiker can. Something that made it worth it for kerbals to be there on the spot rather than just get the data back with the spacecraft. Perhaps, rather than imposing a penalty for transmitting results (other than the actual samples), you can instead get a bonus if there are kerbals present in a lab module. I must say though, I do like that crew/EVA reports and surface samples give you incentive to send crewed missions rather than just probes. I just wish they were there doing actual science instead of just talking about what they see. As for the new parts, I'm not sure what they're supposed to be exactly. I can't think of any real equivalent to the Mystery Goo in the specimen containers. I don't think we do science by simply exposing some material to various conditions. The Materials Bay seems to be just a more sophisticated version of Mystery Goo. The closest thing to the Materials Bay I can think of is the experiments the Viking landers brought to Mars. But they were testing regolith from Mars, not some mystery substance brought from Earth. I love the biomes system. Its great that there is a reason to go back to the Mun and find different landing spots. I just hope that they release biome maps for other planets in mini patches instead of waiting for the full .23 update. To sum up my comments: -More reasons to stay on planet and do experiments over time -More experiments to do in space -Lab modules for kerbals to do science in -Model science parts after real experiments instead of mystery science boxes. -Give me more biomes! I hope this post doesn't sound too critical, because I'm loving this update. I'm aware that this is just the first iteration of science, I just thought I'd give my feedback for future tweaks and such. And of course, I would love to see what others think.

Forgot one: Always perform Munar gravity assist when going interplanetary.

Funny thing is based on the view in the VAB, it should be facing the right way by default. But when you go outside, it's facing north :S

Always: Rotate craft 90 degrees in VAB to make gravity turn by pitching down instead of yawing right. Put a probe core on orbital insertion stage so I can deorbit. Use standardized lifters for light, medium, and heavy payloads Never: Use a bigger rocket than I need

The advantage in real life of having a Mars Cycler (or any craft on an Aldrin Cycle) I think would be to have a large craft making regular encounters between two bodies, while a smaller craft serves as a shuttle to and from the large craft. That way the shuttles could have minimal life support and other supplies, using less fuel to manoeuvre between orbits while the passengers spend the bulk of the journey in the larger craft. That advantage is largely lost in KSP due to the lack of life support. The other interesting thing about an Aldrin Cycle is that the Cycler's orbit would have to be in resonance with the orbits of both of the destination planets, so it wouldn't be a simple Hohmann Transfer. In at least one direction the journey would be significantly shorter than in a Hohmann transfer, but the orbital period of the cycler would have to be at least twice that of the inner planet I think. I've thought about trying to set one up in KSP, but then I think that it would be largely useless. Maybe I'm just lazy

Ya, it you're planning to land on the body you're orbiting then being in a prograde (usually counter-clockwize when looking down on the north pole) orbit will help you. During decent you'll notice that your velocity drops as you switch from orbital to surface relative velocity. This saves you fuel because you don't have to slow yourself down as much. In the same way, as you ascend, the body's rotation slings you forward and gives you an extra boost on the way up. In a retrograde orbit, that same velocity works against you, so your delta-v requirements go up by twice the body's rotational velocity. If you were going into Jool orbit, Retrograde might be the way to go, like HavOc13 did, because then you can slingshot your way down using the various moons. I did that once. Came in retrograde, go an encounter with Tylo, dropped a probe as I did a slingshot, aerobraked in Jool and ended up in orbit around Val.

I would respectfully disagree with that last wholeheartedly. I love the new Mun surface. It adds a new dimension to my Munar missions, now I send an advance craft to scout the area and select a good landing site by planting a flag. Then I send my main mission with base modules or w/e and aim for the flag. It's way more fun than just throwing down bases wherever.

Looks like you have the interplanetary stages for a whole fleet of spacecraft there. Why not send a colonization mission to Jool?

^^ Agreed. I think it's too early to call the water theory busted just because of one experiment.

Well, this discussion got derailed fast... I think there are lots of late game options that are either planned or are part of current mods. We've got things like kethane and the planned resources and mining feature, which will push you to explore the farthest reaches of the Kerbol system. There's also the extraplanetary launch mod, which helps make colonies a viable option. I think there are lots of things in the pipe to make the game interesting even in the later stages. Once they're fleshed out of course.

Just wait until they make the LEGO Kerbal Space Program game for Wii, then you can ask what's the point

Wouldn't that be the exhaust particles? Like th trail of smoke that follows your craft.

Where's the option for yes, but I heroically turned my failed munar mission into a glorious Mun base?

I have taken to using a utility bot around the base for docking akward things. It is a small probe that is way overpowered in terms of SAS torque and RCS thrust, so when docking to large modules it adds to the manouverabity of the module.