Sᴄɪɴᴛɪʟʟᴀᴛᴏʀ

Wow, Laythe is...big. I guess it makes sense, oxygen is a relatively light gas so a body would need a decent amount of gravity to maintain an atmosphere with a lot of it.

Try making your rocket as symmetrical and balanced as possible. That way your rocket will be less inclined to tilt in a given direction.

Good luck, little steps!

People who are consistently hypocritical.

I name my landing sites after the commander of the mission. e.g If Jebadiah landed on the mün for the 908th mission I would call the site JB-908M landing zone. If he crashed it would be the JB-908M impact site.

The large radial engine by far. Every craft that I put that engine on has crashed numerous times, I don't trust it at all.

Recently joined the forums, I've been playing for about a year though.

Welcome to the forums, there are plenty of guides in the tutorial section videos may be of benefit to you as well, happy flying.

Welcome to the ultimate source for kerbal knowledge

You didn't crash and no one died, an achievement in itself

I'll only hire Kerbals by the name of Bob, Jebediah or Bill.

If I was stranded on the moon... I'd be unable to post this. In all seriousness though, the whole idea is very dark. I can't imagine being stuck up there.

Very nice, good video

Mechjeb Kethane Subassembly Saver/Loader Wouldn't leave home without them

I went with Laythe but Vall is a close second.

Props for making it, its something everyone will find useful.

I assumed you meant designing an actual rover in-game, my mistake. You should look on the wiki for a basic guide to modeling for unity. This video might help:

You want to come in as low as possible but you don't want to create a new crater on the surface so make sure your periapse is above the max terrain height. Aeshi did a very useful table for this.

Thus far? I don't think so. Nassault630 has created some very nice cinematics in KSP though and would probably be the most likely to attempt such a task.

Probably to keep the Mk.1 pod relevant as the cupola is an alternative not a replacement. You get better IVA visibility and more electric charge at the cost of additional mass, its balance.

I just set up an abort sequence with action groups, which usually works. I have a little safety achievement board as well, "It has been 1 day since the last accident"

No problem at all, I've been playing KSP about a year so I have a decent understanding of the mechanics but in practice you aren't going to have a fully rigid rocket unless you strut the connections between all the major parts because if you strengthen one connection it will just begin to sway at the next weakest point until you have struts everywhere. The simple fix without inflating the part count is just to shed weight to mitigate the sway effect and use separate launches. But if his computer can handle the extra parts then strutting should fix it as long as he doesn't do an overly-steep gravity turn lower in the atmosphere where drag becomes an issue.

It really depends on what you want to do. If you just want to add a basic new part that fits into the current parameters of the game or pre-existing plugins then you would need 3d modelling software like blender or maya. If you wanted to add something completely new then you would need at least some coding knowledge because you may need to make a plugin as well.

He disabled the gimbals on all but the center stack rocket but even with full gimbaling it can only do so much for a top heavy rocket and once it gets that inertia going as it begins to flip gimbaling won't do much to recover. If the center of mass is too high to maintain the rocket upright during the gravity turn then either weight shedding from the payload or a new stage is needed.

They have their uses but unfortunately these can be quite limited with the current aerodynamics model. Ferram Aerospace does a lot for the spaceplane in this regard but still leaves a bit to be desired.