SRV Ron

Same problem I had as well with the larger design. While waiting for the final specs of what is expected on the satellite network, I designed the satellite and two variations of launch vehicles. Will position them so that they can see each other while in the same orbit later in the day. Installed Flight Engineering which takes some of the guesswork out of tweaking SRBs for launch boosters.

That is -250 meters. Note how slow the probe was going with parachutes not deployed. Note the pressure reading going down.

A hint. If you throttle down to avoid flameout, you can go a lot higher and faster until your intake air drops to zero. A bit more fuel would help as well.

Try building something simple with a pod, single turbojet, fuel can, air scoops, fins for stability in the rear, Canards up front for control. You only have to get it flying under control up to high speed and altitude. So far, the next day challenges are being posted late afternoon EST. Hopefully, they won't get too complex that they can't be accomplished in under an hour or two in game time. Landing on every KSP structure took a while only because of having to do the equivalent of 9 or more missions with the challenge of flying to and landing on each of them.

That old challenge didn't require returning the kerbal. KW rocketry would certainly make it possible to do a low part design to Duna and back. Possibly, a three stage ship to Duna and back taking advantage of aerobraking and direct intercept windows. Needless to say, the Kerbals were stranded on Duna, Eve, Laythe, and the other places. I do believe the two stage five part could do a Minmus and return with just enough fuel left to slow down enough at the last second to keep from killing the Kerbal upon landing. The 10 part no problem parachuting back to safety. The other question of clarification, interplanetary. Landing on Mun or Minmus is out but landing on any of the other moons is OK since you have to get to the planets with them first. I will let others play with this for now as I am busy with the 24 challenge.

Put a rover on the pad and it will slowly roll off towards the VAB. The same rover placed on the runway will start rolling towards the sea. That is the slight off angle of gravity having an effect in the KSC complex. Rockets launched straight up will land West of the pad, the distance determined by the time in flight and altitude achieved. Again, the cause is the slight angle of gravity at the pad.

To make it official, this part of the challenge should be air breathing power only, I whipped up this design a couple of minutes ago. It can be launched both vertically and from a runway. Good stability as well with no extra SAS modules. A good achievement for the first plane I actually designed and flew. However, having two turbojets creates problems at flameout. Takeoff Highest speed achieved at burnout. Highest altitude at burnout. Note inertia can take it much higher if flown for that achievement.

This was on turbojet only with the speed achieved at flameout. It was launched vertically. Canards were needed to control altitude during the high speed run to flameout. Originally, I used fins with control surfaces but had infinaglide issues during recovery. So standard fins were used for stability. The turbojet was then jettisoned and recovered with the remaining section sent to a Mun flyby and return.

If you plan a direct transfer, no parking in a solar orbit before doing the Duna transfer, it takes little more then a trip to Mun and back. Do an aerobraking to enter Duna orbit at little additional fuel cost. Pick a landing zone in a valley to give your parachute more atmosphere to brake with, short use of the engines at the last minute to reach a safe landing speed, repack the chute, lift off into orbit, and wait for the direct transfer window back to Kerbal aerobraking to land.

The old rule of turning quickly to a 45* at 10,000 meters no longer apply in Far. You MUST make that turn gradually or risk ripping your ship apart due to the stress of hitting the atmosphere sideways to your direction of flight.

1. Is it only me, or career mode in normal is very easy to unlock all the spaceship parts because of the abundance amount of science we can get through strategies? At first, i didnt bother with the new building in 0.25 (i knew from reading the patch notes). But i decided to try it and getting the "strategy" to get science alongside with funds. Suddenly, boom, one simple contracts can yield around 2k science. Default Career is quite generous for beginners. If you are good, it doesn't take long to build up funds and Science Points. Want a challenge? set up the hard mode where you have to purchase individual unlocked parts, the rewards are smaller, and the cost of failing is bigger. 2. Is there an input/output of docking port? i mean imagine two magnets, and you have to put the alignment on the magnet correctly in order to "snap" the two magnets. Is it the docking port got the same idea as magnet, i.e. you have to W A S D the docking port when assembling the vessel to align the docking port. Yes, if you pair them for staging. Note that they are very wobbly if used in that capacity. 3. what is actually satellites do other than orbiting a planet and do all the science instruments? For now, they are just used to initially get science and later to fulfill data return contracts. 4. what is the best mod that improve your experience without diminishing its difficulty? That becomes an individual choice. Mods are available to add many more parts, aids to flight and construction, more realism, or just plain whacky fun. Become familiar with the stock game before adding mods. And, do so on a separate copy of the stock game, easily copied from the default install to it's own location, in case there is a game crashing conflict with multiple mod installation.

Not sure how to interpret that rule either. So, assumed that the same rocket design is needed to land on each and every named structure at KSP. Note, landing on the launch pad and runway can be done but you can't launch from there again unless you recover the ship occupying it. Launch vehicle is the same one used for the satellite dish. Landed at the administration center; Even at the Monolith; (Too narrow to land on but it is possible.) All the landings as marked; (Had one on the pad removed for the Monolith mission.)

Landed on Minmus with Professor Kerbinstein's latest creation.

Probe landed with plenty of fuel to return; Demo ship landing. And, a simple Sandbox design;

Last year at this time, there was a parts limit challenge of 10 parts or less. This design landed Jeb on Eve, Duna, Jool, Laythe and even went Voyager. Some other using the same design, landed on Ike and most the other moons of Jool. Given the improvement of stock, mod parts, and availability of probes, much more will be possible. The same missions can be done with just 5 parts. (powered landing needed along with battery management.)

My dishes are not aimed up so high. Anyhow, drove the launchpad to the dish and after some effort, landed on it. Didn't have to use the lander legs. Then, I took it a step further and landed in the hole in the center.

There is a fourth alternative. A little less efficient but a guaranteed return to a landing on Kerbal if you fail to perform the Mun capture burn. It is the figure eight maneuver. Difficult to set up but not impossible.

Some example designs; And, a demo design with plenty of fuel to land and return. Finally, a probe rocket to fulfill contract missions.

Burning fuel and oxygen is far more efficient mass wise then using monoprop. Test it for yourself and see how far you can get with each types of fuel.

An orbit between Jool and Laythe. Why? you can use Jool to aerobrake to the station altitude, then plan slingshots using Laythe to travel elsewhere.

Ant Engines are excellent for small probes; Landing gear not required;

Actually, I am amazed that your design, once tweaked, turned out to be quite efficient. While the original goal was to see if I could get it into orbit with the resources available, I was not expecting to have over 1/2 a tank of fuel left once I got into a 100k orbit. All my flights have been done using the Kerbal Rocketry School of Hard Knocks. No Mechjeb, Kerbal Engineering, or other building aids. (Not to be critical of those aids, they have a useful purpose as you gain experience with the limitations of the parts you use.) Just building something, testing it, and if it works, improving on the design to make it work better.

It is like a commercial from a major corporation. They didn't invent the item, they just found ways to make it work better.

Modification for better performance. Basic design remains. 1. Fuel lines for onion staging with matching braces. This added a bit more thrust. 2. Replaced Giga panels with 3x4 Ox Stats. This reduces payload weight by about 1/2 ton. 3. Moved mono prop fuel cans. Just looks better in all one place out of the way. Results, better performance in even more fuel in a 100+ orbit.

1. Use the other radical decouplers that is first unlocked on the tech tree. 2. Mount the three boosters as centered as possible. If they are off to one side or the other, you will have turning issues. 3. Leave just enough fuel in the test booster so you can deorbit to bring Jeb back home when you run the test. If properly balanced, you won't have the tipping issue as well as you won't need the decouplers and struts. See Jebs Orbiter based upon a similar design as yours.