KerbMav

But you wanted to reach 0 relative speed ... ?

They very well can if they are misaligned, as they create drag (on their position). You may want to attach your intakes to something else so the editor does not place them at an odd angle like in your picture.

Id just like to be able to label them after their purpose. Or else we could remove the base categorie, as every lander is a base until it takes off again ... ? No.

Your last point may be a clue, but not evidence! It might simply be, that KSP does not account for the movement of the atmosphere - as there are no winds/currents in the game right now, I would think that this is the case. Possible experiment would be to drop a probe into the atmosphere and to kill its horizontal surface speed before deploying chutes. If the horizontal speed then changes again ... but would it ... hmmm ...

I would still like a new category - so far my satellites are marked as probes - which is not really what they are, is it?

By the amount, but not the direction (vector). The conveyors are standing in for the planets surface here, as is the bird for the lander! Almost. Keep thinking about exactly this point a bit more and you will get it right! Yes?! No, to reach 0 relative speed you have to change your speed by 0 = (2 + 0.5) - 2.5 0 = (2 - 0.5) - 1.5 else your equation is wrong, because you would be saying 0 = 2 ... Third law: When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction to that of the first body. What does this have to do with anything (here)?

Depends - where is the probe, can you fly it back home and refuel? More seriously: If you cannot get a reasonable encounter (with the fuel you have) with Duna, set a node and see if you can get an encounter with another planet to salvage the mission. Then go back and launch a new one at the proper time. Mod suggestions: Protractor (to get all angles and timings) Kerbal Alarm Clock (to do something more useful in the meantime without forgetting about the probe) Kerbal Engineer or VOID (for orbital information of active craft, like inclination and current ejection angle)

Is this correctly simulated in KSP? Nitro, let go of the vertical component of the landing, here you are mostly correct. Imagine driving a bike at 6m/s (21.6 km/h) in a circle around a carousel going at 2m/s (7.2 km/h). If you were driving in the same direction as horsy, piggy and the helicopter are, you would be driving at 4m/s relative speed, else at 8m/s. Now, if you stop your bike and start walking towards the carousel - as if gravity would pull you towards it, thinking of the center of it as the center of a planet - horsy would still hit you at 2/ms. So, rotating a bit faster, planet piggy would hit your lander at 100+ m/s (360+ km/s) from the side, ripping of part by part from bottom to top, rolling it over and smashing it to pieces.

Continued my first (in this save) manned Mun landing and brought back a nice chunk of science, making heavy use of the science container (mod part). With new toys to play with (RCS, probe size engines, better solar panels ...) my engineers started construction of a standardized communications satellite for LKO (RemoteTech 2) for coverage of the Kerbin system only for starters. Some number crunching resulted in planning a minimum of three satellites in a 800km orbit - some mishaps resulted in slightly misaligned orbits and powerless satellites (no panels ...). After reverting/quickloading/deorbiting stuff(/ending preliminary simulations ... ) the launch of the four satellites was scheduled for this afternoon! Planning phase for two twin orbital stations for longrange communication through the Kerbos system has begun. Orbiting at opposing sides of Kerbin they will relay command from mission control at KSC via the communications satellites to all vessels, probes, stations and bases in the years to come.

Engine hum, nice! The UI seems to forget and change its layout though - will have to test more after work. Hm, will have to either pick the ones I want to use or find a way to shrink them. My RAM is becoming more and more ... I mean less and less ...

Some links that might help. If you are looking for orbital periods around Kerbin or want to know how low a non-stationary orbit can be and stuff - basic geometry might be handy though. http://files.arklyffe.com/orbcalc.html This site is in German, but maybe its enough to know a, b, c, α, β, γ ... http://www.arndt-bruenner.de/mathe/scripts/Dreiecksberechnung.htm#rechner Can confirm the sea-level sphere thing.

Yes please, we Germans like us a good manual!

For me the UI does not save its position anymore.

Does it? The MM file for RT adds a MODULE, but I cannot see where it would remove the ModuleCommand MODULE. @PART[probeCoreSphere] { MODULE { name = ModuleSPU } MODULE { name = ModuleRTAntennaPassive TechRequired = unmannedTech OmniRange = 3000 TRANSMITTER { PacketInterval = 0.3 PacketSize = 2 PacketResourceCost = 15.0 } } } Edit: Kerb me ... I could swear it was working at my computer at home. On my friends computer KER is not showing up when having RT and KER installed, using MM to add KER to pods/probes.

Challenge accepted! But lets not talk TWR ...

Would be nice - especially for the more complicated mods - if there was a collection of videos in which these were used (a lot) - could substitute for a written tutorial/manual. Though even I could jump and claw at the screen sometimes - "What ... are ... you ... doing ... ?!" - helplessly reaching for my mouse to intervene ...

For once I was arguing from a gameplay perspective.

Correct me if I am wrong, but this will only happen if you sling by the planets moon retrograde, meaning flying into its SOI while it is "coming at you" instead of "catching up" to it?

Well, it is ...

This will happen more than once, believe me! Get KER - Kerbal Engineer Redux and look for a dV map. Then you can design all your stages to have the thrust and fuel they need for their purpose - and still build in a safety margin if you like. Some may call this cheating, because they like to do all calculations of fuel consumption and mass of each stage for themselves - but whatever makes anyone happy! http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/56898-Eve-Rescue?p=760497&viewfull=1#post760497

I am not at home, open the part.cfg and have a look! But it should, or else a rover without pod and/or probe core would do nothing (apart from rolling down the hill maybe).

Was there a specific need to split the functions into different parts? Flying to and mapping every planet and moon over and over again with new upgraded probes as we climb the tech tree ... well, just let me say I would always edit the parts to be available together at the same time. Which one does provide the biome information btw.? I only had time for a short test yesterday buy slapping it onto my Mun mission. I would leave it as it is - just assume that players that see this point as important will build their probes with batteries and power generation - and those who do not would find a way to hack the consumption out of the parts anyway. If you really want something to wrap your head around, then try to implement the funtions of Remote Tech 2 into SCANsat, in a way the scanned data only becomes available as the probe resstablishes contact with mission control. I think the most annoying thing with the old mapping mod was its impact on performance - I do not know any background details or why your mod is so incredibly faster while scanning with x sensors simultaneously, but avoid doing anything that slows it down again! Definitely not useless, as it gives by itself a use for missions with probes and satellites!

Is entryCost = mandatory?

The Moon is tidally locked because Earth's gravity slowed his rotation down to that point and the same is true for every moon/planet in orbit of a planet/star, it just takes a different amount of time.

nvm /10char