Superfluous J

I doubt it. The only reason I could see it happening is a cash-grab. Which is possible but in that case you shouldn't get it.

I would say bare minimum is a shot of your tech tree before the mission, the vessel on the pad, again in orbit of the target world, again landed on the target world, and finally landed back on Kerbin. And once you've gotten docking ports a picture of the lander redocking (or re-docked) to the orbiter. No save file, I probably won't have time to go that in-depth and it wouldn't include the craft files anyway, just whatever was scattered around the system. I love your screen shots and comments, but one picture per mission is just not enough proof Do you have more? I'm willing to bend the rules if you're missing a picture or two but this would be breaking them. I agree with GRS's comment, they are fine so long as you land in the same biome as the lander. So aim for the water or something big and well defined like the ice sheet, or be ready to reload multiple times to get it right. I added this to the OP. It should have been there before. PROOF Bare minimum proof. I need a picture of, for every mission (in sunlight if possible): Your tech tree before the mission started. i.e., what you had to work with. Your vessel on the launch pad. Your vessel (Lander + Orbiter if you have docking ports) orbiting the target world. Your lander on the surface. Your vessels back in orbit after landing, if you need to re-dock. They can be docked or on the verge of docking. Your return portion of your ship landed on Kerbin. Any special circumstances that need explained. But go for broke. Take pictures like you're on vacation and post them all I'll love them. Or do a video!

It is, but as @GRS has correctly surmised through experience you get me a little quicker if you at-mention me (more coming soon it's a busy time right now and I don't know when or how verbosely I'll be able to respond to the posts made since my last visit)

I have no idea, I've never done that so don't know how well it would do and I'm not one of those people. However I am one of those people who like trying things different ways so I'll give it a shot on my next launch. Which will very likely be next year(!) as I'm going on a vacation for the entire rest of this year in just a few days.

While I agree with you in general, it's fun sometimes to try to build a ship that does exactly what they want. Get one guy orbital, drop him back, take the rest to Mun, but only land one of them, then get them all back. But the contracts that do this should be rarer and should more explicitly state what they want in the subject line.

Remember, there's no "launching" in KSP per se, it's just the stage that happens when you stage for the first time. As was said above, though, most likely you're not throttled up or don't have things in the correct order.

True True False. With no further acceleration on your craft, your orbit will remain as it was when you cut the engines. This "orbit" may go around the Sun, it may plunge you into the Sun, and it may continue on away forever. But it will not change until something changes the path of your craft. Sort of, but not directly. It's not like you speed up 10m/s and your orbit goes up 100km or something. But in general the faster you are going at any point, the larger your orbit.

I too have gotten back into Factorio. I played a bit when 0.17 came out and now that it's almost complete I got the urge again. I just got yellow science and am about to start pummeling biters with mortars. As usual I have a list a mile long of things yet to do, and there's always at least one critical shortage to deal with, and I'm loving every minute of it.

You can sometimes get away with just typing the bbcode you're used to and then submitting, but a lot of times it won't work. What you remember is the old forum software. When they changed software (for security reasons, it was old) we lost our glorious BBCode.

Your gravity turn is SUPER late. You don't start the turn until you're already going over 100m/s and barely even try to turn until you're well past 10km. If I had to guess, you learned that either from playing before 1.0 or from watching videos from before 1.0 on how to do a gravity turn. Try this instead: At 50 m/s turn 5 degrees East so you're at 85 degrees East on the navball. When your Ap (Not altitude) is 5km, bring that down to 70 degrees East. When your Ap is 10km, turn 60 degrees East. When your Ap is 15 km, turn 50 degrees. When your Ap is 20 go to 40. When your Ap is 30 go to 30. When your Ap is 40 go to 20. When your Ap is 50 go to 10. When your Ap is 60 go to 0, and leave it there until your Ap goes to your target altitude. I like 80 or 100 usually. The whole time you're doing this, throttle down if you either see heat (flame is fine, only slow down when things start getting heat gauges) or your time to Ap goes over 60 seconds. A good gravity turn does not shove the Ap way ahead of the craft. Note: Throttling down is generally bad and if you're throttling down a ton, redesign your craft to just not have so much power at those stages of flight. This is not the "best" but it's pretty darn good and gives you an idea of what you should be shooting for instead of what you're doing. Also, I assume by "up" you mean "South" and that's semi normal. Any small deviations early on tend to get worse and worse as you fly. It's far less noticeable when you turn more strongly as I did above, and to correct it, you just need to "break the arm the other way" and aim a bit North until the prograde marker is back where you want it.

It, and the other 2 points, don't bother me. That's my point. Minor realism sacrifices are made to simplify things for players, modders, and even for the programmers. No argument for stellar movement has convinced me it's worth the extra work for the programmers to make it harder for modders to add new stars and players to use them.

For me, I want my incoming orbit's Pe to touch the station's orbit. I burn at that Pe to get an orbit around the planet/moon, then at Ap do the cheaper burn to align my orbit, then another burn back at Pe to get an encounter, and finally on the next orbit meet the station. Once you have that basic set of steps down you can optimize, like setting up the meeting of the station on the same burn that you get your orbit. Or algning your orbit on entry to be as close to aligned with the station as possible.

Like how they have the wrong impression about how Lagrange Points don't exist, or docking ports have supermagnets in them, or astronaut helmets are actually too large to fit through most ship doors?

Sadly you can't. I suggest you do what I do: generally avoid anything other than plain text, and when you want more copy another post that does something similar. And never, ever use tables.

If possible I'd like to see a video of your problem. There are about 100 definitions of a "proper gravity turn" so there are too many ways yours could be acting normally but unexpectedly, to even make a guess right now.

13 degrees isn't that bad, but if it was much more than that I'd consider doing what we humans do: put the station on a tilted orbit and only launch when you're under that orbit.

They are auto generated but the discoverer gets the chance to rename them before uploading. I renamed the first 3-4 planets I found and then stopped caring when I realized I'd literally never see them again.

I also think you can go eva, ] to switch to the ship and back to the Kerbal, and then going back in the pod would work. I've had far more trouble thinking I could revert when I couldn't than I've ever had abusing the ability to revert.

There are two ways I can think of, the stock way and the good (I.e. Modded) way. The stock way is to launch a satellite and use KerbNet to find the rough area and place a waypoint on the little map in the window and hope you get close, perhaps placing a second node closer than the first when you see how you were off the first time. The correct way is to install Waypoint Manager and place the node in map mode, typing in the latitude and longitude directly.

Just saw it. Spoiler free review: they had an impossible job after the dumpster fire that preceded this movie, and for the most part they did the job well. I liked it, a lot.

I came to this very board to brag about being the first to post this make this very announcement, and you beat me to it! I'm guardedly excited about the release myself. KSP is almost assuredly my favorite game of all time and it literally would not exist if Felipe didn't make it, but KSP has a lot of cruft and I don't know how much of it is his fault. I won't buy this day one or anything, but I'll put it on my wish list and watch a LOT of videos about it to see if it's my next big thing.

Very neat, I liked the swivel lights (I saw they were there but would have missed the hinges had you not mentioned them). I'll be updating the rankings post when I can but it's a pain on mobile. You're looking good though to continue and I'm glad you're having fun! I don't know about others but I don't think it's a big deal. Really all debris does is slow down the game. The chances of hitting any are so remote. I do though only delete debris that will crash or intersect a moon's orbit, but on a perfect career that's all of it.

No worries about the tone, I genuinely felt bad because I totally missed the post and am glad you brought it up. I'm looking at Kerpollo now and believe yours is the first manually-pushed rolly car I've ever seen.

Yup totally allowed. The challenge is to do everything in its own missions, not avoid debris from previous ones while not using it

Yikes! So sorry! It's a busy time of year and I missed it. Also, it's a busy time of year and I don't have time to review either of these, probably will tomorrow some time, or Saturday for sure.