annallia

Very true, it would be a very kerbal mission. Speaking of kerbal missions gave it a try myself and got: 3,3,6,5.... Doesn't really get more kerbal than that. Re-rolled and got something a little better, though it will have to wait until after my next piece of super station is constructed: 8,1,4,9 Can we use old ships? My Project Jool system probe launcher shouldn't have broken with .21 and that micro probe would be perfect for this.

Looks interesting... Some of those special conditions are impossible to meet though. Like the time limit. It would be possible for you to only have 10 days to get to Eeloo, pretty sure that is impossible unless there is some super engine mod out there I don't know about. Even if you got lucky and rolled a 9, 90 days is not really enough to go interplanetary even with sitting on the launch pad waiting for your window to open.

I don't know about "crawl tubes" but if you are talking being able to transfer crew from docked vessels without EVA then you want crew manifest which can be found here: http://kerbalspaceprogram.com/18-1-kerbal-crew-manifest/ Edit-2 pods is a good choice. I have been trying to do 3 in one launch on my station and for whatever reason they are failing. First it was my lifter not being able to lift them, reduced weight by getting rid of nuke engines, now its just flat out unweildy trying to dock them with all the rcs ports on the aft of the ship.

I would go for two. That said how many you need really depends on how many kerbalnauts you are going to have on your station. You need one pod for living quarters, another for labs and whatnot.

Electricity seems to go through anything, however clamp-o-trons and stack separators/decouplers will keep fuel from transferring automatically. For those you need to do what astropapi1 said.

True it is a lot of lights... but it would make finding your target port much easier no? As to your edit, what I was thinking as instead of a multi port like this, have the top of the MK1-2 command module or the multi-point connector here which look suspiciously like docking ports actually be docking ports. Edit- BTW love the way your lifter launches in your clubbing on mun video.

I got the opportunity to test my new KORS (Kerbal Orbital Recovery Ship). After a design flaw, or rather I underestimated the fuel requirements of landing my 250 ton Mun base stranded Jeb, Bill, and Bob in orbit around Mun, Ed Kerman launched the KORS from the station and recovered the three stranded Kerbalnauts. Now that they are on board (due to lag when leaving SOI I am not warping when it gets under 10 minutes to escape/enter) all I have to decide is do I put them back at the station and let them take the escape pods down to KSC or do I bring the ship down as it was originally intended to do. As it turns out, the vessel is structurally flawed for an orbital drop. The chutes deployed and the lander can which had the most chutes (8) slammed into the stuff on top of it essentially making it explode. The command capsule which only had 2 chutes was too heavy to safely return off just 2 chutes and slammed into the ground at 16m/s making it explode. So rather than a rescue mission my space agency just lost 4 kerbalnauts.

I don't do so well with planes but all that I know is you will want the gear to keep the plane fairly high off the ground, one of my first successful planes landed on the terrain, only to blow up trying to take back off because part of the plane caught a bump in the terrain. Other than that you will need to either have a hitchhiker can or an empty capsule of some sort for your wayward kerbals. You could always throw in a lander can + probe core to do this as it would save on weight.

There are a few mods that make use of them, however as far as stock goes their only real purpose is to look pretty. But it is what you make of it. If you like to pretend go ahead and put up a dozen communication satellites like I do.

Voted I don't know. Honestly they don't worry me too much. I am sure they will be fixed eventually and the loading time vs new features... well so far the new features are winning. If it does start to bug me I do still have .20 installed as well so I can always go back.

I suggest your final stage of your rescue craft uses nuclear engines. This is because you are going to need a lot of fuel to get them if you are right about their orbit and they are the most fuel efficient (next to ion engines). Your rescue craft could be remote controlled if you want, but unless you had a docking port on the first craft you are not going to be able to latch on to them (assuming stock). Instead your ideal craft will have a hitchhiker pod in it. Then all you have to do is rendevous with your wayward craft and eva your kerbals over to the rescue craft. Once they are in the rescue craft head for home.

I built my first successful jet. My previous record was a 3 minute flight getting only 3k in the atmosphere... Mostly due to the rocket engine I attached to it because I was hoping it would be able to break orbit. New record is 23 minute flight, 19k altitude. Also successfully landed my first jet... Though taking off again didn't go quite as smooth. Had engines mounted under the wings and a small bump in the terrain meant a sudden engine loss on one side... I want to make one now!

I would be almost tempted to steal that second one for myself... You know if it wouldn't make me laugh to hard to take off again after I plant my flag....

Even though my station has a huge battery reserve I stuffed 5 RTG's in it (one in each module). This way no matter what there will be some power coming in, also means that if I accidentally clip a solar panel or 3 (hey it happens) I am not without power coming in. As to orbit, Snooze is dead on. If it is just there to say hey I did it then you can put it at whatever orbit you want. Fueling stations tend to do better in high orbit. In fact, any station that you are planning on visiting often I would suggest a higher orbit since you will be moving slower making docking easier. (at least for me). Speed is ultimately relative, but for some reason its easier to get to in a higher orbit.

Agreed the door swings both ways.

^^ This. Personally I treat it as a navigation computer. I use it to plot courses for me, but I do the flying myself. The only time I use the auto pilot functions are on RC ships like my refueling satellites. I have a vivid imagination that lets me come up with my own missions and I can stick to my own rules, part of making that more real however is injecting realism wherever I can. As such anything that fires without a kerbal on board should be piloted via auto pilot. The problem comes when some of those people decide to bash the ones who do use mechjeb or other mods. When they do that, it becomes elitism.

Press shift 5 times, should bring up a popup asking you to turn them on/off or bring you to your ease of access page so you can turn them off.

I've destroyed a station by hitting space before. Had a probe with SRB's attatched to it docked (needed something to balance the load on the last station part so built an experimental probe in), However I have never throttled up enough to rip a station apart. Hell even my probe with the SRB's didn't really do much damage, just altered the orbit enough to set my station on a collision course... It did however manage to rip off the main docking ports from the rest of the station. That said I remapped my throttle controls to my mouse. Button 4 = up button 5 = down button 6 = all stop.

He should be. Every mission he was on he has broken something in one way or another usually leaving him stranded. This time he has a mission where he won't get yelled at for breaking things because it was his mission to break stuff, preferably himself...

Budget constraints. I I have enough fuel floating around in 1/2 full tanks that were jettisoned from my lifters to fill a small ocean... I prefer to err on the side of caution.

My standard tug. Aside from mechjeb completely stock, if I were building this to go interplanetary though I would ditch the trip engines in the middle and just go off the side mounted ones (but keep the fuel tank). Fully loaded it weighs in at 60 tons. From the top down: 2x clamp-o-tron 1x Bi-coupler 1x RC-L01 1x FL-R1 RCS tank 1x X200-32 Fuel tank 3x Small hardpoints (attatched near base) 3x FL-T800 fuel tanks 1x atomic engine per FL-T800 1x Tristack coupler on the X200 tank with 3 more atomic engines Additionals: 6x RCS thrusters 3x Z400 batteries 12x solar panels (the single panels) Fuel lines feed from the big tank to the FL tanks and struts between the big tank and FL tanks to keep it together though not sure if those are needed.

My standard tugs can make the trip, fairly small (compared to the lifters that put them in orbit...) Key is the nuke engines. Assuming I make my burns just right they have enough fuel to return as well, though I usually end up burning too much of that extra fuel off due to bad course planning.

I do use them now and then, mostly in my ultra light lifters (sub 5 ton payload) because they are efficient and small. Anything with a larger payload though I find diminishing returns on my rockets, rather than build banks and banks of rocket engines I would rather just use a large fuel tank and a mainsail.

Look at the date of the post above yours, its over a year old. For all we know (as I haven't been playing that long) this may not have been implemented yet.

Well the atmo is fairly thick in Jool at that point, or should be anyway. At that point in his fall I got bored of waiting to see if his command pod would explode so took him eva. He ended up doing the funky chicken about 3 minutes later.