xtoro

You could also try Kerbal Joint Reinforcement. It'll prevent you from having to add more parts...

I use Surface Lights for color coding things.

This mod http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/65747-1-0-Hangar-Extender-v3-3

Use as small of wings as you can to get it to fly. If you're not against installing mods, FAR and MechJeb have tools that show how much drag you're fighting. - - - Updated - - - Ninja'd! Also wanted to add a trick for long heavy planes: Tilt your wings 5 degrees. This allows the rest of the plane to stay straighter in the airstream and you won't have air hitting the bottom of the plane as much. Less drag.

So I came up with a cool design, pics to come. I used the I-beams to make 4 V shapes. Well, more like a Y if you split it vertically down the middle. Worked great, and just had to come down roughly on top with the right rotation. The 4 beams sticking straight out of the bottom would get guided in by the lower ship's Y brackets and settle right on the docking port.

I'm totally trying this tonight!

You can try using the place-anywhere RCS thrusters. They have a lower profile so it may help. Just make sure you cover all rotations when you place them.

Heat in general is buggy. I made an ssto, and as soon as I launch it from the SPH the cockpit, cargo bay and wings have heat bars close to yellow and they're glowing, for no reason. I also sometimes get random overheating explosions as soon as I launch. Revert to launch and everything's fine...

For this and future reference, there's an organized list of many different tutorials that can help you out with almost anything you'd want to do in the game here: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/28352-The-Drawing-Board-A-library-of-tutorials-and-other-useful-information

50km is pushing it, but 20 or even 30km depending on how agile your ship is, you can just shoot for it.

I've done this before but wasted lots of fuel hovering to line up the ports. And if you land and its a little off, you have to lift off a bit and try again. Definitely try it out, its a challenge and fun, but not so much fun after a few times.

There's a mod called Portrait Stats that adds little icons to their IVA pictures to tell you what they do, and adds stars to show their level. This link has several mods, scroll down and find portrait stats http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/120731-1-0-x-DMagic-s-Modlets-Latest-Update-Celestial-Body-Science-Editor-v5-0-7-11-2015 By using it, you don't need to switch away to anything to check.

Once you're familiar with the navball it's much easier, yes. Here's the basics of adjusting your course. Click your velocity so that it shows target speed. This will also change your prograde and retrograde markers to be relative to your target's speed. Find the locations of the prograde and target markers. Draw an imaginary line from the prograde marker going through the target marker. Figure out roughly 90 degrees from the prograde marker on that imaginary line. It can be less, but this will also increase your approach speed, not really a bad thing. Just don't be more than 90 off. Apply thrust. If you can see the markers, you'll see the prograde marker approach the target marker. Once lined up, cut thrust and coast. Repeat. Using reaction wheels only helps not waste fuel because you can turn to check the markers and thrust a bit at a time if you can't see them. But you should at least be able to see the target marker.

Tried it before, didn't work well, but that was back in 0.23-ish times. The problem is that you don't have enough velocity at high altitude, and turning on rockets before you reach max balloon altitude and while it's still inflated causes too much drag. But, starting at zero velocity when you deflate is kind of like being on a really tall mountain, however you still need a good sized rocket which means you need the larger heavier balloon =even larger rocket. But, the largest balloons also don't deflate so that's a problem too.

I first started doing what you do instead of starting over, but soon discovered what Harry suggested as a much more fuel efficient way of doing it. It's just a matter of adjusting your course rather than being stopped relative to the target and starting again each time. Sometimes it's difficult when you can't see the markers though.

Sometimes not enough struts will cause collisions. Try removing them completely or adding more. This has only ever happened to me once, and switching from 2x to 4x symmetry fixed it.

For future help: Some parts just won't attach to a node, like the place-anywhere RCS thrusters, even if you hold Alt. To fix this, place if close enough to centered, then use the offset widget to move the part. It will move in snapped intervals, but one of those will always be centered on the part you're attaching to.

I like this theory and would to to expand on it. Kerbals never had a need for time, since they are carefree and do what they want. When they decided to start a space program (when you make a new save game) is when they decided that they need to actually measure time in order to make calculations for spaceflight. Therefore, they invented time once it was needed. There was never any timekeeping or calendars before year 0 day 1.

I made a microprobe that runs on RCS and weighs 0.855t and has 1940dV. You could remove some parts or add more RCS to add more dV. Since it's so small it only needs a tiny rocket to get it in orbit. You can even use what's left in your last ascent stage to start your interplanetary transfer. Link with download and pics http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/125012-Bitsat-mirco-probe-Cheap-science-at-under-0-9t%21

I think that depends on your intended destination and if you're going to aerobrake on Laythe or not. If aerobraking and headed for an orbit in the Jool system, come in behind. If not aerobraking and looking for gravity braking to hit up Jool or another one of its moons other than Laythe, then come in ahead of Laythe. If trying to slingshot using a gravity assist to reach another planet further out and not aerobraking, come in behind. All sounds legit to me, but it would be nice if a guru could chime in to confirm because I've only started using these tricks a few months ago.

My kerbal way of fixing a similar hardtofly rocket was tons of fins, but it was way too many. I switched out the fins for a few airbrakes. As I found out, there was only a few times where it was difficult to keep from flipping. So on my ascent, if I found the rocket started to wander, I would put the brakes on just for a few seconds to get it to correct itself and then release. Airbrakes were on the bottom where my fins were originally. Kept the part count down and i think overall it caused less drag for the entire ascent.

To keep my rovers from pulling wheelies or flipping toward when I brake, I always disable the brakes on the front wheels, and disable the motors on the rear wheels so that it's only the front pulling you. Nice and stable when combined with the other tips above.

I think his intent is the comparison to Jool. However, I can also understand that while aerobraking behind Laythe, its gravity is also helping by pulling you radially in the direction that the planet is travelling, which is the path you want to take to achieve orbit around both Laythe and Jool.

Because laythe's atmosphere isn't as dense and doesn't have a sharp cutoff like Jool does. Jool's atmosphere is like a brick wall. Also, if you can manage to swing ahead of Jool before hitting Laythe, its gravity can slow you down.

But the reason I went with 170 degrees is so that the sun will never be between them. If I place it 180 across and inclined, wont there still be 2 points where the sun is between them at the ascending and descending nodes? - - - Updated - - - I thought of this as well, but it's as much dV as option A. The reason I want Jool to have one is because of probes and rovers in the Jool system of moons.