EtherDragon

After the struggles in episode 10, we get a plane flying and complete a contract in episode 11:

If you pop the parachutes when you are headed up, there is a chance they will vanish when your velocity drops to zero. Try waiting until you're descending to deploy your parachute.

It's another round of experimenting with Space Planes in episode 10:

Click on the plus to find out in the notes. Some contracts require you to "Run Test" where other contracts require you to activate the part via staging.

For a flag, in general, you want to flatten the flag; Favor simple drop shadows over gradients, replace complex shading on shapes and text with simpler cell-shading styles. Also, use borders, but only where needed (e.g. clashing colors).

Ok, then I will modify the bug report - these contracts shouldn't become available at all unless a node with solar power is unlocked.

I have created an unmanned probe and sent it into an orbit that matches the desired criteria. The orbit is stable, and has sat for much more than ten seconds. The probe has a battery with plenty of power and a Communitron attached. All conditions are met, yet the contract will not complete. If a picture is worth a thousand words, then what's a video worth?

So, when people curse about their ruddy ships, this is where the term comes from. Example: "That ruddy rocket won't make it out of the atmosphere!" "Ruddy" is now a more colloquial term used to describe general dissatisfaction about something. But when used to describe a space-craft, in particular, the term "ruddy" really indicates the person's opinion that it just might blow up at any time. It originally derived from the acronym "R.U.D." which stands for "Rapid Unscheduled Dis-assembly." An RUD can occur for many reasons, not necessarily an explosion, although explosions are common for these incidents regarding space-craft. Another common cause of a RUD is descending too quickly, breaking up in reentry, or hitting the ground too hard from insufficient use of parachutes or controlled landings. Thus, "ruddy" can be used to describe any general way that the speaker thinks the craft might fail. Lately, "rudding", "rudd'n", or "rut'n" can be heard in certain dialects, as variant adjectives to describe the same thing. E.g. "That ruddy ship..." or "That rudd'n ship..."

Myself! And Manley, and Danny. Although lately, I've been watching a lot of DFWanderingKid.

It's Space-Walk time in Episode Nine!

A two-for-one day! This set of missions couldn't be broken down into a single episode no matter how I edited it. Part One: Part Two:

Yes, you are very near to having the exact right idea. Here is what I recommend - a slight adjustment to your plan: 1. Try to time your launch so that you establish a stable orbit slightly behind or ahead of your target - this is guess work and will be imperfect. 2. Position your orbit so that your perioapsis and apoapsis are both 5km below or above the target orbit. 2b. If you establish orbit behind, set your Pe and Ap lower than the target orbit. If you come in ahead, set your Pe and Ap higher than the target. 3. Manual inclination change to match - as best you can by eye-balling it. Now, all you have to do is wait; you are guaranteed an encounter that is no more than 5km away. If you have more patience, you can set your Pe and Ap to 2km, and be guaranteed 2km of separation.

He's not a star, he's a rocket headed strait for the Mun! (Probably with Jeb on board...)

In Episode 7 Grabbing a couple more contracts to wrap up:

I remember in 0.24 leaving a lander and Jeb stranded on the Mun with a bunch of science, and not quite enough capability to mount a rescue (of Jeb). A couple tweaks to the craft and I was able to go and rescue the Science! But not Jeb, he had to wait until the Science! expedition returned and I could get more parts from it to make a capable enough rocket to retrieve him.

Think of your rendezvous this way: You need to meet a friend at a particular coffee stand at a particular time, but you each only have 15 minutes to spare before having to move on with your day. If you arrive at the place more than 15 minutes early, you've got to leave before he gets there, and will not be able to meet. If you arrive at the place more than 15 minutes late, he has to leave before you get there, and will not be able to meet. Now, you're in space - and you're still 47km away from where you need to be. Time to reschedule your meeting. As others posted, you reschedule the meeting by modifying your orbit so that next time you get to this same place, you're both arriving at the same time. The goal should be to get within 2km of them during the encounter - then rendezvous is really easy. 5km is ok, but get's a little hairy.

In Episode 5 it takes a few tries to get one of these pesky missions completed, but we finally manage to do so, clearing our mission board and gaining some much needed Science!

Here is an old video I did on my old Korbital Mechanics channel* It's 45 minutes, but shows the basics of constructing a Multi-stage Munar Lander that brings a Munar Lander with it for exploration. This video was from much earlier in my YouTube career, and from the version that first introduced Science! But the principles are still the same... Haha, after rewatching this old video - here are some things that I've learned since then... Lights! They're useful! Muting myself when clearing my throat - also useful. *Note: Korbital Mechanics is retired with no new content coming. But the channel and videos are maintained for posterity.

In Episode 4, I begin working on larger more capable rockets - only to bang into the limitations of my current VAB and Launch Pad. Time to get some contracts completed so I can afford some building upgrades!

I agree, on the Admin building - the costs to start up an initiative are so prohibitive it doesn't really make sense to use them, at all. The entree fees need to be tuned down quite a bit.

I had played another round of Orbiter Space-Flight Simulator, and having a blast with what it offered (extreme realism, very sandbox, no "game" per-se). I was lamenting an idea how I thought it would be cool if some clever Mod Builder made a Mod for Orbiter that essentially allowed you to build your own rockets from parts, when I started fumbling around Steam to assuage mt boredom and craving for more Science! I stumbled onto Kerbal Space Program and went "what?! How did I NOT hear about this!!!" I immediately bought it sight, unseen, and never was I more impressed! I got it when it was Sandbox Complete, but that was it - only later did I learn they were planning a Career Mode and to turn this sandbox into a proper Game.

That's essentially why I pointed out the KSP Mod community as well. For added realism in KSP, there are mods available. I prefer the core game to maintain it's current "simplistic" style.

I say, do videos that you love to do! The main thing that people want to see is you having fun. If you have fun talking about sciency stuff while working your missions - do that. If you have fun struggling through Hard-Mode Career - do that! People want to enjoy what's going on along with you (to point and laugh at you making the same mistakes they once did, having fun learning from it, etc...) DO NOT be afraid to celebrate your epic failures - but don't be fake about generating them. Be willing to laugh at yourself, especially when you trip over thin air and fall flat on your butt over something obvious. Now, let me turn the question back onto you - what content or topics do you have the most passion about covering in your KSP Channel? What do you have the most fun doing or talking about with regard to KSP? Is this a channel that will expand beyond KSP? If so, think about your channel theme - of not, think about a lot of different types of content you are interested in that's related to KSP. P.S. I'm no YouTube Expert, but I do have an active and growing YouTube channel (link in my signature) that features Simulation (mostly space) games, and Science content, including KSP. Check it out and decide for yourself if my advice is worthwhile. Good luck!

FEEDBACK regarding the Early Career: HI SQUAD! Thanks for such an awesome content rich update! I have some feedback to consider as you take this Beta forward toward completion... I know that much of these can be adjusted by sliders, but I think some tuning is needed on the default setting. (From a well tuned default setting, more casual or hard-core players can customize their play experience further). Early Career: Generally this phase of the game seems a tad slow, even for a seasoned KSPer like myself. It costs a LOT of money to do the first few things an early career player would want to do - and this is exactly the time that you want people trying out all of your new features, so they get hooked on their potential! 1. Building Upgrades: Some of the building upgrades are prohibitively expensive to start off with. It's fine to have upgrades get more and more expensive as time goes on - but players in the earlier career should be able to afford one or two basic building upgrades within the first couple of missions. This gets users hooked on what building upgrades will offer in the future, offering more incentive to save Funds for upgrades. 1b. Alternately - many of the buildings are of no use, at all, during the first two missions. I think that the players should be required to buy these buildings in the first place. i.e. the only buildings that should be accessible at the start are the Basic VAB, Basic Launch Pad, and Basic Mission Control. Right now, the area looks a bit crowded to a new player, to be honest. Starting with just the bare minimum of buildings for the first two contracts really sets the player up for a more simplified starting experience. Also, when a player comes back after their first two missions - you could offer the pop-up showing some of their construction options. Players will be much more interested in what a building does for them, after they buy it! Example: after the first contracts are done, the user might decide to by the Administration Building, granting them access to strategic initiatives, I guarantee that once someone buys the admin building, they will be more interested in kicking off a strategy to help their career. Another example: The first time they unlock the Tracking Station and see all the places they can go (and all the junk they've left behind, that might be recovered for some extra funds!) they player will be hooked on using the building - amplified by the fact that they paid for it in the first place. 2. Strategy Initiatives: Speaking of the Admin Building... Some of the strategies are entirely too prohibitive to start! A limit on the number of active strategies isn't a limit at all, if they can't be started in the first place. Entry fees for most strategies should be drastically lowered, so that players can kick them off. I like how the start-up cost is variable based on the commitment percentage, but the fixed values should be much more approachable. Some of these start-ups are so expensive that I would never use them, ever (250 Science points, I'm looking at you)... Again, getting people started in initiatives earlier is a way to hook them on the advantages, and keep your audience coming back to readjust their initiatives. Right now you only ever want to start an initiative once since it's so expensive - offering only a one-shot currency sink. If people can fidget with initiatives more, over time, users will sink their currencies into these initiatives over and over - encouraging them to go out and earn more! Also, if initiatives are easier to start, users will bang against the initiative limit of 2 strait away, encouraging them to upgrade the building (further sinking Funds out of their budgets). 2b. Basically, players need to be able to make decisions about what to spend their currencies on. While a limit on the number of strategies seems good on the surface, it's not a limit at all if the player can really only choose from one of eight strategies due to the high start-up cost. Lowering the initial costs of strategies and building upgrades. 3. Part progression / mission progression. This seems just about perfect for the early game - it shows that it has had a few cycles/releases to fine tune.

One thing to keep in mind is that KSP is still under active development, yes - it's reached Beta, but now is when the real fine-tuning and adding of content begins. Before, we've seen new Features added with each new build - but nearly all the features are present now, and the game has a complete game cycle, all-be-it not particularly well balanced. It's balanced enough to be playable, and enjoyable, but not really dialed in to a polished enjoyable experience. Another thing is, most of us are approaching this game as old hats / seasoned KSP professionals. Imagine what learning curve is still necessary for those who would come new to the game? They would need to learn how to make a rocket, maintain profit, learn how to orbit (this is HARD) all while gaining little money due to as many failures as successes. So I say again, in this phase of development, I'm thinking SQUAD will be spending a lot of effort on balancing out how career mode works to make some of the features easier to approach. That's where our feedback is really helpful!