Sundancer

Decided that all my older designs where horribly over-engineered and begun work on a new, slimmed down, line of vessels. As a result Mervey Kerman was stranded on the Mun. Cue rescue mission! Luckily I'd unlocked the Stayputnik probe core a mission or two earlier, as none of the ever so brave Kerbals wanted to risk being stranded alone with Mervey. Built a rocket with just over 9000(!) Dv, as per my usual design strategy and the mission was underway. Everything went fine and only the Mystery Goo samples were lost due to pressing the wrong key and boarding the original craft. All in all, a fairly successful session. Pleased with the rescue mission as it's the first I've done that hasn't ended up with more Kerbals needing to be brought home.

Thank you! It seems as though both of these things have been at work causing my confusion. You can imagine my surprise when my aircraft ended up with an apoaps of 200km with no rocket engines. Anyway, thanks once again and I'm marking this answered.

I just came back after a break of two months. I seem to recall that radial intakes were next to useless for any sort of high altitude flight. Logged in to check if anything has changed, since I've been able to get a plane with just two radials up to 26,000ft with no flameouts. Everything seems much easier than it was before. Just playing around I've been able to punch aircraft out of the atmosphere on jet power alone, trivialising (small) SSTO building. So I'd like to ask if there have been any changes to air intakes/air breathing engines/aircraft in general? Edit: I'm using FAR, if that has any major bearing on the situation. Although I was using FAR before I stopped playing right after 0.22 came out, so the experience should be the same.

I read a thread on here a little while ago saying that it works out the same. You just have to transmit a LOT of times. Here you go.

You have a point in that the long-term fanbase (I'm loathe to use the terms hardcore and casual) are the ones who will pretty much always instantly buy any new game and then do most of the testing and feedback. But there's no money in that, and that's what game development companies do. Make games to make money. People need to get over themselves and stop thinking that whichever company they like is making a game specifically for them. Using your example, the X series has been going on for quite some time now and has developed an incredibly dedicated fanbase. They're also the only dev team I know that's been able to consistently better themselves every single game, with very few faults to speak of. But before X:Rebirth was announced and publicised, how many people did you know that knew about X? Pretty much all my friends are gamers and before I mentioned it, no one had heard of it. It was the same with The Elder Scrolls. Arena and Daggerfall were (and still are) fantastic games, but before Morrowind barely anyone had heard of the series. Even then it took Oblivion to come out for the series to really take off. Then they come to Skyrim and remove a lot of features that made the games such a hit with the established fanbase and there was a rift in the community. Half of them were saying "This is so awesome, I can get lost for hours" and the other half saying "OMG it's rubbish" because they took out attributes/skills. Then you take a step back and realise that Squad, like Egosoft and Bethesda have to make money. We're lucky that we can mod our games into what we want them to be. With KSP you can use mods to increase difficulty. I'm sure with X:Rebirth we'll be able to mod in new playable ships. For the record, X:Rebirth is a new beginning as the name suggests. It's not part of the X:BTF, X2 and X3 series, hence it not being X:4. We only got to pilot one ship in X:BTF as well, if you recall. They added more in as the series progressed.

You have to look at it from the dev's perspective. At the end of the day, this game is their livelihood. If it's a "hardcore" game, the audience will be small but incredibly fanatical. That doesn't generate a great deal of profit. Whereas making the game accessible to us "younger and stupider" players enables them to keep shifting copies of the game, thus allowing them to put more work into the game and/or work on other projects. What's the problem anyway? If you want a hardcore game, download the mods that make it so. It's as simple as that. Making the game so hard that a complete novice can't enjoy it is counter productive so what games are all about.

That's how I've been doing my landings. It's just a matter of regulating the throttle and your angle relative to the retrograde marker to dictate exactly where and how hard you land. I've never actually landed where I intended to though The sense of accomplishment when you stick any landing for the first time is huge though, imo. Not sure how I'd manage in a situation like Skyrender's though. Shadows are how I did it on the Mun all three times that I've been there. Minmus is easier since if you aim for one of the lakes(?) you can use the altimeter. That said, I certainly wouldn't want to try a Minmus landing in the dark due to how close I came to the surface on my lake-landing. It's quite unnerving knowing that your landing site is "just over that cliff", but that cliff is approaching your lander at three or four hundred metre's per second (minimum!).

There's also a "recover" button hidden behind the altimeter. Simply take your mouse up to the top of the screen (above the altimeter) when you're watching your craft and, provided it's landed, there should be a "recover" drop down menu. This only works for the vessel you're currently controlling though. So if you're on EVA and you opt to recover, you'll have to do as BostLabs says via the spacecentre tracking screen to recover the vessel you left behind.

So it looks like I'm going to buy to some sweets and screw around Kerbin! Excellent. MrPopcup, your first suggestion is one that strikes a chord with me. I've been trying to make my craft smaller and more efficient, but I always seem to run into trouble. My new method is doing "simulated" (revert to launch/assembly) launches a few times to test new designs. I'd never have tried this if I hadn't been interrupted mid launch for my Eve craft. The original launch went horribly. On releasing the first stage the ship lost around 25m/s in vertical velocity, which clearly means the design isn't utilising the first stage to it's full advantage since the second stage then has to build that speed back up again (burning more fuel). After I got back to try again, it made orbit flawlessly. There's so much to bear in mind whilst playing this game... It's awesome. Having fun in planes is a favourite of mine already It's just a shame how the aerodynamics model is compared to FAR. In stock (my career install) I have to be really careful how I fly my aerobatics plane to avoid random flailing and then crashing. Yet with FAR I can consistently push that same design to the very limits of what it can do, and quite often beyond with no real issues. Heck, I can do a pseudo-Mig style maneuver with it and come out fine. But if I install FAR for launching rockets, they invariably end up burning six high powered rocket motors directly towards Kerbin once I begin the grav turn (and I do them smoothly as a matter of course, trying to stay within the pro-grade marker). I'll stick with my stock install until I can achieve circular orbits and/or Mun and Minmus flights with my eyes closed. Once that's done then it's time to ramp up the difficulty and try career again. You make a valid point with the rovers though. I ought to build one so I can start building a lifter around it. The issue I face with this though is the fact that building them in the VAB is a pain. I've built multiple in the SPH for messing around on Kerbin, but to attach them to a rocket they need to be in the VAB, which requires raging at the symmetry system for a few hours. Edit: Although, do the subassemblies carry over from one building to the other? If they do then I'm a happy camper.

Ouch, unlucky with that one. Your lander looks to be fairly similar to mine (mass-wise), and it took me between 50 and 100 units of fuel to get back. As has been suggested, quicksave and give it a go. The way I did it was burning putting myself into a retrograde orbit compared to Minmus's rotation on it's own axis. I simply burned until I achieved escape velocity and continued until my Kerbin periapsis was sub-40km. Doing this you'll have to skip through the atmosphere of Kerbin once or twice, but you can land back home without burning again. Also bear in mind that you can use your Kerbal's EVA suit thrusters to push your craft in a desired direction, should you run out of fuel on your actual rocket motor. It does look like he'll need to be rescued though. Disclaimer: My advice is probably rubbish due to my inexperience. One Minmus landing =/= knowing how to get there and back correctly. Despite having had resounding successes every time I've tried a non-Kerbin landing so far.

Something I've noticed when messing around in the SPH is that if you use angle-snap it's possible to get some minor clipping. But if you turn it off and rotate the part as necessary, you can get much more control over exactly how it clips into the other part. The easiest way to see this for yourself is (with angle snap on) take the Swept wing, and try to join another either in front or behind. Then turn off the angle snap and try again. The part will likely show up first at a weird angle, but with a bit of patience you can build nearly seamless wings that are far larger than you could manage normally. Of course, you may know this already... Edit: It's also not what you were looking for. Disregard this post.

Hello. I'm in career mode and I've done pretty much all I can in Kerbin's SOI. To that end I've got two ships in a 100km parking orbit, one destined for Eve and one for Duna. However, having looked up the optimal phase angles it's clear that I'm not in luck. Eve is around 30degrees ahead of Kerbin, and Duna is around 100degrees ahead. I think waiting for them to align correctly is my best course of action since there is every chance my ships won't make it, even in a best case scenario. IIRC they've got around 5/6000dV as they sit now. According to what I've read, that should be enough. But I'm terrible at this game so it probably won't be What would you recommend doing while I wait for them to line up? I'm going to be sending more missions to the Mun (maybe use a rover to cut down on how many) to pick up the science I've missed there, as well as refining both my Mun and Minmus rockets (read: practicing how to get there and back reliably). I'll also try and learn how to rendezvous and dock now that I have the parts. But all of this will only be ~7 in-game days. It would be nice to avoid time-warping too much, but it looks like that's what I'll have to do. As a sidenote, does anyone know if Kerbal Alarm Clock works in career mode?

Installed Engineer Redux as I got a bit tired of having to guesstimate whether I'd built a rocket fit for purpose. Then proceeded to put a Kerbal on Minmus for the first time, earning 506 points of science on the way. Now to send another couple of missions to the Mun (or one with a rover/hopping lander) to explore all the biomes and start work on a Duna mission.

With regards to that, is there any difference between using the SAS and Inline Stabilizer? Looking at the stats in-game they seem to be very similar. The SAS being heavier and requiring more electricity to run, for no extra torque. I've tried both and, personally, haven't noticed a difference. But then, I'd need a lot more time with the game to notice. Overall though I think it's alright though.

Two Mun landings and many, many failed attempts to build a rocket for Minmus. All my designs either don't have enough juice left once I get into orbit to make up for my errors, or they are an absolute pain to get into orbit in the first place (slowing down as they stage). Half tempted to bite the bullet and watch/read a tutorial just so I know how to do everything optimally. I get the impression my return trips are incredibly inefficient. If I can work out how to do it correctly I'm reasonably sure my Mun rocket could do Minmus too. I relied on Engineer a great deal, apparently.

I'm inclined to agree with Jaxal. While it does make sense to put a probe into orbit before a manned flight, it's definitely not the Kerbal way.

This is the rocket that made my first completely unassisted trip to the Mun. It certainly isn't pretty, and it's definitely over-done, but it worked. Lucky I built it the way I did too, as the lander got back to Kerbin with 3 units of fuel left! Forgot to bring the Goo, and any means of communication though, so it's going back as the Mani III which will feature a more efficient fuel crossfeed system as this one ran out mid circularisation burn. Going from three 215 thrust engines to one 50 screws everything. Another example of extreme over-engineering is my Fenris design. This series was only intended to lift the science module you see at the top into HKO. It did the job beautifully, but could probably have been done with a lot less. I hope Whackjob doesn't mind my blatant plagiarism on the science module/lander. I saw one of his posts including a very similar design and it's absolutely amazing. To be used for actual landings it, naturally, needs some form of propulsion and fuel. It's likely that design will require me to learn docking, as it can't fit the amount of fuel I need for a landing and return. Hoorah for inefficiency! Edit: Typo.

You can simulate currency, if you're that way inclined. It's what I'm going to do once I've unlocked everything once. Restart career mode but making every mission as cost-effective as possible. Granted it's only going to be numbers on a piece of paper, but it serves the purpose of making the missions that much more challenging. Edit: What are you guys doing to rake in the points so quickly? There's going to be a lot of revisiting various places as more equipment is unlocked for me, I think. It's getting to the point where grinding will be inevitable.

I only got round to actually getting stuck into the career mode tonight and oh my! It's fantastic! It's great if you don't have a specific goal in mind. You just think "Right, I need more points for "xyz", how to get them?" and build something to accomplish it. Something that's probably fairly obvious, but it should be said anyway (for the not-so-great players, like myself). If you're struggling for science, build something that can achieve Kerbin escape velocity and put whatever science parts you have on the final stage. I used a probe core because I'm not abandoning a Kerbal to eternity in pace and just transmitting data back racked up around 400 points. Next mission is a Minmus flyby and a Mun landing... (I know, newb-tastic). Thanks, Squad!

Scrapped all my SSTO designs, then started work on the Hyperion series. So far just the Mk1 design, but it got into orbit (three times in a row, not a fluke!) with enough fuel to return. This is probably down to having worked out how to actually fly SSTO's correctly... The Mk2 will either be larger and able to carry more Kerbals (or cargo, not sure). Also debating whether or not to try it without the Sabre's from B9. They seem to make it too easy.

Hello, I'm in the process of putting together an SSTO and it's going pretty well. I'm using FAR, B9 and procedural wings after some poking about looking for things to improve the way my planes looked/handled, but I have a few stock designs as well. However, I've come across a problem that appears in every single aircraft I build. No matter how I place the rudder, it always tries to control roll as well as yaw, which tends to result in what is essentially a wildly flailing incendiary bomb with wings attached shortly after take off. I've tried mounting the rudder(s) vertically, at an inward angle, at an outward angle, and any configuration imaginable really. Is this normal or is it some issue with the mods installed or something else? Is there some way I can get rid of this? I doubt it's the mods since the other designs that have since been created and tested using all stock parts have the same problem. This is my most successful design: Edit: I've made a point of keeping the CoM in front of the CoL by placing the jet fuel tank foremost, since that one will still have a great deal left once in orbit. Then once the oxidizer in the other tanks runs out I pump all the liquid fuel that is remaining into the fore jet fuel tank, any surplus going into the one behind it. Still nada. The only way I got that into orbit (only the once) was by not touching the yaw/roll and simply pitching up at a very slow rate. Maybe 5degree's every 15 seconds or so. Another thing, which I think may be FAR, is that if I pitch up too hard, the plane ends up facing back the way it came very very quickly. This results in a dead kerbal almost every time due to flat spin or otherwise unrecoverable spin of doom. I'm doing something wrong, but I can't work out what. So if anyone can point out what I'm missing or lend some pointers that'd be brilliant.

Put a Kerbal on the Mun for the first time It was a dodgy mission, and far from efficient, so I'm glad I added far too much fuel to the lander/return craft. I'm reasonably sure it could have made it back to the Mun again. Also got Bill stuck in orbit from a failed SSTO flight. The plane made it, but didn't have any fuel left for the retrograde burn to come back down. Now he's stuck, although the periapsis is at 63km there doesn't seem to be any noticeable aerobraking going on. He's going to be the target for my first rendezvous with the goal to bring him home.

That makes sense. It turns out it's unnecessary, messing around with the first node resulted in a circular orbit (hopefully) in an hour or so. Granted it's 600km above the surface, but it's a start. Now all that's left is to work out a reliable trajectory from getting to the Mun from Kerbin orbit, as this time was a complete fluke. Don't tell me though please, I sort of ruined my first orbit because I read up on how to do it after two failed attempts. Takes some of the savour out of it when it's effectively someone else doing it through you. This game is too addictive.

Specifically, setting up multiple ones ahead of time. How will they appear on my nav ball? Currently en-route to Mun, and as it stands I've gone ahead and set up three so I don't have to worry about trying to angle the rocket/throttle and set up another point all at the same time. What I'd assume is that as one is completed the next one shows up on the navball, is that correct? Plus setting them up now gives me time to calculate whether or not I can get away with getting rid of the mahoosive fuel tank that's still with me (overdid it a bit...apparently you don't need a Mainsail to get a 2t probe to Mun). If that's the case, then I'll have to see what to do next. Leave the probe in orbit, try and land it or attempt to bring it home. The latter two would both be more beneficial, since I want to send a manned expedition tomorrow. Apologies for the fairly silly question, but I thought it better to ask than to take a hammer to my PC should I screw this up for the third time.

Aside from getting stages in the wrong order, accidentally hitting "space" one too many times and leaving a command pod in space because that was the motor that was going to be my retrograde burn, getting fuel lines mixed up.... All the silly things. But the best one happened to me just now, rage-quit. Bob was out flying the Ravenspear Mk3 so I could get an idea of how high turbo-jets can go, and how they should handle when I spotted the river in the northern hemisphere from 15km up. Why not land there and have a look around? Fine, just bear the undulations in mind, and the fact that he touched down at 150m/s.... Surprisingly, it held together only for the engines to catch on the ground and tear off, leaving him there. Now, for some reason I'm quite fond of the little guys, so I figured I'd drop my rendezvous planning/building and mount a rescue operation...What could go wrong? After about an hour trying and scrapping numerous different designs, I went back to the first creation dubbed "Ravenspear Mk5" (it used the Mk4 as a base, and modified it to only have one turbojet with a something like 8 ram-jets, airhogging is fun). I'm not sure why it got scrapped in the first place, but it flys beautifully so off Jeb went to rescue his buddy. Cruising at 25km, he used around half the available fuel to get there, but that's no worry. The return trip will be more efficient since there won't be as much faffing around trying to get my bearings. Anyway, he got there, landed 500m away from Bob and the crippled Mk3...only to find the only ladder on the craft was for his cockpit, and in any case there is no action group set up to activate it... Now I have two Kerbalnauts stranded on literally the other side of the planet (engines blew on the "rescue" plane during a dodgy move trying to get the wing within jumping distance). I wanted to try a rendezvous today, not devise two then three seater sub-orbital planes to rescue guys on bloody Kerbin!