Ravenchant

Well, they are really light compared to manned craft, which makes it easier to meet delta-v requirements. Compare sending a couple hundred kg to, let's say, Jool, transmitting the data and forgetting about it to sending a capsule and bringing it back. I disagree regarding the panels, though. You don't really need anything but the static ones, and those should become unlocked once you are done with the Mun. Unil then... battery spam!

They also look far better on your craft when used properly. Besides, for roleplaying reasons one may feel the need to minimize the number of RTGs in close proximity to crew

(I'll have to exchange this with a more imposing shot soon) With the docking of module 4, Rukh station, while still far from being complete, has power, comms and life support, and is thus Kerbal-rated

We need more struts boosters wings!

Still working on that SSTO. It can now dock and get at least 7 tons to LKO instead of the 5 I hoped for, on 1.5 intakes per engine. It is, however, an utter b**** to land

When you only ever buy Orbit chewing gum. (it's the cheapest one around here, too!)

Well- there isn't much else besides the universe to feel at home in, now is there.

I like the external seat. Very Kerbal.

The bounds after substitution will bo m0 and m(dry mass of the rocket). But you need to put the whole thing into differential form. Edit: mass is going to be your new variable. m = m0 - mr*t , and dm = -mr*dt , which means dt = dm/(-mr). Since acceleration = dv/dt, you have to put dt to the right side and substitute. You'll also have to integrate twice. Edit 2: just calculated the whole thing, thanks to WolframAlpha. Yup, it's messy.

Congratulations to the institute! Hopefully our country will one day advance from cooperating to member state... sigh.

1 degree would require a total acceleration of about 560 m/s^2. That's... a bit high.

Disregarding air lift and drag, and assuming the ground is level, 45° is indeed your optimal angle... IF the rocket only accelerates at the start of its path. The travel path would then be a ballistic arc. If you want a straight path at some altitude above the ground, you need to compensate for Fg, so the angle is given by the acceleration of the rocket, which is itself a function of time. Once you have that function (you'll need Tsiolkovsky's equation and force balance in differential form, then an integration), derive with respect to [theta] and see where the derivative equals zero. Once atmospheric effects are taken into account, well... the equations might get a little nasty. Edit: sorry, misunderstood you. It seems you won't need to derive. The first part still stands, though. The sine (assuming 0° is parallell to ground) of your angle is directly proportional to the rockets mass, which is given by Tsiolkovsky.

Hmm. I couldn't dock for the life of me, even after watching the tutorials, even in chase mode, until I stopped looking at the ship(s) and started looking at the navball markers almost exclusively. Let's face it, docking can really f*** with our sense of direction, what with the different orientations and all. But if you ignore this and just point the green marker onto the purple marker, then it pretty much reduces to maths. If the docking target is controllable, switching to it and rotating the port towards your ship can make the difference between a successful docking and a furious Alt+F4 as well. (Speaking from personal experience)

Not only. I've lost some interplanetary probes that way upon switching to them. Or rather, would have lost if alt+F4 didn't exist. It happens often enough that I quicksave compulsively before each vessel switch in deep space.

According to your scoring system, bays with larger part counts will get more points. Not sure if that's intentional. Also, you'll have to define "visited". Entered the SOI? Orbit? Landed and took off?

Managed to make a (light) cargo SSTO! Finally! And to think I was struggling to get to orbit at all pre-0.23. Rapiers are awesome.

Looks more like Korea to me. Anyway, someone here made a handy chart...but I can't remember the username

Point taken.

His posts do have comedic value, but this is getting ridiculous.

I second (third? fourth? ugh...) IL2: 1946. It has loads of planes, pretty good system management in the newer updates (not on par with X-plane and similar, but you do have to worry about overheating, mixture and propeller pitch control, bomb fuse timers, separate convergence distances etc.), good to excellent damage and flight models, an active modding community, runs well on older machines and is still being played online (via the Hyperlobby program). ...did I mention it's still being updated? The downside would be that it's a bit hard to get it to run. Also, it doesn't look that good visually. But that's what cosmetic mods are for! http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t283/BravoFxTrt/2014-01-19at22-51-27_zps5f91181a.jpg~original (not my screenshot)

Whoa... which intakes are we talking about? If you mean rams, then this is way more than neccessary. My last satellite lifter weighed 20 tons and got into orbit with 4 ram intakes (2 per turbojet) easily. ...to be fair though, a lot of that tonnage was oxidiser

Sorry for the slight necro. File updated! The new version has a better launch escape system and tweaked retrorockets (your capsule now shouldn't bounce off the ground - 50% less nausea-inducing) Also, there are now action groups which can deorbit the injection stage without needing to switch vessels. Hope you like it!

Launch it! Launch it!

It would be awesome if it is possible, but the power requirements seem absurdly low. Ion engines dream of such efficiencies!

Installed B9 Aerospace. Got overwhelmed with the massive part list. Somehow managed to throw a SSTO together anyway