StrandedonEarth

And suddenly my kerbals are afraid. Very afraid. Thanks!

So, ARM came out and I started a new career save, just like I did when .23 came out. One difference is that I finally installed Kerbal Engineer in the middle of my .23 save, when I went challenging TyMoholEve. But starting fresh, having KER doesn't seem right. So my first and foremost question is where on the science/tech tree would you put KER? Which got me thinking about where other stuff should go on the tech tree. Thing that are in stock and some features provided by mods. And should they be unlocked on pure science and only science? Perhaps some things could be unlocked by reaching milestones. Maybe something as simple as basic instrumentation (navball, altimeter etc.) could be unlocked after a suborbital lob. I can just imagine Jeb reporting back to the engineers "Wow that was fun, but I could use some way of knowing where I'm going and where I'm pointing guys." That same lob could also unlock the "Ten Times Time Dilator," (Time warp) with more advanced Dilators coming available just as you need them. Maneuver nodes after an orbital mission. Something like ladders could be unlocked with science points, but also unlocked after using RCS to board a landed vessel 5 or 10 times (with the same kerbal). You'd think after awhile Bob would be thinking there has to be a better way! MechJeb (haven't tried it) would be a fairly advanced autopilot, in the top half of the tech tree. The piloting skills (Launch, land, dock) could be unlocked with repetition, or with science points for people who really want it. Engineering data would be in the lower half of the tree; build and flight engineers could be separate. KER's reference bodies would only be unlocked after being visited by at least a science probe. KAC features would be tied to the time dilator and flight engineer. So what do you think? What features would you like to see unlockable, and where would you put them?

Finally got an SSTO spaceplane to orbit

Launching 100-200 ton cargoes on my Goliagus lifter. Building aircraft with the flying properties of a brick

Holy spiderweb Batman! I tried tweaking my design to a lander can, but it's just too much extra weight and I can't get the dV back up. It would have to be a clean sheet redesign. So I gave up and tried to build a spaceplane and the game froze.

Why you no stop posting "Why you no..." guy memes?!?!

Correct on the 'chute loadout and weight class. The drop tank I used was only ever attached in the first place so my lander would clear a tall pair of asparagus stages on the launcher that got it off Kerbin, but it came in useful. I fired 4 of the 16 'spikes on my lander about 500m before the first pair of drogues fully deployed at 5000m to slow it a little more. Then I topped up the tanks those spikes used and dropped the tank before the main 'chutes deployed. I could have put some radial engines directly on the drop tank for that purpose and not had to top-up. Maybe a bunch of sepratrons would work too. Once those first 2 drogues opened it slowed everything enough that there were no other problems. The main reason I had a mainsail (a skipper probably would have worked but it wouldn't have shot off the surface as quickly) was to be able to mount it on my launcher. If I used a landercan instead of a seat (or maybe side-mounted seats) I suppose I could have mounted it upside-down. Imagine my surprise when everything worked perfectly while testing on Kerbin, but everything ripped apart on my first mission to Eve. The second mission, after adding more struts, worked better but I still lost the drogues until I quickloaded and did that small burn. I think at one point it pulled 9Gs according to KER but didn't notice if that was during landing or ascent, that's just what the max showed. I definitely suggest opening just 2 drogues before the rest

Jack Frost! or whatever his name is in the ooold Christmas animation special thingamabobbers

15. Build and launch a Death Star I know, it's a poor imitation

Feeeel the navball. Become one with the navball. Fly the navball. The pretty picture of ships floating in space is just decoration

Ah yes, the parachutes. You may not need that many if your gear can handle a faster landing, and removing 'chutes doesn't up your terminal speed much. My landing at 900m ASL was at 6.9m/s with 4 drogues, 4 Mk25s, and 28 radials. The trick for me was getting those drogues open without ripping the ship apart, that slowed it down enough so that opening the rest of the 'chutes was not an issue. I had to set 2 drogues to fully deploy before before the other 2 along with a brief engine firing or the drogues would just rip the girder they were mounted to right off. Eve's air is so much thicker than Kerbin's that while I had no problem testing the chutes on Kerbin, everything tore apart when I first got to Eve.

I tried that once. Windows tried to fix itself ("Found new hardware, installing drivers") and was soon unable to read any of the drives (hard or optical) as it tried switching IDE drivers. OTOH, another time I tried it on a different machine it was able to reconfigure itself.

Which wire do I cut again? The red one or the blue one? Ah, to halibut! Cut'em all!

Try that again...

True, but if you don't have any sort of transfer window calculator, then you have a whole kolar orbit to play with the maneuver node. I did my first Jool tour that way, and probed many planets before .23, before I discovered Kerbal Alarm Clock. 2-4 LV-N's and 2 jumbo tanks usually gives dV to spare.

I think the Rowsdowser's question was how attentive the class is. Is it mostly "geeks" that are right into science stuff, or more jock-types that are only there because they have to be? I'm guessing with this 'profile' system it'll be the former. Sounds like a good system.

Definitely use map view during the later stages of launch to show apo/periapsis (apogee and perigee in reference to Earth) and how orbit is really just falling around the planet (Falling and missing the planet!). I just watched the latest episode of Cosmos which demonstrated that part. Due to time constraints I wouldn't worry too much about landing on the Mun, just crash or crashland into it. Crashing things is part of the appeal of KSP, after all. Along those lines you may wish to have a RUD (Rapid Unplanned Disassembly; premature staging should do it) during launch, then do a quick revert and do it right. And don't forget to ask Squad for a commision on all the classmates you sign up! (j/k )

Thanks! This pic is at a better angle to show fuel plumbing. KER is showing Eve atmospheric stats. The top stage gains about 700m/s dV in vacuum, to bring it to the 12km/s recommended for Eve. It helped launching from 900m ASL; I wonder how much dV that saved me. The outer SOB's feed the inner ones, which are asparagus-fed into the core. When the first outer pair drop, the second pair is a quarter full. With a test launch from Kerbin depending on direction it can go either interstellar or sunspot sampling, which I guess is the mark of an Eve-capable ascent vehicle.

Docking ports on bottom of rover and top of rocket, strut as necessary. What, you want to be able to deploy it? Build a skycrane on top of it.

Finally landed and returned to orbit from Eve. I didn't aim for any particular spot aside from a dry one, and ended up about 950m ASL at a latitude of 42deg. It took a few quickload launches to sort out the details, like making sure my stages would fire at the same time they decoupled (I had so many stages to sort out when I stacked it on my launcher in the VAB, I gave up and decided to sort out the lander's stages once I made Eve orbit), as well as constantly throttling back to stay within 5% of terminal velocity then firewalling it at staging. The final 'Ah-ha!' was remembering that the most efficient ascent would pitchover onto a heading that was the same as my latitude, which is the best I could do since I didn't land at the equator (now that I think of it I may have been lucky that I started near 45deg, maybe I needed to pitchover to 90deg minus latitude. Hmmm). All in all, I ended up in a 250km x 125km orbit with 750m/s to spare. My orbiting tug had to burn over 3km/s to match orbits, but that's no big deal, it had 11km/s available. Ok, I cheated slightly by just using a Ext Command Seat. The lander massed 153 tons fully assembled, about 140 tons after dropping the landing gear and 'chute trusses. That doesn't include the drop tank that let me fire a few engines while the drogues opened, I then transferred fuel before dropping it. I ended up making a 28-point landing on top of the engine fairing at a leisurely 7m/s, luckily that didn't damage anything. I had 8 asparagused twin-'spike SOB's on a Mainsail core, with an LVT-45 second stage and 48-7s top stage that had 1/3 of my total dV. No reaction wheels meant I had little control authority, especially when throttled down. It flew like a lawn dart; trajectory changes were gradual. Altogether I was at 740 parts on the launchpad, 280 of it the lander. The transfer tug launched separately. That was my second mission to Eve, the first one failed horribly. But all it needed was MOAR STRUTS! Now I just have the routine task of returning to Kerbin with the science that I really have no need for. I also realized the drawback of doing the landing and ascent from a command seat: I could only do one EVA report and no crew reports. I suppose I could have put a lander can (2 for balance) on the landing trusses to stash reports in. It also would have helped if I remembered to add an antenna. Now I may try to build a bigger one. With a lander can instead of a seat!

Boney M ripoff... Nightflight to Minmus? Duna? Moho?

Plan / design / blueprint?

You can do a quick staging change on the pad, but to make it permanent the change has to be done in the VAB

It's so that if you find E.T. he can phone home....

Ribbon / Rope