700NitroXpress

I'm already building them with stock parts, this will be epic!

It doesn't look like that setup would work because the engines are pointed at the asteroid. Also, you're using the nuke engines which have very low thrust so it's possible that you don't have much power either. Try reversing the design and pushing it instead.

I think the best course is to do like they do in Planetary Annihilation. Build multiple engines and attach them to various points on the asteroid so that you have thrust pointed in one general direction. This way you can put multiple engines around the center of mass and you don't have to rely on just one. This will also give you greater control from the engine's thrust vectoring.

It goes poof and disappears.

I pretty much used the same method as what you describe, but I used 8 times symmetry and double stacked it for one of my stations. So you can fit 16 jumbo fuel tanks onto it. The mid section looks the best to me, with the double stack of 4 senior docking ports. These are for docking ships though.

Duna and Laythe are both easy to land on, both have atmosphere for parachutes, although laythe is better for this. Duna on the other hand is closer and has less gravity, so it's a 50/50. I'm building bases on both myself so I'll also recommend these.

Alright looks good, you're approved for the first mission. Can you post a picture of the ship as well? Hodo, this is building outwards in space where aerodynamics have no impact on the vessel, no air. Everything was launched up vertically.

So something like this where you can stockpile a kiloton of fuel right next to the engine, only going horizontally instead of a vertical build?

Quiana, the mods you have listed all look fine to me from what little I know about them. Increase the challenge at your own risk, the only thing that isn't allowed are parts or mods that would give an unfair advantage over stock players. The real question that I have about that nuke engine is if it uses the same fuel efficiency to travel the same distance as a regular nuke engine. Because it seems that because of the higher thrust, it would be able to travel further on less fuel. One of the current members of this challenge I believe is currently using it, just with equalized stats to the current stock nuke engine. So to keep it fair, I would have to maintain that ruling. I don't think it's that unbalanced, but it still seems a little better that stock.

Does an asteroid transfer energy and fuel just like a docked ship does? If there is a part attached to one with RCS ports on it, but no RCS fuel, then another part that has RCS fuel is attached; would that RCS fuel be used by the other attached part with the ports? Is the same thing true for power? Does the SAS modules attached to an asteroid all act together when you go to maneuver it?

You treat it the same way you would with regular docking procedure. Only this is heading out of the Kerbin SOI. So when it gets close to Kerbin, you need to burn towards it as it passes you. This will make you head out of the SOI as well, but it's ok. Click on your velocity on the nav ball gadget until it shows the target velocity. Then you just have to get the velocity to point towards your target. You'll catch up to it eventually. When you do, latch onto it, aiming at the center of mass as best you can. Then switch you velocity over to orbital. You now need to burn retrograde if you're still in the SOI, otherwise you'll have to plot an intercept back with Kerbin. Then you would use aerobraking the way you normally would and all that. Or you could try Plan B, which involves setting a direct impact course with the thing, but I don't recommend that unless you have a lot of fuel and a strong engine. Since you'll have to stop and match it's speed before you hit.

Well done on that mission 4 Finwen, that platform would make me a little nervous, but it looks like it worked out without much trouble. Good designs overall and nicely done.

Yeah, I prefer it if people use the stock nuke engine. If you do use the mod engine then the specs would have to be modded to be the same. Especially sense that engine is the standard for basically all core ships.

Alright, looks good. Take it through the shakedown run around the moon and back and then you're good to go for missions.

If you attach a claw with a parachute on it and an unmanned module, then deploy the parachute, will the claw actually grip and the parachute work?

Does this mean that the claw can gab onto any part in the VAB that can be put into space?

So the new update is out, can our ships hold up and still be versatile enough to handle the new challenges with space rocks? Any ideas on what you guys would like to try?

Sensi, your mission 3 score has been added, nicely done. Finwen your pics are looking epic, waiting for the rest. Leaderboards are updated

Hey guys, sorry I've been absent for so long. Dark Souls II has claimed another soul... also got Planetary Annihilation and Titanfall, so my Kerbal adventures have been put on hold for a bit. I should be done reviewing things this week. So far Sensi, your mission 3 looks good so far. As for maintenance of your ship, if the game caused an error that resulted in your ship missing struts or something breaking, then you can fix it at will. However, pilot error causing a collision is on you and will cost you points -25 points for each time you need to repair your ship due to collisions. Finwen your mission 4 is looking epic so far.

Hodo, thanks for the stats, those engines are fine then. I used a lot of the 215 power engines and aerospikes on my lander and it looks like we used roughly the same fuel. Sensi, I'm reviewing the Mission 3 you posted. After you've completed mission 5, I'll post a new mission for everyone.

Alright then, I would just prefer if stock engines are used. If not, provide me with the engine stats so I can make sure that there isn't an unfair advantage in using the mod engine.

Sensi, what's the stats of those Kethane turbines? Compared to aerospikes?

Here's my Tylo landing experience when I did the Jool V challenge.

My Mission 2 is finally completed, all four Kerbals are back home safely and now I'm preparing for Mission 3. I'll do my point write ups later. Here's the images from the mission, I added descriptions this time.

Build a large ramp, land that ramp on the surface of Moho's largest crater. Then build a rocket powered rover and send it over the ramp at top speed, near the end hit the rockets and don't throttle down. Wherever that rover impacts, if it impacts at all, place another ramp and try to successfully land the jump from ramp to ramp with another rover. If possible, try to jump from one end of the largest crater to the other end and land the jump. Using the debug menu for no crash damage is acceptable, the goal is to make contact with the other ramp. If you do it without the debug menu, this would be impressive. The rover can't use RCS.