DrMonte

I think about Oberth effect in the way - if you want to lower your orbit burn at apoapsis, if you want to put it higher burn at periapsis. Transfers to other planets it's a bit too much math for a Kerbal. It's enough that I wait for a transfer window.

Duna is not so far far away. Don't be overexcited by extremely huge ships. Orange tank in space is never an efficient design. Though beauty is never about efficiency.

No matter they are the clones try to change the docking order or sides. Images would be helpful. It could be vertical rotation or mass change issue.

So why wouldn't you try the stock parts only first. (That's my thoughts)

Asteroid? A, B, C, D, E. I've noticed that asteroids are much bigger than fuel tank of the same mass. It would be quite neat to build a floating base on Layethe on Ast.E or few of them.

FAR reduces required dV on EVE. Can't say exactly but about 10-20%.

Do you mean "Infinite glider" or do you refer to some other issue?

Parachutes opens and stops your ship to somewhat 10m/s immediately. So you might imagine what g your ship is experiencing. It's quite simple to avoid this with your current ship if you still have a save in the orbit. 1. Alter chutes to open as high as possible and fully deploy as low as possible. I don't remember setup now - I think lowest atmosphere pressure and lowest altitude. Don't worry atmosphere of EVE will slow you down without chutes to <100m/s easily. 2. Alter chutes to deploy at different time=altitude. I think 20m gap will do just fine. Note that this might not help if your chutes are attached to some easy breakable parts. When landing bigger ships you should think of attaching chutes to the lower part of the ship also.

Orange tanks might brake off if you mounted them on each other. You should use girders between them. Then it becomes very stable structure. If you would like to go for performance it would be nice to reuse those 5 tanks as a fuel for launcher stage. Then the station will become the core of the launcher. Few rounds of asparagus and you're up. 0.23 version is very helpful with fuel management. Launch it empty and your station will weight less than 30t. Search for "Leviathan Engineering" for heavy load lifting examples. Not all examples (usually none) posted in answers are a good examples.

I might even think that it is possible to land and takeoff but that would be a really daring challenge. Jeb can survive ~100m/s impacts (depends on situation) and we have >7km mountain on the Mun. That leaves lots of variants to think of.

Mun EVA landing challenge would be easier. I remember that in 0.21 we've done this at one shot with >40% prop left no trying to optimize landing too much. I'm quite interested in fact itself that "escape from the Mun can be done just by EVA". If you crash your ship there is no help here. The only thing you can do is just walk to the higher mountain to gain more launching altitude. Also there are challenges for the lightest craft to the Mun. Is there requirement to light an engine on liftoff?

There is a Minmus challenge somewhere here. Just that with Minmus it's a full EVA challenge - land, takeoff and board a ship.

Would you like to try Mun Extreme EVA challenge? Burning straight up is never good option unless you're in deep shcrater. Burn as much horizontal as possible, gain orbit, set your appoapsis, at appoapsis change periapsis.

Ok, I'm teasing you, I've done it and don't find where to post it. It's quite fun and might be easier than you think. The Eagle Jeb has landed. Altitude 4300m. Somewhere at equator. One small push of RCS one big step for Kerbal kind or whatever. EVA does not have the Navball so let the stars show your path. In the orbit. Pe:7865, Ap:13126. Passing over the landing site. One full circle and still alive though! What a hell is there? Nice view provides hope. Here you are. Rendezvous at this altitude takes some nerves. Grab. It's not seen in the picture but Jeb's spinning like hell and there's no RCS to stop him. Going home.

You know I've started this challenge 'cos I didn't found any similar in the forum. The question - "Is it possible to get into Mun orbit using only EVA Jetpack?" arose in the forum and there is no reason why you couldn't. Kerbals Jetpack has ~550dV; To get to quite "high" ~14km orbit you need ~640dV. But Mun is airless body and its highest peak is 7061m somewhere in southern pole. So it's enough to get to ~7km orbit to not to hit a mountain. Also you might find a mountain for starting point to save some dV.

For those who did not hear the term "extreme EVA" in KSP it stands for - visiting celestial body in swimsuit EVA. It is not possible to land and takeoff from the Mun in a single run so we will stay here only with one part of the journey - the harder one The short story Jeb finally landed on the Mun and he is very happy about it (just look at his face). Unfortunately landing was not very successful and all ship fell to pieces. Daily situation in KSP if you would ask me. Good news - Bill is still orbiting the Mun in the return capsule. - Can Jeb get to the orbit around the Mun using just his EVA Jetpack? - Will Bill be able to catch Jeb in such low orbit? Rules The idea is to solve a question - Is it possible to get into Mun orbit using only EVA Jetpack? Of course Kerbal must live so someone must save him there and bring home. 1. I don't care how you bring poor Kerbal to the Mun. Challenge starts here. 2. On the Mun Kerbal can not get any help from any technology. Starts in a way how it stands - in EVA with JetPack. 3. Kerbal must board the ship orbiting the Mun. 4. The orbiting ship is allowed to change trajectory as you like except it should not perform landing maneuvers. Forum rules says we have to have some ranking system: 1. Starting Kerbal altitude on the Mun - H. You get (8000 - H) / 100 points for reaching stable orbit. (The lower you start the higher is reward) 2. 20 points for boarding the ship. 3. 5 points for landing on Kerbin. Don't forget to screenshoot. Made it Kasuha - 105 UrstMcRedhead ~ 69 DrMonte - 62

I think you should keep it to stock parts.

Jebhausen

Jeb, why the sol panels ar'nt working?

Deadly nice view.

So sad. I hoped to attach my 3D TV

1. What does it mean "straight up"? I have no idea how much more fuel you'll need if you would not start your orbital turn at 10km. 2. I think you know that stationary orbits are only at equator? You should go either equator way or pol way from the start. Changing inclination by 90deg costs a lot lot of fuel (even maneuver over the Mun sometimes is used to save some). Although Ion engines would be forgiving here.

Read this thread: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/65130-Graphic-setting-and-what-they-means?highlight=graphics+settings What ever your PC is it is no big deal to overuse it with bad settings. I have average three year old PC and don't have issues with launching 1000 parts ships at FullHD.

Quadcoupler part looks perfectly layed out: node_stack_top = 0.0, 0.5, 0.0, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1 node_stack_bottom01 = 0.625, -0.4875, 0.625, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1 node_stack_bottom02 = 0.625, -0.4875, -0.625, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1 node_stack_bottom03 = -0.625, -0.4875, 0.625, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1 node_stack_bottom04 = -0.625, -0.4875, -0.625, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1 but I would not decline possibility of rounding errors in further calculations. Minor rounding errors would lead to very minor fluctuations in trust vector. We know that second by second these minor forces sum up to visible trajectory changes if not compensated. For really from my quite long KSP rocket building practice I have never bothered about this. Just add a SAS or few winglets and you are done. I'm not sure if it's even possible in real world to build a rocket without an additional controls to be stable enough. We can always say that it's something about uneven trust from engine tube and side winds of the Kraken.