LiveHereNow

I like this idea as it really expands the free-space function of EVA (versus terrestrial EVA). Many NASA missions that included EVA were to repair, replace, upgrade, reinforce, etc. Not only would it be useful in the game, but it mirrors much of what is done during EVA in real space programs.

I think this is a great mod feature idea. You got it to orbit, you did the mission. You just don't want to spend two hours micro-adjusting satellites every few times you fly. Auto-reset and then like you mention... some sort of cost in monoprop and then "drift" sets in and you have to refuel, recover or kill (or whatever). May want to write that up in further detail and share with the RemoteTech folks?

I really like the creativity in the "decoupler" launcher! I'd have never thought of that!

Hmmm.... I think I see what you mean. You don't want a total copy-me instruction set, but you'd like to know some concepts to consider so you're not flying purely blind. I'll list a few to help out. And I agree that Werner Von Kerman and Scott Manley are good resources on YouTube. These really helped me get over the hump using maneuver nodes early on and later rendezvous and docking (it felt impossible). Anyway... some thoughts on learn-as-you-go: 1) Learn your gauges... they tell you a lot and most are ignored. Example: The atmosphere thickness gauge at the top let's you know the air resistance. You don't have to have someone tell you the numbers... you can see this yourself realtime! Add to it homework reading from NASA... speed and air resistance in low atmosphere, gravity-turn, when/why to throttle up (and why they don't just have it "floored" the whole time), etc. Then use the book smarts w/ the indicators in-game to create your own concepts. And remember, Kerbin's size, gravity, atmosphere thickness are different than Earth, so copy NASA in concept only... their exact math won't help. 2) Heat happens three ways that I can tell... direct contact with a hot part (can be a problem), radiant (not a big deal but not ignored), and by exhaust (almost always a problem). So, space your engines out and they won't overheat, test to see if they start to overheat but don't actually blow up. See if you can use seperators so hot parts don't touch or a heat-sink... something to absorb/spread the heat (a big metal part takes more heat from an engine than a non-metal part). Put a decoupler on one stage and the engine start on the next so you can space the timing and avoid explosions... 3) ALWAYS LOOK AT THE WEIGHT OF PARTS. I can't stress this enough as it's not always obvious visually for given size/materials. It's easy to just keep piling on parts and you'll end up overbuilding badly. This compounds problems when trying to reach a new personal goal (farther planet, heavier lander, etc). Again, you don't have to calculate it, but if you always think, "could I do without this or use a lesser part?", you'll be on a good path. 4) Use probes when trying something new. These can be SUPER light, often handle easier and require less resources than manned capsules... good to learn concepts w/ less complication/weight. So, while you're learning, think of not killing Kerbals for the sake of skill advancement :-) 5) Build w/ modular parts. Save "tops" of rockets as something like "One Man Orbiter" or "Unmanned Science Lander" and then label it's contents in the description, then a full launch version when you have booster, orbital, transfer stages and maybe add a "FULL" suffix so you know that's a launch ready version. While building though, save the (usually bigger/complex) booster stage for this as something like "1m LKO booster" or "3m Heavy Asparagus Booster " and save that to the sub assemblies. You can then mix/match chunks you know work well and speed up your build-to-test time versus buld-from-scratch every time. 6) Don't just add more struts on a problematic rocket. It's an easy "fix" but actually does add to the weight, air resistance AND the part count. Sometimes you can build a more orderly rocket and reduce complexity. That said, struts are vital... just think of the physics of push-pull (they seem to only work that way... not torsion or flex... just tension/compression) and use them sparingly when you can. 7) Print up the controls/keybindings for the game and keep it handy. Example: You probably don't use RCS translation controls yet. And if you get to where you need them and have no idea they exist, they won't do much good!

Okay, so I have a pretty interesting "launcher". It both suits the spirit of the contest and the rules. I can't get images in my reply though... any suggestsions/help here? (I dug in the FAQ and didn't find anything first... sorry for being a newb). That said, I launched it 36 hash-marks... which is 1,800 meters if the other guy's math of 1 hash=50 meters is correct. I'd like to share the pics as I think some would like to build on the concept (it's a stair-step thruster array).

I really like the creativity in the lander layout... I'd have not thought to put the legs on the side of the hitchhikers... gives me ideas for other landers. Thanks!

I understand this in theory but I'm still not sure how to do it right. I get an ejection from the Mun that seems to be retrograde to the Mun's orbit but I still end up with a largely circular orbit around Kerbin. In watching others' videos, it seems they more easily launch from the Mun and get a highly elliptical orbit back to Kerbin that requires less delta-v. I'm using far more fuel and can't figure out why. Let's assume I've landed equatorially and am leaving equatorially (seems simpler). I think once I "get it", I will get more mileage from my rockets. Any thoughts? Any good video links?