Pecan

Nice job. Always good to see people writing stuff, even though Squad only ever advertises videos. I envy you your writing. I lost count of the number of times I read mine and still found loads of grammatical and typographical errors; didn't notice any in yours, but wasn't really checking closely enough for proof-reading. Some comments: try out the “stock†vessels preloaded in the game (they aren’t too useful at teaching you how to design rockets in Science and Career mode, however, as they use parts from all over the tech tree). - The stock ships aren't much use in sandbox, either. They are deliberately built 'a bit wrong' so people have to work at making them fly well (or at all). Easier to just go straight to making your own. save your game from the building view. Note that saved games are like snapshots of the current game profile and is stored in a separate folder; - Mention alt-F5/F9 for multiple quicksaves? Symmetry Mode when you hover over it. If you click on it, the number of fins changes. Click it until it shows two fins (note that you can also cycle through this by pressing X repeatedly) - Shift-X cycles backwards Getting into orbit will require a vessel that is a little more complicated than the ones you built in the previous chapter. - This is a very complicated ship just for orbit, but I suppose it depends on how quickly you want to show advancement. - Explain the difference between SRBs and LF engines/tanks? Not sure that I agree about the T45 vs the T30, but in any case gimballing/rotation might be better with more explanation too. set Thrust Limiter to 48%. - The whole 'tweaking' thing could be explained here. Why you're reducing thrust needs some explanation. Turn your craft slightly past the artificial horizon. Wait for your time to apoapsis to reach about 15 seconds. - create a manoeuvre node instead of 'by eye'? Now here comes the tricky bit: Take an Mk2-R Radial Mount Parachute, and place it carefully on top of the Stayputnik Mk1. - use symmetry-2, place 'chutes on the pod, save more of the ship? To do this, you will have to perform what is known as a “plane shiftâ€Â. Click on the point of your orbit with one of the nodes (pick the one that’s closer). - 'closer' might not be right; try 'the one that comes next in orbit'? Now pull or push the ksp-normal normal and ksp-antinormal antinormal axis to adjust your plane. - At this point you haven't said to create a manoeuvre node, or how to. Then point your ship to the zenith (white dot in the center of the blue half). This is because EVA’d kerbals have a preferred “up†direction, for some strange reason, and have no “roll†controls; aligning your ship to the zenith would make it easier to board. - maybe, but the EVA preferred alignment is N/S

Oops, I haven't posted any vehicle information, have I. To keep it simple I'll use the ones in my tutorial (link in signature) and the SSTOs represented by examples in:

Mine cost as much as a length of string.

The best places to ask for support with a mod are: a) that mod's thread support (modded installs) c) gameplay questions But that's a popular enough mod that someone should come along with more useful answers soon. In the meantime, so you know you're not being ignored, http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/59545?p=1233759&viewfull=1#post1233759 might help.

Other; the one in stock all the time. I do not recognise the term 'sloppydynamics', although the mindset behind it is obvious. There are three reasons why I don't use FAR; 1) Memory issues prevent me using any but the most essential mods (to me) - I'm not in atmosphere enough to care much about it. 2) FAR isn't stock and whatever stock changes to is what I'll have to aim tutorials at - another aerodynamic model would just add confusion. 3) I only use the most essential mods because of issues with memory - Now I realise that technically speaking that's the same as '1' but I thought that it was such a big one that it was worth mentioning twice.* [* and the first person to spot the reference is *psyper*]

I hope you have used 'Hohmann Transfers' to raise and lower your orbit around Kerbin (or anywhere else) already. Then consider raising your orbit to the same as Mun's (without worrying about an encounter): your 'transfer' burn should raise the apoapsis to the required altitude, then you drift there and 'circularise'. Note that you are not 'escaping' Kerbin's orbit, you and Mun are simply orbiting it at the same altitude. You might like to try this to see how much deltaV the circularisation burn requires without Mun's gravity to influence it. Introducing the requirement for an encounter and orbit, you obviously need to do the transfer burn at the right point around your (comparatively low) Kerbin orbit. When you orbit around Mun it, and therefore you, are still orbiting Kerbin. You will, in fact, be orbiting Kerbin with the exact same position and altitude as Mun on average (your Mun-orbit representing only insignificant wobbles relative to Kerbin-orbit). After the transfer burn and transfer drift to apoapsis, however, before you do the 'injection' burn, you are orbiting slower than Mun (even if your Ap is higher), which is why you fall back to Kerbin. The injection burn therefore 'circularises' your Kerbin-orbit and, if Mun were a massless-point you'd therefore just want to time and scale the transfer burn to get you as close to it as possible. In practice, of course, Mun represents a bloody great rock with gravity and the more obvious purpose of the injection burn is to establish an orbit around it - so miss, but only just. What all this means is that the 'ideal' transfer burn would put you on a direct collision-course with Mun except that actually hitting it would be what aerospace professionals call "a bad thing". Missing by a little bit - smallest divergence from Mun's own orbit - gives you the lowest periapsis and hence the greatest benefit from Mun's gravity. It also means you take the greatest advantage of the Oberth effect, but as you've seen that's a bit arcane. Missing by more just means you get less help from those and you have a greater difference between your orbital velocity and Mun's to make up. (A prograde orbit around Mun is generally best so you probably want to miss behind it, rather than in front. That rather depends on what you intend to do next though so it doesn't greatly matter). And it takes a lot longer (if you care about things like life support)

Tutorial in my signature, Chapter 5 for lunar (Minmus & Mun) return missions. Note that Minmus is the easier mission, although it requires matching-planes which might be a bit arcane. "Kerpollo" in Chapter 6 is a good Apollo-like demonstration vehicle if you are showing him how it's done and want something more familiar. Links to the downloadable .PDF version and .craft files are in the OP.

Rocket launches tractor module and returns. Rocket launches habitation module and returns. Rocket launches (wheeled) landers and returns. Rocket launches fuel module and returns (x 9). Tractor assembles ship in orbit, transfers to Jool, delivers landers. Landers land and return to mothership. Tractor transfer back to Kerbin. Done, with Tylo, stock, no clipping, rover, no refuelling, no air-breathing engines, no MJ bonuses. *Hint* you left out "in a single launch" and "spaceplane" (if wings are intended). Assuming those: SSTO, detach transfer/lander module, transfer to Jool, mission, transfer back, land. *Hint* Single Stage To Orbit implies that once IN orbit you can detach and ditch whatever you like, so you don't have to drag that useless mass across the solar system.

The wiki may also help.

0.1KN is the lowest I've seen displayed and it's the usual amount I have for quite a long time before jet-powered ships reach space and flameout. I don't have a picture showing it but expect a lot of people who do! Edit for clarification in post 4: Ahh! Right, that makes sense then. Hard to imagine how many intakes you had to spam to be able to keep the engine going that high. Well done, don't think I can compete.

It was made considerably lighter in 0.25

To be clear - you want a SSTO, a spaceplane and a Duna transfer/return vehicle? Do you also want it to land on Duna, or just orbit?

Having solved the immediate problem of the rocket-blast hitting the cupola you should find that it works a little ... too well. Those are big engines for a Mun lander; you may want to change them for 909s, 48-7Ss or even LV-1®s.

Hello and welcome! Nice to see more people from all parts of the world. Indonesia is definitely under-represented :-)

Those willing to read to the end of the post, yes *grin*. Amongst that lot were several good suggestions condensed from really looking at what people have done with RT. Half the fun is in deciding if people want AN answer on a plate or a kick up the *&&^% to find one for themselves. I'm doing Crutchlow the honour of assuming he would like to be nudged towards multiple-options rather than "here is the answer for the learning-impaired".

I shall explain in PM why 'SSTO' doesn't mean 'Spaceplane' simply because, as Claw has hinted elsewhere, hijacking threads is not a great move.

Hmmm, tricky... I think I'd either: a) Read all, or at least some of, the stuff that's been written about exactly the same issue already ... redacted because I can't be bothered with another forum warning c) Drop 'repeat stations' around Kerbin so I can 'see' the whole sky d) Launch straight up e) Use KOS f) Wait until the thing came around on its next orbit, then boost it higher g) Try to work it out h) Delete RT because it requires too much thinking i) Delete RT because the only thing it solves is the problem it creates j) Use a manned ship, since that's low-tech and doesn't have comms problems k) Use the flight computer l) Make sure I understand how the mod works ... but apart from that, off the top of my head, I can't think of anything. PS: Yes, of course I am being a bit sarcastic but I hope several of those ideas will really help. In addition I want to say that this is rocket science, it's meant to be a bit difficult so don't expect it 'just' to be Lego. One thing doesn't work, try something else. It explodes (do it again!), try something else. If it was easy it wouldn't be fun - and with RT, particularly, if you want it to be easy just delete it!

There is a simple way to "picture" this, almost literally: You want to end-up in a more or less circular orbit. Do you draw a circle as a series of straight lines or as a curve? You need to get from a (theoretical) centre-point to that circle. Do you draw a line up, then sideways all the way around, or draw a spiral from the start? Gravity wants to pull you down/around the centre-point. Do you fight it all the way to keep a straight line or let it help you bend that line into the spiral that gives you (almost) the circular result you want? Remember - ORBIT is about sideways-speed, not altitude. It ain't rocket science (except it is).

Connection is a problem and the solution I'm using is the favourite "how can I make ... fit to ..." = Cubic Octagonal Struts* plus the WASD keys to get orientation. [*They are massless in flight so don't affect physics performance, attach almost anywhere and create a new node to which you can connect ... almost anything]

All (but one) of my crew-carrying designs have an 'abort' escape system. I have also installed, but don't currently use, mods that provide escape-pods. Any escape system I do have is wayyyyy less heavy than that you're planning! (The crew-cabin thingy seats 4 instead of 2 in the cockpit, for a start)

Yes, the Mk2 parts are superior in a number of ways. If you want to make a JATO (early-ditch jet first stage) or even a VTVL jet launch-vehicle the Mk2 fuselage with just liquid fuel (name changing) is THE choice. Most of the others fit but are mediocre in choice. A lot of work has gone into making KSP a better 'flight simulator' over the past few updates since that's where the demand seems to be. Rockets have been ignored since ARM, so collectively since 0.22 or so it has become easier and more efficient to make a plane and less useful to make a rocket. Spaceflight seems to have become a 'thing' you might also do, rather than the point of the game.

Cheerfully granted - I am being subjectively lenient and avoided using the word "Must". Which is just as well because ... Drives a truck through the hole in either statement (you can tell I'm not desperately concerned about the idea). I'd definitely have to grant 'limited orbital adjustments' and landing so maybe it should read "A SSTO, by definition, must only be required to perform ONE significant manoeuvre while in orbit - a de-orbit burn." Specifically, however, I am arguing against: Since the TO stands for To Orbit. If something's designed to go to Mun or somewhere in a single stage then all well and good but it is only briefly and incidentally a SSTO; a significant and necessary part of the design and construction being specifically NOT To or even In Orbit. Elsewhere I have argued for the generic term "Reusable launch-vehicle" if Single Stage To Orbit And Back is meant, but I realise the futility of even getting the message To People, let alone getting them to appreciate it. (Most people will continue to just use SSTO to mean 'spaceplane', overlooking everything else a spaceplane might do and everything else that can be a SSTO).

It's got to be one of the most misused terms in KSP, if not elsewhere. "Sub-orbital SSTO", "SSTO to Eeloo", etc. are other oxymorons that spring to mind. Generally people seem to mean 'Spaceplane' but since that precludes things without wings we might just be best using the name "Reusable launch-vehicle". *Sigh* if only it were possible.

*Ahem* http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/93779-SSTO-Spaceplane-Airplane-Design-Contest-II-Akademy-Awards?p=1421588&viewfull=1#post1421588 40t, fuel, passenger, science, mixed. The only reason that design doesn't work in 0.25 is because the balance shifted with the introduction of the Mk2 parts, it's trivial to adjust it back. SSTOs are best between the surface and orbit. For space-work use never-landing tractors. ANY mission then becomes; SSTO carries mission payload To Orbit (optionally lands). Tractor transfers payload to target (optionally returns), payload performs mission. When the mission is over the same or another tractor brings the payload back to Kerbin orbit (or the next mission target), the same or another SSTO lands it (if necessary). My entire space-programme uses a SSTO, tractor, station infrastructure and only requires additional fuel and crews to be launched from (and science + old crews landed back at) Kerbin. Unless I crash there's no debris, no retired ships, no waste. (Harder in career/science mode, but easy once you unlock the first few tech-tiers).