temetvince

Thank you all for the amazing responses. They helped me a lot. I always assumed the atmosphere isp was for anything less than 70k. Seeing as its generally around 10k opens up new doors. And GoSlash27, that spreadsheet is amazing! I'm going to have to come back to it for sure. Thank you. I broke down and installed KER yesterday, and it's been invaluable. Unfortuantely, I just suck at this game even though I've played it on and off for years. Even with ker, the delta-v charts I use... I can't get anywhere close to the numbers they show. The furthest I've ever made it in this game was Duna (with MechJeb), and that was a 1 way trip. I think I'm going to do a full career-mode with mechjeb, including visiting all planets and such. And eventually, once I start to learn what in the world I'm doing wrong so much, I'll probably start again without any mods at all. It's getting frustrating to be so inefficient at everything, no matter how many flights and how much tutorials/videos/reading!

Obviously the swivel engine has more mass than the terrier, but their vacuum ISP's only differ by 25. Does this mean the more fuel(mass) we add, the closer these two engines become to being about the same in total delta-v? Background: Hello, I've come back to ksp after a long time absence. I don't have any mods installed and am trying to play completely "stock". I've been trying to calculate all my delta-v without a mod, but I'm not sure it's worth it yet or not. Is there a hotkey to automatically empty or fill all fuel tanks? This would speed up the process considerably.

The planetary mission of the real life Voyager, if my calcs are correct, would take over 17 minutes of 100,000x kerbal time warp. I can see how if you are good at the game 100,000x could seem fine in all or most situations. But what if you're keeping in the spirit of the game, building a rocket by eyeballing it and launching to even something close like Duna? It could take *several* years of orbiting the sun before getting the intercept with Duna to line up correctly. We're not talking 30 seconds of 100,000x. We're talking 15-30 minutes sometimes.

Thanks for all the discussion! Personally, I dislike it when people feel "entitled" like the developers owe them something; I *love* KSP and think it's great. That being said, I think saying that a person should multitask in a sandbox game is perhaps a little limiting. I could see it in other games, but as a whole, sandbox really should be open to different styles of play. What if your kid is playing this game to learn about orbital mechanics, or is being played by someone who has adhd and can't multitask well? This game is enjoyed by a wide audience, some of which will be single tasking. And who said we have to run a space program? Perhaps someone wants to be a pilot/astronaut role play instead! But I don't feel entitled to a faster option; It would just be nice. As for technical limitations, as a programmer I get that. While I personally think there are some definite programming shortcuts to avoid physics errors for long flights, I am certain that the amount of time it would take to write that code (and debug it) would be better spent elsewhere for more needed/desired functionality. If the 100,000x limit could be raised without a serious time commitment, however, then that would be great. Perhaps it could be an option in the settings menu for faster cpus (hey, I still play games from the 90s, who said I won't be playing KSP on a supercomputer in the future!)

Does anyone feel 100,000x is drastically too slow for working on interplanetary intercepts? I'm pretty sure I could drive across town and grab some food before the intercept happens. Or am I just being cruel and wasting my kerbals lifespan trying to save fuel?

Thank you!

Thank you everyone. I appreciate the feedback. Also, I'm going to check out preciseNode, I've never heard of it before!

How do you get a Kerbal on EVA to change orientation up or down when you press the spacebar. They seem to do it if I change camera modes but that's it.

This isn't a is Mechjeb/KER cheating thread. Please don't turn it into one. I am however, looking for your personal opinions. I started playing KSP stock. I played it for quite a while, and even made it to Duna (albeit horribly so) stock. Then I learned about mechjeb and played with it for awhile. It has taught me a lot. I've also installed Kerbal engineer redux. I really like the information it gives. I'm starting to think that, for me at my current play level, mechjeb is just too much. However, I'm still unsure about KER. I'm not really sure exactly what to ask. I'm just trying to figure out whether KER is right for my current play style or if I want to try to go vanilla again. I haven't visited any other planets other than Mun, Minmus, and Duna. Do you feel like using KER to visit the rest of the planets would take away any long term sense of satisfaction? Or does everyone use it for long voyages? Again, just kinda looking for your thoughts on KER or vanilla for my first "play through" now that I have more of an idea of what I'm doing. I suppose if I don't use KER I'd just have to use a ton of charts for launch windows and stuff? Or would it be better to just play and try to figure it out?

Sweet. I've always wondered about this. Thanks!

When I add lights to my craft in VAB, they are never parrallel to whatever I attach them to. Is this normal? Should I adjust them using the shift key?

You can use the [ and ] keys to switch vehicles.

Imo, you can fit a lot of stuff on it due to its curved surface area. You can get science back by using an antenna, but you will lose some science due to transmitting, and you can't do eva reports, crew reports, and soil samples. It is recoverable if you land it back on Kerbin.

Thank you for the responses. How do I mark this thread as answered?

I've read that with asparagus staging, I should put an engine underneath each fuel tank. If this is true, is there ever a reason to add spare fuel tanks to my craft without putting an engine underneath them? Thanks.