MarvinKitFox

Are Kerbals radioactive? 'cause it sure looks like you hit Critical Mass there, and turned them all into a nuclear explosion.

They are called "rover"s , because they should be dog-sized Most people try to build "gozilla"s, and obviously these are not so easy to fly.

"Keep it simple, less is more." You might want to consider a different signature for the duration of this event. ;-)

Spaceplanes are sexy. That is their biggest, first, and ONLY merit.

How did you train an OCTO to do a soil sample return mission? I haven't even managed to train mine to do EVA repairs yet!

One should be creative in naming one's spaceships. . . . I'm now launching "017 Mun Unmanned Return II" . . Hey, i said "should" be creative, not "is"!

With the use of ISRU mining, it is reasonably easy. With one glaring exception.... the inclusion of that word "EVE". There is no such thing as a single stage vehicle that can land on eve, and return intact. With staging it is only horridly difficult, but quite doable. But it tends to leave your ship a mere nib of its former size. So I foresee a whole lot of orbital docking, mining for more fuel, etc... in your future. Have fun!

Max I've ever managed was 62835m/s That is ion engine with 5 stages of drop tanks, on top of 3-stage nuke, on top of the biggest thing I could get off the ground. Swing that baby on a very low orbit around the sun for ultimate oberth effect boost. (this was under KSP 0.24, so solar heat was not a problem) Top speed was in excess of 110000m/s, it left the system at more than 83000m/s The image below is NOT one of this specific vehicle, this one is from a "how fast can you impact Duna" quest. But it shows a similar maneuver as described above, only at 100000 instead of 110000, and with no final ion stages, just the nuclear stage. It is *easy* to tack on another 40K m/s of ion propulsion on top of this thing. http://i.imgur.com/agpBxjL.png

You mean this sort of thing? Ok, so its only a 105mm, but.... Never try to put a limit to human stupidity.

Flight report... flight report? oh, flight report! You mean the "F3 Tell me what broke report" button?

Well, abandoning your Kerbals like that is more "moral" than grinding up babies to make toothpaste, but only very slightly. Unless you include Jebediah as one of the victims, in which case the toothpaste idea starts looking good. *translation: Not on your nelly! How DARE you even consider abandoning them!

Ideally, you want infinite Gs. Fuel-wise ideal, that is. If you are flying in a vacuum. Flying through the atmosphere at 10Gs would effectively turn the air in front of you into a granite cliff. Bad idea. In Ksp, you want to get off as fast as you can, without forcing matters. If you see more than the faintest whiff of aero shockwave around your rocket on the way up, you are likely overspeeding. If you see red flames flying past, and you are still in the first atmospheric band, then you need a straitjacket. * I suspect your initial design might fall in this class, due to the TWR at launch of 3.31 ! With a sensibly designed rocket (long & pointy, heavy in front), your optimal TWR can be as high as about 2.2 However, you may find control a bit of a challenge. The same rocket at TWR of 1.6 at takeoff will fly like a dream, and still only sacrifice 200m/s of deltav *at most* due to increased gravity loss. * Tested from your design. If you launch at full throttle, you have bigtime aero shockwave by 2500m alt, and red stuff flying by at 10200m. This is way way way WAY way too much too fast. Take that exact same ship, throw away the Mainsail engine. Instead strap in a Skipper. Now you have a rocket that can go to orbit, fly to Duna, and enter orbit around Ike. But has insufficient Deltav to actually land on Ike.

Guys, please stop feeding the (very obvious) Troll

An orbit consists of 4 things: 1)Longitude of ascending node 2)Inclination 3)Apogee 4)Perigee You are matching 2+3+4 perfectly, and utterly ignoring (1) When launching from the surface, you want to consider these four parameters IN THAT ORDER. Trying to get them right in another order is either inefficient, or downright difficult. 1) First make sure you launch at, or near, the correct time. The easy way to do this is to view the intended orbit from the side, and only launch when the launchpad is directly under the path, or will be in less than 5 minutes. 2) Only once (1) is aligned, launch. Aim so as to match the inclination. (optimal is a bit further north/south than the desired inclination, due to Kerbin's rotation, but matching inclination angle is a good first approximation) 3) Once in low orbit, stretch your Apogee to the intended height. Do this maneuver when on the exact opposite side of the planet from where you want your Apogee point to end up. 4) At Apogee, change your Perigee to match the intended orbit. This is also the best time to fix any remaining inclination error. In KSP, it is *much* easier to do all these things by eyeballing the map display, that by trying to match the exact numerical parameters of the orbit.

My imagination. It's an amazingly powerful and flexible tool for creating full-sensory overlay on almost any substrate.

What purpose does your pride in your ssto have, in a thread about tweaking asparagus staging? You can reach a 100 000 km circular orbit with a ssto? That is only achievable around the sun! The Kerbin SOI is too small to fit such a huge orbit.

Which seriously [violates] the OP requirement of JET powered level flight in atmosphere at 6000m/s, which you pretend to support

Ok, use a rocket. Now achieve the 6000m/s level flight in the atmosphere that the OP desires. Hint: You will need a 3.7 TWR engine burning straight up into space, just to keep you at a constant altitude. 6000m/s is ***way*** over orbital speed. Its even way over escape velocity from Kerbin!

These sort of contracts are not mean for you. They are meant for players that are capable of paying attention to fine detail, who bother to read the whole requirement specification, and in general pay attention to detail. The willingness to actually think outside of the box could also be needed, such as the need to understand that one can launch a capsule containing a tourist, which you simple laterally attach to your rocket. Some hints: *Mission requires you to haul (or activate) a part at a specified height AND speed? Just mount it on a strong rocket that has a throttle control. Throttling your engine power does wonders to select the needed speed! *Mission requires you to fly four people to a location? That's a very advanced mission! Are you sure you do not simply have to fly them to a defined situation, and return? Such as "suborbital Kerbin", or "Mun flyby"? To move tourists, simply mount your smallest tank radially around your rocket, empty the tank and put a capsule on top. To do this needs ONE tech improvement, and that's simply because one does not get very far using fleas for propulsion. Symmetry is a good idea. If your post was to complain that the early contracts get repetitive, or that the relative rewards offered per difficulty was inadequate, you would possibly have a valid point. As it is.... You do not.

There, I've done it! Something that takes a genius crossbred with a moron to figure out, so fiendishly clever that no-one could possibly ever think of it. Post redacted by the secrecy police.Nothing here to see. These are NOT the droids you are looking for. Move along! What? Post it here? Are you nuts? If I post it here, then *everyone* will be doing it, and it will be nothing special any more. This secret is mine, and mine alone! Muhahahahahaha!!

The usual thought of Capital ships vs Fighters is that the fighter's endurance (supplies, fuel, delta-v total, etc.. ) are expected to be **massively** less than the capital ship The big guy has to carry enough fuel to get to the battle, AND return afterwards, AND carry enough twinkies to keep the crew fed for the 3 years the trip will take AND provide a toilet to get rid of the twinkies afterwards. Have you ever heard of a figher with a built-in fridge, shower and loo? Nope. Figher is just pilot on a seat, (maybe) some life support, strapped to a stonking big engine and totin' guns. No frills.

Leave quickload exactly as it is. Change the functionality of Quicksave (and autosave) to leave a 3-deep backup of saves, with the 2 older ones only accessible from the main menu. So when you DO forget to save, and do a 2-week old quickload, you still have your previous 3 autosaves to back you up. And when you quicksave, but the situation proves unexpectedly 100% lethal, you have the option of going a step further back. This single, simple change will totally satisfy all of the above complaints.

Quote from the supporting article: " Uranus Puckering at that moment may have had catastrophic consequences for us here on Earth" Sounds like a real pain in the butt! At least there have been no reports of Klingons, despite their claim it will Wipeout earth.

Space coordinates for moving stuff is easy, as long as the movement follows some predictable pattern. (such as orbits around the sun, for local stuff, orbit around the galactic center for stars, etc..) You need 3 coordinates for WHERE it is You need 3 coordinates for MOVEMENT where it is headed You need one coordinate for WHEN this data was valid All the rest can be extrapolated, although you may need a *lot* of contextual info about surrounding object too, to make any sensible future prediction come out accurately.