Outlander4

We are not responsible for the unfiltered file in any way or form. We are stretched as we are trying to maintain the proof-read version, sorry.

It's a very good idea; it's attention to detail that makes games awesome. It should be put in at some point!

Guys, if you've found any mistakes please leave a comment in the cfg file itself (Google docs allow it). I've already marked KerbAl entries. When Kyle gets better/less busy he'll fix it.

I got ill, so I'll take a leave for a week or so.

It's always exciting to have new entries, but please re-post them into the system using link to the submission page in the first post of the thread (if you haven't done so already).

There are plenty of more serious entries in there; unfortunately, for most people it's easier to write something silly/funny than something serious/scientific due to the lack of normal science in KSP and little available information about planetary composition, structure, atmosphere etc. So there are plenty of 'whackiness' in the file. On the other hand, reports not totally unlike 'WHEEE!' were present in the real world (Yuri Gagarin's 'Let's go!' which actually was 'Let's ride!', or 'I'm feeling good').

It's not set in stone; at least two proofreaders use British spelling; others use American one. If the entry is sound, the original spelling is conserved; if changes are made or entry is re-written from scratch, proofreader uses his/her preferred spelling, so there are entries using both British and American spelling. Dissonance is not that big, and is preferable to starting the flame war about spelling. Metric system is used universally, though, because it's used in KSP. The only guideline I can give is to avoid using local slang/dialect, as it makes everybody freak out.

Aye aye, I'm back, reporting for duty

Guys, I'll be off for a week or so to deal with some real-life problems. Shall return to proofreading afterwards

That's how it was done most of the time. Soyuz was designed as a multi-purpose craft; it can even withstand aerobraking from the lunar return trajectory (using the same techniques as Apollo). And while the capsule itself is very small ('criminally small', as one of the first Soyuz cosmonauts told in an interview), the rest of the ship provides more pressurised and habitable volume than the huge Apollo capsule. And long approach to the station has its advantages - it allows for a wider launch window, doesn't require very high launch precision and generally makes things simpler. And Russians absolutely love their technology to be simple and reliable, even at cost of some inconvenience to the crew.

Well, it's difficult because the logs you submit are not traced back to you in any way. And it's not because we respect your privacy (which we do), but because of how the system works. All being said, we are trying to modify entries which are not good enough to fit the mould to use them anyway. So, if you can't find your entry but can see something that is quite similar there is a good chance it's your entry after some editing, so your work won't be totally wasted. If you want to be sure, send me a PM with several entries that can characterise general style and degree of scientific accuracy of the entries you'd like to submit, and I'll tell you if they are fine. Please note that I live in Europe which may be very different from your time zone and result in me answering you at some rather inconvenient time.

Hmm, something tells me it came from the first (available for anyone to edit) file, which was used as a base for the current file. Thanks for pointing that out!

Actually, the difference between a female astranaut and a male astranaut when they're suited up isn't that apparent. So, if KSP just adds the same model with slightly different face and more femenine hairstyle it'd be more than enough, no? EDIT: I don't know how I've missed people telling the same thing just a couple of posts above; consider that I'm adding my voice to theirs.

I remember deleting child-unsafe entries from the last two experiments; they still contain errors and illogical statements though.

Completely off-topic: Haha, here we are, evil proofreaders pursuing our own petty projects. Actually, I want to construct baskerbal court. Right. Now. Yeah, now I see it! It's a mad combination of tennis, basketball, and maybe golf and rugby. Two teams of kerbals; the starting team selects one kerbal and designates him a ball, or, so to say, a kerball. The goal is to put this kerball into the basket, using strategically placed kerbals as a ladder. There should be some elevations on the court to make it easier and moar interesting. Basket size is just enough for kerbal body to squeeze in, but not enough to let the helmet through. When the point is scored, the section of the court containing the basket is jettisoned to the side, opening a new area with a new basket. If you don't manage to get kerball though the enemy team, and enemy team manages to push your kerball out of the court, the game stops and the turn goes to the enemy team, who selects their own kerball and here it goes. Edit: The team that first jettisons the last basket wins and walks away through the opening. I say it's brilliant.